Posts Tagged rant
You can’t ban Facebook
I just thought I’d write a quick note on Facebook and its presence in the workplace. As an advocate of all things social, you can imagine my stance on this topic – I believe no organisation should be blacklisting sites like Facebook. But of course many do.
They need to stop, now. Here’s why:
1. Facebook isn’t a website, its a platform. If you’ve ever tapped into the Facebook Developer tools you’d be well aware of the universe that exists behind Facebook in what is known as the Social Graph. The Social Graph is everything about you; from your name to your picture, to your interests to your friends. Facebook allows developers to tap into this information from websites that aren’t Facebook.
At its simplest this manifests as a “like” or “recommend” button on a webpage. Next time you hit a button like this on a website, go check out your profile afterwards. Most good implementations of the Open Graph Protocol will be sending information back to your profile when you hit a “like” button. You could well find the item you just liked as a part of your Likes and Interests. From here it’s just a hop, skip and a jump to your complete viewing habits being listed as a part of your Social Graph.
Put simply, Facebook will be reaching its claws into the overwhelming majority of websites you visit over the coming months and years. It’s already on many – for example the BBC News website just overhauled to include elements of this. At what point does a website become so integrated with Facebook that you need to block that too? It’s happening.
2. Facebook isn’t just on a computer and it doesn’t always look like Facebook. Building on the above point, because Facebook is a platform it can come in many flavours. For instance, you can block Facebook on workstations, but you can’t block it on people’s phones. I’ve been playing with the incredible new app “Flipboard” on my iPad. It takes my Facebook and makes it into a fantastic looking magazine style layout. It makes my friends look like publishing geniuses.
My Twitter looks even better…
This is just taken directly from my feeds; I’ve done nothing to get it looking like this.
Facebook Zero was brought to my attention a couple weeks ago as being *very* big in parts of Asia. Facebook Zero is a cut-down version of the site, available on mobile phones. But significantly a number of network operators, such as SingTel, offer access to the site free-of-charge – without the need for a data plan. This is a significant driver of business for SingTel and puts Facebook in everyone’s hands.
When Facebook stops looking like Facebook, stops being accessed through Facebook and is available on every screen in the building, how will you ban it?
3. If your people are wasting time on Facebook it is a symptom of a wider problem. Spend your time addressing this problem instead of attempting to treat the symptom. It will become increasingly difficult to police and restrictive to other operations – you will spend a fortune trying to block Facebook in the coming years.
You can’t ban Facebook. That extends to any of the emerging platforms for communication. Don’t bother trying. Look at the opportunities that these Platforms present and work to exploit the benefits, because most anything negative is a symptom of a wider issue; one much bigger than a social networking website.
Your organisations next Facebook policy
1.a. If at any time during your working day you find yourself with a free moment, it is company policy that you MUST logon to your favourite social network and have a play about. Do this until more work arrives. No exceptions.
I’m getting increasingly frustrated by the attitudes of a wide-range of people when it comes to accessing websites like Facebook at work. Forgive me for incessantly saying Facebook – interchange it for your favourite social network if it makes you feel better – but it is the most popular.
Andrew McAfee, speaking at the DevLearn 09 conference yesterday*, commented that we need to stop jumping on the risks associated with Web 2.0. Currently, in order to get close to any of the benefits that a website like Facebook could provide your company, you first have to jump over all of the associated ‘risks’ that get thrown at you. It’s nearly impossible to do this and even if you do succeed it will be a watered down and caveat-filled experience. Why?
It’s a mindset, one of a previous generation.
Recent UK figures have shown nearly 2.5 million people are out of work in this country. There is significant evidence that being unemployed long-term has severely detrimental effects on both family life and health. People are generally happier when they are in employment. So, reading between the lines here, we all have an inherent will to work. We go into the world of work essentially happy. Then work breaks us down, infringing on the liberties which we take for granted outside of the workplace, for no other reason than to mitigate risk. This sucks.
Eschew risk, embrace opportunity; what’s the worst that could happen?
Browsing social networks is just one liberty that the next generation of worker is going to be denied by most organisations they go to work for. Access to Facebook might not make you happier, but blocking it will almost certainly make you less happy. Social Networks are rapidly becoming a hygiene factor in the minds of new Gen Y workers.
So then let’s look to embrace the opportunity that providing access to Facebook will give us. I’m going to go beyond the normally recognised benefits (of which there are many) and move the discussion to one key area of objection: Time-wasting. If we allow workers access to Facebook they are doing personal stuff on business time and this is wasteful. Yep, I think even I can agree with that.
But let me ask you this; how are you currently measuring employee waste in your organisation? The principles of Lean operations are present in many organisations throughout the world (and many more are paying millions to develop such ideas). The central pillar of this initiative is the cutting out of waste. Some waste is easy to identify. Some waste cannot be avoided. Other waste is difficult to track, like the amount of time a worker involved in a process is not fully utilised. So then, let’s turn the tables on the software packages which track websites visited and time spent. I refer you back to my new policy:
If at any time during your working day you find yourself with a free moment, it is company policy that you MUST logon to your favourite social network and have a play about.
So we insist people use social networks and then we track usage levels to use as Management Information, tracking waste. At the same time as offering great quantitative information with regards to the amount of waste and the times at which it occurs, this system also offers a great visual aid to waste on the shop floor. If you’ve got Facebook open you’re not being utilised. How easy is that from a Line Managers point of view? What a fantastic measure of waste that would be.
Stop evaluating Web 2.0 tools from a risk point of view and start evaluating the opportunities.
*By the way, I did not attend DevLearn 09, all I had to do was follow the Twitter hashtag for a running commentary on McAfee’s keynote.
A response to Blake Lapthorn, acting on behalf of PowWow Water
Please note for context purposes that the below blog is the full transcript of a letter I have today sent in reply to correspondance received from Blake Lapthorn Solicitors, acting on behalf of PowWow Water. I received correspondance from them on September 11th, 2009, in relation to a blog post (see: http://www.ht2.org/ben/?p=17) on this website, which claims that certain comments (appearing after the blog post itself) contain defamatory remarks towards both individual employees of PowWow water and the company itself.
Blake Lapthorn requested that their letter should not be published and I respect this decision. However, I believe it to be in the interest to those individuals who have responded to the post that my response should be available to them, in full.
Reference: PowWow Water Blog
FOR PUBLICATION
Dear Sirs
Thank you for your letter, dated 11 September, 2009 and received 14th September, 2009, with reference to the blog post found at: http://www.ht2.org/ben/?p=17
I must admit I was not surprised to receive correspondence from PowWow addressing the issues raised in this blog post; however I am disappointed that the first approach to me has not come from the company itself, but from you its instructed solicitors, Blake Lapthorn.
By way of background, I thought my blog post the last point of call in my attempts to contact PowWow in regards to the poor customer service I had received (and which I still face today). Throughout the blog posts existence I have sought to be fair and even-handed in the moderation of the general public’s comments, which today numbers over 140 comments. It had been my hope that perhaps PowWow senior management would seek to engage with me to deal with the issues the blog highlights. However, the only engagement that was forthcoming appears to be the fraudulent posts of staff members purporting to be customers (in direct violation of EU law).
Firstly allow me to correct a small issue with your correspondence. The website www.ht2.org does not host a blog where customers can post comments about PowWow. The website hosts the personal blog of I, Ben Betts, which is clearly focussed on the E-learning industry. This blog can be found on the url www.ht2.org/ben and is quite separate to the root www.ht2.org website. Within this blog there is a post, referenced above, upon which it has become popular for members of the public and members of your clients organisation to post their opinions in response to my own. You will also note that my own opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my company (HT2), as highlighted on the “About” page – http://www.ht2.org/ben/?page_id=2
Your letter first advises that some comments from the general public contain personal mobile phone numbers of various PowWow executives and that these numbers are currently subject to abusive phone calls. You list 4 current male employees for whom this is a problem, but then go on to state that these calls are frightening for female personnel. I do have to question the legitimacy of the claim that these are “personal” mobile phone numbers belonging to 4 male workers if female employees of the company are frequently answering the calls.
However, I do not wish to perpetuate any calls which could be thought of “harassment” and as such I have taken measures to remove all mobile phone numbers from the general public’s comments, in complete compliance with your letter. It should be noted that I first solicited confirmation that these were “work” numbers before they were allowed to be posted in the first place (see post #25, September 4th, 2009) and that I have deleted other comments which made no such efforts.
The second part of your letter comments on the so called “Defamatory Comments” made by “alleged former employees, current employees and customers”. You note that these comments extend beyond the company towards individuals, suggesting that “Mr Parks and Mr Kitley are bullies, Mr Parks is dishonest, aggressive and abusive and that Mr Kitley is spineless and ineffective”. You also later draw attention to a comment which states that Mr Parks has a “**** winky” amongst other allegations.
You will of course be aware of recent High Court Judgements made in similar cases to this, such as Smith v ADVFN PLC, where Mr Justice Eady found that Bulletin Board comments made by the general public were “when considered in the context of defamation law…much more akin to slanders”. As your letter takes no issue with the original blog post itself, only with the comments which appear in a “Bulletin Board” fashion, it is fair to assume that this ruling is applicable in these circumstances. Further to this Mr Justice Eady found that in the case of the general public posting to a bulletin board, “opinions may be expressed in exaggerated and strident terms; the only requirement is that they be honestly held” in order for the comments to amount to “fair comment”.
As such, I do not accept that these comments amount to the defamation you claim. However, as earlier demonstrated, I am more than willing to comply with your demands despite this complete lack of grounds. Your letter goes onto list 14 comments to which you deem defamation has taken place. For confirmation of actions taken (or to be taken), I list these comments below. Where discrepancies appear I would appreciate further confirmation of your requirements. By making these amendments I offer no admittance of guilt (either on my behalf, or that of other authors) to the allegations.
1. Comment by “ex-emplyee”, 24th August, 2009 – Last 18 words
This comment has now been edited as required.
2. Comment by “Huey”, 25th August, 2009 – entire comment
This comment has now been removed as required.
3. Comment by “Baz”, 26th August, 2009 – entire comment
This comment has now been removed as required.
4. Comment by “Current Employee”, 27th August, 2009 – “The phrase beginning at the end of line 8,and ending after the first word of line 11”
I assume that ‘the phrase beginning at the end of line 8’ might also be considered ‘line 9’, which states: “As has already been mentioned a good few times, jim park is *** a **** man. In so many ways he’s almost like a **** **** *******, and it would be hilarious if it wasn’t for the” – is this the phrase you require removing?
5. Comment by “ex-employee2”, 3rd September, 2009 – “The sentence beginning at the end of line 13 and ending at the beginning of line 14”
I’m sure you realise the above statement makes no sense, however the sentence which fits the bill closest is “It’s not looking **** for powwow”. Is this the sentence you sought to be removed?
6. Comment by “Saddended”, 4th September, 2009 – “The last 4 lines”
This comment appears to have no defamatory remarks in it, only remarking that:
“I hope Jim Parks & everyone that has bullied & shouted & screamed at decent human beings trying to make a living in a place worse than hell gets their comeuppance soon”. Unless you have incontrovertible evidence as to the nature of “hell”, I would suggest this is personal opinion and therefore fair comment.
7. Comment by “ex-employee”, 4th September, 2009 – “The last three lines of the penultimate paragraph”
I assume that you wish the reference to “their lovely PA Sarah Howes” to be included in the defamatory remarks to be removed?
8. Comment by “MW ex-employee”, 7th September, 2009 – “The last sentence”
Do you also wish for the following link (http://www.alloaadvertiser.com/news/tullibodyandsauchie/articles/2008/07/09/26064-tribunal-awards-manager-11000/) for the article “Tribunal Awards Manager £11,000” as published by the Alloa Advertiser to be removed?
9. Comment by “ex-employee”, 8th September, 2009 – entire comment
This comment has now been removed as required.
10. Comment by “ex-employee”, 8th September, 2009 – entire comment (#46)
This comment has now been removed as required.
11. Comment by “Big Billy”, 24th August, 2009 – “The last line of paragraph 5”
The last line in this comment is “Possible not”. Might I rather assume that you seek the penultimate sentence, “Is an organisation that has over 100 case awaiting an employment tribunal sticking to these policies”, to be removed? If this is the case could you please inform me as to the number of employment tribunal cases outstanding so that I might confirm the defamatory nature of this remark?
12. Comment by “Taste The Difference”, 27th August, 2009 – “Paragraph 5”
I am again unsure as to the defamatory nature of this remark (with the exception of the phrase “**** water in ***** bottles”, which has been edited). The post does make mention of price increases in percentage terms which could be defamatory if found to be inaccurate. As such I would appreciate your confirmation of price rise figures.
13. Comment by “Ernie”, 27th August, 2009 – “The penultimate sentence”
This comment has now been edited as required.
14. Comment by “Big Billy”, 4th September, 2009 – “The first two sentences of paragraph 3”
I am unsure as to the defamatory nature of this comment as it would appear that the weight of comments held within the blog would uphold this comment to be true.
Further to your demands for the above edits/removals of comments, you ask for, “an apology and retraction to Mr Park, Mr Kitley and PowWow water (our client) to be agreed and an undertaking not to repeat the allegations or similar allegations” to be submitted within 7 days from the date of your letter.
Firstly I am unsure as to which “allegations” you refer?
Secondly, you earlier highlighted in your correspondence that your issue was with postings made by persons other than myself. Of course, I cannot apologise on their behalf. You suggest that I am the owner of these defamatory comments, which I am not. The copyright of these comments remains with the person(s) who originally authored and posted the comment. As a means of contacting these individuals it is my intention to publish this letter, in full, on to the blog post. The individuals in question will then be in a position to take the demanded action, should they so desire.
Further to this information, please confirm the addresses or other means of contact which you wish the individuals in question to use in submitting their apology. Many appear to have difficulty getting in touch with your clients senior management and as such a reliable means of correspondence would be a welcome move.
Finally your letter lists 13 anonymous users and tells me that I should provide you with the IP addresses of those individuals, under threat of further action. You refer to these individuals as bloggers which is incorrect. These users are not bloggers (which can be defined as: ’a person who keeps a Web log (blog) or publish an online diary), they are merely commentators on my blog.
How ironic that you have probably come to the conclusion that I am in possession of individuals IP addresses having seen the screenshot of a Murray White worker passing themselves off as a customer in clear violation of False Representation laws. I reserve the right to pursue further action in respect to this violation, should I deem it appropriate at any time in the future.
Users post under anonymous identities for precisely that reason; they wish to remain anonymous. Whilst it has yet to be decided in a UK court of law that an IP address is definitively a piece of “personal identifiable” information, there is significant precedent both in court rulings (Sheffield Wednesday vs Owlstalk) and UK/EU legislation (Data Protection Act & EU Article 29 Working Party discussions) to suggest that this can only be decided by a court of law.
As such I will not release the IP addresses of those users without the order of a Court Injunction.
I am sure you will appreciate that seeking such an injunction would bring unnecessary media attention to this situation. We are in somewhat a “grey area” of the law as it is tested thus far and as such any coverage on this story would likely be significant.
Thus far I believe I have shown good faith above and beyond reasonable measures. I have replied informally, without the involvement of my solicitor. I have acquiesced to your demands on the mobile phone numbers and I am willing to edit the comments you have highlighted to your requirements, despite no wrong-doing having occurred. Furthermore, I will endeavour to prevent personal, defamatory comments from publication to the blog post in question where possible.
As such, I politely request that you withdraw your demand for commentators IP addresses immediately and submit that any apologies your client is lucky enough to receive in light of your request will be the only ones you shall seek, regardless of further action.
An urgent response is required. I reserve all of my rights in respect of this letter and do not acknowledge any wrong-doing. Further to this I once again indicate that the blog in question represents my opinion and not that of my company. I reserve the right to publish this letter as widely as I deem appropriate.
Yours Faithfully
Ben Betts
When bad service turns worse
A little time ago I wrote this blog about my experiences with Powwow water. A few people have managed to find my post and also join me in voicing their displeasure.
We also had a couple of positive comments, which I allowed in the interests of fairness. So imagine my surprise when it was brought to my attention that all of those positive comments were in fact fake, posted by someone on the Powwow network.
Check out the blog to see the posts, the comments and the evidence.
No one from Powwow has legitimately contacting this blog to discuss the post, despite the fact they are obviously aware of its existence. Is it just a case of bad service getting worse?
A free business tip…
Like most companies we have a phone line. Like most companies this phone line is kept relatively busy by people trying to sell us things we don’t want. This is officially my new nemesis (the Powwow water machine has been relegated to 2nd place).
I wanted to write this blog before 10am as this seems to be the time that all of these telemarketing companies deem the best to ring me.
I’ve taken a moment to categorise them so that we might recognise this evil a little easier:
The Florida Holiday: *Click*. “Hiiiiiiiii. You have won a holiday of a lifetime to sunny Florida…” These are annoying but easily dealt with. Unless it keeps ringing you back, which is a fate worse than death.
The “We Rang You, but Now We’re Busy”: This is enough to make you write a letter. Imagine, there you are, deep in thought crafting another witty blog when the phone rings. Your heartbeat flutters a little. Could it be a sales lead? Has the LMS crashed? Perhaps I’ve won the Florida lottery again…. So you can imagine the disappointment when an automated voice clicks on to tell you “I’m sorry, all of our agents are currently busy, we’ll call back later”. ARGH! YOU’RE BUSY!?!?! BUT YOU RANG ME!!! ARSEHOLES!!!
The Foreign Call Centre: characterised by a long pause after you answer the phone and an Indian accent coupled with a fake name and an offer that is completely irrelevant to your company.
The Rookie: “Can I speak to the business owner” is the Rookie’s opening line. The answer is “no”. If you’re going to try and speak to the business owner at least have the good courtesy to look up his name.
The Incredulent: These are quite simply a bunch of people in strict denial at their job. They are employed under the job title of “Customer Liaison Officer” and are convinced they are saving you money by wasting your time. Characterised by a tone of voice that belies how stupid they think you are at turning down their outstanding offer with phrases like “but don’t you want to save money?” No, I don’t, now piss off!
The Fake Sales Call: These are the worst of the worst. These are the people who look briefly at your website (hi!) and then drop you a line to “learn more about your business” and to “see if we can do business”. No-one wants to loose a possible sales lead so you have to play along. You tell them a bit about the business, they tell you how they are in close contact with top UK policy makers and they love your approach. Can we put you in direct-touch with decision makers, they ask? By direct touch they of course mean a crappy advert in an easily discarded journal that no-one will read. Apart from the people who are made to wait in the reception area of public servants offices and read magazines. Which, ironically, is me.
So they waste your time and charge you to be the only the person who reads your advert. So naturally I’ve got very little time for these people.
It’s a tough thing to deal with this menagerie of enemies in innovative and amusing ways, but we think we’ve come up with a solution…
Simply invent a new person in your office who deals with all these calls. Want to speak to someone about saving money on long distance calls? That’s Trevor’s department. Want to know how we interface with the Middle-East? Trevor is your man. Got discount femine hygiene products to flog? Trevor’s all over it.
Trouble is, Trevor is a very hard man to get hold of. I mean, with all these calls to deal with Trevor is rarely available. So as long as you don’t mind these people calling you back (they will anyway), it’s a perfect solution. They identify themselves immediately as a cold caller by asking for Trevor. Who by now is on maternity leave. He’ll be back next week.
And the real genius of this is that you don’t miss real customers. If you accidently say its Trevor’s department and a little further information emerges to say this is a legitimate call, then its no problem, someone else can call them back.
Trevor hasn’t let me down yet. I highly recommend his services.
-Ben
P.S. To protect Trevor’s real identity some names have been changed for the purposes of this blog…
Democratising Twitter
I’m really quite fed up with the concept that Twitter is “democratising” anything. I’m sure I don’t fully understand all of the implications that people refer to when they use this statement, but what I am certain of is that it’s not making Rock Stars out of anyone, except maybe Rock Stars.
This opinion is born out of watching community initiatives such as “Follow Friday”, visiting the many directories of “who to follow” and of the industry focussed “best people to follow” lists that appear from time to time.
I guess the underlying idea of all of these is to make life and twitter easier. But democratising it is not. At no point are these initiatives really propagating the “unknowns” of the twitterverse. All it results in are the “Rock Stars” of each field being pimped out again and again.
I believe my industry is pretty incestuous in this manner. This morning a call was put out by Jane Hart (@c4lpt), a well known industry figure, for links to the 10 Learning Pro’s you REALLY couldn’t do without. And the industry responded, as it always does. To see who people are recommending, see http://www.c4lpt.co.uk/socialmedia/top10twitterers.html
This is obviously small scale, but it’s relevant to my world and I think it paints the picture of a bigger problem. We see the same names cropping up again and again in this sort of list. And these aren’t obscure names; they are the Rock Stars of the eLearning world. They don’t need to use Twitter and neither do you. If all you want to do is find these people and their opinions, you can visit their website, read any industry commentary or even pickup a magazine – these are the people writing columns.
I’m not picking on Jane here; God knows she does better work than I do. And I’m not picking on the Rock Stars either, they have earned their places. But to think that Twitter is democratising niche networks of business professionals simply isn’t the case.
The rich are getting richer; Twitter is just another tool in the box of a well networked professional.
This week saw the release of a Harvard study that painted a fairly bleak picture of the way Twitter is actually used. It basically confirmed what I am saying here – an overly small population of users is responsible for the majority of activity.
Twitter has significant barriers to entry that lie beyond the physical signup process. Unless you move in the right circles and are familiar with the approach, it is REALLY difficult to “get” twitter and to make decent use of the facilities on offer.
So what I would propose is the exact opposite of what’s going on now. We need LEAST popular lists, not most. The most popular people are easy to find and they don’t need help.
I’m going to start by looking through my followers and recommending people who make insightful industry comments or offer good twitter banter and have fewer than 100 followers (#100Club I’ll tag it).
So here’s my list, I’d love to have your list up here too, just add it in a comment or RT yours. It doesn’t have to be eLearning, it can be anything, but let’s get more people involved!
#100Club – recommend any twitter user with less than 100 followers! @rbancroft @julianfifield @LearningTech1 @gfoden @danviv
Please don’t hesitate to contact me – a rant about Powwow Water
Posted by Ben in Uncategorized on April 16th, 2009
[Please note: If you are going to reply to this blog post with your own experiences of PowWow Water, be they bad or good, you might wish to read "A response to Blake Lapthorn, acting on behalf of PowWow Water"]
You might also be interested to know that it would appear Powwow Water has gone into administration
I don’t usually go as far as to rant in written form; I prefer a brief spout of verbal abuse into thin air. But there are of course exceptions to every rule and seeing as I’m now blogging, why miss an opportunity…
My office, like most, has a water cooler. I think it’s fair to say it doesn’t rank very high on the list of objects I think are important. No one talks by it, not many people even use it. But for the last 4 months it has become my arch nemesis, or more precisely, its owners have.
Our story begins back in December of ‘08. The water cooler broke, spilling water all over the floor. It wasn’t the first time it had happened, but whatever, no big deal, just ring the company (Powwow) and get them to replace it. But of course Christmas and New Year got in the way, so it took them a few weeks to come out. Eventually the cooler was replaced by a new model with the engineer commenting that the old model “did have this problem”.
“Of spilling water all over the floor?”
“Yes”
Ok, whatever, replace it with the new improved model, we’re done.
The new model works great for about 5 minutes. Then it breaks. It refuses to dispense any water, which is pretty much its only function in life. Apart from keeping the water off my floor.
Then it leaks on my floor.
So I’m back on the phone; an engineer will be with us within 48 hours. Of course no one turns up, so back on the phone again. Engineer booked, he will be with us shortly.
Two weeks later and the phone rings, it’s the Powwow Engineer.
“Yes mate, coming to fix your water cooler but your address isn’t right, I can’t find you”.
No one has ever had a problem finding us before; bills make their way to us in a timely fashion. I direct the engineer to the office. Twenty minutes pass.
“Yes mate, still can’t find you, I’ll have to leave it, other jobs to do”.
I have mates. He is not one of them. I suggest that perhaps I could put the cooler out by Junction 8 of the M40 where he might come across it, mate?
But that’s the end of it – the engineer can’t find us, it’s not fixed and a note is put on the system for someone else to come out and sort it. Presumably this time they will send someone who isn’t a complete idiot.
No one turns up for 4 weeks so I am forced to assume they are all idiots.
Bills keep arriving, we keep ringing them and informing them we want money back, we aren’t paying them a cent for a water cooler that hasn’t worked in months.
Eventually two letters arrive from Powwow. The first is a credit note for £20. The second is a bill for £30. Not getting it are they?
I’m done with water coolers at this stage, I’m having nothing more to do with it and it’s going in the bin as far as I’m concerned. Someone else takes up the case and finds similar frustration. You ring customer services, explain everything, they note it down and then promptly do nothing. Its like 3pm is frontal lobotomy time at head office (which incidentally is less than 5 miles from my HQ).
So, long story short, it’s a tale of sad customer service which reached depths of incompetence I have never before seen. No company has ever been this bad at keeping promises and meeting expectations. We’d cancel the contract, but no one comes out to collect the damn thing and we keep getting billed.
But then, light! Yesterday an engineer appeared at 9am without any due warning and replaced it. 24 hours in, it’s still working. But then today I get the final straw – in the form of a mass marketing letter from Powwow.
“Powwow is pleased to announce the launch of the most exciting website the bottled water market in the UK has ever seen”.
I sh*t you not. The most EXCITING WEBSITE EVER (for bottled water). They follow this up with more great stuff.
“This is a huge step forward in our company history… join us in supplying any good news you think would be of benefit to Powwow”
There are two really amusing parts to the site which warrant further investigation:
Mission Statement
“To provide the best Customer Experience to our customers and to monitor and manage customer relationships, ensuring the highest standards at all times”.
I’m not convinced they’ve nailed this one yet. But it’s nice to have ambition.
The Mission Statement is followed by a note from the top:
I am Robert Kitley – Chief Executive
“Customer feedback is invaluable to our business, and I would therefore welcome your thoughts about Powwow Water. Whether you just want to say “well done”, or perhaps you have an idea for us, please don’t hesitate to contact me or one of my Senior Management Team”.
I’m not one for hesitating and I’d love to talk to Bob (can I call you Bob, or would “mate” be more appropriate?) but of course, you don’t actually provide your contact details, just the general customer service line. So I ring them. It takes a fair while for anyone to respond, but a bright sounding woman answers the phone (must be pre-3pm).
“Do you have a ship-to number?” she asks
“No I’m afraid not, can I speak to Robert Kitley please?” I respond.
“Err, I’ll see what I can do”.
In all fairness to the woman, she did well. I wasn’t expecting her to know who he was, perhaps she didn’t, but she did manage to find his number and connect me.
Robert sounds suspiciously feminine when he answers. Perhaps it’s his PA. I ask to speak with Robert. It doesn’t sound promising.
“Have you spoken to Robert before?” she enquires.
“No I haven’t, but I have a letter from him here asking for my feedback, so I thought I’d drop him a quick line”.
Now she thinks I’m a total nutter.
“Maybe I can help? I deal with most enquiries” she responds.
“Well I’d prefer to speak to Robert, he asked me to get in touch on the website.”
“Can I take your number and I will see if he can call you back?”.
I see what she’s doing. I use this tactic at the office all the time, mostly for recruitment companies. Them and nutters.
I give my number and thank her for her time.
No call back yet. I’m not hopeful, this is an area in which they have been historically bad. If he calls me back, I’ll keep the cooler. Otherwise I’m fully open to suggestions on what to do with it.
Don’t hesitate to contact me (through the comments)…
***UPDATE – 16/04/09***
So, I got call back! But alas, ’twas not Bob. It was Chris, a very pleasent fellow who wondered if he could help. Nice thought, but what I really want is to speak to Bob. So the message was relayed – could Bob please get back to me?
***UPDATE 2 – 17/04/09***
Today another letter from Powwow – this time its a credit note! 50 squid back! They are getting better at this customer service lark, now if only Bob would call me…
***UPDATE 3 – 3/08/09***
We’ve had a fair few comments now from the general public showing their dissapointment at Powwow’s service, but nothing from the company itself.
Or have we….
For you see the 3 “positive” comments (there were others which I deleted) have been coming from a bunch of different names using the same IP address. I did a quick lookup and the results weren’t exactly surprising…
If you aren’t sure what you are looking at in that image, its showing that the IP address of the person posting the comments is the same as an IP address registered to Murray White / Powwow.com. So instead of actually addressing our issues, they are wasting time posting false reports of how great they are.
What’s even funnier about this is that the practice is actually illegal.
Go POWWOW!
***UPDATE 4 – 27/08/09***
Just changed a few phrases in the blog and also removed some stuff about their website which is no longer relevant. But it is still awful.
We’re nearing 100 comments from customers, ex employees and current employees of this company and its becoming a bit of a sad, if fascinating, case. If you have had an experience with this company I would love you to add your thoughts!
***UPDATE 5 – 16/09/09***
PowWow have now taken measures to have some comments which they consider defamatory edited or removed from this website. If you have left a comment on this blog please read the following post in full:
http://www.ht2.org/ben/?p=151
You may wish to edit your comments or you may wish to direct an apology towards PowWow.
If you haven’t left a comment still go and read that post in full – this threat of legal action is the only legitimate response I have received from PowWow since posting this blog. Tells you a bit about the approach to Customer Service…
And all I wanted was a chat…!
-
More on E-learning:
