![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Musings on Customer Service
Mar. 8th, 2007 11:21 amI hate the everyone-is-a-customer mentality.
My employer today announced on the intranet that all our customers are able to now customize their own particular intranet portal for company info. I thought, gee, I didn't know we had any sort of portal for corporation's clients at all. Digging a little deeper, I realized the customers in question are actually the employees of the firm.
How can I be a customer if neither I nor my department are paying money for the service? Indeed, since the intranet systems are funded out of our internal operating budget and not via some funny money internal fund transfer from misc unrelated departments, how can they imply they're selling a service at all?
Various managers have declared our UNIX support has customers who are always right. (Except, of course, when they're not and UNIXSUPP then has to suddenly slip from mindless yes men to gatekeepers of regulations and standards.) But an arrangement of vendors and customers implies we are dealing with each other voluntarily, there's some sort of exchange of currency in return for services rendered and our relationship is transitory. There are so many holes in the philosophy the metaphor is unsustainable.
I think the better model is that of a family, for better or worse. We can't choose our relatives: whether we like each other or not, we're stuck with each other. We have to play nice with each other because no matter how much one may wish other parties to spontaneously burst into flames, it ain't gonna happen. We have collective good days when all is well and we have not-so-good days when some party or another is under fire. We get more done when we cooperate, less when we're adversarial. We don't exchange money for services but we do exchange goodwill and trust.
I'll be happier when the current fad fades and is replaced by a new one. Except, of course, when the new one is even worse. :-^
My employer today announced on the intranet that all our customers are able to now customize their own particular intranet portal for company info. I thought, gee, I didn't know we had any sort of portal for corporation's clients at all. Digging a little deeper, I realized the customers in question are actually the employees of the firm.
How can I be a customer if neither I nor my department are paying money for the service? Indeed, since the intranet systems are funded out of our internal operating budget and not via some funny money internal fund transfer from misc unrelated departments, how can they imply they're selling a service at all?
Various managers have declared our UNIX support has customers who are always right. (Except, of course, when they're not and UNIXSUPP then has to suddenly slip from mindless yes men to gatekeepers of regulations and standards.) But an arrangement of vendors and customers implies we are dealing with each other voluntarily, there's some sort of exchange of currency in return for services rendered and our relationship is transitory. There are so many holes in the philosophy the metaphor is unsustainable.
I think the better model is that of a family, for better or worse. We can't choose our relatives: whether we like each other or not, we're stuck with each other. We have to play nice with each other because no matter how much one may wish other parties to spontaneously burst into flames, it ain't gonna happen. We have collective good days when all is well and we have not-so-good days when some party or another is under fire. We get more done when we cooperate, less when we're adversarial. We don't exchange money for services but we do exchange goodwill and trust.
I'll be happier when the current fad fades and is replaced by a new one. Except, of course, when the new one is even worse. :-^
