Technology Versus People
Darlene D. Richard, Director, Customer Response Integrity

At the ACCS Strategy Series: People vs Automation Debate recently held by Vivaz, three burning questions were debated by four industry leaders. 

Two debaters stood on the side of technology and two on the side of people.  Why we would be on opposite sides remains a mystery!  The truth be told, before the debate began the four of us met together to shake hands and we sheepishly agreed that this couldn’t be a proper debate because technology and people have a symbiotic dependence from which benefits can arise.

Thinking about it now, perhaps there’s a hidden truth in the idea of the two topics being at odds that underlies why people are not yet reaping all the gains from technology investments.

Who wants more technology?

The first question posed at the debate centred on whether customers want automated self-service.

The answer was “of course they do.”  But not all of them want it, and not all the time, no matter how much of a technophile they might be.  Some days,  only a person can manage to satisfy another person’s query. 

Technically-savvy customers expect self-service to be fast, simple and sensible.  It must solve their problems easily, quickly and cost-effectively -- for them (not the business).  On the other hand, businesses have learned not all customers are savvy or properly equipped with technological tools, so creating a user-friendly experience for the common denominator is critical. 

Customers appear to be of two minds about self-service.  Some just want what they want when they want it.  Other times they are doing all the work and using their own paper, yet they’re not realising corresponding cost or fee reductions for their efforts. 

Self-service solutions

Self-service technology offers two types of service solutions:

- Efficiency-driven solutions. This are based on internal goals and strategies and are geared to save money.  They can easily damage the customer experience, spend and loyalty.
- Customer-driven solutions. These involve identifying and meeting the needs of differing market segments, from those who need more “hand holding”, to others who prefer convenience and are not too dependent on human involvement. 

The Return On Investment (ROI) for self-service is based on the ability to grow and create repeat and related business by tailoring the ‘customer experience technology’ to cost-effectively meet the individual customer’s needs without compromising quality.  Ideally, every time a customer returns to a well crafted, self-service site, they’re rewarded, with their past-buying behaviour being apparently noted.  When the site remembers his or her preferences and purchasing history, they feel like the organisation is ‘listening’ to them. 

Consider Amazon.com.  It ‘remembers’ you and your purchases, builds a special website for you, makes sensible and enticing buying suggestions based on what you like....(the customer is the centre of the universe). 

These types of ‘intuitive algorithms’ develop over time and are powerful because they’re based on direct marketing data-analysis methods.  Yet, they can be flawed when common denominators are ‘polluted’ by occasional one-off purchases.  If you usually purchase legal and mystery books and buy Kathy’s Song by Apoptygma Berzerk, you may be surprised at how drastically those buying suggestions change.  Ultimately, this can affect your confidence in the organisation and their suggestions.

Who is in the driver’s seat?

The debate’s second question: ‘Are customers or organisations driving the current automation trend in the Australian contact centre industry?’

Customers want products, services, answers to questions and solutions to their problems.  However, they have grown impatient.  They are more aware of sophisticated media channels and are increasingly time-poor.  So they do not care where they get good service as long as it is good.

On the other hand, organisations are searching for technical solutions to serve customers’ needs, cut costs and help schedule staff with precision.  They work harder at anticipating customers’ needs before more investment is made.  According to the Australian Contact Centre Survey (ACCS)  research, it seems technology investment may be slowing.

What’s of significance is how technology providers are attracting increasingly professional and skilled staff to more authentically partner with their clients.  In this way, they truly offer specialised services based on multiple client experiences that help organisations better identify and apply technology to serve customers while meeting business drivers. 

Pining Customers?

Third question:  ‘Are organisations pushing for automation to help reduce human capital costs, leaving customers pining to speak to a real person?’

The key driver for contact centres in Australia was, until 2007, cost reduction, according to the ACCS research.  Now it’s about contact centres being recognised as legitimate profit centres.  This new perspective will re-focus business on the value and loyalty of their customers.

Two customer segments are rising to the top of this debate:

1. Customers who are not techno-savvy, and who are searching for new organisations to take their ample disposable income, properly cater to them and provide ‘more sensible services’ for their dollars.
2. Customers who are techno-savvy and who are more focused on time and costs (a majority call from mobile phones while on the run, therefore having them wait in a queue means they are bearing the cost and they won’t do this for long).

The word ‘pining’ represents the emotional nature of these issues for customers.  When customers are met with technology barriers that isolate them from what they want, they can easily leverage that same technology to move elsewhere. 

Conclusion

Businesses must not make the mistake of thinking if they have more technology, people will (have to) use it, and if they use it they’re satisfied.  That’s not logical.  Just talk to anyone on the street and you’ll hear how dissatisfied they are. 

The ACCS Strategy Series: People vs Automation debate  ended with something important:  ‘Each individual company needs to assess the impact on their customers (of more automation or not).  This said, the future outlook is for increased focus on the automation side of the people versus automation debate.”

To me, what is missing in this ongoing debate is the customer’s voice.  Sometimes I believe we may be reluctant to hear this voice, let alone the voice of our frontline staff who actually spend their entire days listening to these insights.  People or technology, customers will tell you when you listen.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

Show/Hide comment form