Here's an odd situation I ran into the other day. I was called by a CSR with an obvious accent (something French based). I was being nice an letting him give his speil, then I said 'Hey, are you from Quebec?' And he said 'No, I'm from Southern Nebraska.' Now I knew immediately that this person was lying to me, and so I quickly ended the call without buying what he was trying to sell.

Now, my question: What should this agent have done? And do you think he was from one of the foreign call centers that train their agents to pretend to be American? (and are there very many that actually tell their agents to lie about their origin?)

Marianne

Hi Marianne,

Your observations are true. In India where the call centres are outsourced the Indians are given different identity. A name which is not his/hers. Reason. They want to keep their customers happy. When every one has his/her own identity, and are accusomed to being called by that name throughout their life, the call centre management has taken away a fundamental right. Right to use his original name. These call centers ape the US counterparts. Without realising the damage they are doing to the individual values. They repeatedly make him/her fake their identity thus ensuring that the customer relationship is built on dishonesty ( Probably to these outsourcers the values mean a s**t and customers a device to be manipulated). When we discuss this interesting topic we see more such foolish policies being practiced in international outsourced call centres.These call centres are there only to make money but not to help build relationships. Can we ever think of building a successful relationship lasting for life time based on fake identity? There is something wrong in their approach.

One call centre in Mumbai gives incentives to agents who speak like an American. They have a more bizarre policy. They ensure that the agent speaks inan unnatural accent as long as he is in call centre and if he/she reverts to his/her natural Inglish(Indian English ofcourse!),they are sacked.

Are there any human right violations?This is a question for which I need answers.

Vedula

Peeps

The kind of action you talk about here is utterly deplorable and I applaud you both for bringing it to our attention.

For an agent to deliver the best service they must develop a relationship with the other human being. This is physically impossible to do if they are forced into 'acting' in this manner.

Personally I would like to see it outlawed. Additionally if a company feels its customers are so biggoted, narrow minded and stupid that they would not be able to stand or understand CSRs using a different accent than they do not deserve to be in business.

For me the greatest crime in all of this is that the poor guys tasked with providing this farce will be blamed if it not a success when it's patently the bigots (nation or company)

Sorry if its a bit strong but...

David

The people selling this service are just as biggoted and should be sacked.

David

Marianne, what a great topic. Vedula, David, excellent insights, as usual. To continue the discussion, let's play "Agree or Disagree?". Ready?

1. The primary motivation for a company to outsource their call center operations to another country is to 'provide same or better quality service(s) at a significant cost savings'. Agree or Disagree?

2. One of the key concerns for a company when outsourcing to another country is 'customer satisfaction', which will be defined differently among various companies. Agree or Disagree?

3. Companies that believe their customers prefer speaking with someone with the same general accent, or are at least in the same country, are mistaken. Agree or Disagree?

4. Outsourcing companies are participating in this type of 'identity-bending' at the request of the companies that have hired them to interact with their customers. Agree or Disagree?

5. Customer satisfaction surveys and overall sales results are the same, regardless of the 'accent' of the person speaking with the customer. Agree or Disagree?

6. Companies are to blame for this issue, because they want the benefits of incredibly low costs, but are not willing to embrace the culture of the vendor's country. Agree or Disagree?

7. Outsourcing companies are to blame for this issue, because they are seeking to differentiate themselves by providing this kind of service, as opposed to remaining morally opposed. Agree or Disagree?

8. The customers themselves are to blame for this issue, because they are clearly not responding to 'accented' people as well as they would to 'non-accented' people. Agree or Disagree.

Can't wait to get in tomorrow and read responses! By the way, I havea philosophical stance on this topic, set in stone. Just want to stir the pot a bit on everyone's business logic.....

Brent

Brent

You rascal! Ok. Answers on a postcard…

1 - The premis you approach this from assumes the same level of weighting within the business who are outsourcing for the two issues of cost and quality.

Sorry my friend but my experience of working with outsourcing vendors here in the UK is that majoritively they win on price. The experience I have here, is that initially (by that I mean literally the first discussion or two) the two have similar weighting. However, once these are ‘out of the way’ quality is discarded and price takes over completely. So, when recounting the facts, one can say that quality gets mentioned in 2 meetings and cost in 6-8 which, rightly or wrongly, leads one to concluded that cost is the driver and with quality very firmly secondary.

2 – Agree. But, this is always talked about after the outsourcing vendor has been beaten up on price and so in reality has no where to go in terms of flexibility.

3 – Agree. The facts are that it is the competence and manner that competence is delivered that determines a customer's real satisfaction. My experience here is that it's possible to deliver real satisfaction and not actually 'like' the person making you feel good.

4 – Cannot answer. I have no evidence one way or the other who started this. However, when looking for reasons why, it seems obvious (to me at least) that part of this problem is the general over-supply of outsourcing vendors and the potential tactics employed to gain business in that kind of market.

5 – Agree.

6 – Agree. However, in my view the fundamental reason is not so much a lack of embracing culture as a complete misunderstanding of what constitutes real satisfaction. What this translates to, isreinforcement of a paradigm that is already proven not to work…

7 – As 4.

8 – Disagree.

I’m really sorry, but once again this issue demonstrates very graphically the consequences of measuring and delivering the 'unimportant' in human satisfaction terms. If outsourcing vendors focussed on delivering an empathetic service, then no matter what kind of satisfaction survey was carried out they would score well and comments would be received that indicated high levels of loyalty. By the same token, if companies truly understood the nature of transactions with its customers then it would see that people are actually willing to pay more if they believe they will receive value for money.

No matter how clever or stupid you are the facts speak volumes. Profit contribution is at least TEN times greater from sell price rises than it is from the same percentage cost reduction.

By cutting costs mercilessly you say to customers, “We want to squeeze more from you.” Byimproving quality (and price) the message sent is, “We want to deliver what you want.”

Which would you choose?

David

David, thanks for playing! I do believe we are doing our part to pump a bit more life into our beloved Call Centre Voice forum, and in so doing are addressing an important topic.

I agree, the 'origins' topic is illustrative of a number of greater issues within the call center community, indeed within the business community as a whole. I'm curious to hear other opinions on this 'microcosmic' topic.

Not to unduly influence any potential responses to 'Agree or Disagree?', but I'd like toaddress some of your responses, David, to continue our discussion. I agree with you that the service/cost issue drifts quickly to the side of costs. Much too quickly, in fact. The issue, I believe, is that costs are often easier to quantify, at least on the surface.

Having dealt with US, Canadian, Mexican and Central American outsourcers, I have found quite a varied overall understanding among them regarding both service and costs - the best ones will attempt to differentiate themselves with high service (ill-defined at times), but all eventually must 'cave in' to competitive pricing, or simply close their doors.

My experience, particularly with US companies, is that companies that outsource some or all of their call volumes to vendors have two key problems:

1. They don't understand their own cost structures and key performance indicators within their internal call centers well enough to provide direction to the vendor. In other words, a company that excels in making widgets does not necessarily excel in running a call center. This disparity in expertise creates an often chaotic relationship with the outsource vendor, which rarely is resolved to anyone's satisfaction - leading to poor service all the way around.

2. American companies like to 'dicker' (haggle, negotiate). If a person in an organization can do nothing else of value for their company, they can at least 'beat up' a vendor on pricing. This is a piss-poor (pardon the language) business tactic, onefed mostly by lack of business understanding and an overdeveloped ego. A vendor can provide a company with excellent services, excellent technology, and excellent pricing - and can expect to be kicked in the teeth by a mid-level up-and-comer whose sole directive from his/her boss is to 'go find me 10% off that deal'. I'm a big John Wayne fan, but even the Duke wouldn't keep shooting a corpse just to make sure it was really, really dead....

Sorry for the soap box interlude, there....businesses that wish to deal in integrity and in true partnership with their clients must on occasion say 'no' to a client request - be it a lowering of price, a lowering of service levels, or the implementation of an 'identity disguise' plan.

More thoughts, anyone?

1. Agree

2. Agree

3. Hmm..I don't believe that the accent should matter, as long as the person can speak the language clearly. (Now a very thick accent sometimes prevents that.)

4. I guess, I don't know who actually does this.

5. See #4.

6. Agree.

7. It would depend on who is forcing the agents to do this...is it the client or the outsourcing company. Or is it just one person in the company with a crazy idea that they have to 'pretend' to be 100% Mid-Western American to sell a product?

8. Disagree. See #4. I would really like to see a survey that shows a response between accented and non-accented speakers. However, the CLARITY must be the same.

I just believe it is genuinely harmful to the callcenter, the client and the agent when they are asked to flat out lie, about anything. It has to be horrible for the agents morale!

Marianne

Vedula,

That sounds like it would be horrible for their self-esteem. To constantly be told they were not good enough as themselves.

Are they forced to speak like Americans, or just to enunciate clearly and use proper grammar?

We have problems with some agents here in Florida who can't speak clearly or with proper grammar, and if they are unable to improve, then they don't last long in the call center. This has nothing to do with their accent, but rather with the ability to communicate effectively.

I just want to differentiate between speaking improperly and speaking with an accent.

Thanks,
Marianne

"I just want to differentiate between speaking improperly and speaking with an accent."

A very important distinction to make; however, more important than this is the fundamental consideration that the operator must be capable of communicating with his or her audience - the caller - with clarity and accuracy. Both 'slang' and 'accents' can be double-edged swords in this regard.

I'm reminded of the difficulty I had trying to make sense out of a very-quick-talking Irish accent during my last encounter with the Dell helpline... a lovely language, and the country's tax incentives have indeed worked, but sometimes the accents can pose obstacles in the ultimate goal of bi-directional communication!

John

Hi Brent,

Let me complete your survey first before I answer Marianne.

1-Agree
2-Disagree
3-Agree
4-Disagree
5-No idea
6-Agree
7-Agree
8-Disagree

My views on the topic:

1.Origin must not matter as long as you can communicate clearly.

2.There are innumerable accents in same country.Hence the accents should be neutral and words should be pronounced the way the majority understand rather than adopt one particular standard.

3. Wrong grammar and poor vocabulary can be overcome only by training and practice.

4. Voice defects which are minor can be over come by voice culture exercises but serious defects can not be overcome and better not recruit them in call centres.

5. some people stammer when not confident but are fluent in face to face interaction. Need focussed training and they need to build their self confidence.It is one of the stress symptoms. It can be overcome.

6.Clear communication is the basic skill but there are other skills apart from communication which constitute effective customer interaction.

7. Satisfaction=need fulfilment. Excellent communication and no Need fulfilment = dissatisfaction.

The real issue here is false identity for customer interaction. It is abominable and should be condemned by every sane individual.

The callcentres which practice this are not providing customer service but are fooling customers.

Looking from outsourcer point of view- The correct Pronunciation of foreign names is a special skill set which call centre agents can pickup by training but the customers would not like to speak to someone whose name they can not pronounce properly. Something to do with barrier to rappot formation-strangers.

Vedula

John ,

interesting point. I seem to recall several instances when I was on the phone to
a call centre based in England where I could clearly hear every word she said but when I answered her questions she complained that there was a bad line.Now that may have been the case but , since I am from "scotchland" , I also heard her say to her colleagues "shhh he's from scotland..." as if she could not understand me.

So accents are very important especially if the call centre staff cannot understand their cutsomers and vice versa.

I for one would not use that particular company again because of the bad experience I had with accents - afterall everybody in the UK do speak the same langauge.

Here are the combined results of 'Agree or Disagree?', with my votes added in. Thanks, David, Marianne and Vedula for playing...

1. Primary motivation for outsourcing out-of-country is to provide same or better quality at a lower price. Agree-2 Disagree-2.

David's comments, I believe, hit the nail on the head when describing how often quality and pricing are mentioned in negotiations: "quality gets mentioned in 2 meetings and cost in 6-8". That ratio sounds about right to me, having negotiated a few of these on both sides of the table.

To add to David's comment that "once these are ‘out of the way’ quality is discarded and price takes over completely", I submit that most companies hammer hard on pricing during negotiations, and then begin to make knee-jerk demands on the quality once the project is underway.

2. Customer satisfaction a key concern when outsourcing out of country.
Agree-3 Disagree-1.

Vedula's lone voice ofdisagreement is telling, however, considering his unique perspective on the topic. My own vote of agreement is based less on a belief that companies are truly concerned about customer satisfaction, and more on the belief that companies DO want to keep their customers from getting truly pissed off. Big difference.

3. Companies that believe their customers prefer speaking with someone with the same general accent, or are at least in the same country, are mistaken. Agree-3 Disagree-1.

Marianne states, "I don't believe that the accent should matter, as long as the person can speak the language clearly." Further, David says, "The facts are that it is the competence and manner that competence is delivered that determines a customer's real satisfaction." Both are true, in my opinion.

However, I am the lone dissenter on this one. Unfortunately, there is (in my humble opinion) a sizable percentage of the population who have not reached any enlightenment regarding dealing with other cultures. Maybe in another 50 years or so.....

4. Outsourcing companies are participating in this type of 'identity-bending' at the request of the companies that have hired them to interact with their customers. Agree-1 Disagree-1 Not Sure-2.

Again, Vedula's vote is telling. He believes (presumably) that the vendors are doing this on their own. My guess (and hence my vote) is that companies are presenting vendors with 'accent issues' and are leaving it up to the vendor to fix it - with the result being the kind of behavior we are talking about.

5. Customer satisfaction surveys and overall sales results are the same, regardless of the 'accent' of the person speaking with the customer.
Agree-1 Disagree-0 Not sure-3.

Interesting, I think, that three of four aren't sure, including me. My guess is that there is a statistical difference (see #3). Barring all anecdotal data that I'm sure we all have, has anyone done a study for real data? This is the most important question of our little mini-study here, I think. What does the customer think? David is the lone person with an opinion on this one - David?

6. Companies are to blame for this issue, because they want the benefits of incredibly low costs, but are not willing to embrace the culture of the vendor's country. Agree-4 Disagree-0.

Ah, a clean sweep! David says, "...the fundamental reason is not so much a lack of embracing culture as a complete misunderstanding of what constitutes real satisfaction." Amen - to add to that, companies may not necessarily factor in customer satisfaction at all. The manner in which a company chooses to do business with their vendor, and with their customer, is key here.

7. Outsourcing companies are to blame for this issue, because they are seeking to differentiate themselves by providing this kind of service, as opposed to remaining morally opposed. Agree 2 Disagree 0 Not Sure 2.

Marianne says, "...is it just one person in the company with a crazy idea that they have to 'pretend' to be 100% Mid-Western American to sell a product?" Once again, Vedula's vote of agreement carries a lot of weight. Personally, I can understand a vendor's desire to keep their client happy - however, giving 'too much, too often' leads away from the desired strategic partnership needed in every business relationship.

8. The customers themselves are to blame for this issue, because they are clearly not responding to 'accented' people as well as they would to 'non-accented' people. Agree 1 Disagree 3.

Sorry I ruined the sweep on this one. I think we all hesitate to use the word 'blame' and 'customer' in the same sentence. And while I have no data to support my instinct, the postings onthis thread alone give evidence that we've all had memorable experiences on the phones where there was an obvious communication struggle. However, is the solution to lie about who you are and/or where you're from? No way.

As Marianne says, "Ijust believe it is genuinely harmful to the callcenter, the client and the agent when they are asked to flat out lie, about anything. It has to be horrible for the agents morale!"

Vendula also adds, "The real issue here is false identity for customer interaction. It is abominable and should be condemned by every sane individual.
The callcentres which practice this are not providing customer service but are fooling customers."

I think on that we all agree.

Brent