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