- Swallowing Yahoo may make Microsoft want to take a nap
- ISO approves OOXML as standard
- Maintaining integrity on the Net
- Microsoft caves, in part, to online computing
- Eyewitness to H-1B scammers
- Social networking hits the bar scene big screen
- Is the slow economy hurting high-tech sales?
- Take the smarts out of smartphones
- U.S. Immigration [USCIS] changes selection process for H-1B visas
- Will the iPhone force Apple to change course?
August 21, 2007 | Comments: (0)
Customer service gets human again
Eschewing automation, Netflix puts folks on the phone in hopes of achieving competitive advantage
Customer service sucks. For everybody. Not only for those who require it, but also for those who have to provide it.
So the news that Netflix is investing in its customer service strategy, as reported by The New York Times, is heartening for those of us who rely on customer service from time to time -- but perhaps disheartening for providers that specialize in automated customer service technology.
Netflix's solution runs counter to every high-tech business strategy I have ever heard: The DVD rental company is putting customer service reps back on phones rather than trying to reduce the workforce and costs associated with customer service by automating the experience through technology, which typically includes a Web interface or e-mail interaction.
But with Blockbuster suddenly giving Netflix a run for its money, Netflix officials believe customer service can provide it a competitive advantage. Perhaps if done well.
Notably, Netflix went even one step further. Not only did it turn its back on technology by returning to a human interface, it chose not to use an offshore service provider. Rather, it located its phone banks outside Portland, Ore.
The Times quotes Michael Osier, vice president of IT operations and customer service at Netflix, as saying that "it's amazing how consistent people are in their politeness and empathy" in the greater Portland area.
For those who firmly believe that technology can be used to solve any problem and that it is superior to most human solutions, the Netflix move has to be disappointing.
What we are witnessing here is a perfect example of what is sometimes called the "uncanny valley." There are many definitions of this term, but let me explain how one expert in artificial intelligence defines it.
E-mail is not a robust technology solution. Rather, it is just another away of saying to the customer, "Talk to the hand." In other words, send a letter.
I think companies are confusing the use of a computer interface with the true meaning of high tech. Let's face it, e-mail as a technology is simply not smart enough to provide high-quality customer service.
This despite the fact that once the e-mail is received, companies usually deploy some kind of NLU (natural language understanding) technology that attempts to interpret the e-mail by looking for particular words and phrases before determining how to resolve the issue.
Unfortunately, NLU technology isn't fully up to the task yet, and this is where we begin to enter that uncanny valley, according to Eliezer Yudkowsky, research fellow and co-founder of the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence.
Yudkowsky says, with a laugh in his voice, that we certainly know more than we did 200 years ago about customer service, "but not quite enough."
By that Yudkowsky means that although technology may be capable of solving any problem, time remains a factor. Today we can build skyscrapers much taller than ourselves or steam shovels far stronger than we are, but remember, says Yudkowsky, the human species was running around for tens of thousands of years before we created such marvels.
"There is always time, and there is also the uncanny valley," Yudkowsky says, explaining the "uncanny valley" as a gap between two systems.
One system is so dumb that we don't expect it to be helpful. The other system is so lifelike and helpful that it fools us into thinking it is human.
In between is the uncanny valley, technology that works just well enough for us to be disappointed with it.
As a consumer who has spent many frustrating hours punching in selections on my telephone keypad or waiting for an e-mail response to arrive in my inbox, I'm of the mind that most automated customer service technologies are stuck in this uncanny valley.
Someday technology will evolve to offer reliable customer service, but until then it might not be a bad idea for companies to turn their backs on hype from customer service technology vendors and just follow Netflix's lead.
Posted by Ephraim Schwartz on August 21, 2007 03:00 AM
RATE THIS ARTICLE:
-
- COMMENTS
My few experiences with IM as a customer service vehicle have been very positive -- probably because it employs technology to implement a (relatively) timely connection with (rather than a substitute for) a helpful person.
Posted by: Paul Brogger at August 21, 2007 01:34 PMI'd much rather talk to a human. I can get my question answered 100% faster when I can simply tell them whats wrong and make sure they understand. I never could understand how sending messages back and forth 10-15 times was faster. And when is the last time one of those NLU readers actually got something right? Yes I need sugar with my LAN card, and some cream too ok?
Posted by: Scott at August 22, 2007 11:04 AMEmail is too slow. Automated phone systems are just aggravating to customers - completely ineffective.
The best use of technology for customer service is the online chat. It is generally instantaneous (occasional waits do occur); however, it is only effective because you have an actual person on the other side.
Kudos to Netflix for recognizing that "humanizing" customer service is a real asset.
Posted by: Mel at August 22, 2007 11:09 AMYou can get a ? answered "100% faster"? You mean it takes no time at all? Or it takes half as long (since it's twice as fast)?
I agree IM is a good substitute in some instances - like problems with web sites where you (the company) know I'm probably already on your site. If you keep me waiting, though, I'd much rather wait on speakerphone.
Also Netfix was made a smart business move. If someone is unsure of what movie they want, a person can help. That person can judge what the customer might want or need, much better than any automated process.
So instead of someone ending an incomplete order in frustration, the customer rep can sooth and/or sell another product. One frustrated customer ends with a sale. I'll bet Netflix rentals go up.
Posted by: bdweiner at August 22, 2007 11:25 AMI for one would be willing to pay a few dollars more for any product, high tech or otherwise, in order to have a human answer the phone when/if I need customer service. If I could be certain when price-comparing between products that one company would provide human service by charging a slightly higher initial cost for their product, there would be no hesitation to pay up front. I cannot believe that all the time I have wasted trying to get customer service--either automated or off-shore--could ever be offset by the few dollars I've saved in buying a cheaper product. I'd like to think that my time has value to the company who was so willing to take my money. Not so, I have learned. That Netflix will provide this service for something as trivial as picking a movie, yet most companies are not willing to do as much for equipment I've spent thousands of dollars on--that is truly mind-boggling to me.
Posted by: kjt at August 22, 2007 06:17 PMTalking to a good person is better than talking to any sort of AI system, no matter how well set up.
But many AI systems are still better than an average person off the street. I like empathy, but just because you empathize, if you're a clod or you're not empowered to fix anything or you only listen to the words I say and don't focus on the problem I'm really trying to state but don't have the words for, then you're not useful.
i.e. The average person isn't _necessarily_ better than the help script they read to you over the phone.
Posted by: MikeM at August 24, 2007 09:40 AM
