Do corporates ever brainstorm who they are as a company, and then make sure that’s reflected in their tone when speaking to or writing to their customers?
That makes business sense to me, but from what I can tell, after more than two decades of reading e-mailed conversations between companies and the people who’ve chosen to do business with them, the tone is often inappropriately formal, condescending or disrespectful.
At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, people like being addressed by their name, especially as customers. It makes them feel acknowledged, and the interaction feels personal, rather than can’t-be-bothered, cut-and-paste.
And yet, the catch-all greeting “Good day” is common.
And last week, as a side issue, I addressed that with the insurance company higher-up to whom I was addressing a media query.
The client, who wants to be identified only by his first name, Ritesh, had a really bad experience with a windscreen repair, and there was a long e-mail exchange with a King Price consultant about that.
Each time, Ritesh addressed her by name, and each time she responded with “Good day”. So I asked: “And are your consultants not trained to use clients’ names when corresponding with them? ‘Good day’ on its own is somewhat disrespectful, in my view, when an e-mail is being addressed to a specific recipient, and a client at that.“
Are your consultants not trained to use clients’ names when corresponding with them? ‘Good day’ on its own is somewhat disrespectful, in my view, when an e-mail is being addressed to a specific recipient, and a client at that.
He agreed: “Thank you for pointing out the way in which the claims consultant addressed the client. They do know better and this has been addressed with the specific person involved.”
The company declares on its website that the “Customer is king”, followed by: “Yeah, yeah ... Everyone says this. But we believe it and we live it. We treat all our clients like royalty ... Because you are. We started off by promising royal service and we delivered. Really, we’ve won stuff for our royal service. We take service seriously. Your wish is our command.”
So are they, and others, monitoring how their people are engaging with their valued clients?
It seems to me that too many companies have got into the habit of talking to their customers in a dismissive tone. They’ll tell you it’s “professional”, corporate language, but do they ever ask their customers what they think of it?
In a short letter written by a timeshare management company to a client, which I had sight of recently, just about every sentence was prefaced with “Kindly be advised that”, “Please take note that”, or “Please be advised that”.
The same company wouldn’t dream of using such language in its marketing material, but once the people are hooked, the condescending language takes over.
Perhaps it’s unconscious condescension, but it does nothing to foster the relationship; quite the opposite.
Those stock phrases, reminiscent of 1950s British corporate-speak, are even less appropriate now that most of us are reading — and writing — our corporate correspondence in sloppy clothes in our home offices, aka the bed or dining room table.
Change the templates, companies, for goodness sake! You can come across as respectful and professional without using stuffy words and a finger-wagging tone.
OK, I’m going to hop off my soapbox to tell Ritesh’s story.
Change the templates, companies, for goodness sake! You can come across as respectful and professional without using stuffy words and a finger-wagging tone.
He filed a windscreen claim with King Price on January 4 and, when he wrote to me in desperation almost eight weeks later, the repair was not yet done.
The installer, DGC Glass, cracked the replacement windscreen while attempting to fit it.
On the second attempt, some time later, the cover strip was not properly fitted and flapped as Ritesh drove the car. “I called King Price numerous times, spoke to the manager (she of the e-mailed greeting “Good day”) and e-mailed her with no response.”
What prompted his e-mail to me on February 25 was that flapping cover strip flying off his car, almost hitting the car behind him, as he’d warned.
I took up the case with King Price’s legal and public relations head, Wynand van Vuuren, who began his response by conceding: “This was one of those glass repairs that went completely wrong and I can understand the frustrations that the client had to go through.
“We see these bad experiences in a very serious light and expressed our disappointment to the service provider. We know that things cannot always be finalised without any hassles, but their commitment to resolve the issues was also not of the standard that we require.”
The insurer chatted to Ritesh, who said he’d prefer a payout, enabling him to have the windscreen restored by a service provider of his choice, and the money was deposited into his account last week.
“We survey all the repairs done by DGC Glass on a monthly basis, as well as with our other glass service providers,” van Vuuren said.
“Their service has always been outstanding, with a very small percentage of customers who felt they were not happy with the service provided. They have also shown their commitment to iron out incidents like these and we are confident that their service is overall of a good standard.”
Good save.
In other words, I find that response to be in order.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.