Customer service

I read a bit today about customer service. Apparently, a survey tells us that 75% of high tech CEOs think that their customer service is "above average." The article goes on to discuss the importance of customer retention and customer loyalty.

And yet...I've seen the wild successes of many industries--large discount stores, large hardware stores, computers, food--that indicate to me that consumers care more about price than quality or service. Price seems to win out in the marketplace over both quality and service. The author points out, in one of three tips toward the article's end, for consumers to "be less price-centric."

It seems to me that CEOs, whether or not they're in touch with their customer service quality, have the right idea. Again and again consumers choose lower prices over quality and service. What we consumers say (in miles of service horror story comments) doesn't match what we do (buy on the cheap).

Not one comment that I read said, "Well, shoot, I guess I got what I paid for. Next time I'll focus more on quality and service over price." Again and again, a poor customer experience is always someone else's fault.

Do interviews work?

I had coffee with a colleague last week and we got on the topic of interviews. My friend is a musician. She told me that the structure of an orchestra audition is ideal for selecting a soloist. Everything about the audition tests how well a musician performs individually. Predictably, she tells me, many orchestras are full of people who would make great soloists, but who aren't as well suited to play as a member of a larger team.

I have to take my friend's word--I know very little about music auditions. But I do know a bit about interviews, and to me they've always felt like amateur psychology hour, no matter what side I've sat on. Today I read a blurb in a blog that suggested that, at one company, they ought only allow "successful" interviewers (ones whose past choices reflect solid candidates) to interview. And my colleague sent me a pointer to a Tom Peters interview with Nick Corcodilos, which touches on a similar theme of interviewing:

Hypothetical situations and tests are nonsense. Psychologists have been telling us for decades about test-taking skills. People can pass tests and interviews with flying colors and not know a damn thing. Annette Flippen, an organizational psychologist, read my book and said, "We already know the traditional interview has little or no statistical utility as a selection technique." Most people don't know it.

Here's a great question that fits many situations, including this one: If this isn't working, why do we keep doing it?