AMAZON: The Everything Store

[Stephjk]

Thanks for the post, have wanted that e-mail address for ages!

[Sregener]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

The only thing that counts in most CS departments are policies and numbers.

That may be true, but there's a reason why there are troubleshooting steps: they can save time.

I once drove an hour, parked in a expensive zone (we're talking downtown Washington D.C., within blocks of the Monument) and went into a building to solve a difficult network printer problem, only to discover that it was out of paper. The employees who faithfully reported each and every time that "nothing came out of the printer" never saw fit to notify us that there was a message on the printer screen, and we assumed they were smart enough to add paper on their own. That mistake cost the company hundreds of dollars. Similarly, we would sometimes discover that a computer wasn't plugged in - which helped to explain why they couldn't see anything on their screen.

Phones obfuscate. We can't see, we assume, and without a protocol we may make mistakes that cost the company a lot of money. But policies can be inane as well, because they assume that the person handling the call lacks intelligence. You might be an exceptional employee, which suggests that your future does not lie in answering telephone support issues.

[BadBilly]

Originally Posted by ApK

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.

Oh, no, don't go changing the central point. You said that CSRs doing what they are told to do are failing because they are following instructions. You even used the the phrase "Just following orders," insinuating that they're not just incompetent but actually evil, akin to those who would herd people into cattle cars. Now you want to make it about whether or not they actually did follow instructions.

In my experience, there are always plenty of management drones willing to tell us we're doing something wrong when we're doing what we've been instructed to do. Furthermore, given that I work in a highly-regulated industry, doing anything that has not been approved by the lawyers risks violating a whole bunch of laws. Nothing I deal with involves anybody who is in danger, no lives at risk. Mostly people want me to go against procedure so they can have what they want faster. This is usually due to waiting till the last minute to contact me. Their failure to plan does not constitute my emergency.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by BadBilly

You even used the the phrase "Just following orders," insinuating that they're not just incompetent but actually evil

In this case it referred to being told to do someting wrong and not having the sense or character to challenge or question it. As the sentence following it told, I was speaking of them doing stuff against policy. Think more shady telemarker and less Nazi. And by the way, I was thinking more of the phrase having come up far more recently than WWII, used by our guys. Not evil, but should have known better.

This is usually due to waiting till the last minute to contact me. Their failure to plan does not constitute my emergency.

Yeah, a snarky little sign I often see hung up in the cubes of self important admins and apathetic help desk reps.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by ApK

In this case it referred to being told to do someting wrong and not having the sense or character to challenge or question it. As the sentence following it told, I was speaking of them doing stuff against policy. Think more shady telemarker and less Nazi. And by the way, I was thinking more of the phrase having come up far more recently than WWII, used by our guys. Not evil, but should have known better.


Yeah, a snarky little sign I often see hung up in the cubes of self important admins and apathetic help desk reps.

I'm confused. Should they follow the orders or not? Is it the responsibility of some person who is not capable of getting a job other than call center (not casting aspersions, because in some areas no other options) to think outside the box? Sure it might help them if they did, perhaps they would get a better job in the call center. Call center work even in 3rd world countries is not really a career choice though, or something that most aspire for excellence in.

Helen

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

So in the end, it's always the fault of the normal employee if something is amiss; never the fault of management or their targets. Nice to know, if you work at Amazon in a non-management position.

What a bizarre interpretation. Maybe you should read the book and get back on that unless your belief prohibit that.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

I'm confused. Should they follow the orders or not? Is it the responsibility of some person who is not capable of getting a job other than call center (not casting aspersions, because in some areas no other options) to think outside the box? Sure it might help them if they did, perhaps they would get a better job in the call center. Call center work even in 3rd world countries is not really a career choice though, or something that most aspire for excellence in.

Helen

Apparently the "following orders" reference had the exact opposite of the effect I intended (which was to make my meaning clear). So here's that entire post again, with hopefully clearer one-liners standing in for my original paragraphs:

I think Bezos probably questions the appropriate manager about these issues.

Sometimes a non-managerial employee can indeed be at fault, and even being told to do something that's against policy and harmful to a customer doesn't necessarily excuse them.

It did not read like the implication was that Bezos berates low level employees for doing what they were told to do, rather it reads like he questions bad policy or violations of policy that harm the customer.

[fjtorres]

As is typical for unofficial/non-approved bios, several people with personal knowledge of events described in the book questioning accuracy. Most notably, Mrs Bezos:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-576...ng-store-book/

MacKenzie Bezos plucked out a detail that, according to her, is incorrect -- the timing of when Jeff Bezos read the novel "Remains of the Day" that inspired some of his business ideals. She pointed to two other reviews that were supposedly written by one current Amazon executive and a former one. The two reviews also said some details were wrong but still gave the book four and three stars.
"If this were an isolated example, it might not matter, but it's not," MacKenzie Bezos wrote in her review. "Everywhere I can fact check from personal knowledge, I find way too many inaccuracies, and unfortunately that casts doubt over every episode in the book. Like two other reviewers here, Jonathan Leblang and Rick Dalzell, I have firsthand knowledge of many of the events."
She also didn't like how her husband was portrayed as relentlessly goal-oriented and, at times, harsh in manner.

[Katsunami]

She also didn't like how her husband was portrayed as relentlessly goal-oriented and, at times, harsh in manner.

Heh. I don't think you can build a company such as Amazon if you are not relentlessly goal-oriented and (sometimes) harsh in manner.

"I think I'm going to build a world-wide company, and become the dominant book seller... I think. Maybe; if I feel like it today. Or something. Oh... Kobo took 50% of the e-reader market last year? Hm. Whatever. We'll see what next year brings."

I don't see it working out too well

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Heh. I don't think you can build a company such as Amazon if you are not relentlessly goal-oriented and (sometimes) harsh in manner.

"I think I'm going to build a world-wide company, and become the dominant book seller... I think. Maybe; if I feel like it today. Or something. Oh... Kobo took 50% of the e-reader market last year? Hm. Whatever. We'll see what next year brings."

I don't see it working out too well

Nope.
Being all understanding and empathetic with the middle-managers isn't going to result in fast fixes to the inevitable screwups, either.

On the other hand, if she truly has never seen that side of him it speaks highly of his domestic and parenting skills. Bodes well for the kids.

[tubemonkey]

As long as it's a good read, accuracy's a minor detail

[Freeshadow]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

As long as it's a good read, accuracy's a minor detail

In the spirit of this we are all waiting for a bio of yours.
"50 apes to spray - the monkey, it's tube and a bottle of lube" by Ian Sim

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Freeshadow

In the spirit of this we are all waiting for a bio of yours.
"50 apes to spray - the monkey, it's tube and a bottle of lube" by Ian Sim