Actually I'd say it began about 25 years ago when answering machines took control of a caller's ability to communicate. Remember?
"If you want to check your account balance, press 3." "If you want to open a new account, press 4." On and on the choices went but there was no choice for those who had a complaint or a question which did not neatly fit one of the given department descriptions. Of course you could opt for the general put off "If you need anything else, please hold the line; an operator will be with you shortly"- perhaps!
This system of communication has become quite prevalent among those industries that expect that most incoming telephone calls are made by irate customers and will not be pleasant.
This system has even extended to the world of computer communications. You've seen the letters FAQ frequently on your screen. Officially, the letters stand for "Frequently Asked Questions." However, for many consumers, they might as well stand for "Fudge All Questions."
It is not really certain that anyone ever did ask one of the "Frequently Asked Questions;" but I am equally certain that many consumers would like to ask other questions, frequently asked or not.
Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly the case that firms that offer FAQ on the Internet provide no means of communication other than ordinary or registered mail. Frequently even use of the mail is discouraged by simply not disclosing any physical mailing address.
Obviously, firms that manipulate their present and potential customers this way have decided that two-way communication is not a desirable attribute of customer relations. The reasons for this attitude may vary in detail, but the general impression created in the market place is that:
Some firms have concluded that their market position is so strong that customer relations are a least important or necessary activity.
Other firms, however, seem to have concluded that the consumer should go to blazes. He will buy what we want to sell and suffer with the consequences.
Such are the opinions of many consumers who find themselves effectively denied after-sales service. This is a very pessimistic state of mind among consumers, generated by the cynical attitudes of top management.
This practice of avoiding communication has in fact been spreading and is being applied with ever more rigidity by firms intent on avoiding discussion of any kind.
I am put in mind of the local Internet provider that allows incoming telephone communication only to their "service" department. Upon calling this number one is met with a mechanical voice instructing the caller to hold on for 7 minutes; followed later by another message instructing the caller to hold on for 10 minutes, and on and on it goes! As for new customers, this same firm relies exclusively on electronic sales messages on its web site to which a potential customer either says yes, or no; no questions allowed.
Recently this firm made the mistake of allowing the telephone numbers of its executive offices to be published. However, this did no good for the consumer who, after calling this number, is met with the live voice of a sweet young thing who very truthfully advises that she is not permitted, under any circumstances, to connect the caller with any executive.
Then we have the case of a large chain of supermarkets. At least one of the stores in this chain has probably the poorest record of customer service in the country. Customer service simply does not exist here, nor does any idea of communication.
This store maintains a desk at which two young ladies are seated. Their nametags announce them as "Administrators." What they administer is an unfathomable mystery. On one occasion a consumer demanded to speak with the store manager. This resulted in a long and inconclusive argument with the "administrators," who finally sent for someone else. The hapless woman stood for several minutes only to be met by a young man who appeared to have been dragged off the street to deal with this customer. The woman simply gave up in disgust.
An efficiency expert had been trying to reach the Director of Operations of this chain for several months to discuss a business proposal. Actually, this man had been trying to reach any executive of the chain, but the only communication coordinate he was able to obtain was that of the legal department. His requests to the legal department that he be put in touch with the Operations Director have been ignored.
One wonders: "Is anyone in charge?" With no one to talk with, this is far from a rhetorical question. Among the subjects one might want to discuss with someone are the physical dangers of trying to shop in the store due to unpacked goods strewn in the aisles and blocking a consumer's access to her/his preferred product.
Then we have the government. In order to be fair and not to incite our Ukrainian readers unreasonably, let's make it clear that this example is that of an American government agency. This agency lists only the physical mailing address of its top executives. Letters addressed there are never responded to in less than six months. The only E-mail addresses available are those of very low-level civil servants whose command of the English language leaves much to be desired. Their ability at other languages has provided the same dismal results: i.e. absolutely no positive results, only results of the most negative and laughable kind.
Lastly, we mention the very large and powerful software developer who is quite put out at the level of software piracy around the world and who has even enlisted the aid of its government's embassies in attempting to enforce its intellectual property rights. Strangely enough, this company's sole effort at protecting its market position extends to restricting the ability of consumers to find and/or purchase its products, and then crying about piracy.
Not unexpectedly, at times one finds that one or more of this firm's products has not yet arrived in Ukraine. But when trying to contact the developer one finds there is no contact information available; it is top secret! This firm has a representative right here in Kyiv, one that proudly announces his telephone number on the Internet. But when one dials the number to inquire about the availability of one's favored software, the call is answered only by an answering machine that announces that software is not sold by this organization and one is told to dial another number - which turns out to the number of a person who claims never to have heard of the firm.
A call to the appropriate embassy about this usually informs the caller that embassies have more important things to be concerned with than software availability.
True, but then is it any wonder why people are willing to buy from the so-called "pirates?"
E. F. Riccio, Juris Doctor, is a professor of logistics at Wisconsin International University of Ukraine in Kyiv.
|
