4 ms·
“Leveraging consumer empathy”? This is actually just listening to your customers, and caring about them enough to respond to them thoughtfully. If you get a
by ErikAugust 6y ago
“Leveraging consumer empathy”?
This is actually just
listening to your customers, and caring about them enough to respond to them thoughtfully. If you get a bad review, you still respond thoughtfully.
Why do we have to make it into some buzzword salad term for some “strategy” powered by pseudo-academic research nonsense? Anyone that has actually ran a business could verify it.
- TehCorwiz 6y agoI don’t care what businesses call it if they start treating customers better.
- JadeNB 6y ago> Why do we have to make it into some buzzword salad term for some “strategy” powered by pseudo-academic research nonsense? Presumably because there are some people who are driven to action only by buzzwords, not common sense; so this is a way for the common sense-driven to convince the buzzword-driven of the wisdom of the common sense course of action.
- jcampbell1 6y agoThe paper is not about listening to your customers at all, it is suggesting ways to make negative reviews seem ridiculous so that negative reviews actually form a positive impression. I think the takeaway is to make your critics look like hyperbolic dimwits by being nice and using real names. It not obvious this is the best rebuttal strategy. I see companies often get hyper factual and cold with responses to negative reviews. When responding to a negative review, you are writing not to that person, but rather to the audience that reads reviews.
- ErikAugust 6y agoRight, which in both disingenuous and impersonal. You could just read reviews, personally answering them, which I think would be the best policy. But this seems like a way to game it all instead of actually just being authentic. I guess if you can’t package it into a template it’s too much work.