Support-oriented call centers are often evaluated on such metrics as call times. So people trying to boost their times would claim “phone connection issues” on complicated calls in an attempt to “cut their losses”. Also the NA call centers would often act as “second-level” support, especially for repeat callers. So caller would contact the normal number two or three times, get hung up on and on the third or fourth call-in would get the NA representative. So the customer would finally get the support they needed, but they would be irate by the time the NA rep actually got the call.

Outsourced call centers (foreign or domestic) take a “revenue-first” approach as they get paid on a per-call basis. Companies like Convergys make some X dollars per caller handled rather than on some more elaborate metric. Some times they have other metrics, but the counter-intuitive horror stories I’ve heard from several people just belie idiocy.

It looks like there’s an effort to define better call center performance, I have recently received some call center callbacks where they request feedback on the call. But even then they don’t always ask the right questions.

Businesses need to think of customer service not as a cost they should be reducing but an opportunity to build a relationship at the first level, not at the escalation level.

And this definitely echoes a serious business problem. You’re only supposed to outsource “cost centers”. If I run a technology company, I don’t outsource the technology development, b/c that’s a “revenue center”. But if I’m running a tech company and I only need simple accounting done I’ll outsource that to one of the firms.

Some of the cable companies, cell companies and banks have outsourced their call centers b/c they feel they are “cost centers”. This is why you’re talking to underlings when you call WaMu. What WaMu is failing to recognize is that they are a commodity company interchangeable with one of many other companies. Treating customer service as a “cost center” is foolish, b/c customer service is one of the few relevant things that a bank actually “does” anymore.

This isn’t universal though. I’m with BoA due to excellent service both from my banker and on the phones. My Canadian accounts are with the Bank of Montreal and I’ve received reasonable service from them as well. But in both cases, it’s definitely been “in-house” (most of the Bank of Montreal reps speak french

So the person that told the caller whatever they needed to hear and hangup was rewarded. The person that stayed on the line for thirty minutes to completely solve the caller’s issue, but did not use their name was written up.

I have a friend with Ameriprise and he wants to cash out his mutual funds and buy stock right now but Ameriprise has frozen all customer assets until further notice. I’m not sure if it is legal or not because he is foregoing any potential profits from the stocks he wants to buy. If I were him I would be extremely upset.

- Neko