Why Customer Service Trumps Big Data Every Time

Blog, Field Service

Last updated Mar 16, 2020 at 4:08PM | Published on Nov 26, 2012 | Blog, Field Service

Field services companies can spend millions of dollars on big data-based research, but it won’t work if they ignore the small things that make customers happy.

That means showing up on time, sending trucks with the right inventory on board, creating straightforward online registration processes and opening customer service on weekends.

The good news is that simple technology solutions can help deliver those results, an article on Harvard Business Review’s website explains.

For field services companies, performing the nuts and bolts of service is sometimes overshadowed by too much analysis. If companies spend their time generating “big picture” forecasts without implementing the basics, the analysis will show skewed customer service levels.

The key is to use a tool that efficiently captures time to repair, parts used and expenses for every service interaction. This will help companies grow their business because the system will feed timely price, cost, profit and service level into the data.

Negative customer experiences are still very common. In fact, a report shows that 86 percent of customers have changed companies due to a bad experience, according to the Harvard Business Review article.

That’s why it’s so vital to take customer service solutions seriously. The best part is that they’re often simple, inexpensive and have high payback.

All big data projects are important – just do not expect a quick and easy payoff. Chief executive officers always should link such projects to a rigorous metrics program to capture the full results.

And while companies are trying to capitalize on big data, they must never forget about the actual “data points,” those being the customers.

“If you’re not making your data points happy,” the article warns, “they’ll gladly move into someone else’s database, just as you did after the repair service failed to show up.”

Source: Harvard Business Review, October 2012