Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: brian@ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Music On Hold
Message-ID: <13121@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 7 Oct 90 15:19:59 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: The Avant-Garde of the Now, Ltd.
Lines: 49
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 718, Message 9 of 12


In article <13095@accuvax.nwu.edu> jj1028@homxc.att.com (Maurice R
Baker) writes:

>If you're going to be "stacked up" on hold for any length of
>time, the answering system (tried to choose a suitably generic label)
>should give you the choice of:

> (several ideas for what you listen to while caught in a telephone
> traffic jam)

While those are nice suggestions, they miss the point.  If more
companies started regarding call that was abandoned while on hold as a
LOST SALE, they soon start doing something about making sure people
weren't put on hold quite so much.

It's simple: if you call an organization and get parked for an
impolite amount of time, whenever practical, abandon that call and
call the competition.

If you have to deal with that firm, and it's appropriate, simply ask
the clerk to inform his manager that you are unhappy with the length
of time you had to wait and you are now much more inclined to call the
competition.

On a related note, I recently attended the TCA show here in San Diego,
and came away with the impression that the largest single emphasis of
the vendors at this year's show was on more new and wonderful ways for
people to talk to machines.  It's sad that a device that was once
designed to make communication between humans much easier is now being
engineered to make it much less likely.

A human-factors consideration: when I was making my living as a
computer consultant a few years ago, I became sensitive to the fact
that people often needed to call me most when they were having
problems with their computers, and that the last thing someone who is
already upset with his machine needs to hear is another machine
answering the phone when he calls for help.  Several of my customers
remarked how grateful they were that I had SOMEONE (me or the
answering service) available 24 hours to answer their call, even if
all they could do was take a message or promise to page me.

It was clear to me that the $25 a month for a real person (i.e., an
answering service) more than paid for itself in the number of jobs I
got.  Fooey on whizz-bang technology: people want to talk to people,
not machines.


Brian