Integrity

When I was a lad the world was a different place: computers came with bundled applications, Sony mini-disc was the future and BMWs were fashionable. In customer service training, the beef was that unhappy customers would tell 12 to 15 other people, which is why customer service mattered. Imagine that now! Imagine what BT thought when the unhappy customer on YouTube passed 10,000 views for his complaint on YouTube. Imagine their dismay when copycat complainants mounted their own videos to complain about their service. Imagine their fury when they realised that their advertising pound will buy them less impact for their message, and over 10% of all marketing spend will be online by 2011. They shouldn’t fret too much. They are in good company: KFC, Jet Blue, Ikea and more get the same pasting.

As far back as 2005, when Expedia was wreaking havoc with package holiday firms by fuelling TripAdvisor.com, cultural organisations could stand back and smile. At least we only had the arts critic from the papers to deal with. That’s changed too: art galleries and cultural institutions are turning up on TripAdvisor, complete with ‘customer’ rating. This social network has amassed over 5 million registered users and over 7 million reviews and opinions covering 23,000 sites. TripAdvisor also boasts more than half a million candid traveller photos. If you don’t think this online transparency issue is going to affect your organisation, you are out of date.

YouTube, Flickr, Facebook and MySpace are arguably a new tyranny. Hoteliers check TripAdvisor every day as a form of customer service survey. Companies that leave a gap between the image they create for themselves and the experience they deliver are getting caught out. Unlike the detailed factual analysis of products in ‘Which’ magazine, based on objective analysis from a panel of experts, TripAdvisor, Kelkoo and even sites like LateRooms aren’t based on ‘Servqual’ type analysis. These are very often raw emotional comments based on something that hasn’t gone well.

As our customers increasingly become online reviewers and broadcasters, what does this mean for us as venue operators and service professionals? There are two distinct issues. First, it means we have to manage our service delivery. People will forgive a show they don’t like, but they won’t forgive a scruffy venue or poor employee attitude. It looks as though we don’t care, and they can get ‘not caring’ from their utility suppliers. Second, it means that when under pressure as organisations, we could have an audience that is far more vocal and media-adept to argue our case.

Taking the first issue, I hope you will agree that bluffing quality is over. Disney is right about customers: they want to feel special, to be treated as individuals, to be respected, and they would like to be more knowledgeable. Funders, boards and management all need to recognise that the physical environment, our employees and volunteers, our delivery system, fellow customers and back office support need to be effectively aligned around both our purpose and the customers’ expectations. If we fail to do this, then perception gaps start to appear, and it’s only a matter of time before that reaches the online environment, if not the press.

Given the choice between change and finding evidence that we don’t have to change, we are all too keen to get the evidence. In the closing half of this decade, no matter what our funding position is, alignment of our organisations into clear integrated propositions is essential. The team needs to think and act as one to get this integration straight, and, whilst flexibility of thinking and delivery must be maintained, the whole experience of the institution needs to underpin its values. If it fails, this perception gap becomes noticeable and the feeling of being somewhere special starts to dwindle. The master of this field is A. Parasuaman, who has been writing about perception gaps for years.

Taking the second issue: assuming we use induction, training, performance review, professional development, capital investment, technology and communications to make concrete the values and vision we have for our organisations, then we have a new vehicle for support. Customers will be more willing to recommend the institution to their friends, to the online community and in the end the wider media. If the media, and indeed our own marketing departments, have been training customers to review, blog, comment and rate, then we need to give them something worth writing about.

The plight of Derby Playhouse demonstrates beyond dispute the power of customer endorsement, particularly in interviews with customers who were supporting their theatre. The Chief Executive can say so much and so well; they are expected to rally the troops on such occasions. Seeing and hearing customers doing the same makes a strong impression. Web 2.0 is the new environment. Social networks, participation and customer-created content can be used to the arts’ advantage, but only if arts organisations are prepared to embrace the rigours of transparency. Aligning all our resources into a simple, clear proposition is not easy. The idea of a 21st century organisation may sound glib, but the inherent conservatism of many creative organisations will send some of our community to the wall. I wish Derby Playhouse every success.

The struggle to excel in this new environment is a helpful challenge. It makes us look at our own organisations and think about them more from the outside. Reading those online reviews can be sobering and encouraging. We have to grasp what it is that our audience sees in us. Measuring innovation and the improvement of our offer remain a problem. Even the best in the commercial business world are struggling with effective measurement. Footfall, dwell time, revenue growth, satisfaction ratings and loyalty are all handy, but commerce is the first to accept that measuring experience peaks and trends is more voodoo than science.

Bring to that the unique challenge of the arts and objective measurement goes out of the window, so it’s all the more important that when we do see progress and customer response – and when we have organisations able to assimilate this new environment, we need to make sure they are well rewarded and recognised. We need to make sure knowledge is spread to others and that the original pathfinders are encouraged. We should also reflect that in five years’ time we will look back and think: ‘It was all easier then.’