After some time off for Christmas and Iomega research, here is what I've come up with. I've decided (for now, at least) NOT to take the discount that Iomega's director of customer satisfaction offered me on my next purchase of an external hard drive from their online store. If Iomega gets "live chat" support on Saturdays for "under warranty" products, I may consider it.
But, even then I will need to read the blogosphere's take on the quality of their customer service support, whether it's $25 per incident "paid support" or free warranty support. I say this even though I found this Iomega "Code of Conduct (As adopted by the Board on September 25, 2006) which says "Iomega values a positive business reputation,...", and "Iomega will stand behind its products, quality, services, and the assurances it makes regarding them. In dealing with customers, Iomega will be candid and forthright."
These statements, in my opinion, represent a possible Iomega "TRUTHINESS" (Merriam-Webster's 2006 Word of the Year). By that I mean that this definition of "TRUTHINESS" may apply here: "the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true" (American Dialect Society, January 2006)." The key is, does the CEO know all of the customer service disputes that arise, and how they're handled.
I've always wondered what "stand behind" really means when push comes to shove. Also, a company can be "candid and forthright", but does that mean that the reasonableness of their customer service procedures and the quality of their customer service people are where they should be? To be fair, Iomega did return all my money after I took their product to a local FedX store to return it (at their expense). But, what about my "time = money" in dealing with all their admitted "mistakes"? (See my "Victimized Consumer's Time & Seller Online Reputation Mgt.", Iomega External Hard Drive Website & "PR" Mistakes", and "Iomega Corporation's Apology & Consumer Justice" posts for the details.
My research uncovered some "skeletons" in Iomega's "old closet" along with proof that Iomega still doesn't have a reasonable customer service procedure in place when it comes to software updates for recent purchases. Here is what I found.
This 11/3/06 Amazon review of the Iomega Black Series 250 GB Triple Interface External HD says: "The hard drive works fine but about a month after I bought it, Iomega sent me an e-mail letting me know they would no longer be supporting the software that came with the hard drive. Their solution - I had to buy the new software for $30, no discounts, no apologies." In a situation like that, Iomega should provide free new software for up to at least 6 months (or more) from the date of their disclosure!
On 6/30/06 this "mojo pie" blogger said "IOMEGA sent me a back up/archive drive that once within 80% of its capacity, decided to erase all file system headers and reformat itself...losing 200 gig of irreplaceable audio and data. They suggested I take a course in basic computing...At that point I LOST IT, advising the youngsters that I have been heavily involved ins specialty computing since the 8086 days (long before these people were born)...also discovered that I knew more about 1394b compliant devices than anyone in their tech support department. After threatening lawsuits, I convinced IOMEGA to refund my money (they did) but they made no guarantee nor offer to help recoup the thousands of hours of lost audio files...."
These customer service "mistakes" go back to 9/19/96 with a Stephen A. Langford Az. Attorney General Complaint in which he says "I am wondering whether or not I legally can bill them for my time wasted while trying repeatedly to download promised software upgrade Tools V.5." Then, on 12/9/98 the FTC released "Iomega Corporation Agrees to Pay $900,000 Civil Penalty To Settle FTC Charges It Violated Mail Order Rule. Wikipedia even has a page on Iomega Zip Drives "Click of death".
But my complaint and constructive suggestion was about more and better customer service that brings reasonable justice for legitimately victimized customers. This 6/23/05 David W. Boles comment on his own blog says "Iomega no longer provides toll free support because it allows them to better compete in the marketplace." That, at least, explains why they now have M-F "live chat" (free e-mail based) vs. an 800 #. Iomega needs to cut costs in order to compete with all their competitors listed on this Compare 469 results for "250 GB External Hard Drive" Pronto.com comparison search results page.
I am all for cost cuts that don't affect the quality of customer service or the quality of the products themselves. Live chat is fine for "under warranty" support, if the quality of the training of the rep is better than what I ran into. With my situation, the "live chat" rep should have gotten the director of customer service involved before he said he could only sell me the appropriate software that should have been shipped with my Iomega product. Plus, I wasted a lot of my weekend time due to NO Saturday customer service at all being available to new customers.
So, in my quest to get improved quality and quantity of customer service for other Iomega customers, would I have done better to go over the Director of Customer Satisfaction's head to Mike Nikzad (Vice President, Operations and Customer Satisfaction), or Ronald J. Gillies (Vice President, Sales and Business Development), or Kampfer, Thomas D. (President, Chief Operating Officer), or Huberman, Jonathan S. (Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer), or even David, Stephen N (Chairman of the Board)?
I don't think so, and here is why. This 2/4/06 "SignOnSanDiego" article says "David (CEO), who retired from P&G in January 2005 after 34 years, was chief information officer and business-to-business officer for five years prior to leaving." It appears to me that Mr. David is possibly from the P&G "old school" of marketing, and has not quite adjusted to the changes in the marketplace (specifically, the ANA's new "Consumer in control" and "Changed media landscape"). I think I'm right, but I could be wrong. This 12/17/06 New York Times article "Brands for the Chattering Masses" says "Nowhere have those (old marketing) rules been applied more effectively than here, the home of Procter & Gamble,..", and "But the branding game has changed radically, largely because of the myriad choices the Internet provides consumers and because of the economic influence of widespread Web pontificating, known as the blogosphere, which barely existed as a popular force until about four years ago."
The bottom line is that superior customer service along with superior customer satisfaction can cost more money in the short term, but pays off in the long term if implemented properly. The trick is to get upper corporate management to think long term vs. short! Maybe this new "user generated content/media" era will help with that, because if Iomega looks at a BlogPulse Search for "Iomega Problems" , they may find some very helpful feedback and constructive suggestions from unsatisfied Iomega customers.
I wish this San Diego, Ca. company (Iomega) the best (my wife is from San Diego), as they are a reputable company, but there is a lot of room for improved customer service/satisfation, as well as an opportunity to be better than their competition when it comes to customer service/satisfaction. That is how to win the branding game (which is inherently "long term")!
1/17/07 UPDATE - This 1/8/07 online Advertising Age article (registration required for archieved articles) entitled "Ad Age Agency of the Year: The Consumer" says: "For years, countless big marketing thinkers have repeatedly made the case that the consumer is in control. The evidence: First there was media fragmentation, with the explosion of cable TV and the birth of the internet. Then came TiVo, followed by the rise of the blog." How long will it take for all companies to realize how much more good, or harm, their customers can NOW do for them?
Comments