peculiarities around different customer groups to inform service plans, and the second promotes the dismantling of what may turn out to be generalized assumptions. It’ s an almost damned if you do and damned if you don’ t customer experience quagmire, to try and navigate the Know-Your-Customer space, without the overarching shadow of discriminative thought.
Can it be done though? Can distinctive customer experience plans be put in place and delivered devoid of the silhouette of prejudicial leanings?
The world is full of stereotypes. Some historical and some emergent over time as different human dynamics morph. These are typically responsible for varying aspects of human behavior past and present and customer experience excellence leans towards stereotyping customers both in the product and service space.
The lenses through which organizations view customers are tinged with their buying power, and what differentiates the different purchasing groups and knowing customers in and out, works well in the bid to serve them better.
Something needs to be addressed though? The figurative posit by George Orwell in his famous book Animal Farm that“ All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”, is something the brand, marketing and customer experience fraternity need to reflect upon and determine if indeed- All customers are equal but some customers are more equal than others?
Designing products and services with different customer groups in mind does not contravene good brand practice. Knowing and fully understanding customer characteristics and qualities to enable specialized and customized responses to their needs is desirable. Creating delightful product and service experiences are fueled by understanding group dynamics, and both quantitative and qualitative market and customer research is encouraged towards this end.
What however needs to be carefully cogitated is that the boundary between observation and reflection is not crossed, and that resultant observations are not applied in a critical or judgmental way. Observations and opinions are harmless when held as viewpoints and not as
the truth. However, when an opinion pronounces itself in a harmful manner and applied as a customer truth, then discrimination can be taken as having reared its ugly head.
If the outcomes of a customer profiling exercise lead to providing customers with more exacting products and services, and caution is applied to ensure that the information gleaned from customer reviews is used to increase the positivity of the service delivery, then only good can come out of it.
If listening to the voice of the customer, applying intuitive listening to understand their situations, further asking and documenting out of the box needs and requests is done, then the‘ customer stereotyping’ will not be injurious.
Whilst studying customers in order to deliver appropriately is undertaken, the most basic customer needs of attention provision, responsiveness to requests, awareness and education, and resolution of service failure should never be compromised. This would ensure that the extra frills and thrills applied to customer groups with deeper pockets, does not compromise the application of understanding and supportive discernment for all.
Where every customer gets the benefit of service excellence then customers would be happy to‘ stick-to-their-lanes’ and quit quibbling about differential treatment. When customers are happy, they view VIP or differentiated service meted upon others as aspirational, with a view to climbing up the ladder and getting there. It is only when dissatisfaction creeps in, that other customers interpret the very same contexts as discriminatory.
When the coin is flipped, brands also contribute to customer accusations of their bias whether perceived or real. Customers who feel unfulfilled begin to make associations and attach prejudices with the dissatisfaction experienced.
When service is impersonal, customers start to query the communication, treatment and ultimate delivery, and create stories that when told often, cement themselves as real. These stories are shared in customer networks and circles, and brands do not have the opportunity to be present and clarify fact from fiction. The customer’ s perception is their reality.
Many stories have been told of service providers profiling customers and making assumptions about their ability to afford particular products or services based on how they are dressed, and not giving them the time of day. Only to be shocked later, when the patron proves high value by purchasing a top level product, or ringing up a massive bill and swiping their payment with nonchalance. There has
32 MAL37 / 20 ISSUE