1. Peter Schooff
  2. Sherlock Holmes
  3. BPM Discussions
  4. Tuesday, 14 February 2017
  5.  Subscribe via email
What are the biggest mistakes you've seen companies make with their customer experience processes?
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Sorry for the cliche but companies still fail to consider the customer "journey".

I recently had a Netflix problem and found to my plesant surprise that I could contact customer support directly from the app using a VoIP call. However as I had made some initial attempts to correct the problem myself the tier one agent was unable to provide a fix and said that she would have to escalate the issue. This however is where the customer service journey fell apart. Instead of transitioning me to another service representative online she provided be with a landline number. A US based landline number. The problem is I’m located in the UK. Never did make the call.
Yeah that's how they filter out people using Netflix via US proxy servers. :)
That's incorrect. I'm a UK subscriber.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 1
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
It's probably obvious, but Customers cannot be locked into a structured process. They can be guided through "the right steps in the right order", but must be allowed to follow their own impulses. Very similar to herding cats.

You've got to build adaptable processes that insure everything gets done regardless of the order in which the customer chooses to do them.
Founder at John Reynolds' Venture LLC - Creator of ¿?Trules™ for drama free decisions
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 2
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I see clients designing customer experience to cater to internal operations first, end customer second without even realizing it. We continue to see this tendency with the intent to ensure the organization requirements are met... then the customer experience incorporated. Begin with the customer experience, your team will be surprised at the design choices you make when adopting this point of view FIRST.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 3
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Customer processes are "their processes", not your view of their processes.

Once you have worked out their process, you then need to orient your entire operation to be able to deliver on your "customer promise". Unless, of course, you are happy promising your customers an awful, inconsistent, frustrating experience. In that case, you don't need to do anything.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 4
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The previous pundits' points pretty much paint the precise picture. Here we call it “empathy”—the ability of the designers, architects, and implementers to imagine themselves as end users of the systems they are creating.

In that sense, applications built on BPM platforms are pretty much the same as every other product in the universe. Car brands, for example, differ very little from one another in terms of basic operation, but diverge substantially along the axis of user experience. My Subaru is designed to make it pleasant and easy to commute, run errands, etc.; my friend's enormous Ford pickup truck is built more around the experience of carrying cargo and towering above nearby vehicles.

But BPM-driven applications are rarely created by the kind of customer-centric, B2C marketing types that determine automobile forms and features. If an enterprise has such people, they've probably squirreled them away on their “mobile” team, safely away from all the nasty folks who build complex and important applications that aren't very pretty. Organizations that learn to meld powerful engines with intuitive, even luxurious, user experiences will find that, like their automotive counterparts, the devotion and envy they thereby inspire will offer them Porsche-like brand recognition, customer loyalty, and pricing control.
Scott's opinions only. Logo provided for identification purposes only.
doesn't "intuitive, even luxurious, user experiences" seem to contradict your previous stance of how universal, stock UX is the only efficient way of building user interfaces?
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 5
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Customer Experience Process? Didn't even know you could see it as something separately. Customer <anything> should always be part of a process (like Ian said).

Customer Experience (good or bad) is the result of a process, not a process itself.

I think my blog post on Customer Journey summarizes my opinion: http://procesje.blogspot.nl/2016/10/i-love-it-when-customers-do-all-our-work.html
Sharing my adventures in Process World via Procesje.nl
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 6
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
This is based upon seeing UK Government struggle and spend huge amounts yet fail with good interactions. They like most spend to much attention to the web page design and fail to recognize that it is just part of what should be an integrated business operation to deliver the service. They like many try to integrate with the mess of legacy and create a new mess. Such large operations are driven by IT and only the enlightened would even think of BPM as a driver as the knowledge of "how" would hurt too many empires.......think about it.....!
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 7
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
A prospect or customer on a customer journey is performing work; the result of this work is the customer experience. This work is essential to the product or service value chain of which the purchase is a part. The best customer journey or CX process designers keep this work front-and-centre as a process design consideration.

When building and supporting customer-facing processes, and all things being equal as far as offers-to-do-business are concerned, savvy organizations (both public and private) consider "experience" and "psychology" and "perceptions" etc. But it's worth going further to consider the cost of the work that the process traveller must perform. Especially are we imposing burdens on human memory? Are we requiring more time to perform tasks than would be possible with a better design? Economics also implies assets. @Ian draws attention to the question of a process being "the customer's process". One could take this further and imagine that a customer process is a fleeting asset owned by a customer. How can we maximize the value of that asset as perceived by the customer?

BPM process software is the software that is best suited to supporting the automation of customer experiences, customer journeys and customer narratives. Attention to economics, costs, benefits and incentives associated with work tasks for every actor in a process will help guide us to process designs that maximize mutual value creation for those processes.
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 8
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The discussion topic has a focus on CEM but it is worthwhile to remind ourselves that CRM and CEM are related.

  • Good CRM does not necessarily lead to good CEM.
  • Bad CRM can, in theory, result in good CEM (but it’s not a good idea to rely on this scenario).
  • No CRM usually leads to bad CEM.

The only one that counts at the end of the day is CEM.

The best place to measure/assess CEM is at a Case History where you hopefully have easy access to a reverse chronological listing of all interventions with data, as it was, at the time it was collected, on the form versions that were in service at the time.

You also need a BPM process pathway history so you can, taking healthcare as an example, look back and answer questions along the lines of “Why did John Doe not have an X-Ray back in August 2016?”

So, what key mistakes do companies make with their customer experience?


1. Failure to set up Case Management/Case Histories and BPM process pathway histories

2. Failure to meet customer expectations (long list)

Pushing out bad products (it does not work!) or services (being put on hold when call, delayed responses, etc.)

Poor customer service (Mr Bloggs works out of another department, I cannot transfer you but I will be pleased to
set up a new ticket for you).

Failure to give the impression that the company cares (sorry, your warranty expired yesterday at midnight).

. . . . .
  1. http://www.kwkeirstead.wordpress.com
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 9
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Fully agree with Ian re 'Once you have worked out their process, you then need to orient your entire operation to be able to deliver on your "customer promise".' (Especially, because I am Tokyo right now.)

Actually, each B2C contract is an explicit "imposing" of an implicit customer process on customers and this may lead to poor customer experience. Making everything explicit allows finding gaps in such "imposed" customer processes. See [ref1].

  1. http://improving-bpm-systems.blogspot.jp/search/label/CX
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 10
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
I think the answer to your question is very short - the reality is that "Customer Experience Processes" is the wrong way to think about it.

All your processes and the experiences they deliver need to be thought about from the outside in. It's not as though there are processes that are just for experience (in some customer facing silo) and the rest of what you do can just carry on ... in their own merry little silos.

It's a cultural thing - how you need to rethink value delivery, working backwards from the Persona and Job To Be Done, into the journey of the customer (not their journey through your crap), and then into the experience that you want to deliver. From that understanding comes clarity around a set of service propositions - which are composed of a set of configured capabilities (implemented by process and resources, systems etc.

as Ian accurately points out ... your customers have processes of their own and you need to work out how to fit in with them.
+1 to Derek for mentioning the JTBD framework.
While the ideal is that we find out what our customer processes are, in practice customers rarely have the patience and the grace of sharing with us the full process context - they have a problem to fix, they have a pain to be relieved, they have a job to be done and they have some value to extract from us.
And while I love the persona concept, in practice I find it much more difficult to identify those personas in a corporate environment (where actual job descriptions and power distribution in the buying center is much more difficult to grasp) than in a consumer environment (where brand values are relevant to the point it's sometimes a self-fulfilling prophecy in how it attracts certain personas).
Re: "your customers have processes of their own and you need to work out how to fit in with them".

Seems to me six (6) scenarios cover all bases
1. customer identifies touch points in their process and will want to link to the supplier in as seamless a way as possible.
2. supplier identifies touch points in it's process and will want to link to the customer with minimum fanfare..
3. customer needs to connect via an ad hoc connection.
4. supplier needs to connect via an ad hoc connection.
5. a processing engine needs to connect for info request
6. a processing engine needs to connect to respond to a request

Solutions [have I missed any of importance?]
a. voice (risk of telephone tag, no record of the phone call unless you voice record and later do speech-to-text)
b. fax (avoid)
c. e-mail/iinstant message (use for advisories only to alert other party to go to portal, or be informed of an auto-import)
d. portal (good security, no great inconvenience to have to log in assuming a party has LastPass or equivalent, always good to use dual factor for increased security)
e. auto-import i.e. machine to machine communication (setup required, not always real-time; least disturbing of all solutions to counterparty, data automatically goes into the Case).

Not all communication needs to be logged in Cases - we use Skype/GoToMeeting with business partners, with customers where there is an ongoing high-volume level of communication (i.e. are you there?, can we change meeting to 1500 hrs? can we do a GoToMeeting so I can show you something on my screen?, sending you a file)
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 11
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
The biggest mistake companies make when designing the experience their customers have with their products/services is not employing enough empathy.
This leads to all sorts of design mistakes: processes that are too structured (frustrating customers) or that are too lax (making it very frustrating for employees to properly serve the customers), user interfaces that do not take into account the physical and logical context of the customer, siloed data requirements that are irrelevant, processes with needless handoffs and float, etc etc.
But it all starts with lack of empathy.
CEO, Co-founder, Profluo
The biggest mistake : forget the customer due to internal organisational stuff...
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 12
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
Most companies oversimplify customer experience processes. As a rule, all relevant tasks are just delegated to CRM. However, even most advanced CRM alone can appear not sufficient to handle all customer processes. CRM rarely offers enough flexibility to configure multiple levels of interaction with client through complex decision logic, gateways, escalations and delegation of tasks. For this reason, full-fledged BPM system with well configured process hierarchy is indispensable element of quality customer service.

Customer experience processes are among most complex processes, which exist in organization. This is because customer processes are champions in terms of people involved. In fact, every new customer is a distinct private or business entity with own individual features. As a rule, number of customers exceeds a number of suppliers and other business counter-agents by a number of magnitudes. This abundance of customers itself makes the process of their handling chaotic and very unpredictable. Respective processes must have elaborate reservations to efficiently handle all possible complications in routing these arbitrary customer flows and demands.

Robust implementation of responsive customer service requires complex modeling of stochastic processes, artificial intelligence, predictive analytics, integrated logistics and other techniques from business intelligence domain, which go far beyond standard CRM forms and procedures.

See, e.g. curious outline “Findings From Forrester Wave: Customer Service Analytics Empower The Predictive Process” on the link below.

  1. http://blogs.forrester.com/james_kobielus/10-07-19-findings_forrester_wave_customer_service_analytics_empower_predictive_process
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 13
Accepted Answer Pending Moderation
@Boris .. extremely interesting.

re: "CRM rarely offers enough flexibility to configure multiple levels of interaction with client through complex decision logic, gateways, escalations and delegation of tasks."

The problem disappears once you embed CRM into whatever Case Management System (some call this a BPMs) an organization may be using.

We did this about 1 year ago in healthcare for OutReach.

At any step along a process (structured OutReach) OR at any point in the lifecycle of a Case (ad hoc OurReach), we can cause an Event to post to a Case Patient Calendar.

The Event has various context-situation appropriate Forms attached to it, same as process steps have context-situation appropriate attached Forms.

CRM becomes seamless relative to BPM (just another service at Case, either closely linked to BPM or totally ad hoc).

A background engine causes the Event\Form to post to a portal and we can, of course, send out a parallel e-mail advising "you have events at the portal", given we cannot expect the recipients to be going to our portal every day/hour.

The patient logs in, accesses the Event\Form, takes note of any instructions, views any sent data, records data, and clicks on Submit.

We have NOT yet done this for InReach because we piloted this in healthcare where we know that open invitations to "contact us if you have any questions/needs" would take up a physician's entire day responding with the result they would not be able to see any patients.

We will accommodate InReach in healthcare once we get some AI between the patient and the physician.

We are going to be providing InReach to commercial customers (much less demanding user group).

We will do this by making available at our portal, a menu of services that a customer can reasonably request on their own (i.e. what is the status of my order?, I am having problems installing my smart TV, I need you to call me earliest convenience?).

Live chats are good, but rarely is the person you are chatting with able to do other than refer you to someone whereas Portal InReach goes straight to the right person who is in a position to respond.

We could easily classify the range of possible InReach requests

1. answer available, simply respond
2. some lookup/research required, do it and respond
3. some clarification of the request is need, probably best to phone and talk

As for OutReach, it is, to me, a matter of little consequence whether outreach is a structured step along a process template or an ad hoc step (nothing more than a process of one step).

Clearly, you don't want any outsiders having direct access to their own Case records.

Not a problem - we designate corporate users as "able to log into the Case system" and we designate all others as 'no-log-in' users.

The latter cannot log into the Case system, at all, ever, (they can only log into the portal) and everything they do at/from the portal is totally at arms-length with the back-end Case Management System (an engine handles all messaging to the portal and all messaging from the portal).
  1. http://www.kwkeirstead.wordpress.com
@Karl, thank you. Very interesting notes on approach and implementation.

"Live chats are good, but rarely is the person you are chatting with able to do other than refer you to someone" - incredibly apt observation!

This is why real CRM should have complex workflows and multiple levels, as you describe. In fact, all major CRM, such as SAP or Dynamics, already move in this direction, although it is far from completion and inclusion into a standard supply.

I m not exactly sure, if these BPM functions should really sit inside CRM itself. Standalone BPM command center gives much more flexibility for an organization to change CRM or even combine several CRM at once and probably other technologies merged. However, general approach should be exactly as you describe, whatever preferences on components will prevail.
From my personal experience, especially in medical field, described extended CRM may well consume soon most of work of physicians. It saves a lot of time both for patients and for doctors, if patient can just drop a message and receive relevant service. Very often there is no need for a physician to view a patient in person to just prescribe a routine medicine, which is administered for years in same doses with whole patient's awareness. Every such inquiry is considered as an actual visit to clinic with all associated benefits for all parties. Same applies to submission of administrative documents for insurance coverage and other formal cases. All this can and, to much extent, is already done online drastically decreasing load on medical workers and reducing inevitable chaos related with personal involvement.
Precisely, "real CRM should have complex .... "

So here's the deal - put CRM and BPM in a Case runtime environment and make things such that you can either invoke processing of a structured set of steps (BPM template instance) OR you invoke processing of a "process of one step" (an ad hoc step) that can be either a single BPM step or a portal OutReach step.

The only variant across "steps" becomes whether the intended recipient user is a Case worker or a portal user (guest user, customer, patient, contractor, 3rd party).

With this setup, the Case environment does not know, does not care whether a construct is a BPM step or a CRM outreach.

Therefore, your question " not exactly sure, if these BPM functions should really sit inside CRM itself." disappears because BPM was all along capable of performing all required actions of CRM.
Looks like I predicted this back in 2012, but it took me 4 years to implement a practical solution.

See "Saying Goodbye to CRM"

Again, on "CRM may well consume soon most of work of physicians", I agree 100%. In the USA, tele-health is growing rapidly, especially in the area of depression, PTSD where a call out can keep a patient on track with their therapy (manytimes consisting of nothing more than a visual chat).

One of the important additions to our scheduling piece for tele-health was the ability for a dispatcher in Texas to be on the phone with a patient in San Francisco, looking at the tele-bookings of a therapist in New York (3 different time zones). Nothing special, except that without this capability, the players show up at the wrong times.

Today we have a customer who dispatches 150 therapists to ADHD children at their homes with several must-have features in the Case Management System -

1) the therapist needs to know where to go (things change on the fly).
2) during a session, if there is a problem the field worker may need to do a live-video with a senior therapist to get advice and assistance.
3) since the patients have therapists coming in/going out every 2-3 hours with a replacement coming in as the other person leaves, it is essential that the progress notes be wirtten up, unloaded and then out to a new process step in the interest of continuity of care. ( 5- minute turnaround instead of days previously).
  1. more than a month ago
  2. BPM Discussions
  3. # 14
  • Page :
  • 1

There are no replies made for this post yet.
However, you are not allowed to reply to this post.