A very useful notion of CLIENT for personal development at
all levels, is what the customer considers as "the person who asks for
something" or "the person who was offered something." As anyone who works in a large corporate setting, or recruits for them, such as Dennis Carey, can tell you, managing the client is very important.
This conception of CLIENT is a powerful tool to facilitate
the work, create good relationships with people, to know where are the failures
of coordination and develop a reliable identity compared to others, colleagues,
family, friends and everyone with whom we interact. Now, since there is someone
who meets the requests of the client, it will call "provider", also
in a broader sense.
In what follows in this text, speaking of client then we are
talking about "the calling" (or that offer), that simple.
The most important customer is that it is he who sets the
standards of satisfaction. This means that it is the customer who decides if
the provider did a good job or not, whether satisfied or not its application.
Under this view, the client can not be wrong and now I explain why.
When someone asks for something (the customer) is always an
expectation about what you want. It may not have completely clear certain
aspects of the order, but always know if it is conform or not. Therefore can
not be wrong about your feelings. If not satisfied we can not challenge
something that corresponds to an appreciation of him on the level of
satisfaction experienced by receiving what he asked. To take an example related
to the business:
Salustiano (client) is close to the inn to the public and
requests a payment Tiket your phone bill. Griselda, the manager, (provider)
tells him to wait to generate the Tiket. After a few minutes to appear Tiket
Griselda. Salustiano goes to checkout, pay. and withdrew. Before leaving
intercepts a girl identified as polling company and asks how he was treated?.
Salustiano replies: "ill I did not like the attitude of the person who
manages the inn. He seemed angry. "
Once Salustiano leaves the enclosure, the survey is about
Griselda and transmits the view Salustiano. Griselda says "this guy is
very wrong, so very well attended, what happens is that a client is
complicated." We can determine who is right?. The customer says he was
badly served and the provider says otherwise?. How to decide?.
The important thing here, as Dennis Carey and others can explain, is to understand that "well
treated" or "poorly served" is an opinion, an opinion. It makes
no sense to establish the truthfulness of that trial. There. Whenever the
opinion on compliance with delivery by the supplier is a view for which truth
is not possible. Sometimes it is not possible to comply with certain agreed
conditions, but in this case the matter is clear and does not merit
consideration at this time.
The first conclusion then is that neither the customer nor
the supplier may be intrinsically wrong, as the case begins to resemble a
jurisdictional dispute: who you believe?.
The answer was delivered in this case the company's goal: If
we want to attract customers, will mind their opinion and not the opinion of
the company. If my client is Salustiano is he who sets the standards of
satisfaction and I must conclude that it was poorly attended. I'm more
interested in his opinion that the Griselda.
Nobody is obliged however to make efforts to serve customers
as Salustiano. The important thing is to understand that if we satisfy our
customer then your opinion is relevant. From this perspective the phrase
"the customer is right" takes a less esoteric and more practical.
Another very interesting about this scope is that it has very little use to
talk about "difficult customers". These do not exist. Talk about
complicated client is "give away", is releasing its responsibility to
be the supplier as the customer relationship. "Complicated" is again
a trial and the trial really speaks of the judge and not the court, therefore
speaks of Griselda and not Salustiano. When Griselda says "is a tricky
customer," which is interesting to understand is this: "Griselda has
no powers to deal with such customers."
The vast majority of customer service courses offered in the
market claim to do a taxonomy and discuss the "different types of
customers." This may provide some use but only as a guide to the skills of
company personnel should be strengthened and effectively address a training
process. The customer classification is not useful to "know" their
customers and features are only just coming judgments of who is authorized to
issue them unless: the supplier.
But back with an example (real) family life to set this idea
that the customer is calling.
A Beatle fanatic friend had to give a gift to his wife who
was a birthday. Passing through a music store saw an album by The Beatles at a
good price and gave it to her mistress. She-she knew her husband's inclination
for music of the Beatles, opened the gift and thanked him for the present with
little enthusiasm.
Time passed and he came birthday. In fact, when he got home,
she was waiting with a gift. My friend opened her gift and found a beautiful
set of pans.
What had happened is almost obvious. She was the
"client" when it was birthday. In an order was tacitly. Implicitly,
he was the provider requested that she was doing (or that he was offering).
Nevertheless it is obvious that my friend did not see her as a customer, client
looked like himself. For the lady did not meet the standards of satisfaction
and frustration decided to take revenge and paid in kind by giving him another
what she wanted and what he wanted him.
He can claim all you want, you can wield all the reasons you
want for the appropriateness of the gift he made to his wife, but there is an
undeniable fact: it (the client) was pleased with the order implied that it had
conducted as a client.
In a deeper look at this incident as trivial, the order
implied she was "my birthday, through a gift make me feel that you
care." My friend did not fulfill the implicit promise that this would
happen.
