4 ms·

I. WANT. TO. CALL. SUPPORT! Nothing is more infuriating than having a problem, and being endlessly redirected from a FAQ to user forums to email. Email gets me

by nikanj 11y ago

I. WANT. TO. CALL. SUPPORT! Nothing is more infuriating than having a problem, and being endlessly redirected from a FAQ to user forums to email. Email gets me a canned answer from Bob, who didn't read my mail for more than 7 seconds. Replying to said mail gets me Chuck, who's very sorry Bob couldn't help me..and then pastes the same canned answer. With a phone, you're not running totally stateless, and can actually make progress towards solving the problem.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
nicky0 11y ago
But I'd rather find the answer in a well-written FAQ than for there to be no FAQ and have to call.
- soylentcola 11y ago
  Yep. My ideal scenario is to have an extensive FAQ or manual/guide with a functional search so I can look up potential fixes to all common and known issues. They can have a "common issues" splash page in front for the more common stuff that the average person might need but I'd like to be able to expand that to the full knowledge base or whatever they name it. Calling should be reserved for issues that are either unknown or require something to be done on the company's end (resetting a flag on an account or some other option that I can't do on my end). It's just a matter of convenience and access. Common and obvious issues have up front solutions listed. Less common or more technical issues have easily searchable details and solutions or potential fixes listed. Then only the "deepest" level of issues/fixes that require action from the company require a call. It keeps their phone support costs lower, it keeps wait times shorter, and customer "friction" only goes up as much as it needs to relevant to the fix.
Silhouette 11y ago
With a phone, you're not running totally stateless, and can actually make progress towards solving the problem. Maybe the underlying problem here is that people increasingly assume calling won't help them actually make progress towards solving the problem. Years of dealing with tedious phone menus, call centre staff who literally can't understand or speak basic English properly, and often call centre staff who don't have the authority or capabilities to do anything useful to fix the problem anyway, have taught many customers that calling will be a waste of probably significant amounts of their time. I'm not sure how fair that really is, but phone support seems to be increasingly polarised these days. Some organisations still take it seriously, and you can speak reasonably quickly with someone helpful and knowledgeable. In these cases I often find the phone support is the fastest way to find reliable information or solve a problem. Other organisations are more like the stereotype I described above, and I confess to having very little patience with them these days. If I'm calling because an automated system already wasn't working well enough, and I don't get a confident feeling about the phone support almost immediately, I don't mess around any more: if it was an enquiry about a sale, they probably just lost that deal, and if it was a significant problem or complaint, they're probably getting a letter with verified delivery instead.
CPLX 11y ago
I want to call a support person that's actually more knowledgable than me. Many phone support agents are just looking at and reading from some sort of scripted FAQ, which means they are between me and the content I want. I'd much rather they just put all that text online rather than having it read to me.
- mannykannot 11y ago
  > I want to call a support person that's actually more knowledgable than me. Amen to that. Unfortunately, it is not a common option any more. Leggett's article is at best ambiguous over this, and she gives the impression of not understanding the issue. Firstly, 'voice' is not a unified category: on the one hand, there is informed-human voice support, and on the other, there is the combination of voice automation and uninformed flunky. Leggett shows no sign of understanding that people are not abandoning the former out of choice, but because it is not available.
TillE 11y ago
Good email support exists. Even a massive company like Blizzard has been consistently fast and responsive for me. I've had great support direct from the founders of small companies. I doubt that companies with bad email support would serve up anything better over the phone.
superuser2 11y ago
A thousand times yes. Support articles are written from the perspective that the company's products and services are perfect and I might not understand how to use them correctly. Only on the phone can I get someone who will acknowledge the existence of an actual problem and start drilling into it with me.
VLM 11y ago
Its a lack of contract renewal, or monopoly presence, in that field. In the telecom world, say whatever you want verbally, nobody records things, but anything written in email will come up at contract renewal time or in court if the contract needs breaking.
david-given 11y ago
Phone calls are synchronous. If I phone someone, I have to commit to (usually) an hour of my life to get the problem solved. Email is asynchronous. I can send the message and then get on with something else while waiting for a reply. I loathe phoning support.

by nikanj 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

nicky0 11y ago

But I'd rather find the answer in a well-written FAQ than for there to be no FAQ and have to call.

soylentcola 11y ago
Yep. My ideal scenario is to have an extensive FAQ or manual/guide with a functional search so I can look up potential fixes to all common and known issues. They can have a "common issues" splash page in front for the more common stuff that the average person might need but I'd like to be able to expand that to the full knowledge base or whatever they name it. Calling should be reserved for issues that are either unknown or require something to be done on the company's end (resetting a flag on an account or some other option that I can't do on my end). It's just a matter of convenience and access. Common and obvious issues have up front solutions listed. Less common or more technical issues have easily searchable details and solutions or potential fixes listed. Then only the "deepest" level of issues/fixes that require action from the company require a call. It keeps their phone support costs lower, it keeps wait times shorter, and customer "friction" only goes up as much as it needs to relevant to the fix.

Silhouette 11y ago

With a phone, you're not running totally stateless, and can actually make progress towards solving the problem. Maybe the underlying problem here is that people increasingly assume calling won't help them actually make progress towards solving the problem. Years of dealing with tedious phone menus, call centre staff who literally can't understand or speak basic English properly, and often call centre staff who don't have the authority or capabilities to do anything useful to fix the problem anyway, have taught many customers that calling will be a waste of probably significant amounts of their time. I'm not sure how fair that really is, but phone support seems to be increasingly polarised these days. Some organisations still take it seriously, and you can speak reasonably quickly with someone helpful and knowledgeable. In these cases I often find the phone support is the fastest way to find reliable information or solve a problem. Other organisations are more like the stereotype I described above, and I confess to having very little patience with them these days. If I'm calling because an automated system already wasn't working well enough, and I don't get a confident feeling about the phone support almost immediately, I don't mess around any more: if it was an enquiry about a sale, they probably just lost that deal, and if it was a significant problem or complaint, they're probably getting a letter with verified delivery instead.

CPLX 11y ago

I want to call a support person that's actually more knowledgable than me. Many phone support agents are just looking at and reading from some sort of scripted FAQ, which means they are between me and the content I want. I'd much rather they just put all that text online rather than having it read to me.

mannykannot 11y ago
> I want to call a support person that's actually more knowledgable than me. Amen to that. Unfortunately, it is not a common option any more. Leggett's article is at best ambiguous over this, and she gives the impression of not understanding the issue. Firstly, 'voice' is not a unified category: on the one hand, there is informed-human voice support, and on the other, there is the combination of voice automation and uninformed flunky. Leggett shows no sign of understanding that people are not abandoning the former out of choice, but because it is not available.

TillE 11y ago

Good email support exists. Even a massive company like Blizzard has been consistently fast and responsive for me. I've had great support direct from the founders of small companies. I doubt that companies with bad email support would serve up anything better over the phone.

superuser2 11y ago

A thousand times yes. Support articles are written from the perspective that the company's products and services are perfect and I might not understand how to use them correctly. Only on the phone can I get someone who will acknowledge the existence of an actual problem and start drilling into it with me.

VLM 11y ago

Its a lack of contract renewal, or monopoly presence, in that field. In the telecom world, say whatever you want verbally, nobody records things, but anything written in email will come up at contract renewal time or in court if the contract needs breaking.

david-given 11y ago

Phone calls are synchronous. If I phone someone, I have to commit to (usually) an hour of my life to get the problem solved. Email is asynchronous. I can send the message and then get on with something else while waiting for a reply. I loathe phoning support.