rework is expensive.

the phone rings while we are trying to finish a job. an email comes in asking for an update we thought we already gave. a customer forwards a screenshot because they do not trust the last message.

this can hijack a lot of the day.

we want to respond fast and protect the relationship.

we also need time to focus on new products or services, and everything else that makes our businesses run.

that tension increases when our businesses grow.

a recent fast company article points out that a poor customer experience can lead to a lost sale, to a lost client, to a lost reputation. fast company

according to pwc, bad service in the u.s.:

·       32%  of customers say they will walk away from a brand they love after one bad experience, and

·       59% will walk away after several bad experiences. pwc.

bad service punishes us twice:

·       we pay to fix the issue.

·       then we pay again in time, because the fix interrupts work that would have moved the week forward.

the internal cost of rework

someone asks about a delivery, a schedule change, a billing detail, a warranty question.

the person who answers does not have the latest context, so they ping someone else.

that second person is busy, so the reply comes late.

the customer reaches out again.

now we have two threads, two versions of the story, and a frustrated client.

customers chase us: when customers have to come back, workload increases without any new revenue attached. long before a customer leaves, repeat contact means extra inbox load, extra calls, extra meetings, extra apologies.

context gets lost: each handoff resets the conversation. customers repeat themselves. we patch together conversation threads. someone checks an order, then a note, then a calendar, then a spreadsheet. we spend time rebuilding shared reality, instead solving the problem.

root causes don’t get fixed: we spend time fixing the issue instead of what caused the issue. we patch the symptom and move on. then we get contacted again by another customer about the same problem again and again.

take a quick check, look at the shape of your day. lots of small fires, lots of “can you just,” lots of tabs open. that is the rework tax.

the external cost of rework

friendly service is important, but reliability is what drives customer loyalty.

reliability means the customer hears the same answer no matter who picks up. the timeline stays steady. the business remembers what happened last time. when that slips, customers start having to manage us, and both sides get tired.

as business grows, we accept work faster than we can fulfill it with the people we have. updates turn late or vague because nobody wants to say “we are behind.” customers reach out, then reach out again. we respond in fragments because context is spread across tools and people, etc..

the loop ends in one of two ways:

·       we refund, discount, or redo work.

·       or the customer leaves and tells someone why.

according to bain’s loyalty research, a small lift in retention can have a large impact on profit, partly because it’s cheaper to keep a customer than to gain a new one. bain & company.

to be clear, when an issue happens, we need to resolve it and customers do notice effort.

but a study found that the “service recovery paradox”: the idea that a company's exceptional handling of a service failure can lead to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty than if no failure had occurred at all, does not reliably turn into repurchase intentions or word of mouth. de matos, henrique, rossi.

recovery keeps damage contained. prevention buys you capacity back, because fewer issues need saving in the first place.