This statement only makes sense when customer experience refers to customer interactions, rather than genuine customer experience. Still, many industry authorities, experts and opinion leaders have expressed or supported this statement or similar concepts. This statement is logically incorrect: customer experience cannot be compared with or pitted against price and product, because customer experience includes them.
(See: Why a major CX misconception is causing customer experience job cuts.)Ĭustomer experience will overtake price and product as the key brand differentiator.”
Forrester’s research director Harley Manning rightly remarked: “CX transformations are massive, take years, and cost millions.” Since CX transformation can only be afforded by large enterprises, for most companies, customer-centricity is impossible. (See: Stop Trying to Eliminate Customer Effort.) Two Major MisconceptionsĬX transformation is needed to become a customer-centric company.”ĬX authorities, experts and opinion leaders have been vigorously advocating that CX transformation is necessary to become a customer-centric organization. This is because except for brands whose promise is about or related to “fast and easy,” striving for an effortless experience will bring a homogenized experience, decrease customer pleasure, and compromise your brand loyalty. These successful brands cannot be built and sustained without the good frictions.įor the CX industry to promote effortless experience to all companies, it will greatly reduce the competitiveness of the company. If IKEA didn’t have DIY services, Ryanair didn’t have lean and mean policies, Starbucks didn’t have premium prices nor waiting time, customers wouldn’t be able to enjoy cheap furniture, cheap air tickets, barista chats and the Third Place. All of this is because one wait violates its brand promise (bad friction), while the other supports it (good friction).įor that reason, not all frictions/efforts/pain points are bad and must be eliminated. Obviously, the aforementioned fictional Chris’ wait at 7-Eleven is an unacceptable pain point, while waiting at Starbucks is a tolerable effort. My conclusion from the discussion with Dave is this: Except for things that support the brand to fulfill its promise, the rest of the experience should be as easy as possible. Reduce the Competitiveness of Enterprises But it’s inevitable that he has to wait longer than when he was at McCafé, because many Starbucks customers like Dave cherish a hearty chat with the barista. Dave mentioned that he enjoys regular chats with barista Stacey at his local Starbucks.
#EFFORTLESS EXPERIENCE HOW TO#
The inefficiency of the convenience store ruined Chris’ supposedly romantic evening.Ī few months ago, I had a fruitful discussion with Dave Fish, founder of Curiosit圜X, on his article Innovation and Delight: How to Break Away from the “Effortless” CX Pack. But when he arrives, there is a long line in front of the cashier moving at the pace of a snail. He rushed to the nearby 7-Eleven store without even thinking about it. On a special night, Chris really needs condoms. By promoting effortless experience, the CX industry has, literally, become an accomplice in exacerbating this social inequality. This increases income inequality there is no doubt that convenience and income inequality are closely related. dollars, while the tax rate was only 1.2%.Īs a result, since tech giants like Amazon have an absolute advantage over any other company in providing “fast and easy” experiences, when customers have become slaves to instant gratification, those tech giants will make the most profit while paying extremely meagre taxes. However, in reality, two factors must be considered: 1) customers are addicted to convenience, and 2) tech giants pay very little tax.
Yes, in theory, convenience is not directly related to income inequality. Convenience has nothing to do with income inequality. The second misunderstanding emerges: convenience is a good thing, and income inequality is a bad thing. Therefore, although it is important to discuss whether the tech giants should assume social responsibility, my focus is on whether the CX industry should continue to promote ‘convenience’ that exacerbates income inequality. For example, “Should CX be socially responsible and stop advocating effortless experience?” “CX” should be understood as the CX Industry. In that article, when I said “CX”, most of the time I was referring to the CX industry, not the tech giant’s CX.