The problem with pushing right up to borders of tolerance is that borders shift. Sometimes suddenly and violently.
As I'd commented a few days ago[1], Google's then-CEO Eric Schmidt said "The Google policy on a lot of things is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it".
The problem with such a policy is in thinking that cultural and legal boundaries are fixed and inviolate. The very process of repeatedly pressing up to a border may trigger the backlash which moves it, and can leave the fate-tempting party in deep water -- with its own culture, processes, amd institutions unable to adapt, or with goodwill so badly burnt it never recovers.
In particular, the resource most being burnt is trust, a commodity that's expensive to acquire, quick to burn, and that big business in particular has had in short supply for most of the past 50 years[3]. Trust, once earned and deserved, hugely reduces costs of business in that counterparties -- not just customers, but vendors, employees, regulators, and even competitors -- tend to be inclined to cooperate and assist. And when squandered, makes every interaction (including customer service) a scorched-earth battleground. The topic is something of an evergreen in the business field, I'd posted an item recently on it.[4]
There are numerous places where customer service gets it wrong, but breakdowns of trust across multiple boundaries is hugely evident: the company doesn't trust its customers, or CSRs, marketing doesn't trust manufacturing, sales doesn't trust service, engineering doesn't trust sales, and more. Combine this with monopoly-sector practices and you've got huge problems. Add in elements of James C. Scott's Seeing Like a State and much more.
As I'd commented a few days ago[1], Google's then-CEO Eric Schmidt said "The Google policy on a lot of things is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it".
The problem with such a policy is in thinking that cultural and legal boundaries are fixed and inviolate. The very process of repeatedly pressing up to a border may trigger the backlash which moves it, and can leave the fate-tempting party in deep water -- with its own culture, processes, amd institutions unable to adapt, or with goodwill so badly burnt it never recovers.
In particular, the resource most being burnt is trust, a commodity that's expensive to acquire, quick to burn, and that big business in particular has had in short supply for most of the past 50 years[3]. Trust, once earned and deserved, hugely reduces costs of business in that counterparties -- not just customers, but vendors, employees, regulators, and even competitors -- tend to be inclined to cooperate and assist. And when squandered, makes every interaction (including customer service) a scorched-earth battleground. The topic is something of an evergreen in the business field, I'd posted an item recently on it.[4]
There are numerous places where customer service gets it wrong, but breakdowns of trust across multiple boundaries is hugely evident: the company doesn't trust its customers, or CSRs, marketing doesn't trust manufacturing, sales doesn't trust service, engineering doesn't trust sales, and more. Combine this with monopoly-sector practices and you've got huge problems. Add in elements of James C. Scott's Seeing Like a State and much more.
______________________________
Notes:
1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20507894#20511372
2. https://www.businessinsider.com/eric-schmidt-googles-policy-...
3. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.as...
4. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20531236