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.
