Me: Is there any way I could call you tomorrow?

Him: No. You can contact the call center here, but there is no way to ensure that you get me.

Me: Is there any way you could call me?

Him: No. We are not allowed to make outbound calls.

Me: Well now surely in this age of electronic communication there is some way to do this. Is there a set time when I could call-in tomorrow, like when your shift first starts so we could talk?

Him: No.

Me: Could you email me or text me when you are about to be available to talk?

Him: No.

• • •

Two hours into a telephone call with a computer service technician and after sharing a bunch of information on my particular glitch and his attempting a number of possible fixes, he was about to end his shift and I had a meeting to attend. This guy was thorough, easy to understand, and by now was well versed in the problem and had eliminated a number of possible causes. From my standpoint, I could think of nothing more inefficient for me than starting over with a new guy and having to repeat everything. For his company, this guy, already informed and invested in the problem, was more likely to efficiently resolve things, than was a new guy starting from scratch. He was frustrated by being precluded from successful closure and I was frustrated because my two hour investment in this relationship and all of the information exchanged and trouble-shooting performed was about to go out the window.

This Fortune 500 company had designed their call center to absolutely, positively under-no-circumstances allow for a follow-up interaction, what we might call a relationship. It was not relationship neutral or relationship challenged or even relationship every-so-often – it was relationship NEVER.

Now, there are numerous situations where what is needed is just an efficient, completed transaction. Order efficiently fulfilled. Question promptly answered. Problem methodically solved. Even, relationship courteously ended. Both parties do what needs to be done. It is one thing to avoid relationships where the conditions or needs do not warrant them. But it is another where the unique circumstances cry out for the ability to salvage the investment in information, trouble-shooting and two-person sympatico by re-connecting rather than starting over

It then occurred to me that while one part of our economy has worked incessantly to develop technology to augment our relationships by staying in touch via email, cell phones, instant messaging, twitter and the like, there has been another part of the economy that has been working around the clock to ensure that we only have one-time transactions with no possible follow-up relationship. One part of our world is designed to help us stay in constant contact and relationship 24-7, while the other – the anti-relationship system – is designed to prevent even a letter or a follow-up phone call. Two metal cans connected by a wire or smoke signals provide a more likely chance of relational contact than this system. In this age of instant communication could anything be more unnatural than a complete ban on follow-up interactions by two consenting adults?

It was a reminder of just how far we have devolved in a world of scale and so-called efficiency that the marketplace now settles for relationship abstinence in so many of our dealings.

Operating without a relationship often works okay until something goes wrong. It is precisely when things go wrong – like an inability to get the computer finally working, the snafus resolved, the documents delivered – that relationship is most needed. Relationship is not only the source of shared information that helps us efficiently get things done, but it is also the backup system that kicks in when the unscripted happens. A system designed with great precision to prevent relationship at all costs, is inherently out of touch with today’s always-in-touch marketplace and is inefficient in certain circumstances for organizations all about cost

Wonder what percent of service calls are redundant and costly replays of earlier interactions? How much unnecessary time is spent preparing and reading notes, re-discussing issues, repeating procedures, working through relational issues because the service representative cannot continue on the case in a follow-up interaction? What percent of customer dissatisfaction and disloyalty comes from customers accustomed to 21st century virtual communication technology and the ability to stay connected, forced to interact and operate in the mode of the dark ages?

I then imagined how my request could have been handled differently, if the service rep could schedule a follow-up call. You know, the way two stark strangers might be able to text, call or communicate in order to work together. I also imagined an organization, while devoted to efficient transactions, also seeking to use the new technology to ply the advantages of relationship, even for just selected interactions.

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde: when it comes to relationships, too many of today’s organizations seem to know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

(Column appeared originally in ABA Bank Marketing magazine – July-August 2009)

By ROBERT E. HALL

Not to be reproduced without written permission. All rights reserved. © Copyright Robert E. Hall 2009