Shout out to CX - #2

A little mix of my own customer experiences from the past week

Welcome to the second edition of my new weekly LinkedIn newsletter, Shout out to CX.

Each week I'm reflecting on a series of my own interactions with brands and businesses big and small, noting my own CX reflections on their service, systems and strategies. I'll hope to bring a lot of this into my own work, share experiences for the benefit of those brands and add some thought to the wider CX community here on LinkedIn.

Monday - Subway's loyalty sandwich

Another week, another changing loyalty scheme. I haven't shopped in Subway for quite a while - what used to be a great value proposition, especially versus other fast food offerings, felt like it became very expensive very quickly. Coupons and vouchers used to be commonplace and now feel quite rare, plus my local store changed its opening hours so for example I could no longer pick up a breakfast sub before starting work.

This week Subway sent their latest communication confirming their 'Rewards' programme is changing, and as part of that change existing points earned would have the slate wiped clean (Costa did the same a little while ago whilst making it so that rewards took longer to earn too).

With current economic pressures, making a loyalty scheme less rewarding is disappointing for customers but perhaps sadly not surprising. But to delete the bonuses customers have built up to that point is kicking your loyal customers when they are down. I don't have many points left as an infrequent visitor to Subway, but those who were saving for something bigger will now be forced to visit before the deadline - a forced purchase out of spite might be cash through the tills but it harms brand trust in the long run (I'll spare readers the full terrible experience of what happened when I tried to use the last of my loyalty points, safe to say I won't be returning to use Subway's new programme!).

Why would this deletion be necessary? I can only imagine at best case that this is a system limitation, which in itself is no excuse as a customer-centric approach would be to ensure a requirement of any new system would be that it could carry over the existing points. At worst case this is a commercial decision, to cut losses and ensure those next purchases cost pounds not points - similar to when a struggling retailer stops accepting gift vouchers, though the necessity is more understandable in those scenarios or at least we've been warned by previous examples.

Loyalty schemes are so commonplace now that the sentiment of it being hard to keep up feels like it's growing by the day. Even with the use of digital wallets, it feels like we need a card, app or membership signed up for just about every outlet (one of my personal bug bears is the Co-Op and how I'm expected to recognise which franchise a particular store belongs to and therefore which loyalty scheme applies). But do loyalty schemes really reward loyalty? The rise of so called 'loyalty pricing' in supermarkets in particular has caught the attention of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), who announced a review into the practice in January. An update is expected in July with findings by the end of the year, and whilst some in the grocery and retail sectors responded with predictable criticism , the fact remains that I can be a Tesco clubcard holder and in theory get cheaper prices, but what if I forget my card/wallet or my phone battery dies so I can't scan my clubcard one day? The store can clearly still charge the promotional price and make a profit, so why is that price not available to all? Is there more value to the retailers in gathering associated data behind loyalty schemes, and if so do the benefits to the organisation outweigh the benefits to the customer?

Whatever the outcome of the CMA review, brands would do well to proactively assess how customer-focused their loyalty programmes really are. One that genuinely rewards loyalty could be a real differentiator in the current climate.

Wednesday - Clocking up the miles at Asda

I clearly have supermarkets on my mind this week! On Wednesday I visited the Asda Havant superstore - and 'super' is accurate in terms of scale here with the store boasting pretty much all offerings and sub-branches modern stores tend to offer (cafe, clothing, electronics etc) and being almost overwhelming in its scale. As I arrived at the store late on Wednesday I parked at one of the two sets of entrance areas, the one which I knew to be closest to the clothing section where I needed to shop (my little girl needed leggings and I was under strict selection criteria from Mrs Allaway).

Finding this set of doors closed, I couldn't help but let out some frustration. I knew this would mean using the set of doors at the other end of this large site, walking all the way over to the section I needed once inside, then all the way back again once I'd paid. I then had a real battle trying to find the leggings themselves (when a helpful member of staff assisted me they were in a totally random one-off shelf position), and was met with the usual self-service only option now commonplace when using supermarkets outside of peak times (I was really surprised to also see self-service tills at a fish & chip shop earlier on that evening!).

I made a joke when I got home about getting my steps in for the day thanks to Asda, but the experience really didn't help counter the idea that this behemoth - both in terms of the unit space and the brand name - didn't really care much for my experience or whether or not I would come again. It had stripped back its offering and usual standard levels on the basis of footfall and maybe from some research on what people who visit later on in the day might prefer. Whether the trip was easy for me or felt tailored to my needs didn't feel like a factor at all.

Thinking of the scrutiny the sector will face as the year goes on with regards to loyalty as mentioned above, perhaps more of a focus on the physical buying experience at Asda, away from the constant noise of matching prices at Aldi & Lidl, would be of great benefit.

Friday - Why S.W.A.Y is my new CX principle

I'm on annual leave this week, and with us being in the midst of the fourth month of 2024 already it's a great time to take stock of the year so far.

Reflecting on my own work, my personal development on the CIM chartered marketer pathway, industry events such as Sabio's Disrupt and my personal life there's been an awful lot going on.

Thinking of this newsletter and what's to come for the rest of this year, I found myself wondering if there was a guiding principle I applied to my work and wider view on customer experiences generally. Was there a pattern in the things I'd picked out so far for Shout out to CX?

Then I stumbled upon a catchy acronym that I intend to embed in my work and philosophy moving forward - S.W.A.Y.

It's made up of the two questions I think we're asked most as CX professionals - 'So what?' and 'Why?'.

'So what?' usually comes following the delivery of a metric, an insight, a recommendation or an example of feedback. It's asked from C-suite and SLT through to the front line and our own CX colleagues. It often means 'This is interesting but what's it got to do with me?'. Or 'This is great but how do we justify the time to fix it?'. It can be both a fair challenge and unfairly dismissive - usually depending on the level of customer-centricity of the speaker.

'Why?' comes from a similar place, but so often is tied to commercials and a need for a direct link to ROI. 'Why should I make that change, show me the benefits playing out'. 'Why should I make recognising great service such a priority, show me the uptick in productivity it will generate.' Again, culture is a huge part of whether or not the challenge is fair, or at least determines where you have to start your argument from. The bottom line will always be - and we should not apologise for being bloody-minded about this - that good CX leads to good commercial outcomes. Fewer cases of dissatisfaction that need resolving, fewer complaints to handle, less bad press & brand damage. More positive word of mouth, free or low cost referral business thanks to higher propensity to recommend, greater chance of cross-sell, additional product take up and retention as well as higher staff morale and lower attrition.

So What And why (Y) - it's the question I'll ask myself when reviewing any of my output, challenging myself to ensure my work is as targeted and well-rounded as it can be. The case should be clear (thinking of data presentation, formatting and channel of delivery), compelling (metrics, volumes, changes over time etc all simple and attributed) and rooted in both the commercial growth of the business and its ethical values. Whilst you can't predict every question or challenge an audience or stakeholder may respond to you with, it serves as a cornerstone to return to with every finding and suggestion put forward - punchy enough that it focuses the mind to not solve all issues in one stroke, but simply to make the effective gains that add up to an overall better experience.

If I were on the Insight team of the businesses mentioned so far in these first two editions, I think S.W.A.Y would certainly help me demonstrate why these interactions matter to the business. And therefore that has to be as good as any philosophy for me to take on and apply to my own work in future.

It's hardly Bain & Co trademarking the NPS survey - but I'm already excited to see the change it will bring in my work.