Why The 350 Dead Bangladeshi’s Are Our Fault

Ever shopped at Primark or any of the other 100′s of clothing stores who turn a blind eye to their supply chain?

How’s that cheap t-shirt you’re wearing feeling today?

The terrible irony of Primark (which is often the target of choice by campaigners against cheap labour etc)  is that it’s actually owned by Associated British Foods plc, which is a conglomerate which is 54% owned by a not-for-profit trust which does a lot for charity in the UK. I know this because on my way to Sweden last week I sat next to the Marketing Director (of ABF, not Primark) who explained this. According to omnipresent Wikipedia:

“Some 54.5% of ABF is owned by Wittington Investments.^[17] and 79.2% of the share capital of Wittington Investments is owned by the Garfield Weston Foundation, which is one of the UK largest grant-making charitable trusts, and the remainder is owned by members of the Weston family.”

Garfield Weston are a family-founded, grant-making trust which has been supporting charities across the UK for over 50 years (check out their good work here) but lets get back to clothing and 400 dead Bangladeshi’s…

Your leverage to affect change is directly related your choice to buy from a retailer who guarantees supply chain good standards and ethics, or not.

Specifically Primark, with revenues of £2,730 million and 36,000 employees, itself has the resources if it so wishes to ensure it’s entire supply chain adheres to certain standards. The market (in this case the supply chain itself) would accordingly respond if this is what was demanded of it by the buyers (e.g. Primark).

The future is in your hands

So, the fix, is actually really rather straightforward. All that is needed is the impetus – best demonstrated by our own purchase choices along with -ideally- a PR outcry, in the same way that most people don’t want horse meat in their burgers from some far flung country, resold and transported half way across Europe.

So friends, the power to prevent another 350+ dead clothing workers really is in your hands; or at the very least, the catalyst for change resides in your wallet/purse.

UPDATE: Primark (and some other companies) have offered compensation to the victims (BBC News link)

The march of Windows Metro inspired design

A while back I wrote a blog post saying I thought the forthcoming release of Windows Phone and it’s metro interface (plus subsequent Windows 8 release) would probably trigger a change in fashion with regards digital design. This was partially demonstrated by the MySpace new design also.

Seems this prediction may have been salient, as I’ve started seeing a variety of designs popup both on software and websites which clearly owe a nod and sometimes more, to the Metro interface.

What designs have you seen which look like bastard children of the Metro UI ?

 

Note the menu design on the Port du Soleil website navigation and the new AVG anti-virus navigation.

What happens when you complain to TFL about London Bus drivers?

..in short, the answer is a belated but appreciated personal reply, but tangibly, precious little.

Many London bus drivers, employed by private companies operating in conjunction with TFL, are at best aloof and at worst down right rude.

Credit to this article on public transport customer service, for the photo>

My main complaints were:

• That I had a specific bad experience with a bus driver
• That this is not unique
• That many people I know (including other bus drivers I have spoken to) AGREE that rude, uncommunicative, unfriendly bus drivers are endemic in the industry

My complaint, and subsequent reply, are published below in full, for those who care.

My email sent on the 3rd December 2012:

Sent:	03.12.12 12:10:19
Subject:	Formal Complaint

Dear Sir / Madam

Bus REF: DLA20S,
Registration: W404VGJ,
Route: 243 from Waterloo, @ 10:47 am on Monday 3rd December 2012

Can someone explain to me why TFL find it acceptable that on repeated occasions your bus drivers are permitted, seemingly encouraged, to treat passengers with such contempt?

The bus reference and time above refers to just one occasion where, after I ran to the bus stop and bus door, the driver closes the doors as I arrive, sees me, looks at me, and despite it being obvious I wish to board chooses instead to drive off.

There was no traffic which caused his need to depart so speedily as Waterloo bus station is not on the highway.

The hall mark of a successful business in this day and age is good customer service. While a minority of bus drivers still seem to embody this (and what I would hope remains a British tradition of politeness and good will) a vast majority do not.

I have too often experienced an arrogance from drivers, or at best ambivalence. Aside from driving off, many:

- Don’t respond when said “good morning” to or “good afternoon”
- Some accents are so thick that if they do reply they either mutter or sometimes one can’t understand their response
- Some don’t speak or respond when asked questions, at all!

I’m paying for a service and they are being paid by the custom I provide. Moreover, they are representing my (and presumably their) country and London, to everyone single passenger that boards a London bus.

I’m fed up with feeling like an unwelcome guest aboard my own bus service.

In summary then I would like a proper response (and action taken) around two points:

1) Regarding my specific experience:-

A) why the driver felt it appropriate to drive off

B) what has been done to ensure he pays more care and attention in future

2) In general why so many TFL bus drivers:-

A) seem to feel empowered not to put the passenger first

B) are rude, unresponsive and uncommunicative (if you don’t want to speak to the general public all day, don’t be a bus driver)

C) ..and what is going to change in TFL’s training and employment policies to ensure the points A/B change to substantially improve the customer service and friendliness of London bus drivers, to have an impact on tens of thousands of peoples lives every day who use London buses.

Perhaps TFL’s senior leadership can view it as a revolutionary new approach to their people, to go along with their revolutionary (and very good) new London busses.

Yours sincerely,

Andrew Scott

NB: To ensure a considered response from you, this letter will be published on line, on my personal blog, to my 3,600 twitter followers, publicly on Facebook, and sent to the Evening Standard newspaper.

The reply I received, 23 days later:

Our Ref:         1011585328/ABB

Date:              27.12.2012

 Dear Mr Scott

 Thank you for your message. I was very sorry to hear that a bus driver on route 243 (registration W404VGJ) did not allow you to board his bus when departing from Waterloo on the morning of 3 December 2012.

 Arriva London, who operate route 243 on behalf of Transport for London (TfL) have asked me to pass on their apologies to you. The driver could have allowed you to board and the incident is being followed up with the aim of minimising the possibility of similar errors on his part in the future.

 I am also sorry to hear of your many experiences when bus drivers in London have not exhibited the expected level of customer service. Transport for London (TfL) certainly does not encourage the sort the sort of behaviour you described and we engage with the private bus operating companies, who employ the bus drivers and manage the day-to-day running of the routes, to ensure that standards are as high as possible.

 All bus drivers in London are formally assessed by a Driving Standards Agency (DSA) Approved Assessor and must pass an additional test for Passenger Carrying Vehicle’s (PCV) as assessed by the DSA (which includes a focus on customer service). In addition, we work very closely with all our bus operators to improve the quality of our services, highlighting the need for attention to proper standards of service and driver conduct. We also strongly emphasise staff training and liaise with all bus companies to ensure we continue to achieve improvements across London. Whenever we receive complaints about poor standards, we follow them up with the bus company concerned. Assuming the complaint is upheld and it is not of a nature that could lead to dismal or suspension, the driver will undertake a variety of follow-up actions aimed at improving their standard of service.

 We would hope that the majority of bus drivers are not rude, unresponsive or uncommunicative and that they do try to the put their passengers first. The evidence we collect from our various monitoring exercises suggest that most of London’s 21,500 bus drivers carry out their jobs in the manner expected of them and customers find many to be helpful and professional in general. It is regrettable that isolated drivers cause this perception to be called into disrepute. Therefore we greatly appreciate you highlighting this incident to us, as it allows the bus operator to take action aimed at continuing to improve the level of service provided to our customers.

Once again, please accept our apologies for the delay and upset caused by the driver’s behaviour on 3 December. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. Please don’t hesitate to contact me again should you require any further information or assistance.

Yours sincerely

 David Gwynn

Transport for London – Customer Experience

We’re All Drug Addicts. And The Drugs War Is Madness.

I could easily spend the entire day writing a post about this headline statement.

In fact, I could probably consume the next year of my life researching and justifying a case for a radical rethink of the way we deal with drugs – both legal and illegal – in our society. But that will have to wait for another life time.

What I do know is that current policy is not working. The war on drugs is being lost every day. For me it’s a matter of simple logic. You can blame capitalism, market forces and the human condition.

If enough people want something badly enough, there is always going to be a healthy market which someone somewhere is going to try and serve in the name of making money.

Put simply, I’d rather that money was collected by the Exchequer (the tax man, in simple parlance) and put to good use, if you’re content to call government spending a good use, than lining the pockets of the few; a group of rich criminals who control and expand their international organised crime empires on the back of mass consumption of illegal substances. Even if you’re not happy with the term good use for government spending, the government does considerably better things with the money than organised crime – well, at least most of the time. Illegal wars excepted.

You’re a drug taker. Oh yes you are. Every day.

Medicines, tea, coffee.. In fact, that most people don’t view coffee – or more accurately caffeine – as a drug, is an anathema to me. Such a powerful psychoactive drug, which is highly addictive and readily available to anyone. Pretty toxic to dogs by the way, so best not perk up your pet Labrador with a quick Nespresso.

The power of this substance was ably demonstrated to me today, after an abstention of a couple of days from this Ethiopian elixir. I woke up at 4AM with a cracking headache. Seven hours and some ibuprofen later I’m no better (and I’m not a big taker of painkillers).

One cafe latte and within 15 minutes, I’m right as rain.

Caffeine at it’s best.

We’re all drug addicts. Alongside the 90% of Americans who consume crystalline xanthine alkaloid doses every day.

The American alcohol prohibition of the 1930′s didn’t work (and in the process, set the stage for three decades of organised crime, as the profits from the illegal alcohol production set the American Mafia up for the next fifty years). It’s ridiculous then to think that prohibition of Marijuana or in fact other substances is going to be successful.

Drugs should be make legal, probably with a couple of exception. Why? Because they can be controlled, quality controlled, access controlled and because Marlboro & co will kick the arse of every drug cartel in the world within months.

A not insignificant 7.6 billion pounds of the UK government tax revenues comes from Tobacco sales. Imagine what you could do with those from  additional drug sales?

Education. Proper care for those addicted to any drug – prescribed medications included.

The sometimes dangerous differentiation between legally rubber-stamped drugs (that many of us consume every day – some good, some bad) and those which are illegal for historical or habitual reasons must surely stop in our lifetime.

Two of the biggest practical problems with the illegal street trade is the up-selling onto harder drugs by street dealers and that those substances which are already dangerous are made more dangerous by impurities. For a drug user, it is a lottery.

How often do you go the off license to buy a bottle of wine or beer and be up-sold by a shop keeper to a crate of 50% proof Polish vodka? ..almost never. And at least even if you did, you could be pretty sure the Vodka wouldn’t blind you.

Every day, people risk their general health by taking illegal substances, bought from dubious sources, and in the process support child labour, horrendous criminal activities both at home and particularly abroad, creating in the process potential future or immediate burdens on our health services, without even having contributed to their funding via the very recreation which subsequently causes the damage.

In summary, de-criminalisation is no answer. This actually makes the situation even worse. It encourages consumption and increases demand which further funds organised crime – as even if not a criminal action to consume, production will remain so.

Politicians need to grow up and lead. Part of a politicians job is to educate the masses and to lead  the country to the right solution. That will, for sure, take time. And sadly, perhaps a very long time as the electorate are not renowned for their forward thinking. That translates then, to potential political suicide for any one who dares suggest the status quo with drugs is not the way forward. May be. May be not.

Juan Manuel Santos should know what he’s talking about, he’s the President of Columbia. He say http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/13/colombia-juan-santos-war-on-drugs  ..it may be an interesting decade for management of the drug problem.

UPDATE: Here are the full results of the Q1 2013 UK Survey on the amendment of drug policy for the UK Drug Foundation.

Will Facebook Ever Hit 2 Billion Users?

I just read Jason Hesse’s recent article on the falling stock price of Facebook. It makes some good points and generally I agree with it’s conclusions around the execution of the IPO and possibly today’s valuation. The multiples on revenue were after all, many times that of Google at IPO, for example.

Some of the other conclusions around future growth, I feel hold less water. Jason states:

“More than 900 million people is enormous, but could the company realistically double its monthly users? Anecdotal evidence would suggest not. ” …. “Naturally, the company’s growth could come from new sign ups. Facebook’s largest market is Europe, with more than 230 million users. This means more than one in four people in Europe are signed up to and use the social network. So realistically, there is little scope for this to grow significantly – if you’re not on Facebook already, the chances are you just don’t care and won’t join anytime soon.”

I don’t think I agree with this statement. Why won’t people care any time soon? I consider Facebook and social networking as a part of our lives, to be similar to the take up of email and other new technology, like the web itself. Even my Dad has a profile now, although admittedly for a 75 year old he is pretty well connected with PC’s, tablets and Android phones!

I also can’t help feel the sentiment of this statement is similar to the naysayers of the web 10 yrs ago; I would conclude social networking is following a very similar growth path.

With 1.5+ billion people on the regular internet but with 5 billion mobile subscribers, who are all fast moving to Smartphones with internet, the numbers also don’t support this statement.

And why would more than 1 in 4 people in Europe not want to join Facebook?

It’s taken just two years for Facebook to nearly double it’s user base.

The real issue IMHO is not that Facebook will stop growing because people don’t want to be on a social network and embrace the sweeping social change which those services is causing, but whether Facebook can maintain and evolve a service which captures that growth.

Given that a lot of the growth will be users who access the service by mobile, this is the second issue which faces Facebook (no pun intended). Can a service routed online historically successfully transform it self to become the stalwart of the mobile world?

In summary then the -in my view inevitable- growth of users numbers in Facebook is theirs to screw. They must:

1) Continue to innovate their product and maintain existing users attention
2) Navigate the cultural preferences of the untapped developing markets
3) Become a truly mobile orientated company, with the same level of UI/Ux on mobile as they demonstrate online.

Arguably they are currently failing at no.3

Finally, there is the spectre of “Privacy”. Jason says:

“If anything, as privacy concerns continue to grow, more people will leave the social network.”

I think this is also unlikely UNLESS Facebook makes a very serious faux pas. Radical transparency is not for everyone but there is good evidence to suggest the trend is in that direction. I can’t help feel this argument, that social networking has a limited growth due to privacy fears, is akin to the talk about e-commerce never taking off online for the mass market because of fears of credit cards not being secure online. In other words, it’s a red herring.

Compuserve was my first ever email address back in the mid to late 1990′s. It then slowly died over a period of years, as destination closed wall portals were trumped by the world wide web. Facebook, if it doesn’t continue to aggressively become more open, may risk it’s position as the ultimate social graph and silo of social data. (BTW, that little button in the top bar,  a globe with two striped lines, took you out onto the ‘scary’ WWW)

Facebook must get it’s future strategy right and that strategy must be around becoming more a platform and less a destination site, if it wants to maintain it’s position as the biggest silo of social data on the web. If it doesn’t do this fast enough, it will likely go the way of AOL and Compuserve before it, or be out manoeuvred by a future more open and yet to exist mobile competitor.

My Failed Virgin Atlantic Cocktail Competition Entry

Some months ago Virgin Atlantic had a competition to find a suitable cocktail recipe to use at the opening of their shiny new Virgin Atlantic clubhouse at JFK in New York. Always eager to get creative I came up with the original cocktail below, which included what I thought was an awfully clever hat-tip to their two new routes for 2012.

Virgin's swanky new $7m club house at JFK. Image courtesy http://www.modern-traveler.com/

Sadly, the competition judges clearer didn’t agree that it was anywhere near as clever as I thought it was, thus my “Virgin-Sunrise” is doomed never to become a famed addition to the New York scene. Nor did it win me return tickets for two to New York.

Gutted.

However, rather than this concoction go to waste, I thought I’d share it with the 1.5 million internet users and rather lesser number of blog readers. Let me know what you think!

(Competition entry copy pasted below for good measure – pun entirely intended!)

Virgin Sunrise-Jack

Ingredients: Orange juice (or blood-red orange juice), grenadine and Yukon Jack.

In honour of Virgin Atlantics two newest routes to Cancun Mexico and Vancouver Canada for 2012, this creation is a hat-tip to the famous Tequila Sunrise cocktail invented in the 1930’s (Mexican Tequila, orange juice, grenadine) and Yukon Jack, the “Black sheep of Canadian Liquors” (a whiskey-based liqueur with citrus overtones brewed with honey).

The “sunrise” is for the way it looks after it has been poured into a glass, with the denser ingredients (cassis or grenadine) settling, creating gradients in colour.  Yukon Jack is said to be born of “..hoary nights, when lonely men struggled to keep their fires lit and cabins warm” it is boldly flavourful yet surprisingly smooth, just like New York itself – the city that never sleeps.

Predictions for the World from 2002.. many have come true

An interesting set of predictions, from 2002…

I Love You, I Hate You: The New Influence Economy

The world of customer relationship management and brand management is changing fast; again. This is going to be a shock to many companies.

Some businesses have only just started to remember that their customers might actually be right, others have only just got their heads around CRM and being “online”. Others continue blindy on trying to save money by passing the leg work on to their customers and annoying us all in the process.

Entering your mobile number at a call centre in a cue, only to be asked it three more times once you get through, is just one great example.

Rude retail staff, telephone operatives and n employees who can’t speak basic English or empathise with customers are others.

The Enlightenment: 2011

The more progressive companies are waking up to the new economy of influence – better known as social media.

Klout and PeerIndex as businesses both exist for a reason. They purport to measure “influence”.

The passionate and vocal devotees (or detractors) of your brand online are fast becoming the kingpins of the next 10 years of successful brand building.

Ratings scores like Klout and Peerindex will become a new currency in a world of social networking, online endorsement, virality and brand reputation. Even some credit score companies are already experimenting these scores in to account and providing third parties this data alongside traditional scoring methods.

Brands need to wake up fast to the fact that the price of a ticket is no longer necessarily the most reliable indicator of the “spending power” of a customer.

Klout and Peerindex scores are fast becoming the standards of "reputation" online; but how do they compare and what do they really mean? It's early days...

What is the on-going endorsement worth of a customer with an influence score of 59 but who travels economy, worth over an Upper Class passenger who keeps quiet and never endorses your brand?

I don’t have the right answer, but it’s certainly the right question.

Who do you think you are?

I’ve flown with Virgin Atlantic since my first ever transatlantic flight age 22, to sunny Los Angeles. Since then I’ve been a devotee; but as this article attests, last time I flew I was very disappointed.

I’m was left wondering if my friend Milo had been with me, whether I’d have had the same experience.

That time around a train had broken down or something, but despite my arriving very late we sailed through check-in just 30 minutes before departure and were upgraded, although at least he had got there on time. I however, had not, nor was I checked in. The difference is, at the time he was working for The Telegraph.

However in my own way to my own audience – and certainly in my industry – I have some influence:

• I write for WIRED and do guest blog posts
• My Klout score is reasonable as is my PeerIndex score.
• I’ve invited friends to join Virgin Miles.
• I can identify specifically at least 25 people who I’ve directly influenced to fly VA over other airlines in the last 24 months, because Virgin Atlantic has been a lovemark of mine.

As with most things we love, we naturally endorse them and want them to prosper. They represent part of me. As I said in this post about brand relationships and lovemarks:

.. when you as a brand [a lovemark] behave poorly I feel you’re attacking not just me as a customer but me as your brand.  Your bad performance means subconsciously I feel like I’ve performed badly, because a little bit of your brand has become me.

It is true that influence scores have their problems and on these the two specific companies mentioned (here’s another bloggers overview of PeerIndex and Klout) although they are the current market leaders, the jury is still out.

The Context of Influence Matters

Who are they the influencers of? If I have 10,000 followers on twitter who are all unemployed, or worse all spambot fake accounts, how influential is that? ..the answer is of course not very.

Both services (PeerIndex top radar image, Klout bottom list) try to work out WHAT I'm influential about. Klout lists me as influential about "Germany" ... clearly there is still some work to be done!

These things are changing though. They are becoming more sophisticated. This is inevitability; they will become more accurate.

Smell the coffee anyway

Consider where we are today in reputation scores as the AM radio of the early 20th Century; rough, low fidelity, all a bit hit and miss. We’re not going to have to wait 100 years for it to improve before we get to DAB digital Stereo radio. Try 5 years.

So listen up Virgin Atlantic when next time you give me crappy service, or maybe I’ll respond to that Executive Club email from British Airways, or maybe I’ll send tweets, or write a blog post. The inherent viral nature of social media means these outbursts can have disproportionate impact.

Not significant perhaps you might think, given that I’m just one passenger and I’ve probably only taken nudging thirty transatlantic flights in my life; and they weren’t even all Upper Class?

However, you must also consider the influence of the people I influence

To fully measure influence you need not just context but to understand the TRUE reach of an influencer. That becomes both computationally challenging and inherently hard.

What is my endorsement for the next 15 year’s worth to your brand?

What is it worth to your competition?

If your company’s brand does not get its head around the new economy of influence now, you’re at best missing an opportunity and at worst inviting persistent damage to your reputation; and therefore your profits.

On the horizon are even more advanced interpretations of brand popularity which take the influence of individuals and brands, combine it with a sentiment for popularity, public opinion or value within a virtual currency and publish it for all to see. Empire Avenue is just one of these new indexes, entirely virtual in nature based upon 1000′s of peoples social networks, virtual investments and reputation.

Microsoft is using Empire Avenue to profile the popularity of it's Xbox brand in Empire Avenues Social Stock Market

Brand ambassadors are the future of your business and will disproportionality impact your bottom line – that fact is here to stay.

 

How Britain Is Seen From The Outside, ‘init.

I had the pleasure of attending my first Arete Club dinner last Friday, where the topic under discussion was “How is Britain perceived by the rest of the world?” certainly to my mind a timely subject ripe for debate.

Britain remains sometimes schizophrenic in its approach to the outside world. We maintain a veneer of global power broking thanks to pivotal roles in modern history, a legacy of Empire, our native English speaking tongue, London being a global financial centre and an experienced foreign office and diplomatic service (what’s left of it).

We are still an independent nuclear power and, despite the drastic cuts in our Armed Forces, still maintain a more professional and capable army, airforce and navy than most other countries; but the vacuum of meaning created by our decline as an Imperial world power remains. By this, I’m arguing that until the 1950’s our role in the world was clear. Even during the Cold War, a position as an Atlantic bridge and European protector against the Soviet menace provided some level of direction for foreign policy and excuse for defense spending.

Today, with the imminent Communist threat dissipated, where does Britain’s future lie? Are we the bridge for Europe to our American cousins? Should we continue to try and project power and police problem countries outside Europe? With higher levels of mostly well(and some not so well)-integrated immigrants providing a richer cultural landscape, what does being a Briton mean? Colour, race and creed these days do not define Britain. So what does and does this bear any resemblance to how those outside view us?

The dinner speakers tasked with stimulating discussion around this theme, did not disappoint.

First up was Roddy Gow who gave a polished and highly educational talk on the way Britain is seen in Asia, specifically India. Current affairs communicated eloquently in context of history always delivers a rich and engaging speech; Roddy Gow did not disappoint.

An image of Britain and indeed it's Empire, long gone. How are we perceived now?

Sadly I can’t write specifically about what was said, as the events are held under Arete rules in order to precipitate honest and candid debate – another reason why attending an Arete dinner can be a unique experience.

Events are black tie and usually held in salubrious surroundings. With good wine and good food fuelling the invited guests, between each course the speakers take the floor, propped up by their dining chair as lectern.

Our intellectual main course was Minister Qin Gang from the Chinese Embassy. He spoke candidly and passionately. Inevitably some of what was said you might expect to hear during a formal press conference – the Minister is after all a member of the Chinese Government and consequently – just as our own government ministers – he is expected therefore to speak bearing in mind his formal capacity.

Minister Qin Gang also brought though a personal perspective to his own experiences living and working in London as native Chinese and highlighted some of the challenges that two different cultures can face, living and communicating in our complex globalised world.

Ziauddin Sardar was reserved the honour of “being the pudding” as he so eloquently noted (I asked him specifically if we could use that quote!) and gave a very informed and often humorous talk on straddling two cultural origins, being both British and Pakistani. Many of the topics are covered in his recently published book, “Reading the Qur’an”, which I’ll be adding to my reading list.

Our current circumstances, immigration, the make up our society and what people think of us around the world are as a direct consequence of the Empire Britain once commanded

 

Over coffee we had the honour of questioning our speakers; for me this was the highlight of the dinner. It produced enlightened and engaged debate between the speakers, ably chaired by Professor Stephen Chan who was a pitch perfect ringmaster for the evening. Before drinks, Arete’s founder Sara Fazlali rounded off with an insightful and humorous summary.

There are many networking dinner events out there, but Arete Club does much more than provide wine-fuelled matchmaking. First, it combines people from disparate sectors (business, politics, the military and the arts – indeed this idea was a cornerstone of Arete Club’s inception) and second, does so in a way that challenges dinner guests to think about something beyond swapping business cards.

In summary, I enjoyed an excellent dinner and then drinks in the most stimulating of company. I discussed global politique with a senior Chinese Communist party minister, the global challenges facing our Armed Forces with a Royal Navy Lieutenant Commander and with a Canadian journalist the stubborn hangover bequeathed by a loss of the British Empire.

I will certainly be returning for seconds in the months to come.

You can read more about Arete Club here.

Why Corporates Struggle To Provide Good Customer Service (and what they should do about it)

We are all human and humans make mistakes. Most people understand this.

Therefore, as I described last week when discussing making a loyal customer out of an annoyed one, it is not the problem itself that loses you the customer, it is how you deal with it.

Corporate Control Kills Customer Service

I have an entirely inconsistent experience with most large companies I deal with regularly. O2 and HSBC are two I deal with particularly often.

Things inevitably go wrong, as they would with any telco or bank.  The problem is that I enter a lottery every time I pick up the phone to deal with them.

• Will I get someone intelligent or stupid at the end of the phone?
• Will someone know the software systems / products and services correctly, or will I actually know them better than the monkey I’m talking to?
• Will they even care, or it 5 minutes to clock out and they just want to go home and watch Eastenders (that’s a depressing UK Soap Opera, for my American readers ?

You can only empathise and correct a problem effectively if you have two things:

1. A human customer service agent who cares
2. A human customer service agent who has been giving the autonomy to make decisions and take action

The first of these is an area most corporates should be good at; there is really no excuse. Incentive schemes, good office culture, performance related pay. It’s all obvious.

The second, of autonomy and giving individuals authority, seems to be on an ever more rapid decline, especially in larger business.

Whether it is local bank managers having lending powers stripped away, or shop assistants unable to make a refund decision without the manager (who has gone out for a fag break; US readers, that’s a cigarette), people are more often than not being turned into drones.

I find it an anathema that companies really believe ever tighter controls and restrictions will ultimately protect profit margins, let alone increase profits, or ultimately share price.

Back In The USSR

The analogy is that of the Communist state – of dumb workers following the instructions blindy. It is akin to Russian airline pilots who have been so programmed not to cross authority or argue, that they’d rather risk killing a plane full of people than do what they know is the right thing.

Removing the ability for people to think for themselves and take responsibility for their actions, also automatically results in lower performance, caring less about their job and not THINKING about what they are doing.

Treat an adult like a child, they will behave like one.

Sure, some people will behave like a child anyway. Sure, some people will make too many mistakes and are not capable of making even basic responsible decisions – but then do you want to be employing these people anyway? Anywhere??

Don't turn your team or workforce into a bunch of lemmings by being a control freak. Give them responsibility and make them answerable for it. (Image from Saturday Cartoons. Click to visit)

How To Use Staff Autonomy To Win

The next generation of winners going into the 21^st Century will be those corporates, blue chips and giants of industry who buck this trend and do the opposite of everyone else.

Re-engage your employees, give them responsibility, challenge them to make decisions and then subsequently justify them if needed. Make this the founding differentiator of your company and corporate philosophy.

There are even successful templates for this ethos, taken much further than customer service; just read Maverick by Ricardo Semler.

You will turn your monkeys into ambassadors of your brand, proud to be skilled and pleasing your customers. This will increase your share price, this will increase your profits, this will ensure you don’t end up like Stalin, the Polit Bureau and every other system in history which has tried to restrain and suffocate free thinking.

Instead, your staff can take responsibility for their own actions; and best of all, it far more quickly reveals those who under perform, are incapable in their role or simply don’t care enough.

It’s obvious when you think about it.

Let’s start the revolution today!