The Hindu Business Line : Different strokes for different folks?

ARE YOU BEING SERVED? The service experience is something that cannot be compromised. (In pic) New member of the international culinary panel of Singapore Airlines, Chef Sanjeev Kapoor, at the launch of Indian in-flight cuisine.

For years, a flight on Singapore Airlines meant a classy and comfortable experience that began even before boarding the plane. So it was with considerable dismay that I found, on the last leg of a long overseas trip, that these high standards seemed to have deteriorated into a more chalta-hai attitude. Instead of the usual staggered row-wise boarding, we found an indifferent ground staff that let the assembled passengers converge in a slow-stampede, before being herded into a crowded bus. And instead of a convenient aerobridge, we faced a tall stairway up which we had to lug our baggage, again unsupervised by ground staff. When we finally huffed and puffed our way up, the hostess ushered us in, oblivious to the palpable discomfort and irritation emanating from the passengers.

"Why are they doing this to us?" I overheard one miserable passenger complain, as she tried to juggle her baby and bags and battle the crowd. "Because no one is complaining," muttered another passenger. "Because this is the India sector, and they think we don't care," was another reply.

After I had recovered from the shock, I decided to register my discontent. My request for a feedback form obviously flagged me off as a `cribboo' passenger because I was suddenly showered with a degree of attention that would have been flattering, if I wasn't aware of its origin. Fellow passengers threw quizzical looks at me when solicitous hostesses dropped by at regular intervals to check if all was okay.

I had plenty of time on the flight to think about this and when I bounced my thoughts off colleagues, the most popular theory advocated was the "India-sector" one - that the kind of passengers that formed the bulk of the traffic between India and Singapore were simply not demanding enough. I have no idea if this is indeed the case (especially since there has been no formal response to my complaint), or whether this particular experience was an outlier, but it did set me thinking about the vulnerability of service brands.

Does a service-experience brand stand for something absolute and non-negotiable, or is there a licence to offer fluctuating service quality based on what the traffic can bear? Offering different experiences for first-class and economy-class passengers is one thing: there is a transparency in pricing and promise that makes such stratification acceptable. But does it make sense to vary service levels depending on what you think the market will bear? In the airline business, for example, if the majority of the passengers flying a route are first-time air travellers and not savvy enough to either recognise or expect good quality service, does that make it okay for a service provider to lower its standards?

Coincidentally, the Reader's Digest I had with me on the flight had an article on a similar theme: in a humorous piece called Eating Incognito, Ruth Reichl described her experiences as The New York Times restaurant critic. As she was instantly recognised by the restaurants she was attempting to evaluate, Reichl worried that the service experienced by her was not truly representative: what, she wondered, was the experience of the silent majority? In an effort to find out, she adopted a series of successful disguises and personas. Her experiment indicated that the same restaurant that offered royal treatment to a well-known critic dished out pathetic service when her persona was that of a mild, unsophisticated, ordinary customer. This gave her an insight into the dissonance experienced by infrequent samplers of premium products and how their experiences could vary dramatically from that of customers that the restaurant wished to cultivate. Yet, in other places, she received impeccable service irrespective of her persona, demonstrating a strong sense of identity and standards that were applied across the board, and did not vary based on a perception of what sort of customers deserved good service and what sort could be fobbed off with less. She finally ended up rating restaurants on how they treated the ordinary customer, not the restaurant critic.

The thing about service quality, especially in premium services, is that it needs to be very, very consistent, much more than for mass-market or discount services. When customers pay more, they expect more. One bad experience in a month may be acceptable from the point of view of traditional quality control, but for the customers on the receiving end, it is one too many. The problem in taking the silent majority for granted is that while they may not squawk too loudly when upset, they tend to vote with their feet. And ultimately, it is the silent majority that accounts for the bulk of any brand's revenues.

(Radhika Chadha is a consultant in strategy and innovation. Karategy is the proprietary name of the strategic exercises conducted by Paradigm Management Knowhow Ltd.)

More Stories on : Customer Relationship Management | Karategy

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Hooking mobile users on cricket

Different strokes for different folks?

`There's a stationery freak in all of us'

Got ideas?

Remunerating agencies

India Inc takes wing

Agencies run on emotions