Posts Tagged ‘Airlines’

Airline Service and the Art of Communicating Bad News

by on Tuesday, September 27th, 2011

Do your customers hate you? If not, you probably don’t own an airline.

I’ve blogged before about airline service, mostly because as a frequent traveler I see a lot of it. But I also write about airline service because I believe it holds lessons for every business.

Airlines frequently disappoint or frustrate their customers, often for reasons that are beyond the control of front-line employees. Flight attendants and gate agents can’t predict weather delays or overbooked flights and they can’t do much about charges for checked bags and onboard food.

Creative Commons via popculturegeek.com

With all that practice, airlines should be outstanding at communicating bad news to customers. They aren’t. This is how airline employees on three recent flights on the same airline handled the common issue of the flight being too full to store every passenger’s carry-on:

  1. (Flight attendant) Please help us fit as many carry-ons as possible into the overhead bins by stowing them with their wheels out. We hope you understand if we run out of room and have to gate check your bag. There will be no checked baggage fees if we do have to check your bag.
  2. (Flight attendant) Carry-ons must be stowed wheels-out. I am going to come through the cabin and if I find any bags improperly stowed I will take them off the plane and gate check them.
  3. (Gate agent) Please do not give me a hard time if I tell you I have to gate check your bag.

The first example is probably what most employers expect from their associates. The other two, not so much. Unless airlines are uniquely tone-deaf, they probably wouldn’t find condescension and rudeness acceptable, either. The lesson for airlines – and every business that cares about its customers – is to do a better job training associates in the fine art of conveying bad news.

Associate training should focus intensively on likely scenarios where “customer satisfaction” won’t mean giving customers what they want. Associates need to understand that sometimes the best way to satisfy customers is to treat them with respect, be transparent about the source of the problem and be proactive about minimizing its impact. That can make the difference between acceptance and resentment, good will and bad.

It seemed to me that the two hostile airline employees never got that message. Perhaps they thought they were “protecting” the company or perhaps they were um, winging it, but they clearly were not calling on an appropriate set of skills. My take on the flight attendant who got it right was that she was relying on solid training when she: explained the situation clearly, enlisted the customers’ assistance, asked for understanding and communicated a countervailing benefit.

This example shows how important it is to monitor how associates handle customer interactions. Airlines and other large companies should spend the money for mystery shoppers if they can’t provide dedicated personnel. Smaller businesses should at least solicit feedback, whether in person, by email or by using social media. And just asking for customer input can improve customer perceptions.

The Zavee takeaway:

  • Businesses will inevitably frustrate or disappoint a customer from time to time. It’s vital to prepare associates for these situations so they can provide as good an experience as possible under the circumstances. They should never be taken by surprise.
  • Effectively communicating bad news to customers isn’t an art, but it is a skill. It needs to be part of every associate’s training and performance review.
  • Failure to monitor how associates interact with customers should be unacceptable in every business. In a small business it can be fatal.

0 comments
Tags: , , , , , ,

Airlines and Loyalty … It’s Not Getting Better

by on Wednesday, June 29th, 2011

Bill Hanifin of Loyalty Truth recently posted about airlines and customer service, a post prompted by his trip around the world (Malaysia and back – that qualifies). My trips are rarely as exotic but I fly almost every week, primarily between Newark and either FLL or PBI, and primarily on Continental. Like Bill, I have a soft spot for airlines, having begun my career in aircraft finance. Again like Bill, I am amazed – and not in a good way – by the unforced errors airlines commit when it comes to customer service.

Bill writes that airlines should be using the wealth of data available to them to build in more flexibility in dealing with customers, some of whom may be very valuable to the airline. I agree, but I think that ignoring their own data is only half the problem. A lack of empowerment is the other. Associates can only be as flexible as the rules allow. And I have a hunch that consolidation has made carriers more rigid and reduced employees’ sense of ownership (anyone have similar – or different – experiences at newly-merged carriers?).

Bill isn’t a fan of unbundling, but my view is mixed. I think baggage fees are a slap in the face to passengers. Airlines ask us to cooperate in limiting what we carry aboard, then charge us for our cooperation. Nice. On the other hand, unbundling food is a win-win, because concourse food concessions are improving steadily at many airports just as on-board food is disappearing. Carrying on our own food is one of the few freedoms we have as passengers, and I wouldn’t want to turn back the clock.

via Flickr - where are the jonses

Maybe it’s because there aren’t any bosses or unions at 35,000 feet, or maybe it’s because the airlines know how to hire for the cabins, but most flight attendants do a great job despite more crowding and fewer amenities. One recent flight departed “on time” by pushing back before the aircraft was fully catered. Not surprisingly, grumbling ensued. Very surprisingly, the flight attendants up front decided to open bags of almonds left over from the inbound flight and serve them in wine glasses. It showed that the flight attendants cared and it put a smile on every face in first class. Airlines can’t teach that kind of resourcefulness, but I hope they reward it.

One of the biggest customer engagement problems the airlines face as they impose more rules, charges and limitations is that the customer-facing staff is constantly required to disappoint or frustrate the customer. The trick, whether in the cabin, at the gate or at the ticket counter is to avoid turning delivering bad news into delivering bad service. Being told your bag has to be gate-checked is bad news; being made to wait for it at baggage claim is bad service. Being handed your bag at the Jetway is a smart way to ease the sting.

Flexible rules, empowered associates and a premium on resourcefulness can do wonders for an airline’s word of mouth. At a time when consumers are increasingly willing and able to share their experiences effectively, bad service is just reckless. If I hated Continental – and I don’t – I’m sure I could find a different way to get to Florida every week. Travelers under fewer constraints can drive to a more distant airport or just drive to their destination. And many people would just as soon stay home. Customers like me who really have to fly can use social media to make sure that everyone in our social graph – including whoever runs social media at the airline – knows exactly how and what the airline is doing.

The Zavee takeaway:

  • Airlines need empowered, resourceful associates applying flexible, data-driven rules. The alternative is an ongoing low-intensity conflict with customers that the airlines can’t win.
  • Every customer has an alternative to a bad airline, even if it means staying home.
  • Social media levels the playing field for airline customers. They can sit us down, but they can’t shut us up.

0 comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What Can We Learn From Airline “Unbundling”?

by on Tuesday, August 24th, 2010

Anyone who has flown recently has experienced what the airlines call “unbundling”: separate fees for optional services that used to be bound up in the ticket price. Unbundling means, for example, that a passenger who flies with just a laptop bag will pay less than a passenger who checks baggage in the hold. The passenger who fills up at McDonalds or Starbucks before boarding will pay less than the passenger who wants an airline meal. The economics of unbundling fees for ancillary services have been amply discussed elsewhere: The airlines do well and the passengers … well, it depends.

From the passenger’s perspective, unbundling works best when (1) the service really is optional (i.e, the passenger isn’t coerced to to incur the fee) and (2) the fee itself doesn’t seem like an unreasonable money grab by the airline. Airlines are most likely to be successful unbundling services that a substantial number of passengers either don’t want or need or that they can easily live without or replace on their own.

Suitcases (via Malias - Creative Commons)

Airline food is a perfect candidate for unbundling: It’s easy to get cheaper and better food on the concourse and the airlines no longer forbid passengers from bringing their own on board. Seating is another example. Want a reserved seat? Pay for it. Willing to take your chances on your seatmate? Save your money. Some airlines charge more for seats that are larger or closer to the exit. Worth the extra fee? You decide. These fees are relatively easy to explain to passengers, but airlines on the whole have been lax in communicating with their customers.


Checked baggage fees are also economically defensible, since every piece of checked baggage adds to the fuel required for the trip and thus to the airline’s cost. But airlines are fooling themselves, and doing a disservice to their customers, if they think the economic rationale is self explanatory. While many passengers, especially those on business, don’t check bags and don’t pay the fee, other passengers, especially families, find the policy coercive. One unintended consequence is that passengers have an economic incentive to carry on bags they might otherwise have checked. As the Steven Slater incident reminds us, trying to stuff oversized carry-ons into undersized bins can end badly.

As Bill Hanifin points out, it’s essential that airlines communicate the policy both on the plane and via social media. This is especially important with airline policies that are new, subject to change and may be perceived (rightly or wrongly) as unfair to the passenger. Why are airlines so lax about communicating with their customers? One guess is that there hasn’t been a storm of complaint about most of these fees. But the likely reason for such acquiescence is not consumer satisfaction, but its opposite. As a frequent flyer I hear a lot of grumbling, but most of it sounds more resigned than angry. Many airlines survive consumer dissatisfaction, but only because consumers often have few alternatives and, except for the most egregious service issues, have simply given up. This is the sign of an industry in trouble.


The Zavee takeaway:

  • Communication of any significant business change is essential. Customer dissatisfaction will fill the void if you let it.
  • Don’t assume that customers understand the economics of business decisions that affect them. They aren’t stupid, but economic rationales require explanation.
  • Don’t confuse the absence of complaint for approval. In fact, if you do something that should generate (some) complaints and don’t get them you have a problem that you need to address immediately. Unlike airlines, few small businesses can count on getting away with taking their customers for granted.

4 comments
Tags: , , , , , ,