Call centres would be a comedy if they were not such a tragedy for brokers
"Good morning. Thank you for calling Preposterous life, Call Centre 1, my name is Cynthia, how can I help you?"
Does this ring a bell? When I hear this, I assume the staff have been on a Victoria Wood training programme. The problem is that Victoria Wood is a comedienne.
We recently carried out detailed research with Swiss Re looking at the service IFAs get from providers. It may not surprise you the responses were not all favourable. The big issue to us is that many IFAs support providers whose service is poor. Common responses were:
* We have to use the best product regardless of service (often quoting compliance).
* We will put up with bad service if it does not hurt the client
* Most are bad.
* A provider which had good service when we gave them business has gone downhill and we still have to deal with them.
In the "good old days", each provider had a local office and a team of broker consultants. The consultant and the support people knew the IFAs and their clients. People took ownership of problems.
Why did it change? like all industries, there was pressure to cut costs. The fad of the early 90s was Business Process ReEngineering, business-speak for changing the way we do things. The obvious area for cuts was distribution. The sales and marketing cost of putting a policy on the books varied from [pound]150 to more than [pound]500, excluding commission.
Along came the axe. So-called telesales consultants replaced broker consultants. Call centres in remote offices replaced regional offices. High-quality telephony and advanced technology ensured the call centre had all the data to ensure first-class service.
So why don't IFAs get first-class service? Inexperienced staff are handling IFA queries. They refer to someone else when they do not know the answer. They are nameless, you get someone different each time. No one takes ownership.
Instead of direct-dial numbers giving access to individual human beings, we now have touch-dial systems that, if you are lucky, give you access to a call centre. The technology is not good enough. The electronic files are not recording all communications and this results in inefficiencies, delays and frustration.
The messages from the research for IFA Survey 2000 are clear:
* IFAs do not like call centres.
* IFAs do not like nameless people who refer queries.
* IFAs do not like inefficient touch-tone telephone systems.
So what do they want?
* They want people to own problems.
* They love technical helplines.
* They like a name with a personal number.
It is really not too hard, is it? So, who are the winners?
In addition to a good brand and a broad product range, Standard life still employs a big salesforce working from regional offices.
IFAs are not happy that Scottish Widows has withdrawn local service. On the other hand, it is the one office that seems to have cracked the telesales problem. From the IFAs' viewpoint, it employs qualified people who provide answers.
Norwich Union and Legal & General have also had some success. L&G would not win the top award for service right now but it has setup a system for key accounts that is working and in the field it has a consultant, what it calls a business development manager. Servicing the same account is a telesales person based in Cardiff and an administrator based in Hove. Because it has the right technology, each member of the trio knows what the other has done. The survey shows its service provision to networks is well regarded.
Ninety per cent of those interviewed said service played a part in selection. But when we looked deeper, only 52 per cent could consider removing providers of bad service from panels so nearly half support bad service providers.
FSA proposals are bringing poor service to the fore. This just might make IFAs rethink who they support.
Despite recent criticism of broker consultants, when asked if they wanted any relationships with provider personnel and if so who, 85 per cent said they preferred a relationship with a broker consultant.
What of the future? We asked IFAs what technology they were investing in and what effect this would have on provider communication.
Eighty-seven per cent of respondents have websites or immediate plans to build them. Once internet access is unmetered, most communications will be online. But there are concerns. IFAs still want technical helplines - they do not trust electronic systems to solve problems and they still expect consultants to provide marketing and sales solutions.
Largely, IFAs do not use provider extranets because there are no standard systems. Providers seek competitive advantage by differentiation, IFA administrators need standardisation.
The survey carries a simple message. Use standardised and efficient systems for transmission of data but ensure qualified and competent people are on hand to own problems, provide technical help and sales support. Easy isn't it?
No comments:
Post a Comment