Get off the phones

IvanOpinion

Pollycat said:

I think we're going round in circles because you cannot or will not accept that companies are possibly to blame for inaccurate information on websites.

I am pretty sure that on at least 2 occasions I have said I mostly agree with you.
My only variance is that it isn't all one way.
Could some companies be clearer, yes, if it under their control.
Do customers ignore the latest information given - yes, when it suits them.

Barny1979

BooJewels said: They're clearly trying to move as many routine tasks to their web site as possible to free up the phones.

It's not to free-up the phones, it's to streamline the staff and get more customers to self-serve.

Pollycat

IvanOpinion said: 

I am pretty sure that on at least 2 occasions I have said I mostly agree with you.
My only variance is that it isn't all one way.
Could some companies be clearer, yes, if it under their control.
Do customers ignore the latest information given - yes, when it suits them.

It might be me simplifying things but why would it not be under a company's control to amend the delivery details on their own website?

Even if a 3rd party manages their website, the company - as the customer of the website management company - should be able to request a change to the website content.

FTR, I do agree with you about people ignoring information on the website.

As I said way back on page 2, I find it hard to believe that people who want to contact a company don't go to their website first to see what it says before trying to ring a call centre that has closed for the day.

Or trying to email them when they are not accepting emails.

I guess that's why I'm blaming the companies whilst you are blaming customers.

Because I'm the person who does check websites, who does give companies a little leeway.

And as such, I expect the information on websites to be current.

I think we may have reached an understanding.

BooJewels

@Barny1979 Obviously I meant to free up the time personnel are spending speaking to people on the phones, for a routine process that can be more automated, thereby freeing up those personnel to deal with more individual enquiries that do require more personal intervention and thereby reducing the time they spend on hold,  thereby making their reduced and stressed resources stretch further and achieve better results etc etc.  But I think you knew exactly what I meant.

IvanOpinion

Pollycat said:

IvanOpinion said: 

I am pretty sure that on at least 2 occasions I have said I mostly agree with you.
My only variance is that it isn't all one way.
Could some companies be clearer, yes, if it under their control.
Do customers ignore the latest information given - yes, when it suits them.

It might be me simplifying things but why would it not be under a company's control to amend the delivery details on their own website?
What do they amend them to?  The courier may still be saying that they can get parcels out in the expected timescales - but we all know van breakdowns, staff sickness, mislaying parcels, loading on wrong van etc. can all get in the way of that.  So the company is acting in good faith,

Even if a 3rd party manages their website, the company - as the customer of the website management company - should be able to request a change to the website content.

I did say I can think of a couple of good reasons.  One I know of is that the people who created the website went bankrupt a couple of years ago and nobody knows the passwords to amend it.  They do not have time or the staff to rewrite it.  While they could manage their stock there are certain fundamentals they cannot change.

FTR, I do agree with you about people ignoring information on the website.

As I said way back on page 2, I find it hard to believe that people who want to contact a company don't go to their website first to see what it says before trying to ring a call centre that has closed for the day.

Or trying to email them when they are not accepting emails.

You might be surprised   I agree that for many it is a reasonable expectation - but reality shows different.  I hold my hands up to this one as well.  Late last year I did a search for our gym opening times and found the time so I went as it opened - only to be asked to leave because they weren't open for another hour.  I explained to them their website was wrong - she looked it up and it was correct.  My search had actually picked up an old cached page referenced by a totally different site .... one of those doh!!!! moments.

I guess that's why I'm blaming the companies whilst you are blaming customers.

Because I'm the person who does check websites, who does give companies a little leeway.

And as such, I expect the information on websites to be current.

I am actually not blaming anybody, I am just pointing out that there are always at least 2 sides to the story, and a bit of latitude on BOTH sides would really help the nations blood pressure.
Absolutely nothing to do with this post, but this morning I have raised a ticket about some inaccuracies on one of the web sites we work with.  I have been told fixes will go into the next cadence - that means the start of September.

I think we may have reached an understanding.
I always thought we weren't a million miles away  

I have typed responses above (relaxing between meetings)

swingaloo

After reading through those 6 pages Im glad you are in I.T and not actually in a customer based role. I spent 22 years working in call centers, many years taking calls and many years as a supervisor and then manager. The behaviour you describe from both your 'friend' and from yourself  is extremely unprofessional. What an insulting way to treat customers. People do get angry and frustrated when held in a queuing system but a good call taker will be able to show empathy for the person and probably turn the call around without too much effort.  Yes there are people listening in for training or monitoring purposes sometimes but again it speaks volumes that you refer to it  as 'eavesdropping'.  If I hadn't read your extended monologue regarding your wife/marriage/dogs etc, etc, etc I would think you were just immature.

IvanOpinion

swingaloo said:

After reading through those 6 pages Im glad you are in I.T and not actually in a customer based role. I spent 22 years working in call centers, many years taking calls and many years as a supervisor and then manager. The behaviour you describe from both your 'friend' and from yourself  is extremely unprofessional. What an insulting way to treat customers. People do get angry and frustrated when held in a queuing system but a good call taker will be able to show empathy for the person and probably turn the call around without too much effort.  Yes there are people listening in for training or monitoring purposes sometimes but again it speaks volumes that you refer to it  as 'eavesdropping'.  If I hadn't read your extended monologue regarding your wife/marriage/dogs etc, etc, etc I would think you were just immature.

Do you feel better for that? See 24, 42 and 43.
Since working with call centres, I have gained the utmost respect for the agents that man the lines.  I could not do the job so you will be pleased to hear that I am also glad I do not work in a customer facing role - as would any callers I would have to deal with, because I have no idea how call centre workers take so much unwarranted abuse.  It is for the same reason that I could never man a Samaritan line - I am guessing '!!!!!! just get on with it' may not be a good response.

I accept that you may have worked in a call centre, but your little rant (accepting this is the rant board) makes it clear that you have absolutely no understanding of the technicalities of those centres (despite claims of being a manager).  Explain to me how I treated "my customer" in an insulting way - you don't even know who my customer is, so how can you tell.  My customer expects me to resolve issues, which is exactly what we did.

I have never claimed to work for a call centre so if 'eavesdropping' is not the correct call centre lingo then fill yer boots (i was just using a dictionary definition).  Being an empathetic sort I would never resort to nit picking at someone on using an incorrect term when talking to me about IT.

I have no issues with being called immature, I would fully admit to it (it helps me let off steam and it keeps me young, nurturing my inner child).  It is also one of the traits that keeps me in gainful employment in an industry where age can be an issue.  I am however guessing you meant that as an insult - tut tut, note to self: must check the board rules on that.

Now point me to an example of where we (as a team) did not behave 100% professionally (taking into account my diatribe is obviously written light heartedly which is definitely way over the head of those that just want to troll).

Pollycat

IvanOpinion said:

Pollycat said:

IvanOpinion said: 

I am pretty sure that on at least 2 occasions I have said I mostly agree with you.
My only variance is that it isn't all one way.
Could some companies be clearer, yes, if it under their control.
Do customers ignore the latest information given - yes, when it suits them.

It might be me simplifying things but why would it not be under a company's control to amend the delivery details on their own website?
What do they amend them to?  The courier may still be saying that they can get parcels out in the expected timescales - but we all know van breakdowns, staff sickness, mislaying parcels, loading on wrong van etc. can all get in the way of that.  So the company is acting in good faith,

Even if a 3rd party manages their website, the company - as the customer of the website management company - should be able to request a change to the website content.

I did say I can think of a couple of good reasons.  One I know of is that the people who created the website went bankrupt a couple of years ago and nobody knows the passwords to amend it.  They do not have time or the staff to rewrite it.  While they could manage their stock there are certain fundamentals they cannot change.

FTR, I do agree with you about people ignoring information on the website.

As I said way back on page 2, I find it hard to believe that people who want to contact a company don't go to their website first to see what it says before trying to ring a call centre that has closed for the day.

Or trying to email them when they are not accepting emails.

You might be surprised   I agree that for many it is a reasonable expectation - but reality shows different.  I hold my hands up to this one as well.  Late last year I did a search for our gym opening times and found the time so I went as it opened - only to be asked to leave because they weren't open for another hour.  I explained to them their website was wrong - she looked it up and it was correct.  My search had actually picked up an old cached page referenced by a totally different site .... one of those doh!!!! moments.

I guess that's why I'm blaming the companies whilst you are blaming customers.

Because I'm the person who does check websites, who does give companies a little leeway.

And as such, I expect the information on websites to be current.

I am actually not blaming anybody, I am just pointing out that there are always at least 2 sides to the story, and a bit of latitude on BOTH sides would really help the nations blood pressure.
Absolutely nothing to do with this post, but this morning I have raised a ticket about some inaccuracies on one of the web sites we work with.  I have been told fixes will go into the next cadence - that means the start of September.

I think we may have reached an understanding.
I always thought we weren't a million miles away  

I have typed responses above (relaxing between meetings)

1. They amend delivery timescales to what they agree with their carrier is reasonable for the majority of deliveries under current situations. Exactly the same as they did under normal circumstances.

Even under normal circumstances there will be van breakdowns, staff sickness, mislaying parcels, loading on wrong van etc.

2. Oh come on!

I think you are clutching at straws with your 'couple of good reasons' why companies can't change their website details.

3. No comment. - other than it was your error.

4. It certainly sounded like you were blaming customers. My mistake if you weren't.

IvanOpinion

Pollycat said:

IvanOpinion said:

Pollycat said:

IvanOpinion said: 

I am pretty sure that on at least 2 occasions I have said I mostly agree with you.
My only variance is that it isn't all one way.
Could some companies be clearer, yes, if it under their control.
Do customers ignore the latest information given - yes, when it suits them.

It might be me simplifying things but why would it not be under a company's control to amend the delivery details on their own website?
What do they amend them to?  The courier may still be saying that they can get parcels out in the expected timescales - but we all know van breakdowns, staff sickness, mislaying parcels, loading on wrong van etc. can all get in the way of that.  So the company is acting in good faith,

Even if a 3rd party manages their website, the company - as the customer of the website management company - should be able to request a change to the website content.

I did say I can think of a couple of good reasons.  One I know of is that the people who created the website went bankrupt a couple of years ago and nobody knows the passwords to amend it.  They do not have time or the staff to rewrite it.  While they could manage their stock there are certain fundamentals they cannot change.

FTR, I do agree with you about people ignoring information on the website.

As I said way back on page 2, I find it hard to believe that people who want to contact a company don't go to their website first to see what it says before trying to ring a call centre that has closed for the day.

Or trying to email them when they are not accepting emails.

You might be surprised   I agree that for many it is a reasonable expectation - but reality shows different.  I hold my hands up to this one as well.  Late last year I did a search for our gym opening times and found the time so I went as it opened - only to be asked to leave because they weren't open for another hour.  I explained to them their website was wrong - she looked it up and it was correct.  My search had actually picked up an old cached page referenced by a totally different site .... one of those doh!!!! moments.

I guess that's why I'm blaming the companies whilst you are blaming customers.

Because I'm the person who does check websites, who does give companies a little leeway.

And as such, I expect the information on websites to be current.

I am actually not blaming anybody, I am just pointing out that there are always at least 2 sides to the story, and a bit of latitude on BOTH sides would really help the nations blood pressure.
Absolutely nothing to do with this post, but this morning I have raised a ticket about some inaccuracies on one of the web sites we work with.  I have been told fixes will go into the next cadence - that means the start of September.

I think we may have reached an understanding.
I always thought we weren't a million miles away  

I have typed responses above (relaxing between meetings)

1. They amend delivery timescales to what they agree with their carrier is reasonable for the majority of deliveries under current situations. Exactly the same as they did under normal circumstances.

Even under normal circumstances there will be van breakdowns, staff sickness, mislaying parcels, loading on wrong van etc.

2. Oh come on!

I think you are clutching at straws with your 'couple of good reasons' why companies can't change their website details.

3. No comment. - other than it was your error.

4. It certainly sounded like you were blaming customers. My mistake if you weren't.

1. But that may be what they have agreed with their carriers - and the carriers are telling them that they can meet those timescales (and may well do so be for the majority).  You almost seem to be implying that each morning companies should consult with their carriers to determine what todays timescale is.  We are in a very fast changing world at the minute.  Even prior to this pandemic there were continual complaints from a minority of people that failed to get deliveries on time.  Amazon has never once met their stated delivery time to me as a prime member.
2. Seriously - that is a genuine issue we are dealing with at the minute. Another one is that the legal department cannot come up with agreed wording.
3. I do make the occasional one
4. I don't play the blame game.  I believe that the vast majority of people operate with good faith.  One place i always hated working was in the public sector because there was far too much politicking, covering your back, blaming others reducing the amount of time spent actually completing tasks.  But that is their culture.

swingaloo

IvanOpinion said:

swingaloo said:

After reading through those 6 pages Im glad you are in I.T and not actually in a customer based role. I spent 22 years working in call centers, many years taking calls and many years as a supervisor and then manager. The behaviour you describe from both your 'friend' and from yourself  is extremely unprofessional. What an insulting way to treat customers. People do get angry and frustrated when held in a queuing system but a good call taker will be able to show empathy for the person and probably turn the call around without too much effort.  Yes there are people listening in for training or monitoring purposes sometimes but again it speaks volumes that you refer to it  as 'eavesdropping'.  If I hadn't read your extended monologue regarding your wife/marriage/dogs etc, etc, etc I would think you were just immature.

Do you feel better for that? See 24, 42 and 43.
Since working with call centres, I have gained the utmost respect for the agents that man the lines.  I could not do the job so you will be pleased to hear that I am also glad I do not work in a customer facing role - as would any callers I would have to deal with, because I have no idea how call centre workers take so much unwarranted abuse.  It is for the same reason that I could never man a Samaritan line - I am guessing '!!!!!! just get on with it' may not be a good response.

I accept that you may have worked in a call centre, but your little rant (accepting this is the rant board) makes it clear that you have absolutely no understanding of the technicalities of those centres (despite claims of being a manager).  Explain to me how I treated "my customer" in an insulting way - you don't even know who my customer is, so how can you tell.  My customer expects me to resolve issues, which is exactly what we did.

I have never claimed to work for a call centre so if 'eavesdropping' is not the correct call centre lingo then fill yer boots (i was just using a dictionary definition).  Being an empathetic sort I would never resort to nit picking at someone on using an incorrect term when talking to me about IT.

I have no issues with being called immature, I would fully admit to it (it helps me let off steam and it keeps me young, nurturing my inner child).  It is also one of the traits that keeps me in gainful employment in an industry where age can be an issue.  I am however guessing you meant that as an insult - tut tut, note to self: must check the board rules on that.

Now point me to an example of where we (as a team) did not behave 100% professionally (taking into account my diatribe is obviously written light heartedly which is definitely way over the head of those that just want to troll).

Oh dear,, an example of where you as a team did not work professionally!  You need to ask.
A manager who says 'We don't need people like her'. He hasn't really understood the concept of a call center at all has he. Even your thread title 'Get off the phones' says a lot. Its a call center, there to take calls from people, some of whom are lovely, some not so.   If the woman's rant went on for 7 minutes then I he needs to manage and train his staff properly. If the customer was really abusive then no call taker should have to take that and should have been trained how to end the call politely but any call taker who cannot placate an angry customer within 7 minutes is either not cut out for the job or needs further training. Both of which your 'professional' manager should have realised by now. But to see these callers as 'Wasting his call center's time', that's professional? By the way, I don't have to know your customer to know how they were treated was insulting and the fact that you cant see that for yourself is astounding.
By the way, my reply was just that, a reply, as it is a open forum and if you don't want replies then why post. Im not even sure if your opening post was real or just an excuse to come across as superior to others. As other posters have pointed out your story does change from time to time.