Top 5 reasons why “The customer is Always Right” is wrong
When the customer isn’t right - for your business
One woman who frequently flew on Southwest, was constantly disappointed with every aspect of the company’s operation. In fact, she became known as the “Pen Pal” because after every flight she wrote in with a complaint.
She didn’t like the fact that the company didn’t assign seats; she didn’t like the absence of a first-class section; she didn’t like not having a meal in flight; she didn’t like Southwest’s boarding procedure; she didn’t like the flight attendants’ sporty uniforms and the casual atmosphere.
Her last letter, reciting a litany of complaints, momentarily stumped Southwest’s customer relations people. They bumped it up to Herb’s [Kelleher, CEO of Southwest] desk, with a note: ‘This one’s yours.’
In sixty seconds, Kelleher wrote back and said, ‘Dear Mrs. Crabapple, We will miss you. Love, Herb.’”
The phrase “The customer is always right” was originally coined by Harry Gordon Selfridge, the founder of Selfridge’s department store in London in 1909, and is typically used by businesses to:
- Convince customers that they will get good service at this company
- Convince employees to give customers good service
Fortunately more and more businesses are abandoning this maxim - ironically because it leads to bad customer service.
Here are the top five reasons why “The customer is always right” is wrong.
1: It makes employees unhappy
Gordon Bethune is a brash Texan (as is Herb Kelleher, coincidentally) who is best known for turning Continental Airlines around “From Worst to First,” a story told in his book of the same title from 1998. He wanted to make sure that both customers and employees liked the way Continental treated them, so he made it very clear that the maxim “the customer is always right” didn’t hold sway at Continental.
In conflicts between employees and unruly customers he would consistently side with his people. Here’s how he puts it:
When we run into customers that we can’t reel back in, our loyalty is with our employees. They have to put up with this stuff every day. Just because you buy a ticket does not give you the right to abuse our employees . . .
We run more than 3 million people through our books every month. One or two of those people are going to be unreasonable, demanding jerks. When it’s a choice between supporting your employees, who work with you every day and make your product what it is, or some irate jerk who demands a free ticket to Paris because you ran out of peanuts, whose side are you going to be on?
You can’t treat your employees like serfs. You have to value them . . . If they think that you won’t support them when a customer is out of line, even the smallest problem can cause resentment.
So Bethune trusts his people over unreasonable customers. What I like about this attitude is that it balances employees and customers, where the “always right” maxim squarely favors the customer - which is not a good idea, because, as Bethune says, it causes resentment among employees.
Of course there are plenty of examples of bad employees giving lousy customer service. But trying to solve this by declaring the customer “always right” is counter-productive.
2: It gives abrasive customers an unfair advantage
Using the slogan “The customer is always right” abusive customers can demand just about anything - they’re right by definition, aren’t they? This makes the employees’ job that much harder, when trying to rein them in.
Also, it means that abusive people get better treatment and conditions than nice people. That always seemed wrong to me, and it makes much more sense to be nice to the nice customers to keep them coming back.
3: Some customers are bad for business
Most businesses think that “the more customers the better”. But some customers are quite simply bad for business.
Danish IT service provider ServiceGruppen proudly tell this story:
One of our service technicians arrived at a customer’s site for a maintenance task, and to his great shock was treated very rudely by the customer.
When he’d finished the task and returned to the office, he told management about his experience. They promptly cancelled the customer’s contract.
Just like Kelleher dismissed the irate lady who kept complaining (but somehow also kept flying on Southwest), ServiceGruppen fired a bad customer. Note that it was not even a matter of a financial calculation - not a question of whether either company would make or lose money on that customer in the long run. It was a simple matter of respect and dignity and of treating their employees right.
4: It results in worse customer service
Rosenbluth International, a corporate travel agency, took it even further. CEO Hal Rosenbluth wrote an excellent book about their approach called Put The Customer Second - Put your people first and watch’em kick butt.
Rosenbluth argues that when you put the employees first, they put the customers first. Put employees first, and they will be happy at work. Employees who are happy at work give better customer service because:
- They care more about other people, including customers
- They have more energy
- They are happy, meaning they are more fun to talk to and interact with
- They are more motivated
On the other hand, when the company and management consistently side with customers instead of with employees, it sends a clear message that:
- Employees are not valued
- That treating employees fairly is not important
- That employees have no right to respect from customers
- That employees have to put up with everything from customers
When this attitude prevails, employees stop caring about service. At that point, real good service is almost impossible - the best customers can hope for is fake good service. You know the kind I mean: corteous on the surface only.
5: Some customers are just plain wrong
Herb Kelleher agrees, as this passage From Nuts! the excellent book about Southwest Airlines shows:
Herb Kelleher […] makes it clear that his employees come first — even if it means dismissing customers. But aren’t customers always right? “No, they are not,” Kelleher snaps. “And I think that’s one of the biggest betrayals of employees a boss can possibly commit. The customer is sometimes wrong. We don’t carry those sorts of customers. We write to them and say, ‘Fly somebody else. Don’t abuse our people.’”
If you still think that the customer is always right, read this story from Bethune’s book “From Worst to First”:
A Continental flight attendant once was offended by a passenger’s child wearing a hat with Nazi and KKK emblems on it. It was pretty offensive stuff, so the attendant went to the kid’s father and asked him to put away the hat. “No,” the guy said. “My kid can wear what he wants, and I don’t care who likes it.”
The flight attendant went into the cockpit and got the first officer, who explained to the passenger the FAA regulation that makes it a crime to interfere with the duties of a crew member. The hat was causing other passengers and the crew discomfort, and that interfered with the flight attendant’s duties. The guy better put away the hat.
He did, but he didn’t like it. He wrote many nasty letters. We made every effort to explain our policy and the federal air regulations, but he wasn’t hearing it. He even showed up in our executive suite to discuss the matter with me. I let him sit out there. I didn’t want to see him and I didn’t want to listen to him. He bought a ticket on our airplane, and that means we’ll take him where he wants to go. But if he’s going to be rude and offensive, he’s welcome to fly another airline.
The fact is that some customers are just plain wrong, that businesses are better of without them, and that managers siding with unreasonable customers over employees is a very bad idea, that results in worse customer service.
So put your people first. And watch them put the customers first.
If you liked this post, there’s a good chance you’ll also enjoy:
NB: This is a re-run of a previous post while I’m away from the blog for a day.
Permalink
Spread the message:
reddit
del.icio.us
digg
The stakeholder movement and corporate governance | Managing Leadership Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
[…] “customer is king” days. But it is also one that has flaws, perhaps in both senses. Please see this excellent post by Alexander Kjerulf, the Chief Happiness Officer, about the problems with this concept (my […]
Hayden Tompkins Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 4:41 pm
This is also, inexplicably, the kind of thinking that teachers have to put up with.
Jo Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 6:21 pm
I find myself disagreeing Alex! Your clients are depriving their staff of one the chief satisfactions of a customer service profession - making people happy!
It’s fun figuring out what is really bothering people. A person writes a letter of complaint because they want to fly with us. It takes time and energy to write that letter. They are hanging on to the relationship. They are putting their difficulties with the relationship on the table so we can address them.
How does that become a matter of taking sides? We only have to find out what started the whole thing, which was probably ten or twenty steps earlier, acknowledge it and explain all round.
And then buy both sides a drink! They will be feeling pretty sheepish at that point!
We could say that this is better for business. I just do it because it is more fun!
PJ Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
I’ve got a problem with the hat example - not because I’m a neo-Nazi, but because I’m a strong advocate of free speech. Is wearing a hat, however offensive, “intefering with the duties of a crew member” ? “Causing other passengers and the crew discomfort” is way too vague for my tastes. What if it was a yarmulke instead of a neo-nazi-embellished hat? or a turban? Catering to the least common denominator is always a lose - people need to grow thicker skin, IMHO.
Rebecca Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 7:58 pm
At my company, we do our very best to make people happy, especially since our customers are mostly teachers, and we know that Hayden’s comment is accurate. But we also remember that not everyone is our customer. I like the idea of balancing respect for our workers with respect for our customers.
Jo Said,
March 10, 2008 @ 10:11 pm
@ PJ I had the same thought! These things are tricky. I once took a a cell phone away from a student in class - nicely and gently and she freaked out on me. I was puzzled and asked the young camera man, who had it all on tape, what he thought (our lectures were filmed). He suggested that there might have been a smutty comment on the screen. I hadn’t thought of that. It was a moment of insight to me that a lecture room is an essentially social experience to a young student (under 25 or so - I used to teach post-grads.) I never touched a phone again and when they went off and students expected someone to be kicked out, I just commented mildly that it was 2006 and we all knew what a phone was. The relief in the room was palpable. It was a novel idea that they could make a sensible decisions themselves to switch it off or take the call outside.
@Rebecca, I couldn’t agree more. When I get lousy customer service, I rather suspect I am being treated the way the staff are treated by their managers. There is a spiral effect which students also appreciate quickly. They were fascinated by self-fulfilling prophecies and self-efficacy and quickly grasped that they could make or break a lecturer, particularly an inexperienced lecturer, through their expectations and reactions. It had never occurred to them that had that much power over the atmosphere on the campus (2 x 450 classes).
I fly a lot and I’ve noticed the atmosphere on a flight begins early. Once confusion begins, it escalates. The first stage of those five group formation stages is important. People depend on the staff for cues and direction and if staff appear confused or disorganized, the passengers become disoriented or anxious. And yes, we should expect some storming. The worst possible response is to try to quell the storming. It signals lack of confidence in the airlines’ arrangements, and exacerbates any unease.
You have me started and I shouldn’t take over Alex’ blog. I’ve watched behavior on long haul flights for years and it is fascinating.
Drinkin’ Guinness in the 416 | Two reasons to love five reasons Said,
March 11, 2008 @ 2:16 am
[…] kind of love this post with five reasons why “the customers are always right” is wrong over at the Chief Happiness Officer (who I have quite the internet crush on) as well as this post […]
Ask M Said,
March 11, 2008 @ 10:19 am
Re PJ’s quote, I would disagree with that. Yes, free speech is very important, but do you really want people saying and doing what they like, no matter who gets hurt or upset?
What if there had been descendants of a Holocaust survivor, or relatives of someone murdered by the KKK, on that plane?
No, I’m with the crew member on this one. And had I been a passenger on that plane, I would have written a letter of thanks to that crew member and another of commendation to their manager when I got home.
People (customers) don’t have the right to behave rudely or aggressively and expect others (employees) just to put up with it.
As an accountant, I knew one client who was always rude to his staff and to his suppliers, but treated his customers like royalty. Talk about double standards. I’d have given a month’s salary never to have to work with that man again.
M
Rob Said,
March 11, 2008 @ 11:11 am
Excellent article, love the sentiment. One thing though, the modern way of looking at customers is internal as well as external also lets think about replacing the word ‘customer’ with ’stakeholder’. Customers, suppliers, community etc as well as employees are all stakeholders. The stakeholders child with the nazi hat was clearly not concerned with the other stakeholders and lets get real i’m all for free speach but the hat was advertising illegal and banned organisations. Get real PJ
michael cardus Said,
March 11, 2008 @ 2:33 pm
This falls into the three parts of a team theory - if you split the team and customer base into three parts. 1) the champs these are the yes we love your ideas and mean it people the “early adopters” they love your company and everything you do is greate. 2) the undecideds they are not with you and not against you - they are not sure how they feel and need more information. 3) the sh*@ heads - these are always against you and no matter what you do you are wrong. We as leaders and cutomers satisfaction always pay more attention to the sh*@ head (even when they are the smallest faction). By paying attention to the challengin group the undecided go that way because they are getting attention. THey the champs leave your company and go elsewhere for their businesss.
Ron Pemberton Said,
March 11, 2008 @ 6:57 pm
What an excellent article. Well done. I was just writing an article for my site about this very subject - but couldn’t possibly do as good a job as you have done. Kudos!
Amanda Said,
March 12, 2008 @ 12:52 am
Number 2 resonates with me. As a customer I have always wondered why people who are abusive and complain about everything as a way of life get the better deals and customer service. Something about it just doesn’t seem fair.
Evil HR Lady Said,
March 12, 2008 @ 3:02 pm
I agree with you 100%. If management sets a policy, then the employees should receive nothing but support for following that policy.
HRagitator Said,
March 12, 2008 @ 4:44 pm
I don’t disagree with your points here but I’m concerned with the message that this sends to employees. In a time of communication bombarding from all sides, it seems to me that the simple axiom “the customer is always right” is still useful no matter how flawed the logic. I think that management needs to determine when the exceptions are to be made.
Imagine trying to train a customer call center on the catch phrase “some customers are wrong, some are abrasive, and some are bad for business, so be careful which ones you please, because we don’t want you to be unhappy or provide worst customer service”.
That should be some interesting training!
The Customer is Sometimes Right « Get Some Hairapy! Said,
March 17, 2008 @ 2:07 am
[…] Read the rest here. […]
Links I liked - volume 1 : bettergoalsetter.com Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 1:10 am
[…] Top Five Reasons Why “The Customer is Always Right” is Wrong at the Chief Happiness Officer … I never buy ebooks, but made an exception for this guy, and it’s really good (buy it!). I love this post, because nobody ever seems to write this stuff. Reasons number one won me over from the start … employees deserve every support in their efforts to implement the policies of Those Who Must Be Obeyed. […]
MisseLaneius Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:34 pm
These reasons are fantastic.
I’ve worked in customer service for about 6 years now, and in that time one of the things that I have learnt is that most of the time, people are pretty good. If they have a complaint, they will deal with it in a mature and intelligent manner, and if you try to meet them halfway, or explain why they can’t have what they want, and are treated with dignity and respect, they treat people in customer service roles with dignity and respect.
I believe that all people have the right to be upset when things haven’t gone their way. They have the right to express the way they feel. They do not have the right to demand the ridiculous, and that is sadly the way that service is going in the world. We are spending less and less on first level service, and more and more on complaints handling, so that the people who do all the yelling and abuse get all the service.
That’s going to make the ordinary, quiet, friendly customer go elsewhere. If they go one place for service and don’t get the service they want, they aren’t going to complain. They’ll just leave.
The problem is that in our current corporate culture, businesses value the money that customers bring in more than the capital they have in their employees. Employees understand the value of the customer. However, they also know that for every 100 customers, there are one or two that are simply not worth your while. They are dead weight.
2xyn1xx Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
While working in retail during college, I got a piece of advice that pertains to this very subject. My boss told me ” The customer is not always right, but the customer is always the customer.” He was able to keep his employees happy and loyal while also keeping his customers happy and loyal. Maybe a few more customer service departments should keep this in mind.
jeff Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
If you tell your employees to adhere to one set of policies, then train your managers to make exceptions, you’re entirely reinforcing the model that is described in this article. Employees resent being represented to the customers as wrong for adhering to the policies, and quit attempting to enforce those policies. . . your managers are tied up all of the time listening to complaints because your employees don’t have the ability to enforce the company’s policies nor make decisions that are in the company’s best interests. . . and you reinforce aggressive customer behavior because if they complain loud and long enough, someone will give them what they want to shut them up.
ChannelNate Blog and ReBlog :: Top 5 reasons why “The customer is Always Right” is wrong Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 4:40 pm
[…] Top 5 reasons why “The customer is Always Right” is wrong : Here are the top five reasons why “The customer is always right” is wrong. […]
5 razones que explican por qué el concepto “el cliente siempre tiene la razón” no funciona | eleZeta - Lucas Zallio Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 4:57 pm
[…] un concepto que tiene más de 100 años y fue elaborado por Harry Gordon Selfridge en 1909. Estre blog, enumera 5 razones que demuestran que este concepto no tiene […]
Tom Danver Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 5:04 pm
I’ve never approved of pandering to the whims of customers. Customers take my services on my terms or not at all. I run a training school and if a customer makes an unreasonable complaint I kick them straight out the door and refund the money.
Customers know where they stand with me. I’m not a pushover and can’t be bullied. If they step out of line, I’ll give them a piece of my mind and then they’re out. Nothing gives me greater satisfaction than dragging some dumbass loser who is giving one of my trainers a hard time out of the training room and shoving him into the street.
If more businesses acted liked this, we’d soon put a stop to these professional whiners, who waste so much of our valuable time and money.
Badger Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
Tom Danver please publish the name and location of your training school so those who won’t kiss your a** will know not to give you their business.
fire-pixel.com Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 6:50 pm
A caveat should be posted with this - extreme abusive customers. True customer service is just about non-existent now… they all have their canned lines to try and appease you while telling you to take a long walk off a short pier. *COUGH* KitchenAid *COUGH*… I WAS an avid consumer of their products until I got dead ended with their CSR regarding a 2 year old $400+ mixer that I used about 8x and broke. Ridiculous. We need quality brought back to our products and we’d probably have less reason to put up with seasoned whiners… but when the valid complaints continually get jacked (like most do) I don’t buy into all the hype a company pushes about the customer being important. Put up or shut up. Because in the end of the day, good customer or bad, it’s their cash that supports your products. If you have enough of the good to not put up with the bad, that’s the best spot to be in.
Anyway, sorry for the rant… here’s another good article you might like:
Top 10 Awesome Websites That Sell Cool Products You Probably Have Never Visited But Need To.
http://www.comember.net/blogs/firepixel/
Take care!
Bruce Temkin Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 6:54 pm
Nice post. I wrote a post in my blog (Customer Experience Matters) called “The Customer Is Not Always Right — Now What?” I developed 5 principles to use in place of ”the customer is always right.”
My blog: http://experiencematters.wordpress.com/
The Customer Is Always Right? Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:01 pm
[…] http://positivesharing.com/2008/03/top-5-reasons-why-the-customer-is-always-right-is-wrong/ […]
Mich Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:04 pm
Having worked in customer service for some time, I feel pretty confident saying “fuck people”.
Bad customers, which are the only ones that will get blown off, don’t deserve to be made happy. They want something for free and they don’t care how nasty they have to be to get it.
That is not how I treat my employees now. They strive to make our customers happy, until some pedantic jerk comes through, and we send that one packing.
Letting a few bad customers slide so you can keep the good ones happy, and your employees cheerful, is by far a better model for success than bending over for every dickhead that you run into.
Period.
Aphoenix.ca » The Customer May or May Not be Frequently Not Right Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:19 pm
[…] just read The Top 5 Reasons Why the Customer is Always Right is Wrong and it’s interesting, but there’s a whole part of customer interaction that they have […]
d0k Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:20 pm
The customer is always right. Period.
The customer pays for a service and that service is bound under the terms and conditions of the company providing the service.
If the company does not protect itself from the litigious claims made by customer, well that is its problem.
The company is wrong to try and put the ‘customer is always right’ mantra just to create pressures on its employees without protecting them.
Nice try though.
larry davidson Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:48 pm
Working in a specialty, alternative green grocery in boulder, co gives you an idea of how unreasonable, overbearing, cheap, bratty, and ultimately inauthentic the elitist, yoga/buddha health folks can be. They are supposed to be nicer, setting an example with their ‘enlightened’ ways, from the calm happy that exercise and/or yoga gives them. Instead, they just piss on employees when they themselves are wrong; they have an abject inability to apply common sense while simultaneously filling their space with righteous smug, making everyone in their wake wrong because they have to always be right.
Anyway, working in retail means you have to deal with developmentally disabled people. sometimes you can tell right away and of course you feel good about helping *them*. The other times, you have to wait for them to ask you a question most frequenters of mass market groceries would have the sense and pioneer to figure out for themselves, but then they have to be mean about it when you endeavor to answer with grace.
Leo Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 7:50 pm
I agree with everything except the hat example. The hat should have been OK. Yes, it’s obnoxious and annoying but airlines as well as other people should tolerate some degree of obnoxiousness. If your employees have no tolerance at all for even a little bit of rudeness, then what you got there is intolerant jerks. People can be rude for a good reason, like if their stomach hurts, or if the eye hurts, or if they just broke up, etc. Not all rude people are bad people. Good people can have a bad day. Not everyone wearing swastika is a Nazi. Maybe the guy was trying to make a free speech statement? And if we don’t allow swastikas then what else shouldn’t be allow? This opens a whole can of worms. Should we allow Islamic symbols? Should we allow the star of David? Why yes? Why not?
Even though today companies have the right to block free speech, it is not good, especially if those companies engage in highly public activities or services. As the days go by, government is becoming less and less relevant in day to day life and the censorship provisions in the Constitution do not protect our free speech enough. When every chunk of land is privately owned and when free speech is only guaranteed on government owned land, you have no free speech.
I detest nazis and KKK. They are the scum of the earth. But nonetheless, I love free speech so much that they should have been allowed to fly. If you want to do something, maybe hang a sign right over their seat that says “ASSHOLE”. That’s your free speech. So if he has offensive symbols you can hang some offensive symbols of your own over his head. That’s fine. But you have to let them fly.
larry davidson Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 8:05 pm
The business-to-customer relationship should be like the host to guest relationship. At a certain point, the host is being too reasonable and the guest too unreasonable. What is lacking most in this is familiarity. In our corporate culture, we are used to hitting the reset button on this relationship every time the customer enters the store. this makes for a very transactional experience. businesses need to do a much better job at customer relationship management.
From the POV of the corporation, transactional experience is great…everything is standardized and therefore predictable. This process-orientation makes for speed and sales. It’s very industrial revolution, business one-point-oh. From the POV of the customer, it’s very impersonal, so there’s never any loyalty built. This makes for churn or customers trading standardized, transactional experiences by way of trying-out other brands.
Imagine if corporations actually remembered it’s customers (beyond a number) but actual preferences…how much attention the customer needs- a lot or none at all, potential purchases, special orders, etc. Sometimes all it takes is to remember a person’s name and tell them it’s good to see them to keep them coming back.
Nowadays, retail is becoming even more standard and impersonal. Sure, they have these membership cards which are nothing more than a way to track cash transactions and enforce that you carry their advertising everywhere you go. Automated checkout counters in groceries say ‘thank you *valued customer* for shopping at *name_of_grocery*” Customer service!
Jo Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 8:29 pm
The range of opinions expressed here are similar to those expressed by university lecturers. Lecturers would like to be liked and when something goes wrong, they get very upset with students who become distressed. And then, very often, they ‘deny service’ - arbitrarily and usually un-contractually. Do you remember any of that? Do you remember how you came to hate those lecturers?
I was at Euston Station in London last night. All services were delayed/canceled and I mean ALL out of a major commuting station. Two people were in a little kiosk trying to answer the questions of hundreds if not thousands of commuters. I managed to engage eye contact and I complimented them on the way they were trying to engage and then suggested they get the management on the line for us so we could request them to provide more resources. Guess what - the management were un-contactable. THERE WAS NO WAY FOR PEOPLE ON THE FRONT LINE TO TALK TO THE MANAGEMENT. This is very common. Watch what happens next time you see a service failure. The front line person will have little backup. They are trying to do a good job but don’t have the resources to do it.
In the end every passenger makes an individual decision. What will I do about the kids who haven’t been collected from school? etc. etc. This is what the ’system’ wants - for us to absorb the costs of its failures. Outwardly passengers become docile, which is what the system wants. They stop engaging because they believe it is futile AND THAT NOTHING BETTER CAN HAPPEN. Learned helplessness sets in and they become angry. Like many of the people who are commenting here. And they hand on that anger to their customers in their next service encounter.
So what can we do here? We can thank Kamila and Mohammed who were on duty at Euston Station last night handling hundreds if not thousands of people who were very worried. I doubt they will read this. They are exhausted right now. So am I. But I took the day off to recover. So double thank you.
I think we can build up knowledge on how to handle people who are distressed. While Kamila was checking out options to reroute, Mohammed provided practical advice in a way that was respectful and useful. He simply recounted his experience of the last stoppage and extrapolated heuristics which the passengers could apply. That allowed us to make decisions in an orderly way. As a result I actually decided not to try to get on first train out because I didn’t have kids to pick up and realistically I could wait provided there was no risk of subsequent trains being canceled.
After a similar experience just two weeks ago, I have resolved to build a gratitude mashup - where we can log on to say “Kamila and Mohammed were fantastic at Euston Station last night”. PS a guard on platform 16 was also pretty good.
Anyone want to help?
Jeniffer Gradie Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 8:31 pm
You know what, sometimes we don’t have a choice but to deal with you. Sometimes the market has no competition, perhaps your company got some of the govt pie and we can’t do anything about it. Perhaps you’re the only one who can service us. Perhaps you made a promise. I find too often you like to pretend the customer is irrational, petulant and stupid, but we’ve been putting with your crap for far too long.
You’ve gotten free rides far too long.
HRagitator Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 8:55 pm
So your opinion is to NEVER make exceptions. I’m sorry, but that’s unreasonable. The problem is not that exceptions are made, it’s that they’re made arbitrarily or without consideration for precedent.
Exceptions will always need to be made. There’s no perfect policy. Check out the Constitution and it’s amendment process (i.e., a formal exception system).
I’m not suggesting that managers make a lot of exceptions, I’m just saying that exceptions should be meted out by a few rather than many. The more people you have being lenient with the rules, the more you open yourself up to unnecessary waste, expense, litigation, etc.
My point is simply that you shouldn’t lose sight of the principle or meaning behind the motto just because it doesn’t work perfectly in 100% of cases. The golden rule is logically flawed, but it will always be a good rule of thumb at heart. That’s why it endures centuries.
Grig Larson Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 9:31 pm
The biggest thing that people get wrong is “The Customer is Always Right.” That comment was never supposed to be taken literally, but was meant as an attitude you should have with the customer. You TREAT them as if they are right, even when wrong, because that’s how you maintain control over the call or sale. Let me address your points from that angle:
1: It makes employees unhappy
Non-supportive management makes the employees unhappy. An example from my past: we had a very abusive customer who didn’t care for women or black people. His order got screwed up (he got the wrong style headboard on a bedroom set), and so he called the delivery guys “useless as a bunch of niggers” and threw them out of his house. Then he decided to threaten to kill the store manager, called the police to tell them the manager was a thief, called the district manager a “mattress-backed whore” in her answering machine, and was so horrible to the head of our customer service department to the point she broke down crying. The customer demanded to speak to the company president. The president said, after seeing his head of customer support crying, “I am not speaking to anyone who treats people that way.” The vice president called the guy back, and said, “While a mistake was made, that was no excuse for your abusive behavior. We’ll fix the problem if you call everyone you spoke to back, and apologize. Otherwise, I have been authorized by the company president to have a cease and desist order drawn against you in a court of law. Be a man, and do the honorable thing.” We fixed this guy’s problem AND got his apology. An argument could be made that the company could have told him to go to hell, or kowtowed to him, but they didn’t do either. So while the customer was abusive, the employees knew management had their back, even though a mistake had been made in the delivery.
2: It gives abrasive customers an unfair advantage
No more than non-abrasive ones. Never tell any customer what you can’t do, tell them what you CAN do. Don’t say, “I can’t give you a new car,” but “I am sorry you are having issues with your car, why don’t you bring it down, and we’ll look at it for free. We certainly don’t want to leave you with a poorly-running car.”
3: Some customers are bad for business
This is true. But you shouldn’t make that assessment right away. In this case, terminating the Airline customer was probably a good idea in the example you gave.
4: It results in worse customer service
Only if the employees don’t get support.from management. There are really no “problem customers” just “problem situations.” I used to run a book store that had a “no returns, exchanges for same book only” policy. I had my cashiers enforce this rule, but if anyone demanded to speak to the manager, they could come to me. Could I “bend” this rule? Of course. I always explained to the cashiers that this made their life simpler, and it wasn’t because they were wrong or looked stupid, but they shouldn’t have to deal with that burden. I wasn’t contradicting them, I was simply the next up the chain, and they did their job just fine. If a customer bitched that “well, that ditz on the register said I couldn’t get a different book,” I replied, “that’s what I tell them to say. She did her job well. And I would like it if you did not refer to any of my employees in a derogatory manner.”
5: Some customers are just plain wrong
Oh, absolutely. But don’t treat them like that or you’ll get nowhere. Sometimes, the best thing is to let them scream for 3-5 minutes. After that, they are out of breath an easier to get them to do what you want.
Customer service is an art. There are not many black-and-white policies to dealing with anyone in the human race; ask a doctor. But I wanted to claifiy that “The customer is always right” is a path, not a goal.
PENIX Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:08 pm
I demand that you remove “Top” from the title of your article since the importance of each of your points is completely arbitrary, and cannot ranked as the absolute top 5. As a customer of your site, I am always right.
Jim Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:16 pm
Free speech does not give you the right to broadcast that speech to a captive audience in a private setting. The hat guy’s position is indefensible. It’s a private setting and the attendant has the agency to determine what speech can be broadcast in that setting. That is, you have no more right to wear a piece of clothing with a visible message on an airplane than you have to wear it in my home.
On a public street, on a public bus or ferry, in a park or in a government building? Yes, he has the right to wear that hat. But in a private vehicle, a privately-owned building (inlcuding one with public access) or on private lands? No, he does not have that right.
The right to free speech only protects you from being interfered with by the government; it does not give you the right to require non-interference from other citizens in private settings.
Jo Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 10:17 pm
@Grig
Agreed Grig - the trick is getting everyone to rise above the problem situation. And oft times that leads to greater understanding all round and greater loyalty all round which leads in turn to a more engaged approach when the next problem arises.
And therein lies happiness! Feeling that we can sort problems out together, even bad ones.
The internet has been so quiet that I assumed the Easter holidays have effectively begun. Then the CHO burst into life!!
Mike Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 11:14 pm
PJ, the hat issue is tricky, but consider: does support of free speech extend to the point of allowing one customer to shout the n-word at another customer? Wearing clothing with racist sayings or insignia might be thought of in the same way.
charles goodall Said,
March 19, 2008 @ 11:32 pm
I don’t see what this excellent article has anything to do with nazis, holocaust or free speech. I guess anyone wants to support their own fervent agenda no matter what the issue may be. Anyway, I have to make comment about the whole issue of people “saying what they want”.
Adults do business together. Adults understand that their approach with another person will bring about a reaction that is deserving. Even the most immature and irrational adult understands that they will not always get exactly what they want.
The point of the discussion for a customer in a conversation with a supplier is to get what they are asking for. The point of the discussion for the supplier is to provide what the customer wants, while satisfying their first needs which are spoken or written, and the periphery needs that come from the unspoken requests of body language and chit-chat. The abrasive person will get “just” what they want and loses an opportunity to give and take with full understanding of the possible results of the meeting.
Nearly every level of customer service demands an agreement between two people. The two people are negotiating a deal. There are rules of the game that will promote a strong conclusion for both parties. Those implicit rules demand respectful discussion and an open ear. Often there are people who walk into a situation of supply, carrying a whole lot of demand. It is tiresome to deal with anyone who seeks assistance and advice, but will not entertain any validity or quality with the expertise that is being offered. Yes the supplier wants to satisfy and may readily do any number of things to make the deal in a satisfactory way — leaving a contented buyer in a good relationship headspace.
However, I have sometimes been rebuked in business when I have stated in private conference with associates that the customer doesn’t “fit” or that there is entirely too much work and cost to bear when attempting to do business. Oddly, it is the “greasy wheel who gets the grease” who demands the most time and effort and pays the least. In a real business model, it is simply not realistic to devote that kind of energy to someone who cannot be satisfied at any level. Wait — there is a level that will satisfy and that is total subjugation to their will. I have to sigh. What is the point of that? In the long run the supplier loses time and money and mindshare of the customers who actually support the business as it is designed to conduct business. Go into a car showroom to buy a heavy machinery vehicle? The SUV will not satisfy that request — so why not move on to the tractor supplier if that is what you are really looking for.
I agree that the customer who wants to waste a company’s resources should be encouraged to go elsewhere. While the door is swinging, invite the new client in and give then what they are asking for, inside a relationship of supply and demand with reasonable expectations and good business practice. And they will return with satisfaction, and requests and suggestions that will truly build the business for the benefit of those who demand, and those who supply.
Joe Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 12:15 am
to tom danver - i feel the same way you do. i run a retail shop, and don’t put up with the kind of crap that people put out. just because i’m behind a counter does not mean you get to treat me like a lesser human being.
more power to those of us willing to stand up for ourselves.
BobS Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 2:43 am
Oh great! Yet another “excuse” for big business to provide terrible customer service. Rather than pay their customer service reps a living wage, they’re going to be on “their side”. And since almost all the corps provide terrible customer service, there really isn’t anywhere else for customers to take their business.
Just another reason to despise corporate America and do business with tiny local operators whenever possible.
Yet the author of this piece swallows this entire line of bull and breathlessly touts the propaganda. This is why this country is going down the tubes - far too many gullible people who gladly march in lockstep and swallow everything the propagandists tell them. Pathetic.
golden nugget Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 3:33 am
i am that nugget that would not sit down when the cashier requested me to take my shirt off
christian ross » Blog Archive » Sometimes the customer isn’t always right. Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 6:03 am
[…] from Positivesharing […]
Allie Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 6:49 am
Thank you for this! My sister works at a retail franchise which uses the phrase “The customer is always right” religiously. One day an old lady came in and was annoyed with another woman’s autistic son. She got into the boy’s face and mimicked a noise the boy made. My sister couldn’t say anything to her because if the woman complained to her manager, she would have been fired. If I were in that position they would have booted me out the door so fast, but you can bet I would have taken that old bag with me.
Paul Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 7:30 am
The Customer is always right
BUT…
Some people don’t get to be your customer.
You get to decide who is and who isn’t your customer.
Rob G. Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 7:53 am
To expect an airline to change is quite insane. But they ought to listen to the lady who complains and change everything she complained about since she represents 99.9% of all customers.
There are customers who play games for whatever reason. But listening to suggestions is essential for good business.
Rob Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 8:45 am
In the examples you give where the customer is not “right”, you seem to be citing extreme cases: Abrasive customers, incessantly demanding customers, intolerably rude customers. If the exceptions are to be made in such extreme cases, that suggests to me that the maxim itself is valid, just amended to “The customer is always right, with some exceptions in extreme cases.” What is the alternative maxim? “The customer is always wrong?” “The customer is sometimes right?”
The huge fallacy I see in your argument is that it makes the assumption that “the customer is always right” implies taking the customer’s side over the employee. It means no such thing. It means giving the customer an elevated position relative to THE COMPANY, not the employee. Sadly, the growing trend is for companies to use their customer service departments to SHIELD upper management from their customers. Your argument that siding with the employee requires siding against the customer allows a company’s treatment of customers with callous indifference to be painted as a virtue. It is this callous indifference, this practice of using employees not as a resource to help the customer but as a line of defense against the customer, that results in employees so often being subjected to frustrated and irate customers.
It’s ironic that you give multiple examples from airlines. Is there anyone who hasn’t heard or experienced at least one horror story about treatment of customers by an airline? Now that they can justify mistreatment of customers with the additional excuse of “national security,” the airlines probably have a worse reputation than the phone company! The reason that airlines and the phone companies are such a nightmare to deal with is because as oligopolies they have all the power over the customer, they know it, their employees know it, and they treat their customers accordingly. Conversely, it is in the industries with the highest levels of competition that the credo that the customer is always right is most often adhered to, which suggests that the philosophy does indeed make good business sense, at least for companies that actually feel that they NEED their customers.
The reason that the customer should always be right is because the customer is usually the one with the least power. It is a wonderfully egalitarian principle, like Innocent until proven guilty, that we shouldn’t take for granted. I’ve traveled extensively, and I can tell you there are many places in the world where people are in awe of the American model of customer service. “What? If you don’t like somthing you can just take it back to the store, and they won’t argue with you about it? Seriously?”
I just wish I could be treated with the same level of courtesy and respect I receive when dealing with a well-run business when I’m dealing with noncommercial institutions: the IRS, the Post Office, public hospitals, the DMV…
Deciding that the customer is always right does not mean favoring the customer over the employee. It means favoring the powerless over the powerful. It’s a beautiful concept that this world needs more of, not less.
links for 2008-03-20 | sofarsogeek.org 2.0 Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:24 am
[…] Top 5 reasons why “The customer is Always Right” is wrong (tags: business) […]
Sachin Gopal » Blog Archive » Important Unwanted Customers Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 9:36 am
[…] Top 5 Reason Why The Customer Is Always Right Is Wrong got me thinking on how many times we have had customers who are nothing but a cost to the company. […]
NYFUNTIME.COM Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 10:47 am
very interesting thanks i will take this as a lesson in life..
Jay
nyfuntime.com
5 Reasons the Web Design Client isn’t always right : Brandon Dawson.org Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 11:42 am
[…] But as we’ve transitioned into being a consumer-driven culture, some people have taken these words and twisted them into some kind of childish mantra, wherein they need to be given whatever they want, just because they want it. Alex Kjerulf gives us 5 reasons we shouldn’t be so quick to service the needs of ultra-demandi…. […]
Randy Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 11:45 am
Well, written article. Obviously, from the complaints, it takes a pair to write an article like this.
Jo Said,
March 20, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
I work in the HR function and if there is any part of the business that is service-challenged, it is us.
On Tuesday I heard Adam Greenfield, author of Everywhere and new Head of Design at Nokia talk on the five principles of design. I was testing HR systems against these 5 principles as he spoke and I’ve rewritten them clumsily but positively on my blog. It would be interesting to hear from HR people who have designed systems and people who bear the brunt of our systems, what they think.