As struggling U.S. air carriers try to reach profitability by scaling back services, consumers will soon be missing another staple -- the paper ticket.
The association most of the world's airlines belong to has reached consensus that its members will stop issuing paper tickets for travel as of June 1, 2008. Checking in for a flight from a PC, mobile phone or airport kiosk has become the norm for many frequent travelers, but this is no longer simply an option for frequent, tech-savvy travelers.
Consumer Help Web receives many complaints from travelers who don't often travel for business and might only take several flights in their entire lives. The familiar processes frequent travelers grumble about are unknown to those consumers.
Many start standing in line the moment they reach the airport, unaware of luggage weight limits, how to operate check-in kiosks or security checkpoint procedures. If a consumer flies once every few years, the rules constantly change, and they often miss a connection, are forced to abandon a keepsake at security or waste time standing in at least one too many lines.
Airlines are like many physicians in such cases. Accustomed to seeing a crush of humanity and horrible situations, the average consumer's frustration seems minimal and not worthy of effort. When Consumer Help Web contacts airlines (or cruise ships or even bus lines), even our team is sometimes greeted with a perfunctory offer of extra frequent-flier miles for our customer or a coupon for a future trip. Since neither are very valuable for consumers who don't travel by very often, we have learned to excel at guiding our consumer customers to an appropriate resolution they want to receive.
Meanwhile, we love technology, but we're not sure there was enough time to phase-in the "no paper ticket" rule. Tell us what you think below.
Today was one of the days we saw a major company's contact center operations take a giant step back. Listening to those are sad -- especially when so much attention is being made of customer satisfaction.
During a routine call to healthcare giant CareFirst, a customer service representative told me that my provider had been paid for multiple claims I was being billed for by the provider. Interestingly enough, CareFirst's own computer system showed my coverage as lapsed because I had switched from one group to another, and the old group's coverage still showed on the record.
"That's IT's problem," said our rep, whom we call Cheryl, since that's the only name she provides.
No, actually, it's the company's problem, but what do we do about this bill?
Well, says Cheryl, it's your doctor's fault.
[Stop when you sense a trend developing]
But I want to speak with a supervisor. Cheryl says that doesn't happen because there are none. Apparently Cheryl, whose supervisor uses the name Ms. Taylor, is working by herself tonight. All of CareFirst's 3 million policyholders are apparently being cared for by Cheryl tonight because a supervisor can only call back within 24-48 hours. That's an awesome responsibility.
Later, we get force-transferred (that's what call center reps call the process when they transfer your call without permission). We have to give Cheryl credit though. She forced us into a provider queue for doctors and hospitals. With no id code to enter, we couldn't go anywhere. No buttons transferred us out and without a code, we couldn't get connected to anyone.
The only choice? Hang up.
The First Company, the one originally known as CareFirst, apparently meant healthcare, not customer service care.
As consumers you don't have to accept that kind of behavior when it is inflicted upon you. In our case, a letter is already on its way to "Interim CEO" David D. Wolf. This will allow Mr. Wolf and his team in Owings Mill, Maryland to relieve Cheryl of her awesome responsibility in supervising the company for the next 48 hours.
Mr. Wolf will also presumably fix "the IT problem" and "my doctor's problem". Because this happened to a Consumer Help Web person (and we were fair to say this was going on the web), we won't list CareFirst under our pending complaints, nor will we put a negative one next to their score in our databases.
Yet.
We'll keep you posted on what happens, however, to this real life case study where we can freely use the customer's name and experiences. Our demand letter to Mr. Wolf is very simple and requires that CareFirst update its computer systems to show our family's updated coverage and rescind the letter sent to our doctor demanding a refund for money they already paid him.
A simple resolution request laser-targeted to the senior executive gets results. We get those results and help hundreds of consumers. If this happened to you, let us help you resolve your complaint too.
Zagat, the favorite foodie survey company that has become ubiquitous online, has moved its technology to a new area -- health care.
Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield has announced that a partnership with Zagat that allows consumers to rate their physician experiences. Insurers and managed care companies have compiled physician and hospital metrics for years, and many web sites offering physician "report cards" have launched in the last few years, but the program links two brand name organizations in a new field.
The service will initially be available only in parts of Ohio, but with both companies having national partnerships, one can easily imagine the program spreading if successful.
The results can be a mixed bag, warns Consumer Help Web's George Bounacos. "We find that extreme emotions, either positive or negative, compel people to review or comment on goods and services," said the consumer advocate. "There is a danger inherent in crowd rating versus traditional market research that bias can move the results to consumers who feel strongly about a physician one way or another."
Bounacos advises that the ratings should be a part of a consumer's research and not serve as the only measure to determine whether someone should see a specific physician.
As consumer reports begin to filter to Consumer Help Web about holiday travel horrors, the U.S. Department of Transportation says that November 2007 airline performance was better than in the past.
November, including that awful Thanksgiving travel period, had fewer delays (20%, down from 23.% a year ago and 21.8% the prior month) and fewer cancellations (1% versus 1.6% a year ago and 1.2% in October).
Even more astonishing with full flights criss-crossing the country was that the missing luggage rate plummeted. Despite the improved performance, complaints rose more than 30% from the prior November. Also not discussed in the government report was the Bush administration's decision to open air corridors typically reserved for the military during the peak Thanksgiving time.
The highest rate of cancellations, meanwhile, was Mesa Airlines, which canceled 2.9% of all flights.
But what about specific flights? There are some you may want to consider based on their November 2007 performance. According to the Department of Transportation, the most frequently delayed flights:
1. ExpressJet Airlines flight 2979 from Hartford, CT/Springfield, MA to Newark, NJ -- 88.5%
2. Continental Airlines flight 1532 from Houston Bush to New York LaGuardia -- 87.5%
3. ExpressJet Airlines flight 2076 from Newark, NJ to Indianapolis -- 85.2%
3. Mesa Airlines flight 7462 from Washington Dulles to New York LaGuardia -- 85.2%
5. American Airlines flight 350 from Chicago O’Hare to New York LaGuardia -- 83.3%
5. American Airlines flight 1497 from Newark, NJ to Chicago O’Hare -- 83.3%
5. ExpressJet Airlines flight 2717 from Newark, NJ to St. Louis – 83.3%
Sprint Nextel (NYSE: S) tapped former AT&T Wireless executive Daniel Hesse for the second time to help manage the company. Hesse spent most of his career with AT&T before joining Sprint and spinning off the company's Embarq subsidiary over a year ago.
Hesse is joining Sprint Nextel as CEO after the company's bets on Wimax technology and a reputation for customer service problems have halved the company's stock price from the low $20 range to well under $10 now.
Nextel, before merging with Sprint, went through a similar dry spell before its then new push-to-talk technology and merger buttressed the company's fortunes. Sprint Nextel received more complaints in 2007 than any other wireless carrier, said Consumer Help Web President Joan Bounacos, who praised the company for being "responsive" when contacted by the company's complaint letter writing service.
This move will be unpopular with merchants of every stripe (although we've never had a chargeback at Consumer Help Web so we don't mind...), but American Express' new "billing inquiry" resolution process improves an already good process.
Amex used to flag the funds in question, ask the merchant or member to supply documentation and then make a decision. Now the burden of proof is strictly on the merchant (as it should be in any billing dispute) and the process can be initiated online in addition to phone.
Capping the entire process is a fairly long satisfaction survey to gauge the customer's reaction to the process. The financial services company says it will make a donation to the American Cancer Society for each completed submission and has donated over $400,000 so far. We understand enough about marketing to know that there is a cap and that the value of an individual survey may not be much.
That said, whenever a company tries something new and asks if you like the new process or procedure, you're being a smart consumer to vote. In the world of customer sampling, even a handful of votes can garner lots of upper management attention. Make sure they hear your voice.
Tealeaf Technology and Harris Polls are sending out word of their look at more than 2,000 adults who shop online.
We are not surprised to learn that more than half of consumers who have a problem with an online store report being dissatisfied with the results. Our complaint letter service gets a steady stream of those complaints.
What does surprise is MSNBC quoting Tealeaf's study that says 87% of online shoppers have some sort of problem. We think that number is too high, but are certainly interested in learning more as more about the methodology is made public.
What about you? Do you shop online, and if you do, are most transactions handled to your satisfaction? We have an entire shopping site reviewing online stores, and while the reviews are sometimes mixed, the overwhelming majority are positive.
Our experience is that when a problem surfaces that consumers start to feel pressure and report dissatisfaction. But 87%? That is a big number.
Celebrity CEOs are sometimes worth their weight in platinum. Gates, Jobs, Bezos, Buffett and others have set a high watermark that brand them as much as their company. Even the late Dave Thomas helped resuscitate hamburger chain Wendy's when McDonald's and Burger King threatened the then-higher priced chain.
David Neelman, a serial entrepreneur and airline exec for virtually his entire adult life, was joining their ranks as he led low-cost, non-union JetBlue Airways into the public consciousness. Focusing on frills passengers wanted and mixing second-tier airports with some strategic hubs, Neelman had JetBlue poised somewhere between the low-cost carriers and the legacy major airlines.
Then one service catastrophe after another hit the company in early 2007. JetBlue was the country's eighth largest carrier when a series of winter storms caused it to cancel more than 1,000 flights in February. The cancellations disrupted travel plans for more than 100,000 passengers, and Neelman found himself on the short end of the blame stick. A hasty departure upstairs to the Chairman's seat was arranged for Neelman, and the CEO duties were handed over to another airline veteran, David Barger.
The cachet of free televisions and big seats was no longer the differentiator it had once been. MaxJet began operations to Europe, quickly followed by the launch this week of Virgin America. Both pose huge threats to the cool factor JetBlue enjoyed among younger travelers. Even Wired blogger Dylan Tweney extolled the virtues of Virgin to the world's geeks.
So where has JetBlue gone wrong? Wall Street pundits still are concerned about the company 's cash flow and the growing liability lines on the company's balance sheet. Key financial metrics like ROA and ROE continue to slump in negativity territory.
And then there is the customer experience.
Consumer Help Web was going to try the airline out for a big search engine conference in San Jose this month. We know the web, we understand online airline booking and were willing to fly into Oakland direct from our DC area offices. The price was competitive with the majors, even though United has a hub in DC and nearby San Francisco.
Then the roof caved in. JetBlue's web site returned pricing for a direct flight and prompted us for payment. There were no seat maps so we had no idea whether people would be traveling on full or open flights, or worse, whether someone would be in a middle seat for three hours.
Being good consumers, we called. And we continue to tell ourselves that the grumbles we've heard about JetBlue are traced back to poor customer experience. To begin with, we never should have had to call. But the results were astounding when we did.
"You'll get to choose a seat when you pay," the bored sounding CSR told us on the phone.
No amount of appealing to reason, rationality or the promise of winning new customers could convince her to research the flight and tell us. We moved from asking to declaring that we would not use JetBlue. They would join another unnamed airline on our blacklist.
This comment was met with indifference as well. Finally, we did the only thing most consumers can do before purchasing when they don't feel like investing the time to climb the corporate ladder. We asked that the call receiver make a note of our dissatisfaction and let her manager know that we were unhappy. The thinking here is that if the manager hears that enough, the word makes its way up the ranks.
Not at JetBlue though. Our call receiver refused to tell her manager. The best way to complain, she said, was to visit their web site and use the complaint form there. Three of us here have customer contact center experience. We agreed that we could fix this nonsensical approach in a morning with two coffee breaks -- it's just that easy. We might even do the training free if JetBlue asked nicely.
This wasn't an isolated incident, you see. We tried calling back again and were met with the same brick wall.
Poor customer web experience.
Atrocious call center training.
Nonsensical complaint policies.
JetBlue may have televisions and big seats, but in the battle for customer's hearts and minds, that only works once. Think back to the last time you said to yourself, "I hate doing business with that company, but they give me what I want." It's not a phrase most people say ever and certainly not often.
In the turbulent wake of rising fuel prices, increased competition and a major service quality meltdown, JetBlue may be the next airline finding itself short of customers, cash and finally, solvency.
SprintNextel, long a laggard in multiple service quality studies including an analysis of Consumer Help Web's records, has pushed the envelope for treating customers with contempt again.
The Virginia-based wireless giant announced that customers who had called the company's customer service department dozens of times in a month would have their account terminated. Consumer advocates throughout the country were quick to criticize the company's action.
"The cost of doing business is that most of your customers never call you, but the ones who do should be treated like kings and queens because of the valuable intelligence they give you about your company," said Consumer Help Web president Joan Bounacos.
The consumer advocate said that her company had compelled recent settlements from the company, one for a Maryland consumer for $1,817 several months ago and another for $591 for a Virginia consumer at the end of last year. Bounacos said the consumer resolution specialists had not yet been contacted about joining others in demanding that SprintNextel compensate consumers for canceling their accounts.
"The irony is that SprintNextel is quick enough to trap a consumer who wants to leave by pointing out their contract hasn't expired. They clearly don't subscribe to the first call resolution mantra most organizations practice, and their financial metrics and loss of federal opportunities show that other communities beyond consumer advocates are not happy with the company's action," she added.
Customer service issues that are handled by a computer automated response system (ARS) on the telephone generate significantly lower customer care ratings when compared with issues handled by a live representative, according to the J.D. Power and Associates 2007 Wireless Customer Care Performance StudySM —Volume 1.
Now in its fifth year, the semi-annual study provides a detailed report card on wireless provider customer care performance based on customer experiences with three point-of-contact methods: telephone calls with a service representative and/or automated response system (ARS); visits to a retail wireless store; and online Internet connection. Within each contact method, processing issues such as problem resolution efficiency and hold-time duration are also measured.
Overall, customers who speak with a service representative on the telephone provide an average index score of 127 points, which is significantly higher than the industry average of 98 points. However, customers contacting their carrier with a problem or inquiring through an ARS system rate their experiences significantly lower, averaging 92 index points. The index score drops even further (to 73 points) for contacts made over the Internet.
"One of the main factors contributing to this performance disparity is the quality of the response that is given," said Kirk Parsons, senior director of wireless services at J.D. Power and Associates. "A service representative—either over the phone or in person—has the ability to answer customer questions and clarify answers. This flexibility is very limited in both ARS and Internet contact methods."
In addition, scores for the ARS contact method have decreased 5 percent to 92 index points in overall performance when compared to the most previous reporting period six months ago (97 points). The largest declines were reported for customers experiencing too many prompts before getting to the desired menu and the lack of relevant menu options available to address the customer's inquiry.
"As more companies strive to save operating costs by encouraging customers to contact Internet- and computer-based customer service programs, they run the risk of increasing the rate of customers who will switch carriers, especially as the number of contacts needed to resolve issues rises," said Parsons. "Since future churn levels are four times as high among those who rate their wireless carrier below average in customer care, the challenge for wireless providers is to offer an easy and efficient customer care transaction experience."
For a fifth consecutive reporting period, T-Mobile ranks highest among the five largest wireless service providers by creating a positive experience among customers who contact the carrier for service or assistance. With an index score of 107 points, T-Mobile performs well across all factors that determine overall satisfaction, particularly in the ARS and retail contact channels, and in the overall hold-time duration on the phone. Verizon Wireless (101) and Alltel (99), respectively, follow T-Mobile in the rankings.
The study also finds several key wireless customer care patterns:
* More than one-half (55%) of wireless users have contacted the customer service department for assistance within the past year, marking a nearly 7 percent decline from the most recent reporting period (July 2006). * The average number of contacts necessary to resolve an inquiry by phone is 1.87—up from 1.76 in the previous reporting period. * Among customers who contact their provider, 73 percent do so by telephone and 24 percent do so through their provider’s retail store. E-mail/Internet accounts for only 3 percent of customer contacts. * The average initial reported hold time on calls to the customer service department is 3.58 minutes. In comparison, it takes an average of 8 minutes before speaking in-person to a representative at one of the provider’s retail stores. * More than four in 10 customers (42%) contact their provider with a billing-related service inquiry, with 55 percent of these contacts attributed to inaccurate charges. Additionally, 30 percent of all customer care inquiries are call-quality related.
The 2007 Wireless Customer Care Performance Study—Volume 1 is based on responses from more than 13,970 wireless customers who contacted customer care within the past year. The results are from the past two reporting waves, conducted in June and September 2006. The 2007 Volume 2 report will be issued in July 2007.
As struggling U.S. air carriers try to reach profitability by scaling back services, consumers will soon be missing another staple -- the paper ticket.
