The Return Of The Live Human Being

Metism writes: "The voice on the other end of the phone does not tell you to 'please listen carefully, as our menu options have changed'. E-mail inquiries do not pretend as though they were never sent. More and more companies are finding out that people actually want to interact with other real people, not pseudo-intelligent machines that can't respond to simple things like 'Hi, how are you?' Did pseudo-intelligent humans forget something so obvious? Companies like LivePerson help clients from large ISPs to small libraries communicate one-on-one with people via the web. Softroad takes the concept of live help one step further by allowing anyone, anywhere access to their live Internet surfers via SMS, 2-way pager, or other mobile device. There's nothing like human ingenuity when it comes to questions more complex than 'what's my balance?' or 'what's the weather in Miami?'. But are more companies going to listen?"

Comments

Answer

[bravehamster]

But are more companies going to listen?

No.

The answer is as simple as the economics of phone support. Live support technicians cost much more than automated support. Live *expert* support technicians are both expensive and impossible to hold onto. Once a support tech becomes smart enough to know what the hell he's doing, he's smart enough to find a better job. And he does. And all the training cost thrown at that tech goes down the drain as fas as the company is concerned. Automated lines can work 24/7, can handle much higher call volumes and the majority of the cost is up front. This is why I think the tech support industry is going to be the big pusher behind the development of true AI. And when that happens, everyone wins. The users, the company, the support techs who get laid off and realize that it's the best thing that ever happened to them.

Re:Answer

[dev0n]

I'm going to argue with you on this one. :) I'm the Technical Support and Customer Service Manager at a web hosting company, and we pride ourselves on our support/customer service. Our phone system doesn't have a million menu items. We rarely ever have wait times on our phone lines. Our support reps are experts, and they're all passionate about the technology we use. And they're here 24 hours a day.

As far as staff turnover, we have found that it isn't a problem. I don't consider training "a waste" when I look around and realize that most of my staff have been here for well over a year, and the ones that have moved on have mostly moved on to other positions at our company. We've made our company a fun and exciting place to work, and people just don't want to leave. They want to get promoted, which happens frequently.

So, it *is* possible to have expert technicians that don't cost a fortune in turnover and training.

Re:money

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop assuming that solutions from MS end up costing the most in the long run.

If a solution from the monopolist does NOT cost more than the commodity solution, how is the monopolist extracting more profit than the commodity provider? How is he to maintain his stock price above the commodity provider's stock price?

Microsoft's solutions MUST cost more in the long run, or their stock crashes. Of course, if it costs too much more, the stock crashes anyway, but they have many years experience at hitting the sweet spot, where they are squeezing the maximum possible flow of blood from your turnip.

Did this years ago

[gmhowell]

We dropped our automatic phone attendant years ago. Those who are viewing this post with a colored dot next to my name know that I work for a doctor's office.

Ignoring all of the claptrap, we have three problems. First, old people. Second, dumb people. Third, poor people.

The first two have great difficulty in getting in touch via the menus. The last category still has rotary phones (I'm not sure if my grandfather who died in '93 ever had a touch tone phone. Just not available in that part of the county.) And these are the people who NEED to get through. The old person wants to know what the shooting pain in their left arm is, the dumb people want to know if it's bad that the festering wound from stepping on a nail three weeks ago is bad, and the poor people are usually only calling because that festering wound is causing their foot to fall off.

Then there is the other side of the coin: young, smart, rich. They WANT service. They don't want to deal with voice answering system hell. Basically, in my industry, nobody likes it.

So we ditched it. At the time, everyone was happy.

Problem is, like others have mentioned, human beings are expensive and error-prone in their own ways. Even with 15 phone lines (in a four doctor office) we still have times when all lines are 'lit' for hours. People complain about this. But when we mention the alternative (computer answerer) they quickly say that the wait wasn't too bad. (BTW, it's set up so that if no incoming lines are available, the pt. is told to call answering service. The answering service gets through 90% of the time. Other 10%, and they go straight to cell phone)

So my only question is: why did it take so freaking long for others to figure it out? Remember those 15 voice lines? Double that. That's how many lines we have in the various locations. I dropped our ILEC for a CLEC because I got tired of waiting on the stupid computer (that and getting 30 bills per month instead of one).

Business school story: Guy from a corporation in Baltimore came to speak to the class (marketing?) and said that these computer answering devices were the worst thing ever invented (this was '96-'97, BTW). He used to love 'em. But one day, he was at lunch with a colleague/customer. Customer complained about how long it took to get through the menu. Speaker said "What are you talking about? I just dial the direct number and..." Customer interupted "Here's my cell phone. Call the main number and try to get to your secretary". After ten minutes, the speaker finally got through. Instead of checking on messages, he told secretary "get some people together to ditch the phone system. The meeting will be in 30 minutes, as soon as I get back from lunch."

Well, duh!

Re:Sometimes there's no difference

[X-rated Ouroboros]

It's really a matter of chance as to whether you get someone who can answer your question or whose just going to flip through their script trying to find something that seems to fit.

I've found what seems to be a really good diagnostic question for determining if you've got a script reader or someone that knows (or can find) the answer to your questions regarding to software tech support. "What's the most recent build ID for [product]?"

If they don't answer you within a minute, hang up, call back, and get somone else. If they do answer (and are correct, or at least plausibly correct if you don't know) you can get down to asking your real question.

If you're not in a situation where a question like the above makes sense, be vague when you first state your problem. If they attempt to answer your question- hang up or ask to be transferred; if they ask you to provide more details you've got someone worth talking to.

Also, get several possible solutions to your problem each time you call. If you have to, say you've already done the first thing they suggest (because, more than likely, it would be true if you hung up, tried it, and had to call back when it didn't work). If the representative is thrown by you saying "Yeah, I've done that, that's not the problem." hang up or ask to be transferred.
This is of course all assuming you have a pretty good idea what's wrong to begin with and can adequately describe the problem, of course... If you aren't giving them anything to work with it's not their fault if they can't help you.

What I think is being overlooked here is that a lot of the phone menu systems are in place BECAUSE they're ineffective and annoying. If most folks get fed up and never open a complaint ticket, guess what? It appears that you have a high rate of customer satisfaction.