So I am reading David Meerman Scott’s “The New Rules of Marketing and PR.” Full disclosure here, I’m a big fan of his, in fact the reason this blog even exists is because of his polemics, as I read the first version of his book 2 years ago. Also, he has been kind enough to endorse my book, “Principles of Applied Stupidity.” Anyway, he asked me to take a look at the new addition and talk about it a little bit… and I am more than happy to do that because this book has great stuff in it and I highly recommend it.
I’m only halfway through this second edition, but already I feel compelled to blog about it.
If I may be so bold, David’s core premise can be somewhat simply stated: marketing and PR used to be very much of a one-way conversation in the days of newspapers and broadcast TV, but it has become very much of a two-way conversation in the age of the Internet, and companies that do not actively engage in the online 2-way (or million way) conversations about their products do so at their peril.
One would think that this would be rather obvious. But David spends an enormous amount of time in the book explaining to the “old guard” why they should go from the old way to the new way, so I guess it isn't obvious. This got me thinking. Why would people resist greater levels of interaction with customers, both current and future? I certainly saw people avoiding direct contact with customers in the orchestra biz, so . . .
Well, I can tell you a story that I think might give you the answer.
I have been selling my books on Amazon for almost 5 years now, with no complaints from customers. BUT two nights ago, I got an e-mail from Amazon, telling me that someone who had bought “Principles of Applied Stupidity” had initiated a credit card “chargeback proceeding.” YIKES! I couldn’t figure this out. This was the first I had heard of a problem, and I was wondering if I’d simply somehow forgotten to ship their book, or if they were unhappy and thought I should stop writing forever and ever because I am such a terrible person, or maybe they were a psychotic lunatic who just enjoyed causing me pain and anguish . . .
What I’m trying to illustrate here is, when you sell people things and take their money, there’s always a possibility that they are going to be unhappy and come back and yell at you. My gut reaction, like most people I think, was of course to duck and cover. This is especially pertinent for me as I am selling something I created myself. And so I can see why a large company that sells hundreds of thousands of items to people all over the world might have a backlog of negative experiences, as unhappy customers are much more likely to contact you than happy ones.
Well, since I was in the middle of reading David’s book, I was encouraged and inspired and I decided to follow his advice and send an e-mail directly to this customer asking them what was wrong. I then braced myself for the worst. It turns out this was some sort of glitch on Amazon’s part (or perhaps an identity theft issue)… the buyer sent an e-mail right back to me saying there was no problem and telling me it must be an Amazon thing.
So I have a happy ending, but I have to say, that was a major stress test for me. So I can see why the default, in any large organization, is to avoid direct contact with unhappy customers. No one likes criticism. But as David’s book points out, you’re much better off putting out the fire earlier rather than later. There’s a lot more to this book, and I will blog more about it in future…
Most of us, when we go to work or into a business transaction, feel that we have to somehow put on a suit of virtual armor. Suits of armor were great until they invented the Longbow, then they became obsolete, and were a hindrance. Walled cities were great until they invented artillery. Protecting yourself from negative customer feedback by building walls of either automated phone answering centers, or call centers in India that have no authority to do anything for the customer, are obsolete as well. The internet is a sort of longbow or artillery. We have New Rules.
© Justin Locke
One Response to Commenting on the Oblivious