Tackling customer service challenges
How in-house lawyers can curtail the rise of customer complaints.
November 30, 2011 at 07:00 PM
7 minute read
It's a new age for customer service, one in which inside counsel often find themselves helping to shape their companies' complaint resolution processes, thereby lessening the risk from today's less-tolerant, and often harder-to-satisfy, consumers.
The worry used to be that if your business irritated one customer, he or she might tell a hundred people about the bad experience. Nowadays, thanks to social media and websites dedicated to “irate” consumers, an unhappy customer can share the details of his or her complaint with a global audience in no time. For example, many of us are familiar with the customer who produced a short video called “United Breaks Guitars” after baggage handlers smashed his prized guitar and airline customer service representatives refused tocompensate him for it. Once posted on YouTube, the video quickly caught the attention of 5.3 million viewers.
Worse yet, others today can easily be prompted to join the fray, adding their online “signatures” en masse on petition websites. Word of mouth has been replaced by the “click,” and disgruntled customers have become virtual fodder for journalists, plaintiffs lawyers and regulators looking for someone to interview, sue or testify against a business.
In some or all of the following ways, inside lawyers can help curtail the rise of, and mitigate damage from, customer complaints—either before or after they've gone viral:
Publicize a clear customer grievance procedure. The goal is to provide customers a readily accessible internal venue for addressing grievances before frustrations are taken to the web or third parties. Your complaint resolution procedures should include a system for documenting all communications with, and efforts to assist, the customer. Your business also should have a clear internal escalation path in the event a complaint cannot be resolved initially.
Monitor customer postings on the web. Customer service employees should monitor as many media sources as possible to make sure no complaint goes unnoticed. At Kaplan, we work with our business counterparts who monitor social media sites daily to identify the posters of negative reviews, research their issues and bring them to a swift and complete resolution. Once resolved, ask satisfied customers to take down their negative postings or blog about their positive experiences.
Teach colleagues to put themselves in the customer's shoes, and empower them with the tools of common sense. Let's face it: People love to complain. Most of us have been unhappy customers ourselves and know the frustrations caused by uncaring or powerless customer care representatives. Lawyers are often in the best position to teach others to approach situations as if the tables were turned. Strong complaint resolvers are good listeners, can communicate well, set expectations and effectively close the loop. And perhaps most importantly, basic problem-solving should not always require that a complaint be elevated to a supervisor.
Always close the loop. Lawyers should monitor customer complaint logs to ensure that no customer is left hanging. Positive responses should be documented. Happy customers appreciate your accessibility, responsiveness and, perhaps most importantly, develop a sense that your company “gets it.” Even if the company has declined to grant the specific relief the customer requested, providing a reasonable explanation for the denial can go a long way toward preventing further escalation.
Fix the underlying cause. We must go beyond addressing an individual complaint by identifying and fixing its underlying cause. Inside lawyers should be adept at spotting trends and making recommendations to their internal clientele on systemic ways to prevent problems from recurring.
Janice Block is executive vice president, general counsel and chief compliance officer for Kaplan Inc.
It's a new age for customer service, one in which inside counsel often find themselves helping to shape their companies' complaint resolution processes, thereby lessening the risk from today's less-tolerant, and often harder-to-satisfy, consumers.
The worry used to be that if your business irritated one customer, he or she might tell a hundred people about the bad experience. Nowadays, thanks to social media and websites dedicated to “irate” consumers, an unhappy customer can share the details of his or her complaint with a global audience in no time. For example, many of us are familiar with the customer who produced a short video called “United Breaks Guitars” after baggage handlers smashed his prized guitar and airline customer service representatives refused tocompensate him for it. Once posted on YouTube, the video quickly caught the attention of 5.3 million viewers.
Worse yet, others today can easily be prompted to join the fray, adding their online “signatures” en masse on petition websites. Word of mouth has been replaced by the “click,” and disgruntled customers have become virtual fodder for journalists, plaintiffs lawyers and regulators looking for someone to interview, sue or testify against a business.
In some or all of the following ways, inside lawyers can help curtail the rise of, and mitigate damage from, customer complaints—either before or after they've gone viral:
Publicize a clear customer grievance procedure. The goal is to provide customers a readily accessible internal venue for addressing grievances before frustrations are taken to the web or third parties. Your complaint resolution procedures should include a system for documenting all communications with, and efforts to assist, the customer. Your business also should have a clear internal escalation path in the event a complaint cannot be resolved initially.
Monitor customer postings on the web. Customer service employees should monitor as many media sources as possible to make sure no complaint goes unnoticed. At Kaplan, we work with our business counterparts who monitor social media sites daily to identify the posters of negative reviews, research their issues and bring them to a swift and complete resolution. Once resolved, ask satisfied customers to take down their negative postings or blog about their positive experiences.
Teach colleagues to put themselves in the customer's shoes, and empower them with the tools of common sense. Let's face it: People love to complain. Most of us have been unhappy customers ourselves and know the frustrations caused by uncaring or powerless customer care representatives. Lawyers are often in the best position to teach others to approach situations as if the tables were turned. Strong complaint resolvers are good listeners, can communicate well, set expectations and effectively close the loop. And perhaps most importantly, basic problem-solving should not always require that a complaint be elevated to a supervisor.
Always close the loop. Lawyers should monitor customer complaint logs to ensure that no customer is left hanging. Positive responses should be documented. Happy customers appreciate your accessibility, responsiveness and, perhaps most importantly, develop a sense that your company “gets it.” Even if the company has declined to grant the specific relief the customer requested, providing a reasonable explanation for the denial can go a long way toward preventing further escalation.
Fix the underlying cause. We must go beyond addressing an individual complaint by identifying and fixing its underlying cause. Inside lawyers should be adept at spotting trends and making recommendations to their internal clientele on systemic ways to prevent problems from recurring.
Janice Block is executive vice president, general counsel and chief compliance officer for
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'The Show Must Go On': Solo-GC-of-Year Kevin Colby Pulls Off Perpetual Juggling Act
Contract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readHow Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute readAuditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250