<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: When 3 is Less Than 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/</link>
	<description>News and Insight from the CCC Team</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:48:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rick DeLisi</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-965</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick DeLisi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:08:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-965</guid>
		<description>Peter--Thanks for your thought, and I don&#039;t think we&#039;re disagreeing here.  Yes &quot;anchoring&quot; can be dangerous since it can cross over the line into being clearly deceptive, and is nothing more than just a &quot;trick&quot; to manipulate a customer.  But that&#039;s what&#039;s SO intriguing about word choice and the psychological concept of anchoring.  It IS possible to present a customer with &quot;the next best thing you have to offer&quot; in a way that allows them accept that alternative and to leave the experience SO appreciative of your effort -- even though you (and they) know that you can&#039;t give them exactly what they want. The key is to position a response so that it is much more likely to be seen as a &quot;win&quot; for a customer instead of a defeat.  In life, we all know that &quot;You can&#039;t always get what you want.  But if you try sometimes, you just might find...you get what you need.&quot;  We all WANT for our customers to win.  If there&#039;s a way to help them achieve that victory, wouldn&#039;t we want to do it?  (as long as it&#039;s not deceptive, or worse, an outright lie?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peter&#8211;Thanks for your thought, and I don&#8217;t think we&#8217;re disagreeing here.  Yes &#8220;anchoring&#8221; can be dangerous since it can cross over the line into being clearly deceptive, and is nothing more than just a &#8220;trick&#8221; to manipulate a customer.  But that&#8217;s what&#8217;s SO intriguing about word choice and the psychological concept of anchoring.  It IS possible to present a customer with &#8220;the next best thing you have to offer&#8221; in a way that allows them accept that alternative and to leave the experience SO appreciative of your effort &#8212; even though you (and they) know that you can&#8217;t give them exactly what they want. The key is to position a response so that it is much more likely to be seen as a &#8220;win&#8221; for a customer instead of a defeat.  In life, we all know that &#8220;You can&#8217;t always get what you want.  But if you try sometimes, you just might find&#8230;you get what you need.&#8221;  We all WANT for our customers to win.  If there&#8217;s a way to help them achieve that victory, wouldn&#8217;t we want to do it?  (as long as it&#8217;s not deceptive, or worse, an outright lie?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-959</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 21:16:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-959</guid>
		<description>To say that a hotel putting their best suite on the front of a brochure is more devious than pretending that a bad choice is the only one and then switching out a less objectionable alternative in an effort to save the day is over the edge.  Rick, I&#039;d challenge you to consider your own reaction if you found out that someone had manipulated you in such a way.  The brochure and offer of today&#039;s special are up front and honest.  The other examples are deceptive, period.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To say that a hotel putting their best suite on the front of a brochure is more devious than pretending that a bad choice is the only one and then switching out a less objectionable alternative in an effort to save the day is over the edge.  Rick, I&#8217;d challenge you to consider your own reaction if you found out that someone had manipulated you in such a way.  The brochure and offer of today&#8217;s special are up front and honest.  The other examples are deceptive, period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Customer Service Buzz &#187; Point/Counter-Point: The Ethics of Experience Engineering</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-495</link>
		<dc:creator>Customer Service Buzz &#187; Point/Counter-Point: The Ethics of Experience Engineering</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 04:31:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-495</guid>
		<description>[...] for instance anchoring, a practice of strategically placing an option within a range of carefully selected choices.  When [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for instance anchoring, a practice of strategically placing an option within a range of carefully selected choices.  When [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Customer Service Buzz &#187; Experimenting with Customer Perception</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-161</link>
		<dc:creator>Customer Service Buzz &#187; Experimenting with Customer Perception</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 14:19:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-161</guid>
		<description>[...] I know some of you are thinking we shouldn’t manipulate customers like this, particularly when it comes to anchoring.  And there is certainly a line where such techniques cross a moral threshold.  [Lara created some strong reactions with her blog post on this topic] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I know some of you are thinking we shouldn’t manipulate customers like this, particularly when it comes to anchoring.  And there is certainly a line where such techniques cross a moral threshold.  [Lara created some strong reactions with her blog post on this topic] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick DeLisi</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick DeLisi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-12</guid>
		<description>I am excited to see the level of reaction here (this is a VERY interesting discussion!)--and I agree, presented this nakedly, this does feel manipulative.

But lemme ask you this--when an auto dealership puts its&#039; flashiest and most expensive car in the front window...when a hotel puts a photo of its presidential suite in a brochure...when a restaurant server temptingly offers you &quot;today&#039;s special&quot;--do we recoil in ethical shock?  

The point of &quot;anchoring&quot; isn&#039;t nearly as devious as any of these obvious (but well-accepted) upsell techiques.  The key to competitive success in customer service to find ways to present the information that leads to &quot;resolution&quot; in a way that allows customers to emerge from the transaction with a clear sense of victory and accomplishment--forged in partnership with the front-line rep, who has advocated on their behalf.  

How can we reach that goal?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am excited to see the level of reaction here (this is a VERY interesting discussion!)&#8211;and I agree, presented this nakedly, this does feel manipulative.</p>
<p>But lemme ask you this&#8211;when an auto dealership puts its&#8217; flashiest and most expensive car in the front window&#8230;when a hotel puts a photo of its presidential suite in a brochure&#8230;when a restaurant server temptingly offers you &#8220;today&#8217;s special&#8221;&#8211;do we recoil in ethical shock?  </p>
<p>The point of &#8220;anchoring&#8221; isn&#8217;t nearly as devious as any of these obvious (but well-accepted) upsell techiques.  The key to competitive success in customer service to find ways to present the information that leads to &#8220;resolution&#8221; in a way that allows customers to emerge from the transaction with a clear sense of victory and accomplishment&#8211;forged in partnership with the front-line rep, who has advocated on their behalf.  </p>
<p>How can we reach that goal?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lara Ponomareff</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Lara Ponomareff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 05:02:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-11</guid>
		<description>Thanks for all the thoughtful comments.

I’d agree there are a range of ways to anchor customer expectations –  from gently rephrasing the customer’s options (for example, explaining to a customer why a password reset is in their best security interests) to more extreme forms of conversation handling.

The example in this blog post is certainly on the more extreme end, mainly to serve as a clear example of expectations anchoring. A less extreme, but similarly effective, form of anchoring could involve positive (as opposed to negative) language.  

For example, in the old world a frontline rep would say to a customer who wanted their fee waived, “We can’t waive that fee for you – it’s against our policy.”  In the new world of customer expectations anchoring, the rep might say instead, “What we can do is spread your fee across the next three billing cycles, interest-free.  And we can help you set up automatic alerts so you won’t have to pay this fee again.”  Or of instead, “The store closes in 1 hour.” how about, “The store stays open until 9pm.”  The differences here are more subtle – but it’s the careful positive phrasing of the situation that can greatly influence the customer’s perception of their experience.

My larger point here is to ask – what can we do when our proverbial backs are up against the wall and all of our available options are going to be unacceptable for the customer?  Do we necessarily take a hit to the customer experience – or can we do something about it that can be a win-win situation for both the customer and the company?  Customer expectations anchoring has shown some early promise and even success among some companies I’ve talked to, but it’s clear to me that it’s a hard concept to get right – and has serious consequences if we get it wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for all the thoughtful comments.</p>
<p>I’d agree there are a range of ways to anchor customer expectations –  from gently rephrasing the customer’s options (for example, explaining to a customer why a password reset is in their best security interests) to more extreme forms of conversation handling.</p>
<p>The example in this blog post is certainly on the more extreme end, mainly to serve as a clear example of expectations anchoring. A less extreme, but similarly effective, form of anchoring could involve positive (as opposed to negative) language.  </p>
<p>For example, in the old world a frontline rep would say to a customer who wanted their fee waived, “We can’t waive that fee for you – it’s against our policy.”  In the new world of customer expectations anchoring, the rep might say instead, “What we can do is spread your fee across the next three billing cycles, interest-free.  And we can help you set up automatic alerts so you won’t have to pay this fee again.”  Or of instead, “The store closes in 1 hour.” how about, “The store stays open until 9pm.”  The differences here are more subtle – but it’s the careful positive phrasing of the situation that can greatly influence the customer’s perception of their experience.</p>
<p>My larger point here is to ask – what can we do when our proverbial backs are up against the wall and all of our available options are going to be unacceptable for the customer?  Do we necessarily take a hit to the customer experience – or can we do something about it that can be a win-win situation for both the customer and the company?  Customer expectations anchoring has shown some early promise and even success among some companies I’ve talked to, but it’s clear to me that it’s a hard concept to get right – and has serious consequences if we get it wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:34:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-10</guid>
		<description>&#039;Can you think of ways to anchor customer expectations for your customers?&#039;

Without deceiving them?  I agree that perception is deceptive already...but to manipulate it more?  The ethics line goes further south.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;Can you think of ways to anchor customer expectations for your customers?&#8217;</p>
<p>Without deceiving them?  I agree that perception is deceptive already&#8230;but to manipulate it more?  The ethics line goes further south.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Karen</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Karen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-8</guid>
		<description>I agree with Amy - this smacks of customer manipulation and is not a strategy we would ethically train.  That said, offering options, empowering the customer to choose her best option and affirming that she made a good choice is likely to result in a positive experience all around.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Amy &#8211; this smacks of customer manipulation and is not a strategy we would ethically train.  That said, offering options, empowering the customer to choose her best option and affirming that she made a good choice is likely to result in a positive experience all around.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amy</title>
		<link>http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/2010/02/23/when-3-is-less-than-2/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cccbuzz.exbdblogs.com/?p=126#comment-7</guid>
		<description>The example of anchoring in this article is unethical.  However, I think it is possible to get a positive experience with a perfectly ethical example.  How about offering both the morning flight and evening flight at the same time?  Then the customer can see the relative benefit of the evening flight, and the company did not have to lie to the customer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The example of anchoring in this article is unethical.  However, I think it is possible to get a positive experience with a perfectly ethical example.  How about offering both the morning flight and evening flight at the same time?  Then the customer can see the relative benefit of the evening flight, and the company did not have to lie to the customer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

