I don’t know how many times I’ve sent an email to the Customer Service of an online retailer or service provider and received a templated customer service email response that does not answer my question.

Just today I emailed a major general merchant about an item I purchased that arrived damaged. I informed them of the damage and asked if they could send a replacement immediately (before receiving my return) because I need the item for a date-sensitive reason. Of course, they replied with their return policy and no answer to my question at all.

Now, I realize that the templating of emails saves a ton of money in regards to costs, but someone should be reviewing these emails before they are sent out to ensure that the templated reply answers the question. If it does not, it wastes time for both the customer and the company (having to answer yet another email when I reply with the same question) and wastes money for the company. Surely, it would cost less to answer the question correctly the first time.

It makes me not even want to use email as a method to deal with CS, which is a real shame because it is much more convenient than using the phone.

I got a letter in the mail today from the IRS encouraging me to e-file my taxes. Although it would be easier to e-file, I have steadfastly refused to do this over the past few years because they charge for this service. Why should I pay to make their lives easier? (Surely it is a cost savings for them when people e-file.)

But wait! Myth number one about e-file, according to this letter, is that 96 million taxpayers are eligible to use this service for free. Wait again! What about the other 200 million?

This reminds me of the Ticketmaster “TicketFast” program, where they charge you $1.50 to print your tickets immediately, but don’t charge at all to mail them to you. How is it better for Ticketmaster to mail the tickets? They have to be printed out, put in an envelope and mailed. The other way, they don’t have to do anything.

Instead of trying to convince me to spend money to save them some, shouldn’t the government be improving their service? How about creating a TaxCut / TurboTax clone and putting it on the IRS site and allowing people to use it for free? I don’t know much about the IRS, but it seems like this would be the best way to get tax information in a standardized format that would really cut costs.

Talk to any die-hard college basketball fan about CBS’ coverage of the NCAA Tournament and you’ll hear mostly grumbling about their lack of understanding of what the viewers want. I wonder if they actually do any user research?

- Their choice of which game to show and when to switch between games is generally horrible. Instead of trying to figure out what the people want, why not take NBC’s lead (with the Olympics) and ESPN’s lead with pretty much everything and show all the games on different channels? Viacom owns Spike, BET, and CSTV, all of which would be reasonable options.

One point that was mentioned several times at eTail’s recent Multi-Channel event was the importance of consistent pricing across channels — how important it is to give customers a uniform pricing experience. Thinking about this, however, in terms of shipping costs on the web (a problem that continues to exist for eRetailers — hence the plethora of creative “free shipping” offers), I realized that if the additional shipping cost is considered to be part of the total cost, pricing an item consistenly in-store and online actually does NOT keep said cost consistent across all channels.

I would be interested in an analysis of the cost of running a web store versus a brick and mortar — a web store must be cheaper, right? The transaction cost itself on the web (or any automated ordering platform) is signficantly less than a transaction that involves interaction with an actual human. Obviously there are costs for running a website and distributing products, and honestly I have no idea how this cost compares to that of running a store and distributing products to a store. However, these costs are obviously different, and as such I have to wonder how this affects both the cost and profit margin of any item. The bottom line here is that if items are priced consistently across channels before shipping cost, customers are NOT paying the same total amount across channels, and as such perhaps consistent pricing is not the most customer-centric way to handle things.

What if we integrated the cost of shipping into the cost of running a web store (just as we integrate the cost of running a brick & mortar into the cost of items sold there)? In person, customers are not asked to cover shipping to the store, or to pay wages of the employees of that store on top of the price of the item — that is integrated into the cost.

When I interact with the customers of the company I work for, the most common request is always free shipping — people see it out on the web, but we rarely offer it — and this upsets them. Some friends of mine at another online retailer shared some promotional testing that they ran –”10% off” coupon versus a “free shipping” coupon. In many cases, the 10% off turned out to be a larger discount off the overall price, however the free shipping coupon was FAR more effective. Why? Presumably because customers feel that paying a premium to shop via their preferred channel is unfair; depsite the fact that they would save more with 10%, paying shipping in any scenario just seems like a rip-off.

Is the pay-for shipping model inherently flawed and doomed to fail? How can we fix it?

On my recent trip to Chicago I flew United, who now offers “Economy Plus” on all flights — seats that are towards the front of the plane and offer about 5 inches more legroom than the normal coach seating. Upgrades were offered during check-in for $34 per leg from Philadelphia to Chicago (the round trip ticket was around $225).

Is it worth it?

Read the rest of this entry »

I recently stayed at the Courtyard Marriott on Chicago’s Magnificent Mile while attending Creative Good’s LabFest.

Normally, this would not inspire anything remarkable, but the check-in process at this Marriott was truly remarkable. There was nothing new, but the speed and efficiency with which it happened was phenomenal. I walked up to the desk and said “reservation for Madaio”. The clerk asked for my credit card, scanned it, and handed me my keys, all in less than a minute. That was it!

Why are other check-in processes any more complicated than that? The speed in which they did this instantly created a positive experience at this hotel for me. Other than that, it was somewhat pedestrian, but I left with an overall positive feeling towards the place.

On a somewhat related note, Phil Terry also spoke of hotel experiences in his Keynote speech at the conference. The CG folks were staying at The James hotel, a hip, trendy boutique that was by all accounts extremely nice. One thing, however, was missing — in a downtown hotel that caters to business travelers, none of the rooms had desks!

(Oh — in case you are wondering, go here for my other Marriott story.)