Myths & Legends - top 10 reasons you can't listen to more client voices

Are you frustrated with the amount of client insights you have at your fingertips? Many of the people I speak to in client insight, marketing or BD roles are being prevented from doing their best work.

The firm is pushing to make more evidence-based decisions, but the evidence about client experience is thin. I hear stories about the voice of the client being gathered too infrequently, getting stored in different silos and including only a small percentage of the client base.

Limited data sets continue to be supplemented by assumptions.

Top 10 reasons the voice of your clients is going unheard

If that sounds like you, you’re not alone! For a bit of fun with a side of serious, I’ve wrapped up my Top 10 Countdown of Myths and Legends - the most common reasons that client listening isn’t having the impact it should. If you’re struggling to prove the RoI for client insights, I suspect at least one of these is swirling around your firm.

??10. Client listening is seen as a project

??9. It takes too long to see results

??8. Feedback questions are designed by committee

??7. Clients don't have time for surveys

??6. They wouldn't tell you anything different

??5. The survey questions aren't relevant

??4. The data is in different places

??3. We need to wait until we have more data

??2. It's not the right time

??1. I know my clients

??10. Client listening is seen as a project

I remember once being told by a large law firm that "we do an annual client survey. Well, we call it annual, but we've not actually done it for a couple of years because it's such a big project". Periodic feedback quickly grows arms and legs because it's the one chance to gather data and everything bar the kitchen sink gets thrown in (see #8 questions are designed by committee). Unfortunately this creates a terrible experience for the client, as well as the project team.

Future-proof client listening is the opposite experience, it is 'always-on' rather than periodic projects. The advantage of always-on client listening is that it provides a continuous flow of insights, using a variety of feedback sources. This makes the process more timely and relevant for clients, and much less painful for the various internal teams.

??9. It takes too long to see results

Traditional client listening processes begin with getting partner agreement to include their clients. Then data needs to be given to the 3rd party who sends out surveys and reminders over a 2-3 week period. Once the survey is closed, they then manually analyse the data, report the results and then do any follow-up analysis before providing a final report.?

From beginning to end, the gap between a survey going out and results being reported can be 2 months or more. Modern client listening is real-time. The analysis of the responses, including the unstructured text comments, happens in the blink of an eye. That means you can see the story building while the surveys are still open, and the final results are ready the moment you close the survey.

??8. Feedback questions are designed by committee

Have you ever sent out a list of survey questions for comment, and dreaded the responses? Just like everybody is a copywriter, everybody seems to have an opinion on what questions should be asked in a survey. This usually involves rewording questions to sound more positive and adding more questions to dig into an area of particular interest. A stakeholder who suggests fewer questions is rarer than a black swan.

The way around this is to start with clearly defining the purpose of the survey and then sharing this context along with the suggested questions. Include details of the maximum survey length, and why that's important for creating a good client experience, high response rate and insights that are relevant to the whole firm. A concession could be offering each service line one dedicated question which only their clients see.

??7. Clients don't have time for surveys

This is still a common misconception, that clients don't see any value in sharing their expectations and experiences with the firm. Yet clients are human, and humans want people to know what is working and not working with a relationship. The real problems here are:

• Clients assume it's not worth sharing feedback because it won't be heard and acted upon
• The survey is too long and/or not asking relevant questions, or
• Partners don't want to admit that they would rather not hear the feedback.?

??6. They wouldn't tell you anything different

This is often used as an argument against doing independent client interviews. However, expert interviewers like Claire Rason and Anna Lake tell me the opposite is true. Fresh faces provide a fresh perspective to the conversation and can ask open questions in different ways. They don't have pre-conceptions about the answer, so are free to explore what the client is thinking. Also clients are human, and humans want to feel that their feedback will be heard not argued.?

??5. The survey questions aren't relevant

This is sometimes the perception of a survey designed by committee (see #8) and sometimes an argument against someone else gathering feedback (see #6).

More often it's a response to a well-structured survey. One that asks open questions that don't lead the respondent, one that asks about aspects of the firm's brand rather than the specifics of a matter or an individual's skill set.

??4. The data is in different places

Have you ever uttered the phrase "we have the data but don't do much with it"? It's probably because you have a decent amount of client feedback, but it's all in different places and formats. Survey data is in spreadsheets or pdf reports, interview transcripts are in word documents, reviews/testimonials/complaints/informal comments are each in different systems.

This makes it hard to find the data, get it into a shared place and format, and then manually analyse and report on it. By that stage the results are often 'old news'. It is very hard to create the buy-in for doing more listening, when the existing data isn't making enough impact on decision-making.

??3. We need to wait until we have more data

The firm doesn't currently get very much feedback and therefore doesn't have a good process for handling it nor a culture of using feedback to guide decision-making. They're stuck in a 'chicken and egg' situation.

They don't want to spend more money on client listening until they have the data volumes to justify it. But they can't collect more feedback until they change their processes and technology. Therefore the status quo wins until the leadership develop the appetite to make more evidence-based decisions.?You can't scale a process until you have a scalable process.

Incidentally this logic is the same one that still holds back CRM implementation "until we have better data". Investing in a CRM forces a change of data behaviour, in the same way investing in client listening forces a change in the process for gathering and using insights.

??2. It's not the right time

There are times when this is true. The client may have recently shared unsolicited feedback, or may be up to their eyeballs in work or deadlines.

It's true that certain months of the year are not the right time for certain industries. This timing issue is easily managed modern client listening programme that sends 'annual surveys' at the time that best fits each client (see #1 Client listening is seen as a project).?

However, "it's not the right time" is used too often as a way to manage the results - it's code for 'I don't know if the client will give me a rave review at the moment'. Claire Rason calls this the Fear of Finding Out. The best client listening programmes mitigate this issue through being 'opt-out' rather than 'opt-in'. Clients are 'in', unless a formal request explains why a client shouldn't be included.

And at number 1…

??1. I know my clients

I've saved the old chestnut for last! I know my clients - 4 little words that have held back client listening for decades. Firstly, at larger firms there are teams on both sides so one person can't be in every room and conversation. Even when it's 1-2-1 work, it doesn't mean that clients feel comfortable sharing all their experiences and perceptions, nor that they are heard when they do (see #6 'They wouldn't tell you anything different').

Secondly, modern firms can't thrive with client knowledge locked inside the heads of individuals. Our Future of Client Listening research highlighted that 42% of respondents said that client intelligence was stored in 'people's heads and notebooks' - the polar opposite of a single client view.

Relationship Partners need to know their own clients AND the firm needs to know their whole client base. Unless the feedback is centrally analysed, the firm can't see themes, trends and patterns. It can't learn lessons that are proactively applied to other clients, before they even ask.

What have you seen?

What have I missed? Have you heard another reason why your firm would prefer to make CX decisions based on assumptions rather than evidence?

Perhaps you think I've been too harsh?

Or maybe you have another solution for overcoming these myths and legends.

I'd love to hear your perspective in the comments. MyCustomerLens is on a mission to help firms Listen Differently and use client insights to make faster more informed decisions. Achieving this means helping firms to embed a culture and process that supports their always-on client listening platform.

#ListenDifferently #BusinessIntelligence #ProfessionalServices #ClientListening

MyCustomerLens | always-on listening