You guys know how much I love my iPhone. For a while, I’ve considered getting the new iPhone 4. But I also want to be fiscally responsible. As such, the other evening I announced to Mr. Bartender that I might wait on this purchase. Of course, as soon as I make this announcement, AT&T sends me their latest magazine and the focus is (what else) the newest iPhone.
While I’m back on the fence about getting the latest version, one thing that stood out in the magazine was an AT&T app called Mark the Spot. It’s an app that allows you to tap a button when you encounter a service issue. The app sends a signal to AT&T and they’re able to see where difficulties are.
Fascinating. And, on the surface it sounds like a great idea. But, it seems to me that AT&T is delegating responsibility for quality control to the customer. It’s cheaper to have your users identify areas of service concern rather than pay your own people to track them down.
It reminds me of quality initiatives like TQM and now Six Sigma. It used to be that quality control was a function within a company. The goal was to ensure the excellence of a product or service before it reached the customer.
Okay, sure, tough economic times call for cut backs. And maybe companies still have quality control departments (albeit smaller ones). But really:
Consumers are facing the same tough economy and they’re scrutinizing every penny they spend. Is it really a good idea to cut back on quality control at a time when your customer might be questioning whether or not they get real value from you?
No news is good news is not a quality control initiative. I know sometimes it might appear easier to just react to a customer complaint with the standard “I’m sorry” and hope for the best. But providing a quality product before it goes out your door should be on your company radar. Has your business put a quality control process in place or considered the need for one?
Maybe the software industry is to blame after it became common practice to turn some of their customers into “beta testers”. It certainly fits with this AT&T model. Now, we’ve all become unwitting “beta testers” for every company we buy from. After all, it increases corporate profit margins and customers don’t seem to complain too much about the added “responsibility”.
Now you might be thinking, hey bartender – I’m not in production or R&D so the responsibility for our end product doesn’t really fall on me. Fair enough – but what about the product or service you provide on a department level? Just because we aren’t seeing massive turnover or hiring in droves – yet – doesn’t mean we shouldn’t focus on providing quality to internal stakeholders (i.e. employees).
What do you guys think? What controls do you have in place to gauge the quality of work coming out of your department?
Image courtesy of KB35
0
Amybeth says
Hi Sharlyn, I understand what you’re saying but I think it was a smart move on AT&T’s part to help appease its existing customer base. The idea behind the Mark The Spot app (which was released for the iPhone in December last year and just this summer for Android) was to allow existing customers to provide feedback for areas where they were getting poor reception and/or dropped calls regularly. The company can allocate resources more appropriately in areas with more faulty connections as marked by customers. It was supposed to supplement network testing and regular QC activities, allowing the customers an opportunity to let their voice be heard. As we both know with company presence on social media, what most people want when interacting with a company online is simply to be acknowledged.
Disclaimer: yes, I used to work with AT&T but that has nothing to do with my comment.
HR Exhibition says
I agree with Amybeth, its away of getting feedback from customers which your own people would not have discovered otherwise. depending on how your look at it, I think this is also a positive way to engage customers and promote your customer service.
Trish says
Sharlyn you were off the mark here. Amybeth is spot on. I am an avid iphone fan (and yes have the 4) and preferred to have them get the product out “as is” and let us trouble shoot it. I think AT&T was being proactive by creating the “Mark the Spot Ap” and I appreciate this. I have had minimal problems with my iphone4 and the features far outway them.
Your blog makes a good point, but using this example did not make it.
Love your stuff though! Keep it up.
Sharlyn Lauby says
Thanks for the comments – I love a good debate and this is great discussion for Customer Service Week. I can totally see how, in the case of AT&T, it’s a way to make customers feel better and a little more empowered. Customers get to point out all the places they don’t have good service. Although ironically, I wonder how the app will process the ‘lack of signal strength’ via the iPhone…when the problem is signal strength. Reminds me of those companies that tell you when your internet service is down, contact us via our website…
IMHO, the app sends the message there’s a signal strength problem. And I feel the more I would use the app, the less it sends a positive message about customer service.
What this post and the AT&T example have taught me is quality is becoming a very personal standard. One customer might be content using the app one time a month. Another one time a week. And a third not at all. Ultimately, I’d like to believe the customer would be happiest if the quality of service was such that AT&T didn’t have to create the app at all.
My concern is, if we accept that companies can provide service imperfection, then are we expecting our customers to accept the same from us?
Pat Wood says
Sharlyn,
I definitely agree with you. Just because companies can and do provide imperfect service doesn’t mean customers should accept it.
AT&T & the iPhone is a unique and interesting case (Esp. since customers can’t really keep their iPhone and show AT&T their disapproval by going to another carrier). N ow while AT&T should have had it’s network up to par when the iPhone first came out, it’s being trying to show how it’s improving its network as well as engage its customers. For example I didn’t know about the micro-cell until this post, but I think it’s an ingenious temporary solution. How it’s distributed (Sold or given away) raises a whole ‘nother customer service situation.
working girl says
Interesting – and I applaud your decision to wait, although thanks to people who buy a new phone every year I got a free blackberry that someone had lying around when I accidentally…ah…washed my phone with the laundry. I guess it depends on whether that’s their only QA process or if they do their best to track down problems before consumers buy their products and THEN have the button as a final fallback. There is to say that no matter how good your QA is, you only find certain kinds of problems once the product is in use.
Sharlyn Lauby says
@Pat – Thanks for the comment. Good point about the AT&T and Apple exclusive arrangement. It will be interesting to see if things change when the iPhone is offered with other carriers.
@Working Girl – I bought the original when it first came out. Same with the 3G and 3GS. I’m very proud of myself for waiting a bit on the 4. Thanks for the comment. You bring up a good argument that no matter how good QA is, sometimes problems arise after the fact.
Pat Wood says
Well it looks like AT&T might have to start really worrying about iPhone users switching over to Verizon now…
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703735804575536191649347572.html
http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/06/iphone-4-verizon-yes-again/
John Hunter says
You should definitely have measures in the organization to maintain processes that create products that work (in process measures, testing…).
But you definitely need to also be looking at the actual use of the product and see what people experience. Just putting out junk and waiting for people to complain is not good. But doing your best up front AND paying close attention to actual use is.
Too few companies pay attention to real use. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/customerservice.html