Using the Internet to raise complaints

[River Rat]

Let me start by declaring my interest here. The company I work for has recently decided to give our website a makeover. To do this we have engaged the services of a brand consultant and obviously a web designer. The big debate is whether we should have a facebook page or not. Our company exports about 75% of what we do and we do not sell directly to the public so our feeling is there is no real value in having a facebook page. But our brand consultant and web designer are challenging our thoughts in this regard.

 

The logic that they put forward is that as soon as you use the Internet as an advertising medium this becomes a legitimate form of communication in both directions. The choice you have is whether you wish to provide the general public a platform to raise their issues or not. When it comes to complaints our company is no different to any other in that we need to know what people think about us and the important thing here is not so much whether they are right or not but what their perception is because after all this is your brand. The most convincing argument is that while in the past word of mouth was your brand the electronic reflection of your brand is now the prevailing one. The argument goes deeper you either engage in this by using it to assess and address the perception of your brand or you let it drift in the ether (at your peril they say!).

 

This brings me to the Hub where there have been numerous threads where Hubbers complain about their negative experiences with service providers. We have a mixed bag of responses here with some using the OP's platform to put the boot in, others defending the service provider because their own positive experience has led to some brand loyalty. However, the response that intriques me most is the one that says that you are not entitled to raise the issue on the Hub unless you personally spoken to the service provider directly. This would seem to suggest that a complaint should be dealt with offline, now this might work if everybody did this. But as my consultants tell me those customers that don't have a platform or the relative protection of the anonymity that the web provides will revert to word of mouth with others to voice their complaint. This would mean that as a business you are not only unaware of what is being said about you but you are also unable to address this directly.

 

I am keen to hear from you what you view is.

Edited December 23, 2011 by River Rat

[The Drongo]

Like I have said before: Only after raising it with the service provider.

 

Anything else is 'just not cricket.'

 

1. If the service provider responds in a positive fashion, then let people know.

 

2. If the service provider responds in a negative fashion/does not respond at all, then let people know.

 

Unfortunately, the application of point 2 seems to take precedence.

 

If you have poor service at a restaurant, CALL THE MANAGER, he/she can't be everywhere at once.

If there is a pothole in the road - call the Metro dept. (...try harder.)

If you walk into Pick 'n Pray at 17h30 and 3 out of 15 till points are active, don't queue and bitch - CALL THE MANAGER.

 

Writing to the newspaper first is generally a waste of your time and energy that could best be spent trying to FIX the problem immediately.

 

There are a few semi-NEG threads running at the moment ie: Holla trails and Powasol.

 

BOTH OF THOSE WEBSITES HAVE A - CONTACT US - Tab.

 

I wager that those tabs were not used BEFORE the "Runt and Grunt" tab.

 

Why?

[Slowbee]

 

Why?

 

because of the general notion of terrible service from companies, especially trust. People feel they cannot trust large companies, one person sending an email to a large corporation, will result in a up yours from the company.

 

But, bringing your complaint into the public domain, where potential damage can be done, is more likely to get a response. Which is very sad.

 

But to the OP. Even if no one uses your FB page, it is a form of media that can be used to your advantage, and does show that you are keeping up with technological trends. We are going through the same process at the moment. Except. our advisors, also proposed a "social media management fee" ....

[Ratty]

because of the general notion of terrible service from companies, especially trust. People feel they cannot trust large companies, one person sending an email to a large corporation, will result in a up yours from the company.

 

But, bringing your complaint into the public domain, where potential damage can be done, is more likely to get a response. Which is very sad.

 

But to the OP. Even if no one uses your FB page, it is a form of media that can be used to your advantage, and does show that you are keeping up with technological trends. We are going through the same process at the moment. Except. our advisors, also proposed a "social media management fee" ....

 

 

We were advised to only use social media (twitter, facebook etc) if we are prepared to have someone monitor them daily. If someone comments, you need to reply straight quickly otherwise you will just annoy them more.

[The Drongo]

 

2. If the service provider responds in a negative fashion/does not respond at all, then let people know.

 

Unfortunately, the application of point 2 seems to take precedence.

 

 

 

because of the general notion of terrible service from companies, especially trust. People feel they cannot trust large companies, one person sending an email to a large corporation, will result in a up yours from the company.

 

Then point 2 shall apply

 

 

EDIT: But I'm getting a notion of which side of the fence you are on in your other debate.

 

And 'THEY' deserves it!

Edited December 23, 2011 by The Drongo

[Slowbee]

EDIT: But I'm getting a notion of which side of the fence you are on in your other debate.

 

And 'THEY' deserves it!

 

in an ideal world yes, but that element of lack of trust comes to play.

[Slowbee]

We were advised to only use social media (twitter, facebook etc) if we are prepared to have someone monitor them daily. If someone comments, you need to reply straight quickly otherwise you will just annoy them more.

 

have to agree.

 

Hope you have a great christmas - regards to the family

[EigerSA]

I think having a facebook page just for the sake of having one is not really a clever idea. Regardless of what the consultants say, someone has to constantly maintain that facebook page and keep it up to date otherwise what's the point? As for complaints, is yours the type of company to receive a lot of customer feedback?

 

If it is, do you really want a facebook page that is open to abuse? Just remember that most people out there will complain to friends and family (and even strangers) far quicker than they'll complain to the company; having a facebook page means having a place to bitch/complain without having to go to the company first, and publicly.

 

If your company isn't the type to have public/customer interaction then what's the point?

[River Rat]

Like I have said before: Only after raising it with the service provider.

 

Anything else is 'just not cricket.'

 

1. If the service provider responds in a positive fashion, then let people know.

 

2. If the service provider responds in a negative fashion/does not respond at all, then let people know.

 

Unfortunately, the application of point 2 seems to take precedence.

 

If you have poor service at a restaurant, CALL THE MANAGER, he/she can't be everywhere at once.

If there is a pothole in the road - call the Metro dept. (...try harder.)

If you walk into Pick 'n Pray at 17h30 and 3 out of 15 till points are active, don't queue and bitch - CALL THE MANAGER.

 

Writing to the newspaper first is generally a waste of your time and energy that could best be spent trying to FIX the problem immediately.

 

There are a few semi-NEG threads running at the moment ie: Holla trails and Powasol.

 

BOTH OF THOSE WEBSITES HAVE A - CONTACT US - Tab.

 

I wager that those tabs were not used BEFORE the "Runt and Grunt" tab.

 

Why?

In both the the threads mentioned an attempt was made to address the issue directly with the service provider. I can attest to the Powasol one as not only I but a number of unhappy customers tried to address it with them. None more vocal than the Sabie lite bunch at the start of stage 2 where we were promised better service that day only to get a nonchalant dismissal later when nothing changed.

 

What does interest me though is NicJ's response on the Holla thread where he welcomed the engagement and the opportunity to put things right. The question for me is how many people would have bothered to use the direct route? I suspect far fewer than those that used the opportunity to air their views on the web. So from a service providers point of view I would not receive the same amount of information if the direct route custom prevailed. As a manager I'm not sure if I'm happy with that as I would prefer to have as many inputs as possible as to how my business is performing, this provided that it is real and I guess that maybe where the problem lies. But I have seen enough evidence of people springing to the defence of the service provider if they feel the criticism is not legit.

[katz201]

To have a Facebook page or not. If you do so, it will open another communication channel to your business. In the society we live in today, most people are expecting a quicker response to their queries, than they did in the old days of snail mail and land lines. If I post a complaint on your Facebook wall, I will expect a reply quite quickly. If you as the business representative do not respond, I will see this as giving me the finger, even more so than not hearing anything from you after I submitted an issue on your website and you never responded.

 

So if I you decide to create the page, you must be willing to keep monitoring it and giving feedback when needing, or pay someone to do it for you.

[River Rat]

To have a Facebook page or not. If you do so, it will open another communication channel to your business. In the society we live in today, most people are expecting a quicker response to their queries, than they did in the old days of snail mail and land lines. If I post a complaint on your Facebook wall, I will expect a reply quite quickly. If you as the business representative do not respond, I will see this as giving me the finger, even more so than not hearing anything from you after I submitted an issue on your website and you never responded.

 

So if I you decide to create the page, you must be willing to keep monitoring it and giving feedback when needing, or pay someone to do it for you.

Got you and this is the dilemma I can't envisage sufficient traffic to justify this.

[katz201]

Got you and this is the dilemma I can't envisage sufficient traffic to justify this.

 

If you are going to use the internet for marketing and communication purposes to a broad audience it might be worth it. If you merely want a web presense and you are dealing with a limited number of clients, rather use that time and energy to maintain your customer relations directly. Maybe invest in some CRM tools & principles in your business.

 

Before you decide on the tool, decide on the objective first. Most consultants will throw Social Media and SEO at you if you mention the internet, but decide what you want to achieve first.

[The Drongo]

@River Rat

 

Ok, made the avatar connection!

 

1. I can not state whether an attempt was made to address the poor service experienced by the service provider at Sabie first, before the complaint lodged in public. That done, the service provider has promised to work on the issue, and may have done as much if contacted in a private manner. Their manner of reply on an open public forum is a bit off though, so they now deserves both negative and positive comment. This thread was almost initiated by the provider themselves however.

 

2. Sure, a (half-hearted) attempt was made to address the trail marking problem at Holla. The OWNER in this instance was totally unaware of the thread running, and a simple email (using CONTACT US) was used to alert him to this fact. I am positive, by the response posted publicly, that the issue would have been handled just as well without the negative criticism, in private.

 

My answer was to back up my poll vote.

And I stand behind it. You may be missing my point here.

The option to complain publicly is open to all, and as Slow points out is often a necessary evil.

But doing it first, when the business concerned can often be contacted first to remedy the issue directly, without unnecessarily damaging their reputation, is something that is seldom done. I hear what you say about sufficient people springing to the defence of the provider if the complaint does not appear to be legitimate, but the truth of the matter is often that the complaints posted in public are more often than not done because the person doing the complaining feels they have been 'personally' snubbed, when often a significant number of other factors are involved. In one word, it is often slanderous.

 

To use the P'n P example: I can stand in a queue, 12 deep at rush hour, because only 3 of 15 till points are operating. I can take it personally and bitterly complain to the lady in front, and the man behind, and then do it again next week.

Or I can leave them in the queue, find the manager, discuss the error of his ways and in 3 minutes 8 out of 15 tills are buzzing. Sorted. For all the people in the queue.

 

HOWEVER: If I should return, and the SAME problem is persisting, then I will most definitely tell my mates, and complain in public, and not return soon...

 

Which reminds me: Do not shop at P'nP Waterfall until they sort their attitude out! Use the SPAR, where the manager is always rushing around, and where he greets you and yours by name.

 

EDIT: By the way, well worded OP

Edited December 23, 2011 by The Drongo

[River Rat]

@Drongo I can see the principle to your view and although I personally don't always follow it it does make sense. However, I do get the feeling that we going to see more and more complaints lodged on the web before the business owner is aware of it ( Holla Trails a case in point and not because the OP hadn't tried at least by phone). This is going to make our lives as businessmen quite interesting as we try to anticipate how one should deal with this phenomenon.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Well said, Drongo

[The Drongo]

@Drongo I can see the principle to your view and although I personally don't always follow it it does make sense. However, I do get the feeling that we going to see more and more complaints lodged on the web before the business owner is aware of it ( Holla Trails a case in point and not because the OP hadn't tried at least by phone). This is going to make our lives as businessmen quite interesting as we try to anticipate how one should deal with this phenomenon.

 

Agree with you 100% mate.

 

My question is - Why?

 

Why if most service providers have a website with CONTACT US, is that not used FIRST.

 

Maybe Slow is onto something about the big corporates, and I do have to agree, but this is largely because (for some reason) most seem to make themselves difficult to contact. (tried phoning MTN SP lately??) So yes, they should then be contacted publicly, it is a principle that seems to work with Government inefficiencies too, and I believe this is because there is a Corporate Responsibility, and not an Individual responsibility to handling complaints, ie: no particular individual wants to/can act personally, and the Corporate entity is too large to hear a 'little' voice.

 

So, there are merits. But often small Individually run companies, who are already struggling are irresponsibly/deliberately dissed without first being given the opportunity to remedy the issue.

 

We just need to remember that before we complain.

 

But this form of media - The Big Voice - is certainly making life interesting.

I know it is certainly doing so from a linguistic point of view!