How can HR be more Customer Focused?

The answer to this is that it, again, depends on your definition of HR.
If it is the first, then there isn’t a huge impact that HR can have on being “customer focused” in my opinion. The biggest area where they can make a difference to the customers is by being responsive and quickly addressing the internal problems.  This, indirectly, helps fix problems that could otherwise negatively impact a customer.
If it is the second, however, a HR professional can be leveraged.  Their skills in training and development as well as performance management can be put to use developing both on- and off-line training for customers.  They can also focus on trying to understand where the current customer offerings are missing opportunities and help identify the best areas of ROI.
Human Resources is, admittedly, a challenging area that is a strong support role for the company with a difficult transition to becoming a leading customer focus role.  Anyone else have thoughts on great ways to turn HR into a customer focused organization?

For Team/Group Managers, some of the same exact groups had the following median compensation (includes base pay and annual bonus/incentive):

• Inbound order entry – $61,400
• Inbound with selling – $65,500
• Customer service – $69,200
• Internet support – $63,700
• Collections – $69,900
• Full account management – $73,700
• Technical support – $63,100
• Outbound with selling – $71,900

Compensation levels vary from $61,400 to $73,700 — a range of $12,400.  This equates to approximately from $29.50 to $35.43 per hour, a $5.97 variance.

The areas that I expected to be the highest (outbound with selling) wasn’t — the agents have a much large difference between the highest non-selling and that level (over $3 per hour) but the team/group manager was highest at the Account Management level.  After considering this, it makes sense — full account management requires a much greater level of quality management and focus on standardized processes.  A customer that has assigned account managers will expect greater service and, in turn, a company needs to pay for it at the manager level.

my boss has written me in for shifts without asking me if I am available.

Almost everyone in a call center environment has probably run into this. I don’t believe that the person asking the question works in a center, but the concept still exists.  The answer given is, basically, talk to your boss and gives a general script of how to go about doing so.

The writer’s answer applies to a center as well as it does to any other business, so if you’re curious, take a gander.

Here’s a few that I want to stress.

• Having customers hear your kids playing in the background

Working in a noisy area or with the TV on is distracting and no way to excel. A quiet workplace is the key to success when working from home – it is essential for concentration and for receiving business calls. When customers can hear kids, dogs, TV and other noises in the background, they most likely will assume you are not devoting your full attention to your work. If your customer can hear the noise, there is a good chance that your supervisor could hear the noise as well. A good home office sounds just like a good office environment – silent.

• Using “ancient” technology

Frequently losing Internet or phone connection while working from home will prevent you from doing your job and ultimately lead to losing it. Most companies that allow you to work from home will have specific technology requirements to ensure that their applications function effectively – not adhering to these could be grounds for termination.

• Not understanding the definition of multitasking

Doing laundry or other household chores while on the clock are not perks of working at home. Work time is work time and should be dedicated to professional duties. Mixing personal and professional duties will lead to unfocused work, unsatisfactory performance and a potential job hunt in the near future.

• Spending your work time shopping online

Just because the boss cannot walk by your desk at any moment and see what you are working on does not mean you don’t have to work. When working from home, it is important to be able to prioritize and work efficiently. Goals still need to be met and dedicated work time should be spent doing just that … work.

• “Showing up” late or consistently “leaving” early

Just as your co-workers and supervisors expect you to arrive on time in an office setting, they expect the same when working from home. Responsibility and dedication are extremely important. You must be able to motivate yourself to keep on schedule to succeed when working from home.

To me, the rest are common sense and even apply to a standard office job. Things like “Don’t mouth off to a customer” should be logical and a part of your professional career.

Working from home, as an employee, is a luxury that shouldn’t be abused.  The company is hiring you to do a job effectively, so do that.  Be professional.  Those that don’t? They’re the ones that make life difficult for the rest of the people that want to work from home.. they’re the ones that make the managers go “Why should I?”

Medical history? Gossip? Religion? Politics?  You are at work, so keep it to a minimum or, preferably, not at all.  The fact is that people spend 40+ hours a week in the office together, nearly as much as they do with their family at home.  Most of that time is spent interacting, whether by email, instant message, phone, or face-to-face with people in the office.  This tends to lead to conversations and loose-lips.  You have to be careful with it, obviously.

#1 on the list, however, is “Salary information”.  I’m going to keep my neck out on that limb and say that this is an antiquated way of seeing things.  There’s really no reason to hide what people make, to keep it hidden that person A makes $2 per hour more than person B.

It’d fix gender and racial inequality faster than any legal or morale requirements — those haven’t had the impact that many people would like.  Whether you agree that there is or isn’t a disparity (I’ve seen arguments both ways), the fact of the matter is that if there isn’t this would bring that situation to light and if there is, then the solution would become clearer.

It’d ensure that there is a fairer distribution of money for work — people who work more, better, harder, effectively would generally be able to justify a better salary than those that simply “do the minimum”.

Human resources and managers tend to the be the people who are afraid of this salary discussion.  HR because they fear the possibility of lawsuits or more easily proven discrimination. Managers because .. well many of them are overpaid for the efforts that they take to help the company and because they can keep their budgets down by shaving half a dollar here, twenty cents there.

If you’re asked the question, answer it with fault that can also be perceived as a strength (perfectionism, focus, control, etc) and explain how you’re working on controlling / bettering it.

I’ve got a membership to theladders.com and they write articles every so often. One of their latest articles has to do with the weakness question and how to improve it. I thought it was quite insightful. Due to it requiring a membership, I won’t copy the entire thing here but if you’ve got one, you can read it in their Ops ladder career advice section.

The writer, Rob Sullivan, suggests that interviewers ask the following question instead.

“Someone who doesn’t know you well doesn’t like you. What are five adjectives he or she might use to describe you?”

Once the interviewer has the answer, then ask…

“Now, let’s imagine you are on a team with a new person at the company. You notice there’s some tension between the two of you. You also realize that this person would probably describe you as …[insert their list of 5 adjectives]. How would you handle the situation?”

From an interviewer’s perspective, I think that this would be quite interesting and more insightful than a regurgitated Q&A. The advantage to the pair of questions is also that you’ll also be more likely to surprise the interviewee which tends to get a more direct and truthful response.

If you’re the interviewee, he suggests that you answer the question of “What are your weaknesses” with your answer to the above question. For example, in his case, he’d say:

Sometimes people who don’t know me particularly well get the wrong impression and see me as intense, angry and sometimes even aloof. Even though people who know me well would never use those words to describe me, I know I can come across that way at times. For this reason, I am taking steps to be seen as more kind and approachable – like being the person who smiles and says hello to strangers.”

What would you do or say?

One of the blogs that I read is by Penelope Trunk called the Brazen Careerist. She’s got some very interesting topics and subjects that she covers. In July of ‘08, she wrote a post called:

Figure out how much you should be paid (and three cheers for transparent salaries)

I thought it was quite interesting, specifically the transparent salaries aspect. Every company that I’ve worked for has had strict rules related to discussing salary. Person A wasn’t allowed to speak with Person B about their salary. Even ranges tend to be hidden. I’ve never really understood the logic within it.

According to Penelope, companies should simply have their salaries publicized. Everyone should know everyone’s salary. I guess I don’t see a problem with this and can see certain advantages. She brings an example of her own personal business and some of the employee’s thoughts on the concept into her blog.

For example, the person who was underpaid was not so much jubilant about a potential raise, but upset about his current underpayment. The person who’s losing the housing allowance mostly for tax purposes does not seem to mind. The person who is making way more than everyone else minds a lot that I’m planning on revealing everyone’s salaries. But honestly, I think that person will work much harder if everyone knows the truth. And it should be that way.

People who are paid more should be expected to bring more to the table — not necessarily work harder, but better, more effective, and more efficient. The concept of transparent salaries is something that, to me, is just an extension of the “pay for performance” philosophy that a lot of companies are moving towards.

It makes sense to me.