Sensational service underpins my business.
I've always taken pride in delivering fast, excellent service to my clientele and new customers alike.
I take a real interest in their progress and celebrate their successes.
Most of them are friends. Some are good friends.
I enjoy challenging myself to turn around work as quickly as possible and finding efficient, elegant solutions to technical issues.
I always promptly respond to phone calls and emailed enquiries.
I'm generally happy to go the extra mile to satisfy customers' needs … by working out-of-hours to achieve the 'impossible', perhaps, or building solutions to help their budget work.
Sometimes they need some simple advice - or a referral - or a 'translator' to explain some technical jargon.
Information is power! and customers are entitled to know what's going on.
I never charge for such 'consultancy' services … even when I need to conduct my own research on behalf of others.
In fact, though I realistically can't afford to - and shouldn't! - around a third of the work I perform is charged out either free or at my 'community rate'.
To simplify all this: I'm a professional. I love my work. I love to help out.
'It's all part of the service!'
I was having a chat yesterday with my very good friend S about the many 'gaps' in Australian culture which encompass knowledge, skills and behaviour rather than socioeconomic inequities (although the latter is definitely relevant up to a point).
Here's my thesis: I believe it's accurate to claim that most Australians simply don't understand the simple principle of customer service.
Yes, we know what we expect of others … yet we simply aren't that good at meeting their expectations!
Using the KISS principle, let's start with the commonly understood interpretation of 'customer service': it's how a business and its representatives respond to your needs.
Irrespective of the size of the business - one employee or thousands - I am repeatedly disappointed by their lack of interest in my needs as a customer.
Poor service takes many forms and I won't dwell on anecdotal evidence. Here's a handful to go on with:
A tradesman who doesn't return my first and only call has lost me as a customer (as well as those I whinge to).
In the retail environment I expect to be acknowledged as (treated as) a human being.
A straight question to a salesperson merits a straight answer. ('I don't know but I'll find out' is fine with me.)
Surreptitiously taking over my telco account without my permission is fraudulent! (Yes, this happened to me. Cheers Optus!)
If I choose to do my grocery shopping 'off-peak' to avoid the queues I get bloody pissed off when I end up in a queue.
Whenever I telephone a company with an enquiry or a complaint, why should I be expected to wait at their convenience?
(Feel free to substitute your own experiences!)
To reinterpret: why must the customer repeatedly 'pay' for a business's deficiencies?
Why is the whole notion of 'customer service' so poorly interpreted within our economy?
And why aren't we doing anything about it?
Now that the traditional definition is covered, let's expand the theme.
Ten or 15 years ago, in response to the demands of the market god (see this - 8 November), government departments, educational institutions, charities and other not-for-profit organisations started relabelling their user-base as 'customers' and 'clients'.
Did this change anything? Did the culture improve? No - and NO.
More 'benchmarks'. Sweet. Ample 'workshops'. Cool.
Same old mediocre service in shiny new packages.
Walking the Talk remains the province of the minority.
Again, I won't dwell on anecdotes since everyone can provide their own - so here's another handful, all very recent.
When I present (as a 'customer') at reception and four staff are jabbering I'm entitled to expect that one just might divorce herself from the drivel to serve me - promptly, courteously, professionally.
And when a local government uses my money to destroy a much-loved kids' playground to build a better one, it shouldn't take more than twelve months to 'serve the customer'.
And should an extremely busy individual be expected to spend 20 minutes plus trying to send a fax to a government department because the number is continually engaged?
Face it. In most cases 'customer service' is getting worse - yet we're all talking the talk more than ever.
Why is this shit happening?
A couple of closely-related reasons.
1.
The market knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
In other words, there's a damn good reason why so many non-essential products are so cheap - aside from the slave-labour involved in production and our collective failure to realistically charge for raw materials.
On the retail side, fewer skilled staff allows more competitive prices, higher turnover … ad nauseam.
To put it another way, the market inherently and systematically undervalues humanity.
'god' just wants us all to be productive / consumptive little cogs in this pervasive, fragile, structurally-'needy' machine that lacks either brain or heart.
It's been proven repeatedly that trained, skilled, professional employees not only add real value to a business … they become more empowered in their personal lives.
Some even start to question the morality of capitalism and overconsumption … and then proceed to disengage just a little … eventually, perhaps, even find a better quality of life.
The market can't have that!
2.
As a society we are increasingly collectively selfish.
What I want is more important than what you want!
Too few of us offer respect unless we get it first. (Even then, it's all-too-often 'conditional'.)
We increasingly eschew volunteerism - leaving the dwindling few to carry the load - and then complain when a community project fails or the Country Fire Authority doesn't show up in time.
We 'shop 'til we drop.'
We demand our middle-class welfare.
We stomp across the planet on the back of cheap air-fares and wonder why the Barrier Reef is dying and the Coorong is dead; why Summer's 'getting hotter' and the rain isn't falling like it used to.
We indulge ourselves silly and worry that our kids are turning into spoilt brats.
Enough! There is a fairly straightforward solution.
But I'll keep you in suspenders.
Friday 14 November 2008
Monday 10 November 2008
bye-bye murderers
So, three of the Bali bombers - those pathologically stupid, grinning, self-promoting criminal arseholes - have finally been terminated by the Indonesian state.
Heartbreaker. A handful down, a million or two to go.
No, seriously, it's about about fucking time.
I'd have taken these turds out with a baseball bat … along with the adventurist murderers in the Bush cabinet.
It may surprise many, including my nearest and dearest, that I indeed support the death 'penalty' in some cases.
This is one of them.
As I point out in the following extracts, it's taken me most of a lifetime to arrive at this point.
No, it hasn't been an easy journey.
Two 'wrongs' don't make a right … but, occasionally, one 'right' does.
Here are some of recent posts from my favourite forum - edited for context only.
2 November (1)
Old enough to remember the execution of Ronald Ryan in 1967 … http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/ergo/ronald_ryan … and the community rage it engendered at the time (including the anger and despair within my own family), I've grappled with this issue since I was a kid. Now, nearer to my date of death than my birth (unless I live to 105+ … possible?), I've (more or less) settled on a position I'm satisfied with.
Having read all these posts from people I respect a great deal – who have produced solid 'pro-life' arguments that make sense – it ain't easy for me to say this … but I do indeed support termination of life when it makes society a better place.
Where murder is concerned it's not about punishment or penalties (or even political repercussions) for me: it's more about eliminating menaces, making life safer for the majority.
My support is conditional, however: if any doubt regarding guilt exists, or if the killer/s express genuine contrition, then murdering someone in the name of 'justice' is plain wrong.
I'd happily extend my beliefs to embrace a range of other violent crimes.
2 November (2)
[Responding to XXX.]
XXX: The problem is – people are convicted when the evidence is 'beyond reasonable doubt'. If there was any doubts as to their guilt, they shouldn't be convicted.
Agree 100%, XXX. That's one of the shortcomings of the jury system: average punters are expected to make a life-or-death decision based on a series of evidence which all too often is inconclusive … applying the 'final solution' to a criminal must not be based on weighted conclusions (opinions) but on incontrovertible fact – or, in the case of the Bali bombers, self-aggrandising admissions. And, when the execution takes place, it is (ideally) unpublicised.
XXX: As to whether they have genuine contrition – who decides that?
I'm not a lawyer ;), just a fairly compassionate individual who believes in the greater good. I don't profess to have all the answers and wouldn't dream to proselytize. That said, there are plenty of professionals who are more than capable of determining whether killers, serial child-abusers et al. regret their actions or not. Once again, if a skerrick of doubt remains at the end of a trial, don't kill them in society's name.
3 November
Violent crime rightly evokes an emotional response. We'd be less than human if we didn't feel anger and horror when any human being is violated.
The death sentence – ideally, any sentence – must transcend emotion.
(Or, for that matter, political expediency.)
As I said earlier, for me it's not about 'punishment' – and definitely not about revenge.
Neither is it about the political ramifications, martyrdom (what a pack of indoctrinated loser thugs choose to do in the name of a non-existent deity!) or the murderers' global fan-base.
In those rare cases when the facts are established – with 100% certainty – it's time for society to take out its garbage. IMO.
(Acknowledgements to whoever mentioned cleaning up the gene pool.)
One of the reasons many societies ('Western', 'Eastern', others[!?]) are struggling more than ever is that – individually and collectively – we are increasingly disengaged and unwilling to face problems head-on (but that discussion's probably best left for another thread).
In response to the implied question, Yes – as a pacifist rather than a passivist – I'd pull the pin if my number came up.
Admittedly, this is unlikely in a country where cold killers, child-abusers, rapists and wife-bashers can receive multiple 'second chances'.
Postscript: "Never to be released" is pretty arbitrary in countries where presidents, governments and miscellaneous dictators can overrule court decisions when it suits them.
Heartbreaker. A handful down, a million or two to go.
No, seriously, it's about about fucking time.
I'd have taken these turds out with a baseball bat … along with the adventurist murderers in the Bush cabinet.
It may surprise many, including my nearest and dearest, that I indeed support the death 'penalty' in some cases.
This is one of them.
As I point out in the following extracts, it's taken me most of a lifetime to arrive at this point.
No, it hasn't been an easy journey.
Two 'wrongs' don't make a right … but, occasionally, one 'right' does.
Here are some of recent posts from my favourite forum - edited for context only.
2 November (1)
Old enough to remember the execution of Ronald Ryan in 1967 … http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/ergo/ronald_ryan … and the community rage it engendered at the time (including the anger and despair within my own family), I've grappled with this issue since I was a kid. Now, nearer to my date of death than my birth (unless I live to 105+ … possible?), I've (more or less) settled on a position I'm satisfied with.
Having read all these posts from people I respect a great deal – who have produced solid 'pro-life' arguments that make sense – it ain't easy for me to say this … but I do indeed support termination of life when it makes society a better place.
Where murder is concerned it's not about punishment or penalties (or even political repercussions) for me: it's more about eliminating menaces, making life safer for the majority.
My support is conditional, however: if any doubt regarding guilt exists, or if the killer/s express genuine contrition, then murdering someone in the name of 'justice' is plain wrong.
I'd happily extend my beliefs to embrace a range of other violent crimes.
2 November (2)
[Responding to XXX.]
XXX: The problem is – people are convicted when the evidence is 'beyond reasonable doubt'. If there was any doubts as to their guilt, they shouldn't be convicted.
Agree 100%, XXX. That's one of the shortcomings of the jury system: average punters are expected to make a life-or-death decision based on a series of evidence which all too often is inconclusive … applying the 'final solution' to a criminal must not be based on weighted conclusions (opinions) but on incontrovertible fact – or, in the case of the Bali bombers, self-aggrandising admissions. And, when the execution takes place, it is (ideally) unpublicised.
XXX: As to whether they have genuine contrition – who decides that?
I'm not a lawyer ;), just a fairly compassionate individual who believes in the greater good. I don't profess to have all the answers and wouldn't dream to proselytize. That said, there are plenty of professionals who are more than capable of determining whether killers, serial child-abusers et al. regret their actions or not. Once again, if a skerrick of doubt remains at the end of a trial, don't kill them in society's name.
3 November
Violent crime rightly evokes an emotional response. We'd be less than human if we didn't feel anger and horror when any human being is violated.
The death sentence – ideally, any sentence – must transcend emotion.
(Or, for that matter, political expediency.)
As I said earlier, for me it's not about 'punishment' – and definitely not about revenge.
Neither is it about the political ramifications, martyrdom (what a pack of indoctrinated loser thugs choose to do in the name of a non-existent deity!) or the murderers' global fan-base.
In those rare cases when the facts are established – with 100% certainty – it's time for society to take out its garbage. IMO.
(Acknowledgements to whoever mentioned cleaning up the gene pool.)
One of the reasons many societies ('Western', 'Eastern', others[!?]) are struggling more than ever is that – individually and collectively – we are increasingly disengaged and unwilling to face problems head-on (but that discussion's probably best left for another thread).
In response to the implied question, Yes – as a pacifist rather than a passivist – I'd pull the pin if my number came up.
Admittedly, this is unlikely in a country where cold killers, child-abusers, rapists and wife-bashers can receive multiple 'second chances'.
Postscript: "Never to be released" is pretty arbitrary in countries where presidents, governments and miscellaneous dictators can overrule court decisions when it suits them.
Saturday 8 November 2008
Jed's Ten Commandments for the Naughty Naughties
(Probably a work in progress: this is the first draft.)
1. I, the Market, am the god of everyfink.
Despite my ongoing series of massive fails, all governments shall kneel before me.
2. My servants shall continue to privatise profit and socialise debt in My name.
3. My apostates shall cheat, speculate, exploit and lie massively until found out.
Then tell a different lie … ad infinitum. For this is my divine will. And My children have 'special needs'.
4. Greed is good, as is Poverty - as is Mediocrity - for I cannot survive without all of These Things.
5. The dual fevers of Aspirationalism and Overconsumption are indeed wonderful, god-like attributes.
Thou must continue to believe in Me and refrain from Revolutionary medications.
6. My human race shall make tremendous sacrifices to sustain their planet yet no individual shall be required to Shop Less.
7. My governments shall shield behind incompetence, vacuity, over-regulation, FOI and 'Commercial-In-Confidence' while their constituents, my beloved productive plebs, shall enjoy no privacy.
8. All single parents must be forced to serve Me for slave wages, leaving their children in the care of fellow slaves. (It's My Economy, Stupid!)
9. With several months of experience, a computer, Publisher and Photoshop as thine tools, thou shalt decree thyself a Graphic Designer and market thine services accordingly.
10. My house has many rooms. There are no elephants in the room. god knows everyfink.
(third draft)
1. I, the Market, am the god of everyfink.
Despite my ongoing series of massive fails, all governments shall kneel before me.
2. My servants shall continue to privatise profit and socialise debt in My name.
3. My apostates shall cheat, speculate, exploit and lie massively until found out.
Then tell a different lie … ad infinitum. For this is my divine will. And My children have 'special needs'.
4. Greed is good, as is Poverty - as is Mediocrity - for I cannot survive without all of These Things.
5. The dual fevers of Aspirationalism and Overconsumption are indeed wonderful, god-like attributes.
Thou must continue to believe in Me and refrain from Revolutionary medications.
6. My human race shall make tremendous sacrifices to sustain their planet yet no individual shall be required to Shop Less.
7. My governments shall shield behind incompetence, vacuity, over-regulation, FOI and 'Commercial-In-Confidence' while their constituents, my beloved productive plebs, shall enjoy no privacy.
8. All single parents must be forced to serve Me for slave wages, leaving their children in the care of fellow slaves. (It's My Economy, Stupid!)
9. With several months of experience, a computer, Publisher and Photoshop as thine tools, thou shalt decree thyself a Graphic Designer and market thine services accordingly.
10. My house has many rooms. There are no elephants in the room. god knows everyfink.
(third draft)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
