Customer Experience Doesn’t End When the Check Clears

You only wanted my money. 

Once you had it, you didn’t make me feel special anymore. 

I feel a little bit … used. 

Two weeks ago, I praised the customer experience I had with a seasoned contractor named Mike. He managed a wide range of work on my house, which included replacing the siding and the windows. Throughout the process, he was thorough and extraordinarily responsive. 

But then, something happened. 

We paid him. 

Ninety-nine percent of the work was done, so we felt comfortable settling the payment terms with him. There was, however, one small item that he still needed to address. 

We weren’t worried, given that Mike had been highly responsive in the past. 

Unfortunately, his behavior changed. Now that he has our money, he has become much less responsive and attentive to the one last remaining item. It’s a rather minor item, but his lack of attention to our needs has been frustrating. 

To be fair, I would still recommend Mike due to his work overall. I wouldn’t let this one negative experience unduly influence my overall evaluation. But it’s tempting. 

The big point is that customer experience doesn’t end when the check clears. 

In fact, one could argue that it’s how you treat people when you expect nothing in return that matters the most. 

So in addition to the points I raised originally, there’s another cautionary tale, an important reminder, within my experience with Mike. These include:

• The customer experience includes the pre-purchase, purchase and post-purchase phases
• Negative touch points with the customer at any one of these phases will influence the customer’s perception of you and your product or service
• The post-purchase phase may have an undue influence on the customer’s overall perception 

Because the post-purchase phase happens after the other phases, the customer is susceptible to the recency bias in making an overall judgment. Namely, even though Mike was great during the pre-purchase and purchase phases of the project, having this negative touch point at the end of our relationship may carry relatively more weight in how I think about Mike when one of my neighbors asks about him. It’s my most recent memory, so it’s what’s at the top of my mind. 

Instead of being an excited advocate like I was before, I may be a cautious advocate. 

It’s wise, therefore, for leaders to remember that consistency in the customer experience matters. And even though we all know that the reason we’re doing business is to trade products and services for money, no one likes to feel used—at any phase of the customer journey. 

Find this thought provoking? Leave a comment, like and share!

---

About Ben Baran
Ben Baran, Ph.D., is probably one of the few people in the world who is equally comfortable in a university classroom, a corporate boardroom and in full body armor carrying a U.S. government-issued M4 assault rifle. Visit: www.benbaran.com.

Customer Focus: Lessons from a Roofer

Recently, a flurry of skilled laborers worked on my house. Some of them replaced the siding; others replaced the windows. A separate group painted the exterior trim, and still another group handled replacing the rain gutters. 

Quarterbacking this major project was a big, friendly guy who has been doing roofing and siding on homes in my area for decades. 

We'll call him "Mike." Because that's his name. 

A number of aspects of how Mike managed this project impressed me, but most of all, it was his focus on me and my wife as the customer. For example:

• Mike remained the single point of contact during the entire project. That made it easy for us to know who to call with questions or concerns. It was Mike, no one else. 
• Mike shielded us from the complexities of managing and coordinating the different groups of specialists who actually did the work. These groups were all subcontractors on the project (or at least that's what I'm assuming), but we never dealt with them directly as far as the work itself was concerned. 
• Mike communicated frequently and proactively, using multiple methods. We texted, e-mailed and talked on the phone. Additionally, he stopped by the house in person every few days to check on the progress and make sure we were happy. 
• Mike quickly dealt with any issues--either real ones that we had or ones that he perceived as potential problems--very quickly. 

From a financial incentive point of view, Mike's behavior makes perfect sense. Most of his business comes through customer referrals. If we're not happy, he will quickly lose his reputation and his income. 

To some degree, this is true for all businesses.  We love personal recommendations and referrals. A product with hundreds of glowing reviews on Amazon.com gets our attention. A friend's horror story about dealing with an airline negatively affects our view of that organization. 

When I've worked with organizations on the topic of customer experience, we often go through a process of mapping the customer's journey--all the way from the earliest stages of awareness through the post-purchase stage, at which happy customers become loyalists, or, even better, advocates. Throughout that process are a host of "touch points," or instances in which the customer interacts with the organization. 

Through his attention to our concerns and by leaning forward in his communications with us, Mike was managing his customer touch points. These are direct touch points that he could control, and he did. 

But the secondary touch points in my home improvement story involves the subcontractors that Mike managed. And Mike managed those touch points to some degree as well. 

For example, the first group that Mike assigned to replace our gutters came by our house to complete some initial measurements. The problem is that they came by at 9 p.m. We found this odd, but Mike found it completely unacceptable. He apologized profusely on their behalf. 

And then, he fired them. 

Mike took swift action to protect the customer experience he is attempting to create. I suspect he did this because he (a) wanted to send a clear signal to us that he cared, (b) he lost some faith in their sense of judgment and (c) he found their actions to be misaligned with his sense of how the customer must be treated. He realized that they reflected poorly on him, and he quickly corrected the situation. 

Although the concept of customer experience and the customer's journey along a continuum of interaction applies to virtually all businesses, the details certainly become much more complex in larger enterprises with numerous customer touch points. Customers become aware of the organization through early, often subtle sources of advertising--including word of mouth. Sales people add a critical additional dimension, followed by technical experts, customer support people and so on.

Regardless, a few fundamental principles remain:

• A mindset of customer service must prevail. Top leaders set the tone and all of their managers have a role in expecting, supporting and rewarding behaviors that align with how organizational values pertaining to customer relationships. 
• Competing priorities must be uncovered and addressed. For example, if sales people make unrealistic promises that other people then have to try to clean up, customer disappointment is likely (and internal conflict is certain). 
• Leaders must quickly deal with behavior that fails to reflect a superior customer experience. As an organization, you become what you tolerate. 

Oftentimes, you get what you inspect, not what you expect. This is an old axiom from my earliest days as a U.S. Navy officer, but it applies here particularly well. Mike had a direct feedback loop regarding our customer experience. Namely, he checked in with us frequently. Larger organizations would likely benefit from building such feedback loops and continually measuring customer experience.

Because what every organization wants is an advocate, a person who tells others how great its products or services are and encourages others to buy what they're selling. 

On that note, if you live in my area and need some siding or roofing assistance, let me know. 

I might know a guy. 

Find this thought provoking? Leave a comment, like and share!

---

About Ben Baran
Ben Baran, Ph.D., is probably one of the few people in the world who is equally comfortable in a university classroom, a corporate boardroom and in full body armor carrying a U.S. government-issued M4 assault rifle. Visit: www.benbaran.com.

Engaging Employees and Customers

My research, teaching and consulting frequently focuses on employees and the strategic use of human capital, and the topic of employee engagement has been hot for some time now. It’s clearly important—organizations oftentimes thrive most when their employees are fully contributing their efforts and expertise. Related to the topic of employee engagement is the area of customer engagement—another critical topic. 

Recently, I had the wonderful opportunity to pick the brain of someone who is on the front lines of engaging both employees and customers at one of the world’s largest companies: Heather Gordon, Ph.D. 

Heather is currently the customer strategy manager at Duke Energy Corporation. Here’s my interview with her. 

Heather Gordon, Ph.D.

Heather, you have deep expertise in the psychology of human behavior at work at two of the world's largest companies, so I'm curious to know what you think about employee engagement in general. First, what is it and does it matter? 

Employee engagement is the extent to which employees are passionate about their jobs, committed to the organization, and their willingness to go above and beyond to help the organization accomplish its goals. Simply put, employee engagement is how engaged an employee is with their job and organization. And it absolutely matters. Think about a time when you felt extremely engaged in your job and with your organization… likely, you contributed more to the organization and you did more than the status quo for success. More importantly, you left work with an enhanced sense of your own well-being and a feeling of being valued. 

Likewise, the organization benefits from an engaged workforce in many different ways. First, engaged employees tend to be more loyal to the organization, they feel a sense of commitment and camaraderie with their fellow co-workers, helping to improve employee retention and reducing the expenses associated with recruitment, selection, and training. Second, much research has been dedicated to demonstrating the impact an engaged workforce has on the bottom line. An engaged workforce is more likely to result in higher customer engagement and satisfaction, an effect size as high as r =.43. Contrast that to the correlation of r = .14 with the effect of ibuprofen and pain reduction and you can see the impact of employee engagement and customer satisfaction. 

Here’s the citation to that research article: 

Winkler, Konig, & Kleinmann (2012). New insights into an old debate: Investigating the temporal sequence of commitment and performance at the business unit level. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(3), 503-522.

In your experience, what are some things that leaders and human resource functions can do to increase employee engagement?

It’s simple—engage their employees in the process, ask for their feedback, take actions on it, and recognize them for their efforts. For HR, two jobs are critical—aligning the organization and the leaders to listen to the feedback from their employees, and providing the structure, tools, and resources where employees can be developed. For managers and leaders, talking with their employees is the first step. Many large organizations today provide employee engagement surveys, which is a great start to get collective feedback. However, it must not stop there. The most important piece of the puzzle is getting the employees’ thoughts and ideas to address the opportunities the survey demonstrates. When you engage them in the process of creating the solutions, you get their investment in the solutions and share the accountability in making the organization a better place to work. 

Also, a simple “thank you” and recognition for hard work can go a long way. Imagine the impact of a senior leader hand-writing a thank you note to an employee, thanking them for going above and beyond. I’ve seen it done before and it has a huge impact on the employee and the overall culture.

Recently, you changed your focus from employee engagement to customer engagement. First, what was that change like for you personally? And second, what are some of the similarities or differences between the two? 

I thought it would be a huge shift, and in some ways it was, but in most ways it wasn’t. At its core, engagement is the same for employees and customers. We all want to be heard and want to feel as our needs are met. Once I realized that for customer and employee engagement there is the same process of getting feedback, acting on that feedback and communicating the actions as a result of the feedback, it didn’t seem so different. Likewise, similarly to how HR practitioners have to prioritize which talent and leadership offerings and services are provided and modified, on the customer side we have to decide which products and services will be best received and needed by our customers.  

The same article above demonstrated that there is a causal effect of employee engagement on customer satisfaction. The big difference I see between the two is that organizations have more direct control over the employee experience and thus, the engagement levels of those employees. While customers have many more external influences that may impact their judgments and experiences with a company, the experience of the employee can be greater influenced by the practices and culture of the company. 

For me, it's especially easy to think about how employees engage the customer in settings such as retail. For example, someone helping me pick out a pair of shoes at Nordstrom directly interacts with me, learns about my preferences and sizes, and brings me pairs of shoes to try on. And my experience with that person shapes my perception of Nordstrom overall. Is it the same with Duke Energy? Why or why not? 

Customer engagement is the responsibility of every company and every employee. It is not tied only to those who have direct interaction with the customer. For example, at Duke Energy, we do have those customer service representatives who directly interact with the customer. However, much of the work is being done behind the scenes and at a distance from the customer- for example, making sure the grid is appropriately set up to prevent outages and sources of energy that will meet their needs. Distance from the customer does not mean that the engagement strategy needs to occur at a distance. To be successful, the company’s culture and employees must have the customer at the forefront in all of their decisions, whether or not they are directly interacting with the customer.

What are some practices you've found effective in enhancing customer engagement? Do you have any specific ways in which you measure customer engagement or any ideas about how it could be done? 

It’s about providing real-time experiences and service that reach customers when they need it.
Whether that is a service, product, mobile app, or just electricity, it’s getting their need fulfilled. You can do this by applying insights to the data you have on customer behaviors. By collecting and analyzing data on customers’ behavioral consumption patterns, you can begin to predict what customers will need and hopefully get it to them before they are asking for it. It’s also about listening to the customer, and then listening again. You must understand and empathize with the issues the customer is facing and figure out a way to solve that problem. This is only accomplished through leveraging and embracing customer feedback.

Another thing I have seen that’s very effective is having a holistic view of and understanding of what can impact the customer experience. I’ve been witness to some incredible work dissecting the impact of internal and external events on the overall engagement of customers. When we can understand those impacts, we can begin to understand how information should be communicated with customers to make sure they have the knowledge and background that will impact their experience.

How is customer engagement related to agility, or the ability to sense and respond to the forces of change?

With customer engagement, we must have a broader perspective than simply trying to engage and serve our customers in their current environment. We are building the capabilities to meet their future needs. If we don’t do this, someone else will serve their needs as more options for energy sources and services emerge. Therefore, we must remain agile to the needs of customers by remaining attuned to their changing needs and the changes to external trends in the environment. In order to be successful at agility, it goes back to the right workforce and engaged employees—employees who are willing to go above and beyond in understanding their customers and delivering superior service every time. 

Thank you very much, Heather, for providing your insights on both employee and customer engagement. 

Find this thought provoking? Leave a comment, like and share!

---

About Ben Baran
Ben Baran, Ph.D., is probably one of the few people in the world who is equally comfortable in a university classroom, a corporate boardroom and in full body armor carrying a U.S. government-issued M4 assault rifle. Visit: www.benbaran.com. 

The HR Mindset That Wins Friends and Influences CEOs

During a recent conversation I had with a senior executive, I brought up some of my efforts to promote strategic thinking and using data to guide decision-making among human resources (HR) professionals. She nodded in agreement, but then she interrupted.

“You know, there’s one thing I hate about our HR department,” she said. “They think like gate keepers, when they should be thinking like service providers.”

She went on to describe how the HR department in her organization tends to always be about forcing compliance, hindering processes and creating administrative obstacles. It was almost, from her perspective, that the HR department was so focused on justifying its own existence that it had institutionalized a “gate-keeper” mindset. HR at this organization seems to be operating on assumptions that communicated to others outside of HR that:

• You don’t know what we know.
• You need us to get what you want.
• You must follow our process.

This mindset is anathema to agility, which is the ability to sense and respond quickly to the needs around us.

Like my executive friend said, we need HR professionals to adopt the mindset of a service provider. (Of course, many do already, but clearly there’s room for improvement.)

A true “service-provider” mindset is one that prizes a focus on customers, both external and internal to the organization. For HR professionals, the customer is often internal: senior executives, hiring managers and, indeed, every current employee. External customers that interact with HR directly or indirectly include job candidates and any potential future employee.

So how might an organization’s HR function adopt—or further enhance—a service mindset?

One area of research that applies here is the literature on “service climate,” which essentially refers to the degree to which employees think their managers and leaders expect, support and reward excellent customer service.

Frankly, top leaders must make service a priority. This means that top HR leaders, should, among other steps:

• Talk about being servants to the rest of the organization
• Publicize good examples of people demonstrating outstanding service to internal and external customers
• Consider building customer service into performance feedback and review processes
• Systematically assess the perceptions that other functions in the organization have of HR
• Promote HR professionals who demonstrate outstanding customer service

Interestingly, research also suggests that HR functions that adopt this mindset may also drive better customer experiences for the organization’s external customers—particularly in service-related businesses. This can happen if HR, for example, helps set high standards for customer service, ensures adequate staffing, reinforces the message that customers are important and helps to ensure that tools and technology for customer service are in place for employees to use. (A quick Google Scholar search of Ben Schneider’s work on service climate will reveal a wealth of related research.)

The HR function does have compliance responsibilities, but enforcing standards does not have to be mutually exclusive with a service mindset. A service mindset is about both the “what” and the “how” of what people see as important. And regarding compliance, HR professionals who see themselves as educators and build healthy, service-oriented relationships with line managers will likely make much more progress than the “gate keepers.”

Leaders in HR and talent management have an increasingly relevant opportunity to be agile leaders, and developing a service mindset is one place to start. I’ll be joining other HR professionals at the 2016 Human Capital Summit in New Orleans, March 29-30. The theme of that conference is “Agile Talent Strategies for Managing Change and Shifting Priorities,” and I’d love to see you there. Click here for more about the conference. 

In the meantime, do you see HR as a “gate keeper” or “service provider?” How else can HR adopt a service mindset and be more agile in helping the organization overall? Leave a comment below!

Find this thought provoking? Like and share!

---

About Ben Baran
Ben Baran, Ph.D., is probably one of the few people in the world who is equally comfortable in a university classroom, a corporate boardroom and in full body armor carrying a U.S. government-issued M4 assault rifle. Visit: www.benbaran.com.