On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score • Hacker News Board

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#21

Post by gumby » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:44 PM UTC

DiffEq wrote: post #11

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

Are you implying that government, local or national, is "accountable" or "fair" somehow? All of human experience demonstrates the opposite.

> All of human experience demonstrates the opposite.

That's an absurd exaggeration.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#22

Post by lostmyoldone » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:45 PM UTC

DiffEq wrote: post #11

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

Are you implying that government, local or national, is "accountable" or "fair" somehow? All of human experience demonstrates the opposite.

Not all human experience. There are certainly countries where government is considered to be - on average - rather fair.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#23

Post by ceejayoz » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:46 PM UTC

swarnie_ wrote: post #18

soneil wrote: post #13

How's this a secret? I used to work in retail/service. Not something with data and metrics, just a mom'n'pop. But we knew our customers. We especially knew our regulars. And you did try not to piss off a regular. But from this I learnt that people will try to play their 'value' as a trump card when they want to complain. Do you know who I am, do you know how much I spend here, I come here every day, blah blah blah. T…

I get what you're saying but this seems to miss the point of the article. In your service job did you serve each customer in the approximate order they arrived? I'm almost certain you would have to the best of your ability. The article points to a system which all seem to think is first come first serve but actually inst.

Varying the order and varying the effort are both attempts to do the same underlying thing - retain good customers and waste less times on the bad ones.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#24

Post by bb2018 » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:46 PM UTC

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

It all depends on your notion of fair.

If one percent of people call up customer service to complain about 50% of their transactions they are clogging up the system. I only call if something is breaking and I've exhausted all troubleshooting and automated methods.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#25

Post by pavel_lishin » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:47 PM UTC

soneil wrote: post #13

How's this a secret? I used to work in retail/service. Not something with data and metrics, just a mom'n'pop. But we knew our customers. We especially knew our regulars. And you did try not to piss off a regular. But from this I learnt that people will try to play their 'value' as a trump card when they want to complain. Do you know who I am, do you know how much I spend here, I come here every day, blah blah blah. T…

In my extremely limited experience, the people pulling out the "do you know who I am?" card are typically not regulars. They might think they are, but they're not.

I'm a regular at a few places, and I treasure that status and the privilege that comes with it, and wouldn't go trying to fuck it up unless I was prepared to completely burn that bridge.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#26

Post by mfringel » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:47 PM UTC

DiffEq wrote: post #11

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

Are you implying that government, local or national, is "accountable" or "fair" somehow? All of human experience demonstrates the opposite.

Can you restate your assertion in a way that can not be trivially torpedoed by a single existence proof?

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#27

Post by ceejayoz » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:47 PM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #15

mszcz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use another method. I select all the options in the automated system that indicate that I want to buy stuff from them. Suddenly I get connected to a live person almost immediately ;)

But then when you ask for help they transfer you back to hold...

Sometimes, but I've found it's generally more accurate than trying to figure out the phone tree. Every time I've called my bank about a mortgage issue none of the phone tree options describe my issue at all; a customer service rep usually knows who to send me to.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#28

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:48 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #12

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

Why would fairness factor into a business transaction? And I'm not sure why you're making this a public v. private thing, that's not really relevant to the article at all.

I interpreted the parent comment differently. Basically, I think they are agreeing with you, that fairness shouldn't necessarily factor into a (private) business transaction. However, many people do feel that their should be some notion of fairness factored into what have been historically governmental responsibilities (e.g managing roads, prisons, etc.) and that the push to privatize many of these functions is dangerous if it does away with "fairness" in these functions.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#29

Post by mkirklions » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:48 PM UTC

azinman2 wrote: post #6

“Not all customers deserve a company’s best efforts,” says Peter Fader, a marketing professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School who helped popularize lifetime value scores. I feel like this is a succinct argument against the idea to privitize everything — there’s no accountability nor notion of “fairness” baked in whatsoever.

>argument against the idea to privitize everything

Go to a different company next time?

If the government denies your paperwork, you get to keep working with the same government.

Re: On Hold for 45 Minutes? It Might Be Your Secret Customer Score

#30

Post by azinman2 » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 6:51 PM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #28

pc86 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would fairness factor into a business transaction? And I'm not sure why you're making this a public v. private thing, that's not really relevant to the article at all.

I interpreted the parent comment differently. Basically, I think they are agreeing with you, that fairness shouldn't necessarily factor into a (private) business transaction. However, many people do feel that their should be some notion of fairness factored into what have been historically governmental responsibilities (e.g managing roads, prisons, etc.) and that the push to privatize many of these functions is dange…

Exactly