Quote:
Originally Posted by BadBilly
Because they're following the guidelines the company has created to deliver the kind of the service the company has chosen to deliver and not gassing Jews.
It's not, for example, a crime against humanity to refuse to ship to an address that differs from the credit card billing address.
[...] We're told to do "A" even though we don't think it makes sense and annoys the customers. Nobody will listen to us. But if VP Joe decides we should be doing "B" instead of "A", it's an overnight change.
|
Focusing on the example: If the policy allows for the change of address, and rep doesn't accommodate the customer, then the rep SHOULD be asked about it. If the rep says they were told not to do it, then the 'escalation' should determine if that was true or if some retraining is needed.
If the policy DOESN'T allow for it, then do you really think, in the context of this quote, Bezos is bragging about sending emails to people who FOLLOWED policy? I see it far more likely (with equally little evidence except for context) that If such an in-policy complaint got the '?' treatment it would be directed to the manager who created the policy.
Quote:
|
HA! You have obviously never worked in a customer-facing role in a large corporation.
|
Oh, how wrong you are, unless you don't consider AT&T and several national department store chains to be "large corporations."
(also the Navy, which is not a corporation, and my customers were all internal, but the same issues manifest, and the 'following orders' line carries a bit more weight when someone's request for a software update gets rejected...
).
I'm not saying mismanagement and blame-shifting like you're describing doesn't happen, or even that it never happens at Amazon.
I'm saying there was NOTHING quoted here to suggest it in any way.
ApK