The enterprises that are able to provide goods and services to the 21st century consumer will survive and prosper. The rest will die quick and merciful deaths. I don't really care about the survival of individual corporations, but I do care about the survival of the people employed by those organizations—and I care about the investors in those organizations. 

All too often the people who run corporate America don't care; they are stuck in old ways of thinking. Six Sigma might have been a successful methodology 25 years ago, but methodologies developed in a pre-Internet, pre-Amazon, pre-smartphone, and pre-email world do not empower organizations. They often serve to decrease the ability of organizations to act and react nimbly. 

The rate of change in the world today is unprecedented and business must react to the change. And that means having systems in place to react to change before that change occurs.

Running Faster Isn't the Answer

Radio was around for 38 years before it had 50 million users. Television was a little quicker—reaching that number in 13 years. The Internet took four years; Facebook had 50 million users in two years. The PSY Gangnam Style video was released In July 2012. On December 21, 2012 it was played on YouTube for the one billionth time. 

Change occurs at such a rapid pace in today's world that we must be able to react immediately to the needs and desires of our customers. Microsoft missed the boat on the "Internet revolution" a few years ago. Netscape had 90 percent of the market in 1995. Microsoft was able to react and recover because they had a monopoly on the desktop in those days. Once again Microsoft is in the same situation—desperately trying to win the personal tablet wars with Windows 8 and their own branded hardware. So far that hasn't worked out too well. You can't afford to wait until your competitors have conquered the market before you enter the market. HP has been playing that game for years and still hasn't learned the lesson.

Garbage In, Garbage Out

The amount of data available to the consumer is staggering. I call it data rather than information because the term "information" implies that the data is useful, actionable and accurate. In fact most of the data available for consumption is neither. 

There was a time in the recent past when authors or publishers had a reputation for publishing the "truth." The New York Times and the Encyclopedia Britannica were considered authoritative sources of information. Publications like the National Enquirer were considered sources of misinformation or dis-information. That distinction is gone. 

There is no "truth" in the Internet age. There is only trending or public opinion. Broadcast news networks don't report news—they interpret events to suit the agenda of the owner or publisher. Wikipedia is accepted as a valid source of information. There are something like 1,500 blog posts a minute. There are 700,000 search queries on Google every minute. There are also 700,000 Facebook updates a minute. 

What is going on is that we are churning all this data and providing very little in the way of useful information. People no longer need to think…they just re-tweet or repeat what someone else has already dumped onto the Internet. 

I recently had a conversation with a teen-age relative. I asked her why she re-tweeted a particular item the previous week. She said that she didn't even remember doing it nor did she remember the sentiment expressed in the original tweet. The idea of consuming and evaluating information is gone. If you can't say something in 140 characters you might as well not say it. No one is listening anyway.

Where is the Customer?

So how do we attract new customers in this rapidly changing world of misinformation? Most every good or service that we offer has become commoditized. There is nothing your organization can provide that another organization can't also provide. Using that certain knowledge, Amazon has almost single-handedly destroyed brick and mortar retail. Offerings in the financial services and insurance industry are not easily differentiated. Consider banking.

I haven't been to a real bank in about three years. The reason I went even then is amusing. I was caught in one of those very rural towns whose sole source of income is trapping out-of-town drivers who miss the posted 15 MPH sign and charging them exorbitant fines. 

This burgh was in South Carolina on a bit of two-lane blacktop that cut the corner on the intersection of two interstate highways. I figured to save 40 miles of travel. As soon as I hit town I knew it would have a speed trap but even forewarned I was tricked into exceeding the limit and was slapped with a $400 ticket. The magistrate/mayor/chief of police was not available and I was ordered to either return for a court date or send in a money order. 

That sounded a little suspicious to me. Money orders are those things you get at the 7-11 and are like bearer bonds. So I called and spoke to the mayor, et al and had my fine reduced to a couple of Franklins (still outrageous) and then inquired about the need to pay with a money order. I finally got him to say he would accept a cashier's check. At least the check would actually be made out to the town instead of bearer. And that was my last trip to the bank.

Excellent Customer Service

The reason I don't need to actually go to a bank is because they have such good customer service. I am able to perform all banking duties I need online with maybe the occasional fax thrown in. My salary is direct deposit; my bills are all scheduled for auto-pay. I rarely write an actual check. I am able to deposit stray checks using my iPhone. 

Which brings up one other anomaly; my wife has a different last name than I do. Even though our accounts are joint she always had difficulty depositing checks made out to me or to both of us. The new banking apps have totally removed that difficulty. We are now able to deposit any checks we want without silly harassment from a teller. Just wondering: Why are tellers so suspicious of good, loyal customers?

So my point about banking is that it is the customer service that makes me a loyal customer. I know that any of the big four banks are going to be able to provide me with the services I need, but the reason I stay with my preferred banks is because of the level of customer service provided. 

I can say the same thing for most of my insurance needs. I have been with the same large firm that provides all of my homeowner and automobile needs—as well as other financial services—for years. I suspect that I could probably save some money on premiums for this or that, but over time the service has been impeccable. 

They have a marvelous online presence. I recently transferred funds from an investment account there to an account at my personal bank. The transaction was completed in minutes, the funds were available in 12 hours, and the entire experience was accomplished without having to speak with a customer service representative.

Calling Customer Service

Since we are talking so much about customer service let me digress. Consumers hate to call customer service. To begin with, the chances are that they are only calling because they have a problem, which sets the stage for a bad experience. Interactive voice recognition menus are time consuming and extremely frustrating. 

Voice recognition is not good. I can't tell you how many times I have been speeding down the highway heading to the airport in my rental car screaming into the cell phone "speak to an agent." 

Natural language methods are an improvement. Instead of listening to the menu you are asked to start speaking. Hopefully you will utter the correct combination of key words that will get you to the menu you really want. 

Even better is customer service chat. You communicate with the customer service agent using chat—just like you were on Sametime or OCS or Skype. There are many benefits to using chat. It doesn't require 100 percent of your attention. You can do other things while texting with the CSR. 

It is more efficient from the call center perspective. One agent can carry on multiple chats but only a single voice call. It removes all ambiguity from spoken language. It also provides a record of the interaction for both the caller and the call center. Typically only the call center has a recording of a customer interaction. The more chat you are able to use in your call centers the more time your very best CSR's are available for customer conversations. The only downside for me is that I can't do it while driving (at least I'm not supposed to).

Never Let Go

Getting customers in the door is the hardest thing we can do. Consumers are fickle and capricious. They don't always make rational decisions. If using a lizard or a cute girl in your advertising brings customers your way you must be doing something right. 

But the proof is in retaining that customer. Customer service after the sale is the real measure of success. And that is what keeps great businesses successful. A few extra tweets about your excellent customer service may bring you a lot more success than a few extra lizard ads. I would rather work for an organization recognized for excellence than cuteness.

Please address comments, complaints, and suggestions to the author at [email protected].