Damn surveys again....

[sld72382]

1. A 5 minute process is not "rushing through."

Guy calls in to add a credit card to the database so his security software can be renewed. I add the info, ask him if there's anything else I can help him with (he said no), thank him for calling, end of call. Simple. right?

Well he gives me a 3 on the email survey because not only was he treated at the store like he never saw a computer before (totally possible), but because he said I rushed him through the process.

It's a 5 minute or less process, I add the info, make sure it's correct and that's it. It's not involved at all. Methinks he was upset that I didn't want to become his phone buddy for a half an hour.

The store screwed up, and that makes me a bad guy.

Older person bought a display model TV (first mistake). As such, it's still in store demo mode. How the store didn't reset it for the customer I have no idea, but I digress.

Anyway, I try to have customer go into the menus to reset it which would have resolved the issue but nothing worked. Finally I asked customer what the remote said all the way on the bottom of it. It was for a home theater system, not a TV. The store obviously gave him the wrong remote.

I tell him his two options. He can either go back to the store, or call the manufacturer of the TV so they can ship him the correct remote.

I looked and this guy gave me an overall score of 1 and for product knowledge a 1 on the survey. He failed to complete the rest other than the section that pertained to me, so he didn't leave any comments but I can deduce he called the manufacturer who instead of shipping him the correct remote just had him program the one he had. Of course, he decided to get back at me for it.

Now for people who say "why didn't you just program it?" We are only trained and allowed to troubleshoot and send out service calls for hardware issues with these TVs. Remote programming is not something we are trained in or even allowed to do over the phone (we only offer it onsite and for a charge).

----

Now it turns out that in about a month the head honchos at corporate are launching a new survey where you can dispute the survey right on the page if you feel the customer marked you down unfairly. I wouldn't be surprised if QA sides with the customer, though.

[Salesmonkey]

For a better rating system, why don't they save the recording of the call when you get an unusually low score? If a supervisor could listen to the call, they could specifically coach you on deficiencies. Or they could notice that the person rating was a loon and that you followed procedure exactly.

[EricKei]

Could be worse, your company could be on the NetPromoter survey system (like Intuit/QuickBooks is), where anything under a 9 (out of 10) on the question "How likely are you to recommend [our product] to a friend or co-worker?" is considered a "bad review" x.x They don't tell the people taking the survey this, however -- they just get told that it's 1 to 10, 10 being the best possible. Come to think of it, video game reviews seem to work the same way >_> A 7.9 will sometimes even have the game makers CALLING the reviewers to whine about the shitty score. It happened recently, iirc (DNF, I believe), and the ones that make the news are usually the ones that *deserve* genuinely low scores >_<

[underemployeed]

Ah. grade inflation. Everyone thinks they deserve perfect marks for OK service. I'm sorry, It is nice you want your employees to be "excellent" but that should be reserved for people who are actually good. Now if you get a bunch of less than satisfactory.... maybe do something.

My boss freaked out, because in her yearly review the DM gave her "satisfactory for training" and wondered why does she keep getting peopel to train if she sucks... I was like he didn't say you were horrible, just you could be better. Life isn't fair deal with it

[EricKei]

The sad thing is -- especially with modern businesses' dependence on surveys in lieu of actually, ya know, paying attention to employees' performance -- Many places consider any rating short of perfect to be the exact same thing as a "horrible" rating/horrible service. In other words, all 8.5's might as well be all 1's in their eyes. This is mainly to set up a paper trail for future terminations.

One if the many places this breaks down is the fact that there are a reasonable number of people out there who will NEVER give a perfect rating, no matter what (even if they're not SC's), simply because they figure the reps can always do one better. Naturally, the true SC's who whine and bitch and end up scamming the companies out of money in the end are the ones who give incredibly low ratings intentionally. After all, the rep did not *automatically* cave within 5 seconds, and besides how DARE they not know who was calling as soon as they picked up the phone and heard the SC's mellifluous voice?

[Ironclad Alibi]

Back in the mid 1970s the US Air Force officer rating system rated the officers on a number of elments, the rating ranging from 1 to 10. If an officer ever got a 9 in any element, their career in the USAF was toast. Once of the worst cases of grade inflation I have ever seen.

[EricKei]

If an officer ever got a 9 in any element, their career in the USAF was toast. Once of the worst cases of grade inflation I have ever seen.

Unless the elements in question were things like "ability to read all dials, meters, readouts and gauges in the cockpit clearly", that's pretty absurdly extreme o_O

[Ironclad Alibi]

Unless the elements in question were things like "ability to read all dials, meters, readouts and gauges in the cockpit clearly", that's pretty absurdly extreme o_O

I don't know which elements were rated, but everyone seemed to think it was absurd, and there wasn't anything they could do about it.

[Raveni]

If you google "Air Force downward feedback system" you should get some informative information.

Basically, the only point of feedback is for people who are poor performers who need to be gotten rid of.

[EricKei]

Indeed. That is the ultimate purpose of any such feedback system.

If measurements need to be taken, more meaningful ones could even come directly from the computers and recorders built in to the systems themselves -- Reaction time when presented with threats (environmental or hostiles); ability to consistently follow a flight plans and established regs ('This is Maverick, requesting permission to buzz the tower' would be a slight no-no ), e.g., program in the floor and ceiling for a given flight path and see if the pilot stays within them the whole time; proper pre-flight checks performed (at least, those which can be done via computer and not just eyeballed); etc etc

[Teskeria]

The company I work for considers anything less than a 10 (out of 10) on refer a friend as a failure. anything less than excellent on the other questions is a failure. so if they remember the bad rep before you, even mentioning them by name, on the survey for you, you fail. (Yes our sups try to fight it) Other stupid part is all the other questions 1 is the best. Refer to friend 10 is best. so if they answer 1 on autopilot, you fail there.