Holding the Line: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
0 likes440 views
The study investigates customer perceptions of interactive voice response systems (IVRs) and finds that while most consumers still prefer live customer service representatives, there is significant dissatisfaction with current IVR systems. Key findings indicate that 73.4% find a robust IVR important, and 78.9% would avoid companies with poor IVRs, which suggests a demand for improvement in automated systems. The research highlights a shift as customers begin to expect enhanced IVR technology, indicating potential for better customer satisfaction if companies adapt to these expectations.
Holding the Line: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 1. Holding the Line ! ! Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems Liel Leibovitz Visiting Assistant Professor of Communications New York University ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 31!Hayward!Street! Franklin,!MA!02135! Phone:!(317)!810!@!4108! Fax:!(508)!570!@!4750! E@Mail:!dfox@interactions.net! Web:!www.interactions.net!
- 2. 2! Holding the Line ! ! Executive Summary The attached study looks at customer perceptions of IVRs and other various methods of customer service. The following are its key findings: • While new technological platforms such as social media and tablet computing are by now familiar to consumers, the telephone remains the preferred method for customer service. • Most customers still prefer speaking with live customer service representatives, although an overwhelming majority are convinced that CSRs are either failing to get better or are getting worse. • Customers expect automated telephone service systems to improve, and are inclined to punish companies for failing to comply. For this study, 2,104 respondents completed a 19-question questionnaire about general attitudes towards IVRs and other various methods of customer service. The final question was open-ended, allowing respondents to express their opinions about IVRs. The key findings are as follows: • 73.4% said it was either somewhat important or very important for a company to have a great automated telephone service system. • 78.9% said that they would either probably or definitely avoid giving future business to a company that has a poor automated telephone service system. • 73% said that they had shared their frustrations with difficult automated telephone service systems with the company, with family and friends, and on blogs or social media. In conclusion, the study clearly shows deep levels of customer dissatisfaction with IVRs. At the same time, however, the study also shows that customers are beginning to become accustomed to IVRs, and expect them to improve dramatically. Superior IVR technology could likely continue and build on these allowances and further corporate goodwill and customer satisfaction. Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 3. 3! Holding the Line ! ! Holding the Line: Interactive Voice Response Systems and Consumer Attitudes Liel Leibovitz Visiting Assistant Professor of Communications New York University ! Introduction The purpose of the following research was to provide the most comprehensive study to date of consumer perceptions and preferences of customer service methods and technologies, with an emphasis on Interactive Voice Response systems, or IVRs. Methodology In order to empirically test consumer attitudes towards IVRs as contrasted with alternative methods of customer service, an online questionnaire was designed and disseminated. Data Collection A sample of adult American residents was collected between March and April of 2012. Subjects were approached exclusively online via several distinct and divergent platforms, including social networking sites, forums, and dedicated emails. A quota sampling technique was applied to guarantee a gender and age balance roughly reflective of the general adult U.S. population. A total of 2,104 completed questionnaires were returned by the due date. The average age of respondents was 43 and the sample skewed slightly female (1,064 to 1,027 males). Most respondents resided in large metropolitan areas, and the Midwest was somewhat favored. Questionnaire The questionnaire began with a question identifying whether or not respondents were familiar with IVRs, although no specific industry or technological platform were singled out. Only respondents who answered positively were prompted to complete the rest of the survey. After a few brief demographic questions concerning gender, age, and geographic location, the questionnaire consisted of 14 questions displaying different coding scales, from five-point items to true/false statements to multiple-choice questions. Each question was designed to address a different variable, including, in sequence, respondent’s knowledge about technology in general; awareness of and experience with different methods and technologies of customer service; likelihood of using different methods and technologies of customer service in the future; perceptions pertaining to different methods and technologies of customer service and their ease of use; respondent’s satisfaction with various customer service methods and technologies; perceptions pertaining to Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 4. 4! Holding the Line ! various customer service methods and technologies improving or deteriorating; ideal uses for IVRs; preferences pertaining to touch-tone systems versus speech-based systems; preferences pertaining to various potential uses for IVRs; the importance of a business offering a great IVR; implications of poor IVR service on respondent’s future likelihood of giving a company more business; specific expectations from IVRs; and likely responses in an event of a poor IVR experience. A final, open- ended question asked respondents what they would have improved in IVRs, given the chance. Results Prior to examining any specific attitudes towards IVRs, the questionnaire’s first two questions sought to examine respondents overall level of comfort with technology. Asked to define themselves in regards to adopting new technologies, respondents answered as follows: 25.8% (540) responded “I am typically he first to own the newest technology products;” 49.7% (1,042) responded “I typically wait until prices start coming down and I know the product works well before buying new technology products;” 19.5% (409) responded “By the time I purchase a new technology product, many people already own it and the price has dropped enough for me to be interested;” and 4.2% (87) responded “I never buy new technologies. I’ll wait for a device or software to become essential before spending money on it.” Fig. 1: Which of the following statements best describes your attitudes towards purchasing new technology products? Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 5. 5! Holding the Line ! Similar results occurred when respondents were asked to describe their knowledge of technology in general: 44.3% (926) responded “I am considered tech-savvy and people come to me for advice before buying products;” 46.5% (971) responded “I am not tech-savvy but know enough to make sound decisions for myself;” 8.3% (173) responded “I don’t know much about technology and usually ask others for advice before making a purchase;” and 0.9% (19) had no opinion. Fig. 2: Which of the following statements best describes your knowledge about technology in general? Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 6. 6! Holding the Line ! Next, the survey focused on respondents’ perceptions of various methods and technologies of customer service. When asked which of the following methods they’ve used in the past 12 months to access customer service assistance from a company, respondents answered as follows: Used Not used, but aware I Not used and not could use aware I could use Over the phone with a 80.7% (1,681) customer service 18.2% (379) 1.1% (22) representative Over the phone using an automate system 70% (1,452) 26.8% (556) 3.2% (66) without talking to a customer service rep A mobile site or app 49.3% (1,018) 12.3% (254) 38.3% (791) 80.3% (1,661) 17.5% (362) 2.2% (46) A site using a PC A site using a tablet 28.6% (590) 60% (1,237) 11.4% (235) Texts or SMS using 30.7% (633) 49.1% (1,010) 20.2% (416) phone Social media 39.4% (812) 45.6% (940) 15.1% (311) 78.7% (1,627) 19.1% (395) 2.2% (45) Email Chat on company’s 51.9% (1,065) 39.6% (812) 8.5% (175) website Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 7. 7! Holding the Line ! Results were similar when respondents were asked which methods and technologies they intend to use in the next 12 months, ranking them on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being very unlikely and 5 very likely: 1 2 3 4 5 Phone with 9.2% (190) 4.9% (102) 14.6% (302) 19.4% (401) 52% (1,076) CSR Phone with 12.2% (252) 20.1% (416) IVR 10.5% (217) 21.4% (442) 35.8% (741) Mobile site or 24.5% (505) 23.8% (491) app 14.5% (299) 16.2% (334) 20.9% (430) Site using a 8.6% (176) 15.1% (311) PC 5.8% (119) 25.2% (519) 45.3% (933) Site using 30.8% (635) 21.4% (440) tablet 16% (329) 14.9% (307) 16.9% (349) Phone using 31.4% (644) 19.6% (403) texts or SMS 17.9% (367) 13.3% (274) 17.8% (366) Social media 29.5% (608) 18.7% (386) 15.4% (318) 14.5% (299) 21.8% (448) Email 9.7% (199) 14.3% (293) 6% (123) 22.6% (464) 47.4% (972) Chat on site 16.9% (348) 20.5% (421) 11.2% (231) 20.9% (429) 30.5% (626) Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 8. 8! Holding the Line ! Next, the survey asked respondents to rank methods and technologies of customer service according to their ease of use: Fig. 3: Based on your experience or opinion, how easy to use are each of these methods of accessing customer service? Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 is extremely easy and 1 is extremely difficult. As the above chart shows, the methods deemed easiest to use were email (45.3%); CSR (44%); and a website (39.6%). Social media were deemed least easy to use (14.7%), followed by IVRs (12.6%). Similar results recurred when respondents were asked to rate their own experience with customer service methods and technologies on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being very unsatisfied and 5 very satisfied. If inexperienced with a particular method or technology, respondents were prompted to select the “Not Familiar” option: Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 9. 9! Holding the Line ! Fig. 4: On a scale of 1 to 5, please rate the following according to your satisfaction for customer service, 5 being very satisfied and 1 being very unsatisfied. If you are not familiar with the technology, choose “Not Familiar.” The following question asked whether customer service methods and technologies were getting better, worse, or remaining the same. When asked about web-based sites and self- support functions, 69.9% of respondents (1,446) said they were doing better, 6.9% (143) said that they were getting worse, and 23.2% (481) thought them unchanged. Similarly, 61.2% (1,264) thought chat-based customer care to be getting better, 9.1% (187) to be getting worse, and 29.7% (613) to be unchanged. Results were more evenly spread when it came to IVRs: 31.1% (643) said they were getting better, 35.6% (737) said they were getting worse, and 33.3% (688) said they didn’t change. Curiously nearly identical sentiments prevailed when asked about live customer service representatives: 37.2% (767) said they were getting better, 28.8% (594) said they were getting worse, and 34.1% (703) said they remained unchanged. Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 10. 10! Holding the Line ! Next were several questions examining respondents’ usage of and expectations from IVRs. When asked, 66.5% (1,373) responded that they use IVRs simply to get to a customer service representative, while 33.5% (693) said that they use IVRs to get assistance and answers with speaking to a customer service representative. When asked about their particular preferences, 66.8% (1,382) said they preferred touch-tone systems, 17.8% (369) said they preferred speech-based systems, and 15.4% (318) said that they had no preference. These results were supported in the next question: 70.1% (1,448) said that they preferred touch-tone systems, 16.4% (339) said that they preferred voice-based systems that prompted them to use a small number of pre-selected keywords, and 13.5% (280) said that they preferred natural language voice-based systems that recognized complete sentences. Finally, respondents reported that if given the choice, 40% (826) would prefer to skip any interaction with an IVR and instead directly reach a customer service representative, while 37.3% (771) said they would use an IVR to direct them to a customer service representative and 22.7% (468) said they would use an IVR to get support without speaking to a representative. The survey’s last set of questions focused on the consequences of having poor IVRs. When asked how important was a company having a great IVR, on a scale of 1 to 5, 1 being not at all important and 5 very important, respondents answered as follows: 1 2 3 4 5 5.7% (116) 5.5% (111) 15.4% (312) 25.8% (523) 47.6 When asked how they might respond to a company with a bad IVR, 11.5% (238) said they would not give it any future business, 67.4 % (1,393) said they would try to avoid giving it business, 19% (393) said they would probably continue to give it business, and 2.1% (44) said they would definitely give it business. Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 11. 11! Holding the Line ! Queried what specific traits they valued about IVRs, and asked to rank functions on a scale of 1 to 5, respondents answered as follows: 1 2 3 4 5 System’s ability to 3% (62) 20.2% (416) 62.8% (1,295) 3.5% (73) 10.4% (215) understand you Ability to use touch- tone 2.2% (46) 3.8% (79) 13.8% (285) 25.8% (531) 54.4% (1,121) commands as well as voice Easy and 2.1% (44) 2.2% (46) 10.2% (209) 24.3% (501) 61.1% (1,258) logical menus Not having to repeat 2.4% (49) 3.1% (63) 12% (247) 25% (514) 57.5% (1,180) information Easily reach a 1.9% (40) 2.6% (53) 8.2% (168) 33.9% (693) 73.1% (1,503) CSR if needed Short prompts before entering 2.6% (53) 4.2% (85) 20% (408) 33.9% (693) 39.4% (804) info System having non- robotic 7.4% (150) 9.5% (193) 29.3% (597) 25.9% (527) 28% (570) voice Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 12. 12! Holding the Line ! Finally, when asked how they’ve dealt with difficult IVRs, 35% (722) said they described the experience to family members and friends, 29.8% (614) told the company in question, 27% (556) did nothing, and 8.2% (169) described the experience on a social media platform. The survey’s final question was an open-ended prompt asking respondents what they would recommend to improve IVRs. Nearly 83% said they’d like to be given the option of effortlessly reaching a live CSR at any point in their interaction, many adding that the representative ought to speak fluent English and be familiar with local commercial culture; 9% proposed clearer menu options; 7% asked for all information provided during the interaction to be stored and transferred to a CSR should the need arise without being repeated; and the remaining 1% asked for better, non- robotic voice quality. Biases Related to Age, Gender, and Familiarity with Technology No major discrepancies were recorded when filtering the results for gender differences. Women in general were slightly fonder of nascent methods such as social media platforms than men. In terms of the correlation between age and using various methods and technologies, young respondents were less likely to have spoken to customer service representatives, with only 71.9 percent responding that they had used the method as opposed to a range of 81-83.7 percent in older respondents. The same is true for IVRs, with 61.8 percent of the youngest respondents having used them, as opposed to 72.7 percent of respondents 26- 35, 73.2 percent of respondents 36-50, and 67.8 percent of respondents 51-65. In respondents 66 and older, the number drops considerably, to 25 percent. Younger respondents were much more likely to use social media, with 51.9 percent of respondents as opposed to 34.5 percent of respondents 36-50 and 27.3 percent of respondents 51- 65. The same also held for intent to use new technologies, with 27.5 percent of respondents 18-25 stating a strong intention to use IVRs, as opposed to 39.7 percent of respondents 36-50, and 37.9 percent of respondents 18-25 stating a strong intention to use CSRs, as opposed to 55.9 percent of respondents 36-50. Satisfaction levels, however, remained uninfluenced by age. In terms of the correlations between familiarity with technology in general and using various customer service methods and technologies, early adopters tended to use more technologies—86.9 percent, for example, used CSRs, as opposed to only 77.8 percent of respondents who identified themselves as reticent about technology, and 78 percent used IVRs as opposed to 64.3 percent of respondents who identified themselves as reticent about technology. The same pattern was true pertaining to perceptions of ease of use, with 28.5 percent of early adopters stating that IVRs were extremely easy to use, as opposed to only 18.5 percent of respondents who identified themselves as reticent about technology. As was the case with age, satisfaction levels remained uninfluenced by level of familiarity with technology. Another factor uninfluenced by age, gender, or level of familiarity with technology had to do with the importance of companies having strong IVRs and the negative implications of failing to do so: Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems
- 13. 13! Holding the Line ! respondents across the board overwhelmingly stated that having a good IVR system was extremely important, and that a lack of one would result in refusal to give the company future business. Conclusion All of the above presents a curious portrait of a market in flux. Despite the rapid ascendance of social networks, tablet computing, and similar technological innovations, the lion’s share of respondents still appear to overwhelmingly prefer more established methods of customer service. And while satisfaction with websites remains constant or growing, phone-based services are still perceived as the primary method of customer service, both in terms of actual usage and in terms of overall satisfaction. Here, however, we see a curious divide, reflected in the replies to the question pertaining to perceived improvement or deterioration in the quality of a particular method. Despite the fact that CSRs were generally perceived as among the most preferred methods, an overwhelming majority of respondents replied that they were either getting worse or staying the same. And despite IVRs ranking lower in overall satisfaction, respondents’ opinions were roughly divided on the question of whether these services were getting better, worse, or stagnating. This, I believe, supports the existence of a dissonance of sorts: With the telephone still irreplaceable as a primary mode of customer care, and with the quality of live-person service deteriorating due to outsourcing, consumers continue to embrace phone-based services, including IVRs, but vie for particular improvements. From responses to the final, open- ended question, we learn that consumers expect phone-based customer service systems to improve on both the quality of human resources and the ease-of-use of automated systems, providing the option to speak to a live representative at any time, easily navigable menus, and efficient use of information provided by the customer. This, I believe, also serves to explain the preference for touch- tone systems over speech-based systems: With most IVRs reluctant to provide easy access to live representatives should the need arise, consumers perceive of touch tone systems as more user- friendly, providing, as they do, the opportunity to press “0” at any point in the conversation and circumvent the IVR experience. Based on the open-ended responses, there’s ample reason to believe that a better-designed IVR, allowing for easy and immediate access to live representatives should the need arise, would change that preference and favor speech-based systems. Hanging on the Telephone: Customer Perceptions of Interactive Voice Response Systems