What are the most common logical reasoning mistakes people make in customer support?

1 Confirmation bias

Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek, interpret, and remember information that confirms our existing beliefs or assumptions, while ignoring or rejecting evidence that contradicts them. In customer support, confirmation bias can lead to premature or inaccurate diagnoses, ineffective solutions, or missed opportunities. For example, if you assume that a customer's issue is caused by a certain factor, you might overlook other possible causes or fail to ask relevant questions. To avoid confirmation bias, you should be open-minded and curious, challenge your assumptions, and seek feedback from others.

2 Hasty generalization

Hasty generalization is the fallacy of drawing a conclusion based on insufficient or unrepresentative evidence. In customer support, hasty generalization can result in faulty predictions, stereotypes, or unfair judgments. For example, if you encounter a few rude or impatient customers, you might conclude that all customers are like that and treat them accordingly. To avoid hasty generalization, you should avoid jumping to conclusions, collect more data, and consider exceptions and variations.

3 False dilemma

False dilemma is the fallacy of presenting only two alternatives as the only possible options, when in fact there are more. In customer support, false dilemma can limit your creativity, flexibility, and problem-solving skills. For example, if you think that you can either satisfy the customer or follow the policy, you might miss the chance to find a win-win solution or a compromise. To avoid false dilemma, you should avoid either-or thinking, explore multiple possibilities, and weigh the pros and cons of each option.

4 Post hoc ergo propter hoc

Post hoc ergo propter hoc is the fallacy of assuming that because one event follows another, the first event caused the second. In customer support, post hoc ergo propter hoc can lead to false causalities, wrong solutions, or unnecessary actions. For example, if a customer reports that their device stopped working after installing an update, you might assume that the update caused the problem and advise them to uninstall it, when in fact the problem might have a different origin. To avoid post hoc ergo propter hoc, you should look for evidence, test your hypotheses, and consider other factors.

5 Appeal to authority

Appeal to authority is the fallacy of relying on the opinion or expertise of someone who is not qualified or relevant to the issue at hand. In customer support, appeal to authority can result in misinformation, confusion, or wasted time. For example, if a customer claims that they know how to fix their issue because they read it on a blog or heard it from a friend, you might accept their word without verifying it or explaining why it might not work. To avoid appeal to authority, you should check the source, ask for credentials, and use your own knowledge and experience.

6 Circular reasoning

Circular reasoning is the fallacy of using the conclusion as a premise or supporting the argument with itself. In customer support, circular reasoning can result in circular conversations, frustration, or lack of progress. For example, if a customer says that they need a refund because they are not satisfied, and they are not satisfied because they need a refund, you might end up going in circles without addressing the root cause of their dissatisfaction. To avoid circular reasoning, you should break the cycle, ask for reasons, and provide evidence.

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?