CUSTOMIZING SERVICE THROUGH ATTITUDE TRAINING

The content, duration, scope and style of most customer service training varies considerably and is o en integrated with a number of organizational development initiatives: front-office design, market research, new technologies, organizational structure and strategy and, importantly, the customer.

There are also differences in customer service training with some being comprehensive and systematic through a tailored approach that is incorporated within employee development and reward systems. Other programmes, however, might involve a major corporate ‘event’, be bought off the shelf, or have employees sent on residential or oneday programmes. The focus of programmes also varies from developing techniques and a service culture, to changing attitudes 

This movement towards character formation rather than training is said by some writers to represent a ‘sea change’ in organizational practices and requirements. Rather than imposing bureaucratic practices, employees are empowered to use discretion which then personalizes the customer interaction and provides a ‘new authenticity’.

In effect, there are two models for handling calls. The first involves a very structured and systematic approach that restricts the adviser to a limited range of responses – this is the ‘production line’ approach. The second approach is to develop skills and attitudes and to give advisers a considerable degree of personal freedom in their handling of calls. This approach is o en used for more complex and high-value interactions and is called the ‘empowerment’ approach.

Advisers’ attitudes to customer service training

In some quarters there is a view that customer service training is merely a form of ‘sham empowerment’ designed to increase the workload for advisers, but in fact most employees are very positive about the training. There may be some organizations that adopt a cynical approach but where this is the case there will be no genuine buy-in to the principles of customer service by advisers, with the result that customer satisfaction figures are unlikely to improve.

In practice, most people a ending customer service training recognize the value of it and fully support the intentions. In a study of supermarket managers and staff, ‘no one spoke negatively about the value of the initiative. . . and the majority were enthusiastic’.

All employees should regularly a end customer service training and not just advisers. One of the continual gripes heard by trainers is, ‘You should get our managers to a end these courses, they are the ones that need it!’