Maximise Service Orientation (Part II)

This blog -the second in a series of three- continues the exploration of “customer service orientation”. It looks into how this shift in customers’ expectations and their quest for authentic market offerings has led organisations to redesign their business in a more customer-centric fashion.

In my June blog I explored what “service orientation” is and how it evolved from satisfying customers’ expectations to exceeding them by individualising customer experience.

Today, I will look into how this shift in customers’ expectations has led organisations to redesign their business in a more customer-centric fashion and to organise it for optimal business outcomes -employee customer service included.

Specifically I will answer the following two questions:

•  How can an organisation maximise their customer service orientation?

• How does redesigning business in a more customer-centric fashion impact employee service?

HOW CAN AN ORGANISATION MAXIMISE THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE ORIENTATION?

Successful companies know that it is only when they satisfy their customers’ needs and expectations that they can be successful in their offering.

Having transcended the phase where customers ask for “value for their money” which comprises functional qualities and cognitive assessment of the service, customers need and expect an authentic “experience”.

·       Authenticity  is subjective evaluation of genuineness ascribed to an offering (also brand) by consumers.

Nowadays, consumers struggle to differentiate between the “real” and the “fake” as technology can make the inauthentic look and feel authentic (1). Despite the similarities, it is only an authentic offering that allows consumers to feel that they are in touch both with a “real” world and with their “real” selves (i.e. with two aspects of their self-image: who they are and who they aspire to be).

It is no surprise then, that brand authenticity has a significant impact on brand trust and is considered as one of the “cornerstones of contemporary marketing” which can help fuel firm growth within the market place (2).

The authenticity construct is multifaceted and built around perceptions of quality commitment, sincerity, and design consistency (3). In order to simplify understanding, I will categorise its multi-facetedness in two dimensions of consistency & congruency: external and internal.

External consistency

An offering is externally consistent when the customer is satisfied with the quality of the offering. It comprises three sub-dimensions (4): 

• Employee service performance

• Physical goods quality  

• Servicescape quality

Whereas the importance of the quality of the product is self-explanatory, servicescape is a relatively new concept.

Servicescape refers to a firm’s physical environment and encompasses aspects of the physical environment such as design ambiance and any accompanying signs, symbols, and artifacts (e.g. color, music, scents, lighting, parking, attractiveness, accessibility) (5).

Research on gestalt psychology has shown that individual perception of a space arouses emotional responses that evaluate it positively or negatively and eventually impact the decision to buy (6). An illustrative example is Apple servicescape. Its design is inspired by the hospitality experiences at both Ritz-Carlton and various boutique hotels. Apple's retail stores resemble the registration areas, concierge desks and meeting space experiences of better boutique hotels and complete the unique customer experience of the product and the employee service.

Internal congruency & consistency

Congruency refers to staying committed to defined brand values (7). In other words, the offering needs to be aligned with the identity of the company and vice versa. 

Consistency refers to ensuring that all stakeholders experience the same brand at all brand contact points (for example, packaging, advertising etc).

Organizations are congruent in their offering when they evolve their business ecosystem, change a number of business processes, and address organizational issues.

To become service-oriented companies need to shift their focus from the organization to the customers and pay attention to the complete, end-to-end experience customers have with the company. Business then stops being an organization’s journey and becomes a customer’s journey. When a company understands the interaction through the customer’s eyes, it anticipates what the customer wants and expresses it in its purpose.

Two recognizable examples of companies whose purpose is congruent with their service orientation are Walt Disney and Zappos. At Walt Disney Company “We create happiness by providing the finest in entertainment for people of all ages, everywhere”. At Zappos.com, “our purpose is simple: to live and deliver WOW”. (the ones in quotation marks in italics)

Organisations are consistent when they ensure that all stakeholders experience the same brand at all brand contact points (for example, packaging, advertising etc) almost immediately. This is not an easy task for a company. A study has found that 3/4 of customers expect “now” service within 5 min of making contact online. They also want a simple experience, use comparison apps when they shop and put as much trust in online reviews as in personal recommendations. If we think of the number of customer-employee touch points per day the task becomes a challenge. A study by Cornell’s Center for Hospitality Research estimates that there are about five thousand customer/employee touch points every day in a business such as a moderate-sized hotel. To achieve this level of consistency interaction may need to be reshaped into different sequences (e.g. digitizing processes, reorienting company cultures, multi-disciplinary, cross-functional teams) and organisations may need to focus on their core business competencies that differentiate them from their competitors and outsource the rest (componentisation).

For sure, all interactions and data need to be in one place: The customer may reach out to a company for support across different channels; such as live chat, phone or instant messaging. For the customer, this is one long conversation. They don’t care which department they talk to when they need help. They just want to get their questions answered and their problems resolved. The employee in contact has to see it the same way. That implies that technology and teams need to work together in order to provide a personalised customer experience. What is more, in order for employees to handle each of those touch points correctly, it requires an exceeding amount of psychological and intellectual flexibility from their part (8).

HOW CAN ORGANISATIONS MAKE SURE THAT EMPLOYEES ARE ABLE TO SERVICE AT THEIR BEST?

HOW CAN THEY HELP THEIR EMPLOYEES TO DEVELOP THE QUALITIES THEY NEED TO EXCEED THEIR CUSTOMERS’ EXPECTATIONS?

I will explore these questions in my next blog.

-STAY TUNED-

Selective Bibliography

(1)Arnould, E. J., & Price, L. L. (2000). Questing for self and community. The why of consumption: Contemporary perspectives on consumer motives, goals and desires, 1, p. 140.

(1)Firat, A. F., Sherry Jr, J. F., & Venkatesh, A. (1994). Postmodernism, marketing and the consumer. International journal of research in marketing, 11(4), 311-316.

(1) Fjellman, S. M. (1992). Vinyl Leaves: Walt Disney World and America. Westview Press.

(2) Brown, S., Kozinets, R. V., & Sherry, J. F. (2003). Sell me the old, old story: Retromarketing management and the art of brand revival. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 2(2), 133-147.

(2) Eggers, F., O’Dwyer, M., Kraus, S., Vallaster, C., & Güldenberg, S. (2013). The impact of brand authenticity on brand trust and SME growth: A CEO perspective. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 340-348.

(3) Beverland, M. B., Lindgreen, A., & Vink, M. W. (2008). Projecting authenticity through advertising: Consumer judgments of advertisers' claims. Journal of Advertising, 37(1), 5-15.

(3) Kozinets, R. V. (2001). Utopian enterprise: Articulating the meanings of Star Trek's culture of consumption. Journal of consumer research, 28(1), 67-88.

(4) McKinsey Quartery ( August 2016) What Matters in Customer Experience Transformations.

(5) Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of marketing, 56(2), 57-71.

(5)Brady, M. K., & Cronin Jr, J. J. (2001). Customer orientation: Effects on customer service perceptions and outcome behaviors. Journal of service Research, 3(3), 241-251.

(6) Lin, I. Y. (2004). Evaluating a servicescape: the effect of cognition and emotion. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 23(2), 163-178.

(7) De Chernatony, L., & McDonald, M. (2003). Creating powerful brands in consumer. Service and Industrial Markets, 2nd ed., Biddles, Guildford and King’s Lynn.

(8) Brown, T. J., Mowen, J. C., Donavan, D. T., & Licata, J. W. (2002). The customer orientation of service workers: Personality trait effects on self-and supervisor performance ratings. Journal of marketing research, 39(1), 110-119.

(8) Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (2013). The experience economy: past, present and future. Handbook on the experience economy, 21-44.