On May 9th I received a call from someone identifying himself as my Bell Canada Service Representative. He asked if I was satisfied with the level of my telephone service (I was). He tried to sell me some additional services (I declined). He then offered me insurance protection for my interior phone lines and jacks, which could be damaged by any number of things at any moment without any notice, and which I would have to pay for myself if repairs were required. Only $6 a month. I declined.
Finally he asked me if he could give himself a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10 for the quality of his service during the phone call. I told him he could (although I did think it a bit presumptuous of him to specifically request a 10).
Last night I got a follow-up call from another Bell Canada representative, to inquire about my level of satisfaction with the first representative’s call.
“I only have two simple questions for you,” he said, “And I’m not selling anything.”
“Ok,” I said.
“On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being extremely dissatisfied and 10 being extremely satisfied, how satisfied were you with the representative who called you on May 9th?” he asked.
“10,” I said.
“Thank you,” he replied, “And now for my second question: Using the same scale, how satisfied were you with the quality of the representative who called you on May 9th?”
I paused, puzzled. I waited for him to realize he’d just repeated the question. He continued to wait for my answer.
Finally I said “You just asked me that question.”
“No,” he said, “It’s two different questions.”
“What was the difference?” I asked.
“The first question was how satisfied were you with the representative, and the second question was how satisfied were you with the quality of the representative.”
“Isn’t that essentially the same thing?” I asked.
“No,” he said firmly, “It’s two different questions.”
“I don’t understand the difference,” I said.
“The first question,” he explained patiently, “is about the representative. The second question is about the quality of the representative.”
I took a moment to digest that, and to wonder if one of us was stupid.
“I see,” I said at last, “In that case, I’d give him a 10.”
“Thank you very much for answering my questions tonight,” he said, “Have a beautiful evening.”
I’m still grappling with the distinction between the two questions. If anybody can help me with that, I’d appreciate it, because I’m pretty sure I will be called in the near future by a third representative asking me to rate my satisfaction with the second representative and the second representative’s quality, and I don’t want to sound like a moron next time.
And they pay people to do this! I wonder what job satisfaction is like?
I switched to Rogers quite some time ago. Bell was just getting ridiculous.
I think in the first question, they were asking you to judge that person based on your analysis of his potential, and in the second whether you thought that potential was high enough.
To Rephrase:
#1 For a guy who has to take a job where he calls people and bothers them about their phone service, how did he do?
#2 Should we be finding better people to bother you?
I think you were right to give the 10/10 in both cases.
Wow. That’s really so beyond the pale, it’s almost worse that what you experience every day as a government worker.
I feel moved to convey a story with a similar mood – and subject. I recently got Bell to install a land-line for me (since they, apprently, still hold the monopoly on land-line installation)and when I dialed a friend in Toronto, and then a friend in Montreal, I discovered that it did not “do” long distance.
So, I called up Bell and told them about the problem. Oh, they said, how strange. We will have to have someone look at that for you. We can do it by May 14 (about four days later), can you be home that day to receive a call, from 1 to 5 pm? No, I said, I have a very important meeting that day. So we argued about that for a while, and then finally she said “well, actually, you don’t need to be home – they can just leave a message.”
“Good!” I said, “great! I’m glad we’ve sorted that out!” but actually I was on a roll, my latent loathing of Bell foaming to the surface. “And by the way, can you please have Bell reduce my bill for the period until May 14, to reflect the absence of long distance service?”
“Oh,” she said, “for that I will have to transfer you….”so I waited in limbo while I was shuttled around, and then encountered another disembodied voice to tell the same sad story to. “Oh,” she said. “But, we didn’t charge you for the service.”
“What service,” I said. “The service of disabling your long distance capacity.”
I can’t go on. It’s too painful to think about it. The good thing which I will try and focus on is that this latest young woman figured out that all she had to do was get someone in her office to flip a switch of some kind, and long distance was immediately reactivated. I can now call long distance. Best not to think beyond that.
David, I think you’re onto something with your interpretation of the two questions.
Jay, your story illustrates perfectly how Bell, with all its contracting and sub-contracting, has slipped not-so-seamlessly into the classic situation of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.
I think I might call Bell and ask them about the level of their satisfaction with my responses to their questions about my level of satisfaction with their representatives.
ha!