United and the World of Robots
If your Facebook and LinkedIn feed is anything like mine, it is filled with all kinds of commentary on the latest fiasco by United Airlines. In many ways, it is already becoming tiresome. At the same time you have to admit there is an interesting fascination with this topic and if you engage in the conversation it can lead you down many paths that impact the way each of us going about our job. As an example, my friend Augie Ray from Gartner Research wrote this a piece titled "United Airlines and the Dollars and Cents of Customer Experience." It is a good, realistic look at this from a CX perspective.
As many of you know, United has issued yet another apology on the topic, this time saying some of the things that should have been said from the start. Unfortunately, they did forget to acknowledge their own mishandling up until that apology. I tend to always think the first way you handle something shows the true culture of the brand. All of that is a conversation for another day. I wanted to take a moment to point out a different observation. This came up during a dialogue on Facebook with friends Jason Falls and Chris Heuer. The original post was looking at the victim shaming being done in this situation, which we all agree was horrible and inappropriate. The victims past had nothing to do with anything. But as with many of these conversations, it drifted back to United's actions. Chris inspired me to put on my operations hat a take a fresh look at it and how it relates to other businesses. It was a take that I thought was worth writing a little bit more about.
Do you think this situation could happen within your business? I would hope that most of you would answer no, but there is a reality it could. We have made most jobs in the marketplace completely process driven. There is very little empowerment to drift outside the process in many companies. We also frown upon escalating situations that fall outside the process. We often become accusatory at the person escalating it. So let's take a step by step look at what happened. The plan boards and all is well. Then there is a call or someone coming to the gate agent saying you must get these crew members on the plane. It is a priority. I would guess they then walked away or got off the phone. The airplane staff asked for volunteers. Of course, it is a Sunday night and many people probably have a place to be on Monday morning, so no one accepts. They increase the offer and still no one accepts. They then threaten to randomly select people and ask again if anyone is willing to accept the current offer. No one does. At this point, the process says randomly select people, so that is what they do. Now, remember everyone is already onboard the plane. The crewmember does whatever the process calls for to select 4 people. I am sure many are suspicious of the means to determine the 4 people, but I am sure it is in the process. They then go to the 4 select people and ask them to leave. I am sure each was angry along the way and most likely voiced that, suspicious as to why they were selected. But they reluctantly get off the plane, probably vowing never to return to the airline. Then there is one who actually deviates from the process and says they are not getting out of the seat they paid for. Now, this creates a problem! Oh wait, we have a process for that! Remember everyone is to follow crewmember instructions, and this person is not following crewmember instructions so I have to call security. A call is made. The security agents are dispatched, probably told to remove this person because they are not following crewmember instructions. They probably instruct the person to leave, and he says no, I paid for this seat. Again I am assuming much of this but it seems feasible to me. So based on the orders from the security dispatch, the security officers remove the person by the means they know how, using force to carry the man. Fingers will point to the Department of Transportation Officer, but I would bet that he was doing his job in the manner he was supposed to. All of this was following the process. We did not look at anything outside the box or how someone would feel being told they must leave the flight so other people who work for the company can take their place. It was all about the process.
Now think about at your company or possibly even your job, how many decisions are made each day that are all about the process? Do you ever have Customers deviate from the process? What is your opinion of Customer that deviate from the process? Are they the lunatic fringe? Do you permit your own employees to deviate from the process when it is the right thing to do? How are your employees treated if they escalated something they could not handle? Is it assumed that they are not performing their job? In many operations departments that is the automatic assumption. The problem to all this is your Customer does not have a copy of the process. They are going to react in human ways. Some, like those Customers who got off the plane, will yield that way. Others might not. I know I would be going ballistic online as well as emailing the CEO if this were happening to me.
If you even look at the initial responses to this situation, each followed the standard playbook we have seen so many times before with United. Even the CEO's initial statement. Look at them further! They were designed not to take fault for the incident, just the part that the airline did control, which was the re-accommodate. The initial response from the company made sure to take all human emotion out of the equation. In business, we frown on human emotion. Oh, except the email to employees. Why because it is important we show our employees that we support them. Ultimately they should support the employees but take fault for the poor process and not empowering the employees to actually find a different situation.
We have all become robots in many ways. Most companies I interact with them act like robots in everything they do. The problem is human are not robots. Your Customers are not robots. They are human beings and want to be treated as human beings. There is something in the United situation that we can all learn from. What I would encourage is learning the importance of empathy, respect, and empowerment. Most processes have none of these built into them. This is why we can all laugh at United, but realize it could easily be your brand too.
MICROSOFT Engineer-China/APAC, Boxing, MotorBike Racing, Soccer player
7 年I am agreeing with the preceding Alan Berkson, regarding the fallacy derived from fearing retribution...but, inevitably, we, the broader aggregate society have evolved to just that, as a common everyday state of being. Caveat to process rigidity, it does save time, when employed,...which is exactly why that became a prevalent login that drive the choice for that process model from which it was drafted. Employees, in their fear of getting fired, are compelled to blindly follow the operational processes they were charged with,..often finding that in dissonance with actual human common sense and comport. Much as it is deplorable to robotically perform in the course of daily business, what are an employee's alternatives to following contractually binding procedures for accomplishing work? None whatsoever (no alternatives that are devoid of grave consequences, that is). The problem resolution lies at the top of the strata, the sphere of decision-making - our Executives whose it was, the compulsion to keep the bottomline healthy for their shareholders at large. The hapless, process-driven executives themselves, fearing failure or retribution of not meeting their own measurable stats, must have adopted such defining rigors at service delivery processes for the financial results it guarantees in a predominance of daily situations and conditions, but there is still no remedy or effectively lacing-in of the less-measurable variables - the necessary deviance that would sometimes occur when the human element is inserted into a logic-driven algorithm for designing quantifiable service delivery processes. We lack for such delivery process models that is capable of fully and equally accommodating uniformity in results-oriented processes while consonantly fulfilling every imaginable iota of possible human deviations to occur. Therein lies the problem intrinsic to service delivery processes, ladies and gentleman.
The Dubis Group
7 年I guess the general rule is the larger a company gets, the more a rigid process is in place, and the less latitude employees have to resolve issues in a more humane or common sense fashion. Often it's a "Do what you are ordered to do, or there is the door." Agree we are not robots, but too often inflexible processes and procedures are making their way into our lives.
I help people figure out what business they're in...and then how to talk about it. | Positioning & Messaging | "API For US GTM" | Focused on corporate narrative and aligning messaging across brand, GTM, & product
7 年This is less about process then culture. What are consequences of NOT following process? That's the question that drives a failure like this. I don't think everyone was blindly following process. I expect the culture is one of harsh consequences for deviating from process. so much so they are willing to overlook what would, for most, be common decency. Fear is strong motivation.
Unemployed
7 年This is helpful.
Position doesn't equal power! serving your team will earn you dignity, While, serving your boss will take away your dignity. Isaac Alhajeri
7 年that is really excellent article