customer service equals solving problems

We all know that customer service – whether the customers are external or internal – is crucial. But stating that raises an important question: “What, exactly, is customer service?”

The answer is: “Solving the customer’s problems.” That’s it. And we tend to forget that. Then we focus on creating structures and processes to provide “customer service” and forget the reason behind the structures and processes. Companies with great customer service invariably have strong processes, but processes alone ensure nothing.

Solving problems is more than structures and processes. In fact, great customer service is hard. It requires thinking. It requires being creative. It requires really understanding the customer’s needs. It might even mean sending the customer to (gasp!) a competitor. But here’s what the customer remembers: you solved their problem. Or: you didn’t solve their problem. Or: you prevented them from solving their problem.

I was once trying to return home from a business trip in Europe. A flight attendants’ strike in Berlin delayed my flight from Spain to Frankfurt enough to cause me to miss my connecting flight back to the States. The flight from Spain was on a small, economy carrier and Frankfurt to home was on Lufthansa. Even though it was not Lufthansa’s fault, they VOLUNTARILY (I did not have to ask) booked me on the first flight out the next day, paid for a hotel room, and gave me meal vouchers for my dinner. Maybe they did that for everyone because of the strike, maybe it was because I was flying Business Class – maybe I don’t really care. They solved a big problem without me asking. Any guesses which airline is my absolute favorite?

Here’s the example that sparked this posting. I recently broke some important parts off my mountain bike. When I went in to the local bike shop I was told that the part I needed was backorded for at least a month. Their tone and expression suggested that the “month” was going to be a lot longer than 30 days. They said they could order the part and let me know when it came in or I could try eBay. Not wanting to wait, I scoured eBay, even resorting to looking at eBay pages in Europe (international shipping can’t be that much extra, right?). A friend who currently lives 2000 miles away and runs a small bike shop offered to help. He contacted some folks at the manufacturer and found they had the part I needed still attached to a frame that had been sent back on warranty. Two days later the part is in his hand. Could my local bike shop have done that? Absolutely! Did they? Nope. They probably thought they had provided good customer service by being honest, offering to order the part, and suggesting other solutions. Truly, it was better than most shops, but they failed to solve my problem when another solved it easily.

This struck a huge chord with me from an HR perspective. How often does HR offer the bare minimum of service (“Read the employee handbook.”)? How often do we stop at the policy or just shrug shoulders and say, “Sorry, we can’t do that.”? How often do we forget that our customers are looking to us for help and guidance? How often do we treat our internal customers – the managers and employees – like actual customers who have a choice in whether they spend money with us? (By the way, they do have a choice. It’s called outsourcing. If HR isn’t providing real value by solving problems, it deserves to be disbanded and hired out to a vendor.)

So what are some of the basic tenants that make a person stand out as providing excellent customer service? Here are some thoughts in no particular order. These aren’t customer service secrets, just some observations from over the years:

  • Set and manage their expectations. When can they expect an answer, when will you follow up, what is the process, what can they expect, etc.
  • Do what you say you are going to do.
  • Take time to really understand the problem the customer is trying to solve. They may be asking for one solution when, if you had better understanding, you could easily offer a better solution.
  • Let them know if you can’t do it AND then explain what you can do to solve their problem.
  • Suggest alternative solutions AND provide the pros and cons of each. You don’t always have to have the one right solution, just provide them with the information they need to decide on a solution.
  • Great customer service does not necessarily mean doing things for free. Sometimes you can through extra service or product in for little or no cost to you. However, if they ask for something beyond what you normally provide and this will create costs, the appropriate response is: “You bet we can do that, it will just add $X and Y time to the process.” Then let them decide if it’s worth it. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. Either way you are helping them solve the problem in a way that best fits their needs.
  • Communication regularly during the process. Even if it’s only to say that you have nothing new to report. People can deal with waiting much better if they know you haven’t forgotten about them and understand the general timelines.
  • In fact, go above and beyond all the time (hunt that part down!) AND let the customer know what you’ve done for them. Not in a martyr-ish whiny way, but so they know how hard you’re kicking butt on their behalf. I’ve known so many people who go way beyond and then get resentful when the other person didn’t appreciate it – even though the other person had no way of knowing about all the extra effort. I guess they “should have known.”
  • Respect people’s time. Treat their time like it’s precious and you’re practically guaranteed to be providing great customer service. Treat their time casually or disregard it and they are practically guaranteed to resent you no matter what else you do.
  • People remember how you treat them. Even when they don’t like the outcome, your behavior sets the stage for their response. Grant them the understanding, compassion, and humility that you’d want if you were in their shoes.

Actually, I’ve probably overcomplicated it. Maybe it’s as simple as: help them solve their problem and treat them the way you’d want to be treated while you do .

why HR rocks

I can be quite critical of HR, but it’s only because I really like HR. I see what it can be and get frustrated when it’s not. HR on a good day contributes heavily to great business, to competitive advantage, to a workplace where people can perform at their best. HR is not why the company exists, but it enables the company to do what it does best. Good HR moves things forward; bad HR gets in the way.

I have a personal mission to help people be at their best – that’s why I’m in HR. But why should you be in HR? Why should anyone choose HR as a career? Hmmmm, good question. Some thoughts:

If you have both people and business skills you can be a superstar. HR needs people who can understand, translate, and communicate between the impersonal numbers side of business and the intensely personal human side. Even the coldest, sterilest, most numbers driven work gets done through humans with all their squishy, emotional, irrationality. Understand and communicate to both and you’re a hero.

Influence the entire organization. HR plays a large role in developing the culture (and is also a reflection of the culture that’s been created). It’s pretty cool to help shape a company.

Know what’s going on. IF (big if) you can keep your mouth shut and keep things confidential, you will learn far more than you ever wanted to know about your co-workers and all the scandals kept on the downlow.

Get a big picture view. Even if you don’t want to stay in HR forever, a couple of years will give you a very big picture view of how the organization fits together, who does what, how information flows, and who the real power players are. That’s invaluable info for any rising leader.

Gain exposure. HR is one of the few departments that actively interacts with leaders in every other area. Even the admins in HR have more exposure to leadership than the high potentials in more isolated areas. The exposure and networking can be a huge advantage (just avoid making enemies).

Food. There is always food in HR. My six year old son told me that he wanted a job just like mine.  In moments like this I’ve learned to ask “why?” before getting all misty eyed. He said, “Because you always get to have cake.”

Party central. HR often bristles at the idea of being the ones who have to organize the company picnics and Christmas parties. Yes, if that’s all you’re being asked to do by senior leadership then you’re in a very marginal HR department. However, HR really is in position and generally has the people skills to throw great parties. What better way to reach people and influence the culture? If the HR department is already supporting competitive advantage and helping the business kick capitalist booty why not lead the charge to celebrate it? (Do you really want accounting heading up the next party?)

Helping others. Everything else aside, it’s pretty cool to be in a position to help others. People tend to come to HR when their lives are at their best and worst moments and without getting all clichéd and sappy, it is a tremendous privilege to be able to celebrate with them or help them with their transition.

HR isn’t always fun, but it’s a place I enjoy. That’s why I want it to be the field I know it can be.

human resources’ top goal?

From time to time I see HR folks insisting that the primary purpose of Human Resources is to keep the company from being sued. This philosophy is at the very core of everything I find wrong with HR.

Yes, HR can play a huge role in preventing or mitigating employment lawsuits. This is an important result of HR, but the top goal? Prevent lawsuits vs. select and train really great people? Prevent lawsuits vs. creating an environment where people actually want to be there? Prevent lawsuits vs. helping managers be the best leaders they can be? It really seems to be putting the cart before the horse. After all, a company can get sued if it mismanages its money but no one ever says that the number one goal of the finance department is to prevent lawsuits. You can get sued for being abusive to customers or false advertising, but I’ve never heard anyone suggest that the primary purpose of customer service and marketing are to prevent lawsuits.

Want to know the #1 way to ensure that HR is never involved in any strategic level conversations? Want to guarantee that your company culture is rife with fear and managers don’t manage? Want to be stuck in the glorious tar pit of HR as bureaucracy? Spend all your time focused on not getting sued.

In the perfect little world in my head, HR’s #1 goal is to help the company perform at its best. Minimizing lawsuits is a by product of doing things right; it’s a means to an end but not the end itself. The best processes and practices will help the company perform in a way that comply with all the laws and regulations. However, “not getting sued” as an end goal will never, ever create high performance. It’s like a runner training for a marathon with the #1 goal of not getting injured. Sure, they don’t want to get injured, but the best way to not get injured is to not train. After all, you can’t pull a muscle sitting on the couch. But that doesn’t work because their #1 goal is to perform at their best on race day. Not getting hurt is a part of that, but it’s obviously not the focus. Instead, the runner knows that with good planning, preparation, and execution of a training program they will minimize their chances of getting injured while maximizing the chances of high performance.

It’s an idea worth repeating: HR’s #1 goal is to help the company perform at its best.  And if you do it well, you automatically reduce the chance of getting sued. But that’s an outcome of doing things right not the other way around. For example, adhering to all the anti-discrimination laws does not ensure that you hire great people. But when you are focused on hiring the best people you will naturally seek diverse talent pools because you don’t want to exclude the best talent because of arbitrary bias.

Can we move HR out of the dark ages now? Instead of operating out of continual fear of lawsuit, let’s create high performing companies by helping people be at their best.

you’re not the boss of me

When my son was five years old he was fascinated with “being in charge”. No surprise really because at five it seems like everyone is in charge of you. Even as we grow up I suspect we all want to be in control of our own destiny. This drive, this ambition is a good thing but any strength pushed too far becomes a weakness. Within every organization there are employees, managers, even senior managers getting in their own way – and getting in the company’s way. They spend their time wishing that they were in charge – in complete control. They are irritated by anything that gets in their way and dream of being able to lead unhindered. Why is this dangerous?

It ignores the practical reality that everyone reports to someone. Thinking that you can get promoted high enough to escape the scrutiny of others is fantastical nonsense. If they can’t see this obvious truth, what less apparent realities are they missing? What are they not doing while they are spending their time and energy in fantasyland?

A leader dreaming of being in complete control is a leader who wants their ideas and decisions to go unchecked by law, regulation, common sense, or basic manners. They seem to believe that they are completely right in all situations and should never be questioned, second guessed, or told “no.”

Leaders thinking they are universally right lack introspection and ignore/discredit any feedback that suggests they might be wrong. This is an assertive person who will make snap decisions that are often right, but they are unable to tell when they are wrong. They are also unable to lean from mistake or experience.

Because they believe they are always right, they rarely think through the potential consequences and downsides of a decision. Although they may have good ideas, implementation is often chaotic because they mistakenly believe that creating the idea was the hard part and executing the idea is easy. Likewise, they are continually frustrated by those around them who are unable to implement their ideas exactly as it exists in their minds, unhindered by reality.

The leader who wants to be completely in charge is someone only thinks about themselves rather than what is best for the company, the customer, the employees, or anyone else. They create teams, departments, and organizations whose success and glory is so centered on themselves that it dies when they are not there. This is in stark contrast to the leaders they try to create great teams, departments, and organizations that will thrive after the leader is gone (think petty dictatorships vs enduring democracies).

Unfortunately, these folks are often used to getting their way because others find it easier to give in than keep crashing against the wall of their closed-minded obstinance. This only reinforces the belief that they are right and if they stick to their guns they will prevail. All of these traits make them ferociously difficult to manager and downright painful to report to.

Sometimes this person will get in their own way so much that their career never moves forward and they spend their lives at the lowest levels, forever frustrated. Sometimes, this person will realize that they cannot work for others and start their own business or seek out jobs with maximum autonomy. And sometimes, this person will rise up through the organization, gaining considerable position and power through talent and hardwork, yet still crave more, more, more.

Again, I’m not referring to ambition, but the desire to have complete, unchecked control. So what’s to be done? As an HR pro, how do you help this person lead while staying within the boundaries of law, decency, and long-term success? How do you help them tap into their often considerable strengths while keeping them from creating anarchy and chaos? I’m leaving this open ended as I’d love to hear others’ ideas and experiences.

shrinking comfort zones: the quick path to nowhere

Your comfort zones are either expanding or shrinking – there isn’t any middle ground. Either you’re stepping across the line, challenging yourself, moving a bit into the unknown and pushing back the boundaries OR you’re backing away from the line. Each time you step back so that you can stay with the familiar and comfortable, the line draws in, so you have to step back again, and again it shrinks.

The world it is a changin’ (duh!). Jobs are moving off shore or going away or radically evolving. A sure ticket to failure is to stand still, refuse to change and insist (insist!) that the world not change either. Problem is, the world’s changing whether we like it or not. The jobs of tomorrow are not going to look like the jobs of today. Want to stay employed? Stay relevant. Challenge yourself. Learn. Grow. Push your boundaries. Take on challenges you wouldn’t normally take on.

The more we try to stay safe by not changing, the more at risk we are of being completely behind. My prediction is that anyone who isn’t focused on improving and developing new skills each and every year will soon be either underemployed or unemployed. BUT, I’m not necessarily referring to technology. Technology facilitates a lot of changes, but is becoming more and more user friendly (anyone remember punch cards?).

The biggest growth potential that I see needed is in change, communication, and relationship development. As an HR pro or manager or employee, can you have the tough conversations you need to have? Can you hold people accountable? Can you influence people who don’t report to you? Can you use technology to enhance your communication instead of complicating it? Can you develop the trust and relationships that will enable you to get twice as much done with half the angst? Or do you leave it up to other people who are “better at it.”?

You’re either moving forward or falling behind in direct relationship to the rate you are pushing your comfort zone. Avoiding the difficult or unpleasant parts of the job – often the parts that involve other people – is a fast track to irrelevance.

quick career advice #1

For those just starting out in their careers Woody Allen gave the shortest and best career advice when he said, “80% of success is just showing up.” You want success (or even gainful employment)? Show up in body, mind, and spirit.

It’s common sense, but the power in it is that every knows it but not everyone does it. Be one of the few who does it.

In any job, but especially entry level jobs there is a ton of competition. There are lots of people out there who can: a) do your job better; b) do your job cheaper; or c) both. Here’s how it works when a manager is deciding who to keep and who to drop: Proven person gets some grace, person who looks like he/she has potential might get a little slack, and new person/warm body is first to go. We all have to start out as new person and the key is to show potential and become proven ASAP. First impressions make a HUGE difference. Gotta kick butt from minute #1.

good enough isn’t, but great enough is

I was discussing the idea that good is the enemy of great the other day and someone said, “You ever notice how people say something is’good enough’, but they never say it’s ‘great enough’?”

Great enough. Love it.

I’m a big believer in the concept that good enough isn’t. Hitting the bare minimums isn’t success, it’s temporary survival. Sadly, most companies seem to struggle to reach even the level of good enough. They shoot for good enough customer service, good enough prices, good enough hiring policies, good enough management development, good enough training, etc. The problem is that, at the very theoretical best, it will only be good enough. In the real world, a bunch of attempts at good enough added together tends to equal not good enough. Aiming for “good enough” seems to get us to “doesn’t completely suck”.

In fact, I’d like to propose a real world rating scale. Feel free to use it for performance appraisals, evaluating processes, due diligence for investments, whatever you need a rating scale for. Here it is:

  1. Sucks
  2. Doesn’t completely suck
  3. Good enough
  4. Great enough
  5. Phenomenal, but exceeds the point of diminishing returns
On this scale, there is only one rating worth hitting: “Great enough.” Although “Phenomenal” sounds like a good thing, there comes a point in any quality improvement where the costs/effort/resources required for additional improvement become an exponential curve while improvements move along a very flat linear curve. In other words, you’re spending tons of resources for ounces of improvement.
But, “great enough”… Getting to great enough requires a completely different set of questions, decisions, actions than it takes to be merely good enough. Consider this: getting your life to good enough is easy. You’re probably already there. But what would having a great enough life look like and what would it take to get it there?
How freakin’ cool would it be to work for a company that focused on doing everything great enough? How incredible would it be to know that all your efforts at work were consistently great enough? Who wouldn’t sing the praises of a company that only hired people who were great enough?
I’ll give you tonight to mull it over. Tomorrow morning, what are you going to do to start kicking butt and creating great enough relationships with your friends and family? What are you going to do to create great enough health? To start getting your finances into great enough shape? Come Monday morning, what are you going to do to take your team to great enough? If you’re in HR, what are you going to do to create great enough selection and onboarding processes? To help the managers you serve to become great enough leaders? To create a great enough company culture?
Great enough. Love it!

what’s stopping you?

Ironman Kona was this weekend. This is the big daddy of triathlon. There are several Ironman length races held around the world, but this is the one with all the street cred. It’s a 2.4 mile swim in the ocean, 112 mile bicycle ride, and a full marathon distance 26.2 mile run at the end. Throw in wind and heat and that’s more fun than 99+% of the world can endure.

This year the course record was broken by Craig Alexander. He finished the sufferfest in the 8 hour, 3 minute range. Reflect on the distance and the time. Yeah, I can’t get my head around it either. And as impressive as that finish is, it’s not the most impressive finish.

I’m told that three of the finishers are over 80 years old! Plus, another one of the finishers, Rajesh Durbal, is a triple amputee. My brain goes all slack jawed when I try to think about those four people. I need to go rethink my life.

It reminds me of the scene in “Dodgeball” (easily one of the greatest comedy movies ever made) where Joe (Vince Vaughn’s character) has quit the dodgeball tournament. He’s sitting in the airport bar when Lance Armstrong steps beside him and orders a bottle of water. Lance says that he’s a big fan and tells Joe that he once felt like quitting when he was diagnosed with brain, lung, and testicular cancer all at the same time, before he overcame it to win the Tour de France five times. Then he says: “But I’m sure you have a good reason for quitting. What are you dying from that’s keeping you from the finals?” Joe responds: “Right now it feels a little bit like… shame.”

We’re not all Lance Armstrong and I’m comfortable using that as an excuse. But when I think of those four finishers, I have no more excuses. It’s not about finishing a premier triathlon, it’s about becoming the person I want to be and doing the things I need to do before dying.

What was it you wanted to accomplish again? What was the “reason” (read as: lame excuse) you tell yourself you can’t? Now that all excuses have been removed by those finishers, what’s stopping you?

Soundness, profitability, or growth. Pick any two.

In everything there is a choice and in everything there is a tradeoff. There is an old adage in bicycling that highlights the choice/tradeoff decision: “Light, strong, or cheap. Pick any two.” When buying parts you can have them light and strong (but it’ll be expensive), strong and cheap (but it’ll be heavy), or light and cheap (but it’ll be weak). It’s up to the individual to decide what’s most important to them.

The same is true in business, even though it goes largely unrecognized. We can just as easily say: “Soundness, profitability, or growth. Pick any two.” We can be stable an profitable (though growth will be slow), profitable and fast growing (at the cost of soundness), or sound and growing (but won’t have much left over as profit). The challenge is, that because we don’t recognize this tradeoff, we try to create a business that is stable, has great profits, and is quickly expanding. Trying to maximize all three at once is impossible – at best one (or more) of the three will suffer, but be hidden. For example, the business may be highly profitable and expanding nicely and appear stable, until that first bump in the market highlights just how overleveraged the company is. At worst, the business is neither sound, nor profitable, nor able to grow.

Correct me if I’m off base here, but it seems that Wall Street rewards maximum profitability and growth, generally at the expense of soundness. Yet, the truly enduring companies (whether we’re talking about a sole propritership or multinational giant) – the ones that survive the cycles of recession – are the ones that best understand this tradeoff and keep soundness in the mix, switching focus on profits or growth as their strategy warrants.

In business, as in personal life, it always comes down to opportunity costs. By understanding what you really want, you have a much better handle on the strategy to pursue. As wonderful as it sounds, it’s a recipe for disaster to try and create soundness, profitablity, and growth simultaneously.

That’s the theory anyway. I’d love to hear about examples that poke holes in the theory (I sure can’t think of any).