Slashdot Mirror
Do Kiosks and IVRs Threaten Human Interaction?
DavidGilbert99 writes "According to research by the Hyatt Hotel group, one third of customers are already checking in at self-service kiosks in their hotel lobbies, eschewing the traditional route of the receptionist. This is indicative of a wider trend according to voice recognition experts Nuance who believe we simply never want to talk to a real human again, preferring the clipped, efficient tones of its Nina virtual assistant. Expanding this from mobile to now include the web means we could soon be living in a world where speaking to a real live human is the exception rather than the rule." When things go smoothly, I prefer the automated versions of many things (airport check-in, ordering products to arrive by mail, depositing a check); it's when things go wrong that voice menus and web sites just seem to make simple problems into complicated ones.
There is a difference between interacting with an average human and interaction with someone getting paid minimum wage. There's no value added by the later.
On two recent trips I had drastically different experiences. Front desk clerk at a cheaper hotel took 25 minutes to check in the three people in our group. We asked about simple things like which of the three restaurants next to the hotel was better and he couldn't even tell us what restaurants were next to the hotel. The second was at a much nicer hotel. The person behind the counter was clearly paid more, smiled, and was very nice. It took them all of about 10 minutes to get all four rooms of the group checked in, including changing floors for one of them. They also made some great recommendations for food.
What people want is value added. I'd never check in via a kiosk for the second hotel, but I'd be very glad to check in via a kiosk at the first. Not wanting interaction with idiots isn't the same as not wanting interaction with people.
How many times recently have you tried to call say a cell phone or cable company only to go through the decision tree hierachy that does not give are you an option your need, but you don't find that out until you are 3 or 4 levels down on the tree and you have already invested 10 minutes and then r put in a wait queue for another 20 just to find out you are in the wrong place. That design may save on some human salaries but at the cost of many very pissed off clients.
I think most people would like to talk with a person that can understand what you need and help. We certainly don't have a technology yet that allows a machine to take that place.
There also seems to be the effect if not the intent to limit access to only certain problems or complaints which you can do by design with an automation but not a person. So limited access for complaints is the other problem.
Hmmm, GP says they'd rather avoid people when they're stressed and tired and not in the mood.
You then respond by getting judgmental. You toss out a platitude about the benefits of human interaction and then proceed to insult them. Cause there's nothing like being snide to encourage human interaction. (I guess being insulted could technically count as "invigorating", not so sure about the "refreshing" part though.)
You know, just going by the sample comments, i think i'd rather talk to the GP when the GP is in the mood to talk, and just avoid you. Unless you want to make the defense that you're currently stressed and tired and not really up to decent human interaction at the moment?
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
That only works if the human has some level of decision-making power. These days, many humans you interact with in a business context are essentially front-ends to the software. The computer says you are assigned to room #231, that's where you go: Because the computer also made sure that the cleaners were scheduled beforehand.
What happens if the employee does decide to upgrade you? They get fired, even if it's over something as simple as putting a few extra chocolate sprinkles on your food: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2012/09/26/mcdonald-s-fired-me-after-sprinkling-too-much-chocolate-on-a-mcflurry-91466-31904726/
Bingo. This is exactly why I came to the comments of this post... to call "bull" on Nuance, for the very reason that you've already cited:
Nuance assumes that people don't want to have conversations with customer service reps -- but what they fail to consider is that most people do indeed enjoy human interaction... when it's actually human interaction. Whether it's the rep behind the counter at a hotel with their fake plastic smile and artificially exaggerated concern for your exhaustion, or the cashier at your local supermarket with their scowl and monotonous droning "Thank you... have a nice day..." it's all just forced and... well, predictably inhuman.
Generally speaking, people love interacting with their friends -- and for some of us, that even includes family -- and that type of camaraderie has largely been lost in today's customer services... the small town where you know Doris behind the register at the supermarket and your good buddy Joe who pumps your gas for you is gone. So the reaction from far too many people in "customer service" roles are, quite frankly, already so robotic as to offer no real advantages over the automated check-in kiosk and automated check-out registers... so why wouldn't I want the efficiency of an actual robot?
Now, mind you, if more companies were intentionally hiring employees who show genuine customer focused attitudes -- for example, in the same fashion as the folks running Chick-fil-a seem to have done -- then the pendulum might start swinging back the other way. In the absence of that, I'll go to the kiosk at every opportunity.