|
I bought a new laptop last month from a well-known manufacturer, and it turned out to be a somewhat revealing experience:
- the online transaction was fine, but some minor aspects then needed to be resolved by phone. Getting to speak to the right person was a bit of a pain, negotiating menus then still getting transferred twice. A couple of different people phoned back, apparently unaware of each other's involvement. Then an ‘Account Manager' e-mailed me, with the same information. Impression: clumsy system, somewhat uncoordinated and ‘distant'.
- I happened to check on the order's progress a couple of days later: manufacturing the laptop had been remarkably quick, and I saw that delivery was scheduled in a couple of days. An e-mail or phone call notifying me would have been helpful, as the delivery date wasn't convenient. I rang the outsourced ‘delivery partner' to arrange an alternative, only to be told that this wasn't possible, as the shipment had already been sent to the delivery partner's own contracted third party delivery service, and ‘surely your company receptionist will be there to receive it'(!) – if I wanted to change this I had to go back to the manufacturer. Not impressed! (and it was the manufacturer's brand reputation that was lessened in my eyes).
- phoning the third (fourth?) party contractor on the day delivery was due to ascertain the likely time, they couldn't tell me. OK, so not everyone's got state of the art scheduling systems. But then, nothing arrived. And they couldn't find it. Tales of ‘checking the corners of the warehouse' and ‘interviewing the drivers' didn't inspire confidence. After a day of this I was told that they'd now put the matter in the hands of the manager. This really didn't inspire confidence!
- I informed the manufacturer (via the same phone menu and transfer route), who launched an investigation that they said should be resolved in 2 days. 5 days later – nothing. Another call – the contact was now on holiday. A full 2 weeks later they ‘closed the investigation' and - following another call from me – ‘re-issued the order'. That took 2 days. Manufacture this time took nearly 2 weeks, and eventually - after a total of nearly 6 weeks and a lot of phone calls from me – I received the new laptop.
Sorry if I've bored you with the detail of what is after all just a personal experience! But the point I'd like to illustrate is that it is the detail that counts. In this case, what really mattered to me was not just that there were problems with my order, but that the manufacturer did not keep me informed about how it was dealing with these (and that it was acting promptly to rectify the situation from my point of view, rather than their internal procedures).
It is this inability to really see things from a customer's viewpoint that is a systemic weakness in many organisations. The policies and procedures that develop to provide a framework to guide how people work become the focus – understandably – and embedded in ways of working. Stepping outside of this to consider customers' experiences and what matters to them might be more difficult, but it is more important.
Another, more general (and important) example. A transformation is being attempted in the NHS to establish a patient perspective at the heart of how healthcare is delivered. Healthcare professionals have always been patient focused - their commitment and dedication is outstanding. But the understandably complex system that has developed has resulted in each part of the overall ‘patient pathway' focused only on their step of the journey – so it's like a chain, from GP, initial tests, local hospital initial appointment, back for test results, onward referral to treatment, assessment for surgery, etc. Each link in the chain tries to work as efficiently as possible – but the overall result has been a long chain, with unacceptably lengthy waiting times.
Over the past 3 years the NHS has begun to tackle this by increasing capacity of some of the bottlenecks and setting progressive targets to drive down the overall length of time to treatment – with encouraging results. But the fundamental transformation in thinking has yet to occur – each link in the chain is still focused on making sure they meet their part of the target. Somehow the perspective has to be changed, outwards to the overall experience of patients and across the system to how the various links of the chain work together. Not only is this challenging – it's difficult to think outside of your own organisation's perspective – but it could require sacrifices, changing the way you've always worked, perhaps even eliminating your link in the chain.
Yet this is what really matters to patients. Whether the next phase of development of the NHS can deliver this remains to be seen – it will take enormous effort and perseverance to bring about such a change in thinking and consequent action. And understanding that the health service is a ‘complex system' consisting of many organisations, relationships and influences is an essential starting point to trying to stimulate such a transforming change.
It takes boldness to try to change a system or market - people and organisations naturally tend to do what's best for them, what enables them to survive and thrive. To realise that perhaps this isn't meeting the real needs of the people they serve – and to be prepared to change accordingly – requires vision and courage – especially when others aren't making such changes. But taking such risks, innovating to fulfil better the core purpose of the organisation, will ultimately move the market to the next level and shift the goalposts of competition.
But the first step is developing the ability to see things from a customer perspective, and to want to try to understand what really matters to them, and then to do something about it! |
