Better workspaces help drive better customer service

The recent UK Customer Service Institute survey showed that, across all sectors, levels of customer satisfaction have fallen in recent years.  The economic situation is of course playing a part and this is potentially driving some organisations, as the economy recovers, to push for winning new customers at the expense of focusing on serving existing customers.  Consumer expectations are also going upwards, they are more likely to use things like social media to air any discontent and their needs and preferences are rapidly changing.

For organisations addressing this, they will take various measures, some strategic, some tactical.  This should include examining the service design and those touchpoints where business and customer interact.  An often over-looked approach is integrating this with improvements to the working environment of the staff who deliver the service and the experience that customers want.

The key message, we think, is that for your people to deliver great customer service they need to be engaged with the business and they need to be working in an environment that supports their work and enables them to be high performing.

The challenge is in developing a workspace that is designed around and is adaptable to the individual needs of the range of people who work there.  Often the design focuses more on the corporate objectives for the workspace: maximising utilisation of floor space or a top-down belief in what might encourage more collaboration, creativity or innovation from staff.

A user-centered approach to workspace design is a way of getting to understand the individuals from the bottom up.  This will explore the range of tasks and activities they undertake, the different personalities, the different psychology and the variety of needs.

This approach says that they matter as individuals, and they are not just a body at a desk.  It can direct the design to create more personal spaces, allowing people to form relationships with those around them, it can create personal privacy, spaces where sensitive issues can be discussed, etc.

Technology in the workplace is seen as a major enabler to collaborative and effective work.  But to do that it has to be almost invisible in the process and it has to be usable for staff and, where appropriate, for customers.

It’s about getting the environment right.  Most workspaces these days tend to be more open.  Of course this can help collaboration and communication but it is also frequently a source of distraction and disruption.  Part of the solution can be providing a range of different spaces for people to work.  But it also requires that more attention is paid to the acoustics and understanding the impact of speech intelligibility on distraction. Providing good access to daylight and a connection to the outside world is well understood as important for wellbeing and effective work.

It’s about getting the details right.  Simple things like providing a place for coats and personal belongings.  This reflects that people have them with them and want them at work.  So why pretend that they don’t exist for some aesthetic purpose?

It is also about focusing on the wellbeing of the people.  Many organisations do good things to try and promote healthy living: free fruit, gym membership, etc.  But not enough attention is paid to the workspace and how to encourage healthy, dynamic postures and exercise during the day.  For example, sit/stand workstations are still a relatively rare sight in the UK work place.

Investing in good workspace design is a key component in getting staff to better engage with the organisation and have a sense of place and roots in the DNA of the company.  It is about feeling valued, that the organisation sees them as an individual not some interchangeable component; seeing their place in the history of the company and sharing a common purpose.  

It is about projecting the values of the company to all: showing that staff are important suggests that customers will be too.

The future of self-service & customer experience

There was news last month that some supermarkets are reviewing the use of self-service checkouts. Research has suggested that they do not save time for customers and that they maybe contributing to an increase in theft.

There had previously been an expectation that we would see increasing amounts of self-service in supermarkets because they save on staff costs and were expected to reduce queue lengths.

The initial feeling on customer experience is not positive. There seems to be plenty of room for improvement with many customers still finding them frustrating:

• they are unreliable (we are all too familiar with the phrase "unexpected item in the bagging area")
• they tend not to work as well for customers who want to use their own bags 
• they can make some customers feel like they are at fault when there is a problem (some even feature big red lights above their heads singling them out as incompetent)
• they usually lack somewhere for you to put down other shopping bags or belongings while you use them

It would be interesting to see if any retailers have identified the potential time savings that could be made from making the experience significantly more usable than it is at the moment.

Self-service also lacks the personality and the human contact that you get when served by a member of staff. This emotional aspect seems to be more important to people again as technology becomes more pervasive.

Some people also seem to resent that they are doing all the hard work when the price of products already accounts for the overhead of staff costs. This is not great for the reputation of supermarkets.

Can the checkout process be more integrated with the process of selecting products from shelves? If so could a service like "Quick Check" in Waitrose, the “360 Degree Scanner” in Asda, or the "Scan and Shop" in Tesco be developed further to enable us to pay as we go around the shop rather than require an additional step in the process at the end?

Would the experience be enhanced if rather than removing staff, self-service enabled them to be re-deployed in a different service role? Would we value a staff member dedicated to an aisle or section of goods that has a good knowledge of them, their value for money and the current discounts or offers available? Anyone got examples or retailers making this happen?

Whilst we have focused on retail self-service here, of course there is a similar move in other areas such as transport - check-in counters at airports have been disappearing for a while now.  London Underground have announced the removal of ticket offices in the future. We'll cover this off in our next blog on the subject of self-service.

Is the ticket dead?

The news that London Underground are to close ticket offices (www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25025888) is set to change the nature of the "ticket" and the interaction between operator and customer.

The days of the little bit of paper clutched in our hands are clearly numbered.  Tickets moving onto our smart mobile devices creates a range of opportunities to enhance the passenger experience by offering a more joined-up, journey-orientated service.

With a ticket on a smartphone, the operator knows who you are.  This could be an enabler for more personalised and individual services.  Preferences, likes & dislikes can all be remembered and bookings and offers tailored accordingly.

The operator might also know where you are.  This might allow individual travel information to be pushed to you as you enter the station - "Welcome to King's Cross, your 12.43 train to York is running 5 minutes late and will be ready for boarding in 10 minutes from Platform 6".

Knowing where you are could help eliminate the current advance booking of seats that sit empty for the journey.  The system would only allocate the seat as you enter the station.  This could also provide more flexibility for you to change seats or even change which train you are going to get.  This could be the end of the ticket barrier too - no need to go through a gate as the "station" knows that everyone on the platform is a valid ticket holder.  No more ticket inspections?  Wouldn't that be nice.

This kind of consist information could be really useful to train operators who currently have no idea who is on their train.  It can help with ensuring passengers are spread through the train and enable a range of new personalised services to be offered on-board.

The removal of the ticket office could change the nature of the interaction between passenger and staff.  The current mode is very "over the counter" and is transactional in nature.  Removing the physical separation might allow more of a personal concierge-style service to be provided which is of more value to passengers.

The only loss is the old romance of that collectable bit of paper.  But that probably disappeared long ago anyway.

Let's hope that as this technology becomes more widespread, operators take the opportunity to provide genuinely better services to passengers and do more than get rid of some staff, sell us a ticket and push loads of advertising to our phones.

The Sleeper Train

The news that First Great Western's franchise renewal has included offering more sleeper services coincided with a piece on Radio 4's Saturday Live this weekend on the London to Penzance sleeper train.

It was a great reminder of what a wonderful experience the sleeper train it and how it captures the romance of travel in a way in which only rail travel can do.

What struck us was how the experience was intimate and personal.  It wasn't about grandeur; it was about the small things.

It wasn't about exclusivity either.  It described the Sleeper train lounge that was just for sleeper passengers who seemed to form a temporary community on the train around this shared experience.  This wasn't some extra cost or an experience, like 1st Class on planes, that is only available to the wealthy.  It was available to those having the experience and formed a rich part of it.

It is a simple service and demonstrates something important about designing good passenger experiences.  It reaches us on an emotional level - the going to sleep in London and waking by the sea - and is also something simple and delightful.

Why do rail companies make us feel like cheats?

We understand that railway companies are commercial enterprises and that they need to make sure people travelling on the trains are paying for that right.  But why do they have to make us all feel like potential fare dodgers?  Ticket barriers everywhere inconvenience us (more queues, tickets that then don't work, etc); staff on trains are now "Revenue Protection Officers" there to police us and watch us.

Perhaps the worst element being the arcane and invisible rules around ticketing.  There are plenty of articles on on people being given the wrong advice by staff and then fined once on the train or falling foul of the "rules" in any number of ways.  Mostly innocent mistakes.

It's not a passenger or customer service orientated approach.

So it was interesting to see on the BBC website, that we are not alone.  Rule changes introduced in Switzerland have produced a similar outcome and are resulting in an increasing passenger dissatisfaction with the service.

With railway companies and governments increasingly wanting to encourage modal shift to rail travel, isn't it about time this major obstacle in customer service was removed?

Future of mobility and customer service

Following on from some of our previous posts on customer service and service design, an interesting article from the President of Hertz International on the BBC website on the future of mobility.

The interesting point is his view that technology is changing the way we view and access transport.  Individual car ownership is being challenged with many more options available.  He points out that transport providers have to earn loyalty and our business...and that it is customer service that will determine the choices people make.  Interestingly he also notes the importance of the human element of the service.

All chimes in with our view that you have to deliver a human experience and that consumers still value the human touch in their interactions.  Have a read...

The Olympics and designing for the visitor experience

Visiting the Olympic Park and other venues for the Olympics and the Paralympics, a clear winner was how brilliantly managed they have been from the visitor perspective.  What lessons might be learned for airports, railway stations or other public spaces?

The main pitfall that was avoided was long queues.  There was much in the press before the games about the likelihood of long queues at venues (and at the airports!) especially for security.  But those fears were unfounded.  The uncomfortable truth for other organisations is that this was because of the level of human resources that were deployed at manning gates and security areas etc.  With lots of gates and lines in operation, the throughput of people has been sufficient to have almost no queing.  The Olympics were obviously able to draw about a vast army of volunteers in the wonderful Games Makers as well as the armed forces (and G4S!) for the security areas.  More commercial organisations do not have these resources which is why there is currently a drive in airports, supermarkets, etc for self-service.

However the second truth is that the experience for visitors in using the venues has been enhanced by the fact that the security areas and gates and other points of potential congestion have been manned by real people. As visitors, we often don't actually want to interact with a machine (whose usability has probably been poorly designed anyway) - kiosks and other devices offer a second best option.

The other key for the Olympics is that those people have been enthusiastic, welcoming, happy and a joy to interact with.  Again, this is difficult for operators in airports etc: the Games Makers and other Olympic staff were highly motivated, part of an experience themselves and only had to maintain their levels of positivity for a few weeks.

But both of these show the difference that can be made to the passenger/visitor experience if there is still interaction with real people and those people are positive and helpful.  A real challenge for a day-to-day service delivery.

A virtual day in court - design thinking

For an insight into how design thinking and in particular, the importance of considering the human factor in design, have a read of this report from the RSA in to the use of video conferencing technology in courts. It makes the point that the technological solution is there but most people have recognised that just implementing a technology solution will fail as there are a number of human issues related to its use that must be considered. There is recognition that the solution must "design every aspect" of the wider system and not just the kit. 

The report study highlights some really interesting human issues such as perceptions around cost-cutting measures that ignore any benefit and a load of issues around being face-to-face and reading the faces of people. It also highlights the role of design thinking in engaging with all stakeholders not just those that might seem more important. In this case it would be a grave mistake to not understand the perspective of defendants and witnesses and instead focus on the needs of judges and lawyers.

 There is a really nice description of how designers, using knowledge of people and behaviour, can be so helpful in the design of services like this in delivering insight into the experience of different "users" and using methods like story boarding a "day in the life" to get all parties to see the issues.
A Virtual Day in Court