Authenticity and Rogers
December 19, 2007 by Gary Schlee
In my last post I bemoaned the lack of authenticity in so many PR reponses. Our preoccupation with key messages and watered-down, over-approved phrasing continues to suck the human element out of what we do.
Case in point. I subscribe to Rogers Hi-Speed Internet. I’m generally pleased with the service, but — as is often the situation in any transactions — I feel I’m primarily viewed by the company as an already ripe consumer target to bombard with more opportunities to spend more money.
As a subscriber, I was understandably disturbed to see that Rogers is flirting with the idea of burying Rogers notices and ads into the web pages I visit. If I head over to your blog, it may very well include a ‘message’ from Rogers that you know nothing about. So, I sent them a digital note to express my concern.
I heard back immediately:
Thank you. Your inquiry has been received and is currently being
processed by one of our Rogers Online Customer Service Representatives.If your request requires a response, you will receive a reply within 24
hours. Your reference number is (–). Please keep this number for
future reference.
Okay, okay. I didn’t hear back from a human being, and I know it’s the generic response sent to everybody (after all, I wasn’t making an inquiry). I appreciated the follow-up, and they did indicate a further response was coming. Three hours later it arrived:
Dear Gary Schlee,
Thank you for taking the time to write to us, we appreciate your use of
online customer service.In your recent email, you have informed us that you are concerned about
the possible insertion of Rogers ads and notices right into web pages.Please accept our apologies for any difficulties that you may have
experienced while using Rogers services. At Rogers we are dedicated to
premium customer service and as such have taken your regrettable
experience into consideration. Please be assured that we take your
concerns very seriously, and appreciate the feedback that you have
provided and this has been sent to the appropriate group for their
review.We do appreciate your feedback because this is very important for Rogers
to hear comments, opinions and suggestions from our Valued Customers.
This feedback is used to create ideas for new products, services,
policies and procedures in the future.We hope you will remain loyal to Rogers to allow us to provide you with
superior customer service in the future. If you have any additional
comments or suggestions, please do not hesitate to contact us again. You
may also find additional information on our website at www.rogers.com.
You may also call our Customer Service anytime, 24/7; toll free from a
landline at (–) or by dialing (–) from your wireless phone
for any service you may need and we will provide you with the premium
customer service that is expected from Rogers.We appreciate your continuing patronage. .
For future email correspondence with respect to this e-mail, please
quote reference number (–).
So, it appears my ‘difficulty’ or ‘regrettable experience’ regarding their proposed initiative doesn’t merit a human response. They appreciate my feedback and don’t want me to hesitate to do it again. Uh-huh.
My favourite part is how it says absolutely nothing (redundantly, no less) save for the fact that it has been sent to the ‘appropriate group’.
It’s like a different committee wrote each paragraph, they all wrote the same one, and then they just glued it together so as to no offend any of the aforementioned committees.
We all know how these things go down.
And the beauty of the digital world, Will, is that, despite the ‘Copy’ and ‘Paste’ computer jargon, we don’t even need glue anymore.
As a Roger’s high speed customer, I share your sentiment on both the primary issue and the somewhat evasive and carbon-copy response. (Ok, I grew up in the 70s when we used carbon.)
I received a similar response from a large iconic telecommunications employer, when I checked and emailed the internal HR site after my father passed away to determine how many bereavement days I was entitled. (I was under a new manager and didn’t want to push any limits in my request.) I sent the email on a Sun. night and received the first and only response of: “We have received your question and will get back to you,” on the Thurs. afternoon, after the funeral. From an internal communications perspective, this is high on the “wall of shame” examples.
Sometimes no response is better than a robotic one, Leslie. The “we’ll get back to you” digital response has the same warmth and credibility that can be found in a boss who routinely says “leave it with me”.