On 12/11/2015 10:40 AM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
"Frank" "frank wrote in message
...
Last time she needed assistance because Comcast wanted to know serial
numbers on my DVR so I had to go down to the basement family room, back to
the 2nd floor with the wrong number and back again to get the correct one.

I was being pretty profane and guy told me that he was not using profanity
and I should not either.

I asked him if he would ask his 75 year old grandfather to go up and down
two flights of stairs twice to get a serial number on a device that
Comcast installed but had no record. I told him I was cussing because
Comcast was so stupid and his grandfather would have cussed him too.

So you are admitting that you are so stupid that you could not copy down
the serial number of the DVR and you expected Comcast to keep up with it.

I think that you are lucky that Comcast did not just hang up on you when you
started with the profanites.

+1

OTOH, it was Comcast's piece of equipment; why didn't *they* have the
S/N on record? Did they even KNOW that he had a piece of their kit
on the premises? Was the device unable to report it's S/N to Comcast
"over the wire" -- at ANY time prior to the call?

I phoned my insurance company yesterday. After a slew of voice
menu prompts (at each level, I was asked "are you a client or
a broker -- did they think my answer was going to change from
the prompt immediately preceding it??) I was asked to enter
my ID number. Of course, there are no provisions for fixing
data entry mistakes (or, if there are, they are a closely guarded
SECRET). Having correctly entered my ID number, the FIRST QUESTION
out of the CSR's mouth was, "can I have your ID number"?

Then, why did your machine have me enter it 15 seconds ago if
you were going to ask me for it, now??

My point: I don't think many (any?) companies actually look at their
customer experience from the *customer's* perspective. They design
solutions that are easy for themselves (to implement) without
regard for the customer's experience. E.g., I'm sure the
repeated "are you a client or a broker" question was because the
moron who designed the voice prompts didn't consider exploiting
information that the system ALREADY HAD IN ITS POSSESSION.
Instead, he looked at each interaction point in isolation:
if a client, route the call THIS way; if a broker, route the
call THAT way.

We were at Michael's (a craft store) the other day. Long line.
REALLY long line waiting for checkout. Couple of sales staff
walk into the line with little smartphone "terminals" to scan
our individual orders and tie those to a generic "express checkout"
card (nothing more than a credit card with a unique barcode label).
"Give this to the cashier".

OK, fine. Saves the cashier from having to scan all those
items and keeps the line moving -- just scan the *card*
and it drags all the rest of the information in with it.

But, many people in line had single items -- myself included.
So, now I have to interact with this sales person in line to
scan my item and then scan the card to "bind" my item(s) to
that "token". Then, continue to wait in line. When I make
it to a cashier, present the card -- instead of the item
that I've purchased! -- to be scanned.

How was this experience any quicker FOR ME (and the folks behind
me) than it would have been in the absence of the "token"?
Instead of chasing down waiting customers with "one or two things",
they should have concentrated on folks waiting with carts full
of items!

I.e., the folks designing the "system" were too clever by half
and, as a result, just made things more confusing and less
predictable.