Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k(theregister.com)
theregister.com
Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/11/on_call/
44 comments
I have some anecdotal experience with this. I was at an Oracle event representing my company that managed Oracle for a very large number of customers. I met Larry. He treated me like I was an insignificant and why was I even talking to him. I considered that rude and highly dismissive. It became my goal to get our customers away from Oracle to which I had some success. Quite a few customers were able to move to MySQL which at the time was becoming more stable, more acid compliant and faster. We already had ridiculously fast hardware at that time anyway, not by today's standards. I would like to think it cost him at least a few of his racing yachts.
Larry has all sorts of questionable qualities, and there are plenty of reasons to leave (or use) Oracle, but some person being arbitrarily dismissive isn't really one of them. Unless the dismissiveness was over something very material.
"I would like to think it cost him at least a few of his racing yachts." - because the CEO/Director of a massive multinational conglomerate with 100 000 employees didn't arbitrarily have time for you?
Also - and this may have nothing to do with your experience - but for some reason some people feel as though they have the 'right' to other people's attention. The more influence people have the more people come out of the woods with this.
I do not envy anyone with an iota of influence or popularity, it's a constant stream of people demanding their focus, any one of which may or may not interpret something some way, or even take an actual real slight out of proportion. Also I find that people are bad at interpreting the state of mind of others.
Of course it's probably a good thing to move away from Oracle anyhow ...
"I would like to think it cost him at least a few of his racing yachts." - because the CEO/Director of a massive multinational conglomerate with 100 000 employees didn't arbitrarily have time for you?
Also - and this may have nothing to do with your experience - but for some reason some people feel as though they have the 'right' to other people's attention. The more influence people have the more people come out of the woods with this.
I do not envy anyone with an iota of influence or popularity, it's a constant stream of people demanding their focus, any one of which may or may not interpret something some way, or even take an actual real slight out of proportion. Also I find that people are bad at interpreting the state of mind of others.
Of course it's probably a good thing to move away from Oracle anyhow ...
I would counter that if you are at a networking function with your customers that you should consider yourself the face of your company and act accordingly.
I don't blame them for developing a dislike for Oracle after an Oracle representative mistreated them. Their whole purpose in being there was to put face time in with past and future customers and engender positive connections and they failed.
I don't blame them for developing a dislike for Oracle after an Oracle representative mistreated them. Their whole purpose in being there was to put face time in with past and future customers and engender positive connections and they failed.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may have to think about where feelings come from and how they are actually caused to realize this. Every individual is responsible for their own actions and themselves, for their own body, and for their own body's releases of their own hormones, adrenaline, noradrenaline, cortisol, or whatever it is that is the actual functional cause of the feelings. Taking offense is just as bad as offending. Humility, ducks back, this is ideally what should occur when someone is offensive, but... of course, people should not be offensive, either, they should be kind and empathetic. No one is perfect, but if they have two cheeks, one always has the opportunity to emulate perfection. A lot of people are rude jerks sometimes, but rather than taking offense, we can choose to be awesome instead.
> Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler.
I get where you’re coming from, and in most cases there is a large amount of truth to this. But your statement, as absolutely as you have expressed it, is a bold claim and needs more backing up.
If people could simply choose to be free of sadness, depression, or anxiety, we would - we’d all just decide to be happy all the time. We have more agency over our feelings than we think, but still only some.
Perhaps you were making your statement with people of privilege in mind. People of privilege walk around with fewer open wounds, retain an accordingly larger capacity for resilience, and are much more able to take your advice to heart. However, it is also good of them to be mindful of their conduct for the sake of those who aren’t in that position.
I get where you’re coming from, and in most cases there is a large amount of truth to this. But your statement, as absolutely as you have expressed it, is a bold claim and needs more backing up.
If people could simply choose to be free of sadness, depression, or anxiety, we would - we’d all just decide to be happy all the time. We have more agency over our feelings than we think, but still only some.
Perhaps you were making your statement with people of privilege in mind. People of privilege walk around with fewer open wounds, retain an accordingly larger capacity for resilience, and are much more able to take your advice to heart. However, it is also good of them to be mindful of their conduct for the sake of those who aren’t in that position.
So if I call a Black person the N-word or address a Jewish person with an antisemitic slur, and this bothers them because it reminds them of how society has long dehumanised them and enslaved and murdered their peers simply for being born into that classification, etc, it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing?
It may be the case that some of us can choose whether or not to be offended in any kind of circumstance, but that doesn’t prove everybody can, just like many people not simply being able to think themselves out of major clinical depression. It would be strange to blame them for this.
Edit: grammar
It may be the case that some of us can choose whether or not to be offended in any kind of circumstance, but that doesn’t prove everybody can, just like many people not simply being able to think themselves out of major clinical depression. It would be strange to blame them for this.
Edit: grammar
> it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing?
Your comment is a loaded straw man, and you've confused being offensive and taking offense as a single event when it is two separate and distinct events. I never said anything about fault. I only referred to responsibility. Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own actions. Taking offense is an action. Even if an individual's emotional response is involuntary, that individual alone is responsible for their emotion.
I can tell you that being thin-skinned is just as much a symptom of mental illness as being offensive, and they usually go hand-in-hand: the most offensive individuals are usually also the most overly sensitive individuals.
Your comment is a loaded straw man, and you've confused being offensive and taking offense as a single event when it is two separate and distinct events. I never said anything about fault. I only referred to responsibility. Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own actions. Taking offense is an action. Even if an individual's emotional response is involuntary, that individual alone is responsible for their emotion.
I can tell you that being thin-skinned is just as much a symptom of mental illness as being offensive, and they usually go hand-in-hand: the most offensive individuals are usually also the most overly sensitive individuals.
[deleted]
I would say most theories are overly simplistic for classifying humans. However here are a few I've found helpful.
1. Your feelings typically say more about yourself than about another person. Use them for self reflection.
2. Feeling wronged when someone is an asshole is just. Learn to create boundaries and find ways to separate yourself from such people, both physically and emotionally.
3. Very few things are made better by being obsessively angry. Learn what is causing your anger, work through it and confront people you want to keep a relationship with.
Most of all, try to always give others the benefit of the doubt, and if they ask forgiveness grant it. If they prove themselves repeatedly unreliable than form the appropriate boundaries, but still treat them with the respect that any person deserves.
1. Your feelings typically say more about yourself than about another person. Use them for self reflection.
2. Feeling wronged when someone is an asshole is just. Learn to create boundaries and find ways to separate yourself from such people, both physically and emotionally.
3. Very few things are made better by being obsessively angry. Learn what is causing your anger, work through it and confront people you want to keep a relationship with.
Most of all, try to always give others the benefit of the doubt, and if they ask forgiveness grant it. If they prove themselves repeatedly unreliable than form the appropriate boundaries, but still treat them with the respect that any person deserves.
> Feeling wronged when someone is an asshole is just.
"When someone hurts you, be hurt."
This is not the way. Instead, be tough and say, nothing can hurt me.[1]
[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stick...
"When someone hurts you, be hurt."
This is not the way. Instead, be tough and say, nothing can hurt me.[1]
[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stick...
A wise man once told me (and others), never get offended. Being offended is just you with your dander up. It doesn't do anything other than ruin your day. So instead of getting offended, he said, get even. Work to make whatever was offending you stop or change. That's a good use of your energy. Spouting the vitriol of offense... isn't.
I've never seen taking offense the same way since hearing that.
I've never seen taking offense the same way since hearing that.
> Taking offense is just as bad as offending
Why would you think that? If I, entirely by my own choice, take offense then I've only hurt myself. Hurting yourself should always be far less bad than hurting someone else.
Why would you think that? If I, entirely by my own choice, take offense then I've only hurt myself. Hurting yourself should always be far less bad than hurting someone else.
> because the CEO/Director of a massive multinational conglomerate with 100 000 employees didn't arbitrarily have time for you?
The whole point of inviting people to such an event is to make them feel that the CEO does have time for them. Why else would he even be there?
The whole point of inviting people to such an event is to make them feel that the CEO does have time for them. Why else would he even be there?
I feel like you skipped the core of his message and replied to something else entirely. It's the second sentence.
Hell hath no fury like a customer scorned
How about when you piss off an entire state for your unethical practices?
IBM banned from QLD. 10 years in and there's still no IBM contract within the state government that I'm aware of.
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/queenslands-ibm-ban-lives-on-...
IBM banned from QLD. 10 years in and there's still no IBM contract within the state government that I'm aware of.
https://www.itnews.com.au/news/queenslands-ibm-ban-lives-on-...
[deleted]
I worked in IT and was very thankful I had a manager that wouldn't put up with any bullshit from customers. Any kind of disrespect to the IT people would lead to the customer being chewed out and banned from getting our help. The manager gave us an open form to submit any such issues. We were encouraged to be transparent with customers about the issues, if the problem was out of our hands, what the delay is, etc. no bullshit. It made a shitty job a little less shitty I guess.
What could possibly make the support guy act like that? The only thing I can imagine is the support being accountable for sending out too many spares. But that shouldn't really be a phone guy's responsibility?
The other thing that sticks out is that the support must normally have an idea what client they are talking to, it's not like the company would order 350 laptops one by one on different names. A $350k client tries to get a replacement for a $50 part? Better hold your ground!
The story sounds like a fiction or a wet dream, but given how easy it is to underestimate the extent of idiocy, I'd say it's really hard to tell for sure. If the story is real, the vendor totally had it coming.
The other thing that sticks out is that the support must normally have an idea what client they are talking to, it's not like the company would order 350 laptops one by one on different names. A $350k client tries to get a replacement for a $50 part? Better hold your ground!
The story sounds like a fiction or a wet dream, but given how easy it is to underestimate the extent of idiocy, I'd say it's really hard to tell for sure. If the story is real, the vendor totally had it coming.
Interesting. Then it's a tale of poor CRM, where you can't tie your support calls into the rest of customer flow.
Could totally see that if look up support purely by SKU and serial without thing it into rest of CRM. Hmm.
At a startup I worked, the only thing that kept "is this important" in mind was a rough list of importance in eng managers' heads. Definitely led to us misprioritizing customers.
Could totally see that if look up support purely by SKU and serial without thing it into rest of CRM. Hmm.
At a startup I worked, the only thing that kept "is this important" in mind was a rough list of importance in eng managers' heads. Definitely led to us misprioritizing customers.
Or you can strive to treat every customer like gold and reap the long term rewards of an impeccable reputation.
Eh. Some customers are shitty and very demanding. Most people don’t want to be in the business of pampering assholes, and plenty of people will take advantage of a business that will do anything to make literally everyone happy. Just go read some bad Yelp reviews of your favorite restaurant and ask yourself if all of those people really deserved to be treated differently.
Engineering is constraint optimization. Yes, ideally you have zero issues and your programs never have any bugs.
Agreed, word of mouth is a powerful marketing strategy
The first time I read the phrase "the customer is always right" was a book about aluminum produced by the Alcoa company when I was a kid.
When I parrot this phrase to most people today they tell me the opposite is true, that any customer who isn't satisfied is an asshole and is doing you a favor if they switch to the competition.
I remember reading a business book in the early 2000s that said as much and that you should be trying to fire your worst customers. Around that time my stockbroker fired me as a customer because I didn't trade enough and because when they invited me to a presentation on annuities I asked why I shouldn't buy I bonds from Treasury Direct.
My reply to that is that there's a fine line between getting rid of your worst customers and getting rid of all your customers and it strikes me as another demented example of wishful hinking in "business as usual" like Best Buy's decision to stock a single Sony mirrorless camera body but not stock a selection of lenses to use with it.
When I parrot this phrase to most people today they tell me the opposite is true, that any customer who isn't satisfied is an asshole and is doing you a favor if they switch to the competition.
I remember reading a business book in the early 2000s that said as much and that you should be trying to fire your worst customers. Around that time my stockbroker fired me as a customer because I didn't trade enough and because when they invited me to a presentation on annuities I asked why I shouldn't buy I bonds from Treasury Direct.
My reply to that is that there's a fine line between getting rid of your worst customers and getting rid of all your customers and it strikes me as another demented example of wishful hinking in "business as usual" like Best Buy's decision to stock a single Sony mirrorless camera body but not stock a selection of lenses to use with it.
"The customer is always right" refers to the product design. If you sell shoes that you think are the best on the market, but customers think they're bad, the customer is always right. It helps direct attention toward selling what people want, not what you think they should want.
Notably it does not mean that individual customers (or would-bes) are always justified in their complaints.
Notably it does not mean that individual customers (or would-bes) are always justified in their complaints.
I believe the original phrase was, “The customer is always right in matters of taste.” It’s a shame that party got dropped.
It's just an SNR problem with the phrase. The LTV of the customer needs to exceed the CAC plus COGS for that customer. And if you can't see that being the case, firing the customer is necessary.
In many businesses this is hard to account for, but we can do this now. Hence AWS charging a premium for proper support.
The interesting part of "the customer is always right" is that it moves one from the "this customer is idiot" default to the "what is this complaint telling me" and the notion that LTV isn't apparent at single interactions. So you optimize the marginal COGS down (including support, if necessary) using this as your bellwether, and try to keep in mind that LTV can be much higher than single support case cost.
But if you use "customer is always right" to increase COGS and still leave LTV same you're making a mistake because you're conforming to the phrase over the function it has.
In many businesses this is hard to account for, but we can do this now. Hence AWS charging a premium for proper support.
The interesting part of "the customer is always right" is that it moves one from the "this customer is idiot" default to the "what is this complaint telling me" and the notion that LTV isn't apparent at single interactions. So you optimize the marginal COGS down (including support, if necessary) using this as your bellwether, and try to keep in mind that LTV can be much higher than single support case cost.
But if you use "customer is always right" to increase COGS and still leave LTV same you're making a mistake because you're conforming to the phrase over the function it has.
"The customer is always right" is better read as, "Sell the customer what they want to buy (if you can)".
That doesn't mean the customer gets to mistreat or assault your employees over the proximity of pickles to their hamburger patty when it was being cooked, but that if enough customers ask for more meat on their burger then you should offer a double or triple patty option.
That doesn't mean the customer gets to mistreat or assault your employees over the proximity of pickles to their hamburger patty when it was being cooked, but that if enough customers ask for more meat on their burger then you should offer a double or triple patty option.
Thanks. That's a useful interpretation to me.
The trouble with that is that the music in most people’s heads plays at too high a volume.
If you're always firing your worst customers, then sooner or later you won't have any customers left.
It’s not just about rudeness, nobody who buys thousands of laptops wants to deal with shitty support. If they try stuff like this and managements backs it up, you know there’s more like it in the future and it’s just not worth anyones time.
Better to just wait a few years until that probably outsourced support department has been dumped before you try again.
Better to just wait a few years until that probably outsourced support department has been dumped before you try again.
"And then everybody clapped"
This story could be true, but it smells so much like fabrication.
This story could be true, but it smells so much like fabrication.
^ This guy gets it
The service department will adapt by always talking nice, always promising to service the products but never send or perform anything that costs money.
When you finally reach the person in charge: - "sorry sir, but your request has been filtered by our revenue, cost and risk model, the model is automatic and I am unable to override it, would you please try making the request in another way" - "my request is totally legit, why does the model think it's risky?" - "sorry sir, the exact mechanism is confidential. I would recommend you proposing a solution that doesn't have substantial cost for us, or we can work together on this case for a win-win solution".
When you finally reach the person in charge: - "sorry sir, but your request has been filtered by our revenue, cost and risk model, the model is automatic and I am unable to override it, would you please try making the request in another way" - "my request is totally legit, why does the model think it's risky?" - "sorry sir, the exact mechanism is confidential. I would recommend you proposing a solution that doesn't have substantial cost for us, or we can work together on this case for a win-win solution".
Reminds me this interesting history (in Spanish, but many people here most probably will speak it) mostly about the experience of being sued by Arduino, but also telling the secondary history of how a big telecom lost all contracts to update to 4G in one entire country.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw_q1Hjkuxo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw_q1Hjkuxo
[deleted]