Unused value creation potential

The following interview attempts to answer the question of why companies usually only deal with customer complaints and claims in a rather half-hearted manner.

Professor Stauss, you are pleased about the publication of the 5th edition of your complaint management book. In contrast, the still little professional handling of dissatisfied customers is no joy. Why?

Bernd Stauss: You know, there are misconceptions that have simply taken root. One such persistent misconception is the assumption that meaningful complaint management only costs money, but brings in nothing. In fact, there is still a considerable potential for added value in this area. But companies simply do not want to admit this. And so they make the mistake of dealing with the dissatisfaction they are confronted with more badly than they should, instead of resolving it consistently and winning the customers back over. And experience shows that they promptly get the receipt for this, pardon the pun, unprofessional bungling: the now really annoyed customers leave and are in turn usually lost forever.

Where is the crucial error in thinking that is responsible for the misery of current complaint management?

Well, basically, as I said, the value-added potential that undoubtedly lies dormant in a well thought-out complaints management system is simply not seen. And because of this blindness, companies add a second mistake on top of the first! Instead of pursuing a consistent strategy of minimizing customer losses due to dissatisfaction, they intensify their efforts to acquire new customers, which is significantly more expensive, increase advertising and sales budgets for this purpose, but look for increased cost-cutting potential in customer care. In doing so, the companies are installing precisely the driving force that will now finally drive the dissatisfied customers straight out of the company. This is clearly a counterproductive letting on the one hand and doing on the other!

But what the hell is blocking the insight into these interrelationships and thus the willingness to reset the behavioral course in terms of "complaint management"?

Well, if you like, once again human, all too human. Look at the normal human response to criticism. Most people resist it. Criticism and the critics should not expect exuberant appreciation. And companies are just 'people' too. And that is why there is already massive resistance to the term 'complaint' in companies. It is immediately associated with criticism, anger and the assignment of blame. This is why companies try to avoid this term as much as possible, both in the communication of contact offers and in the designation of the corresponding contact points. Everywhere you come across the sugar-coating of the matter: contact, service, feedback. And because this fear of criticism, this fear of calling a spade a spade and facing the facts head on, is there, there is also a tendency in most companies to (under)suppress the number of complaints. This already starts with the classification of a customer statement. There is almost always an intensive discussion about what constitutes a complaint, whereby there is a great tendency to understand it not as every expression of dissatisfaction, but rather only as reports of objectively ascertainable errors. In this way, the number of complaints is artificially understated. This is self-damaging self-deception.

So complaints and grievances are an absolute unloved child in the corporate family?

Which practice proves sufficiently, doesn't it? And the crazy thing about it is: The companies install a sometimes quite elaborate improvement management, pay out quite considerable sums for improvement suggestions to their employees, but find it more difficult than difficult to recognize, accept and evaluate the improvement suggestions of dissatisfied customers, which are brought into the company free of charge via complaints and reclamations. So, and now we break also times a lance for the enterprises. With the whole misery around the complaint management we may not disregard a again human, all too human factor on no account: Employees shy away from, even hate, dealing with dissatisfied customers, partly because these customers like to let off steam, far removed from any fine English way of life and required composure! Who would allow himself to be insulted without restraint even in the case of small and smallest deviations from the expected?

Or be fooled!

Well, both are unfortunately increasingly the order of the day. Customers are increasingly conspicuous not only for their uninhibited behaviour, but also for their exaggerated complaints and claims. In the same way that insurance fraud has become almost a popular sport, people are increasingly trying to gain an advantage by complaining or making a complaint. However, the damage that may be caused by falsifying facts often outweighs the discontent that a customer may cause for the company, for example in the online community, as a result of unbridled anger over an unprofessional reaction to a complaint or claim. However, companies do not have to reward fraudulent behaviour, just as employees do not have to accept offensive behaviour. Strategic and tactical consideration, carefully weighing up the advantages and disadvantages, should therefore not stop at complaints management. But this does not change the basic fact: The crux of dealing with complaints and claims is not originally a reaction problem, but an action problem. Frustrated customers turn more and more directly to owners or board members in the hope of being listened to, of getting a personal answer and help. A hope that is mostly built on sand, as experience shows that these petitions are passed on down the line and the matter takes its well-known inglorious or, from the company's point of view, damaging course. An end should be put to this, on the one hand, unworthy and, on the other hand, unproductive course of events and a complaints management system appropriate to the size of the company should be brought into being.