AMAZON: The Everything Store

[fjtorres]

From Business Week:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-brad-stone#p1

It takes a whole (upcoming) book to cover Amazon properly.
BusinessWeek has some choice extracts.

Within Amazon.com (AMZN) there’s a certain type of e-mail that elicits waves of panic. It usually originates with an annoyed customer who complains to the company’s founder and chief executive officer. Jeff Bezos has a public e-mail address, jeff@amazon.com. Not only does he read many customer complaints, he forwards them to the relevant Amazon employees, with a one-character addition: a question mark.

When Amazon employees get a Bezos question mark e-mail, they react as though they’ve discovered a ticking bomb. They’ve typically got a few hours to solve whatever issue the CEO has flagged and prepare a thorough explanation for how it occurred, a response that will be reviewed by a succession of managers before the answer is presented to Bezos himself. Such escalations, as these e-mails are known, are Bezos’s way of ensuring that the customer’s voice is constantly heard inside the company.

Lots more. Flattering and embarrassing.
Highly recommended.

He really belongs with Jobs and Gates in his management style. He does not suffer foolishness. At all. Too bad he has to deal with corporate publishing.

[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.

[ApK]

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.

That REALLY doesn't seem like fair conclusion to leap to.
There's not nearly enough information quoted there to find that kind of fault with.
For example, who says that the employee receiving the '?' email isn't a manager?

And anyway, sometime it really IS the fault of an employee.
"I was only following orders" doesn't even excuse sworn soldiers in many cases, why should it excuse a customer service rep?

And, presumably Bezos would not be flagging a complaint if it was something that was in line with management's policies.

ApK

[theducks]

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.

A manager is still an 'employee'

I seriously doubt these go directly to the warehouse pickers

[NickyWithNook]

It depends on how they respond to it. If they are looking for an explanation and accept, "This is the policy at this time and I was following policy" and then look to change policy rather than blame the employee, I think it's fine. But of course we know that sh*t always flows downhill so I don't doubt the employees get blamed for things not their fault. I guess I have mixed feelings. I like hearing that they respond to customer complaints but I do see the potential for unfair treatment to lower level employees.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ApK

That REALLY doesn't seem like fair conclusion to leap to.
There's not nearly enough information quoted there to find that kind of fault with.
For example, who says that the employee receiving the '?' email isn't a manager?

ApK

The article clearly states that a whole chain of managers are involved in the escalation.
'?' Emails aren't about dumping on staff. Not the way the process is described. It reads like Bezos is asking for an audit of the issue that caught his attention and an explanation+solution. That is a healthy approach for any organization.

Now, that he might go "nutters" if the answer isn't satisfactory is a whole separate issue.
(But hardly unique. Most high caliber tech execs are demanding and excitable. A touch of Asperger's seems to go with the drive to succeed at those levels.)

[pidgeon92]

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.

This isn't exclusive to Amazon. I've seen this attitude in every corporation I've worked in.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by ApK

For example, who says that the employee receiving the '?' email isn't a manager?

Because the quote seems to make a clear distinction between "managers" and "employees".

And anyway, sometime it really IS the fault of an employee.
"I was only following orders" doesn't even excuse sworn soldiers in many cases, why should it excuse a customer service rep?

Because I worked as a customer service rep in the past, and know how this stuff works.

"I listened in on your last call. You must give customers more explanation."
*gives customers more explanation*
"Why did you not meet $Target yesterday?"
- "Because you told me to give customers more explanation."
"That's not a reason."

Eh. You can't have it both. You can't expect a CS Rep to both hit a target like 70 calls within a day (~6min 45s a call, including taking full name, address, phone number, e-mail, product type and model, serial number, used operating system, if any... blabla....) *AND* completely explain and teach every little detail to a customer and doing stuff like a complete device installation through the phone.

In the end, the CS Rep never does it right. He/She either fobs off customers, or he/she doesn't meet some sort of target for the company. To the outside, the company screams "customer!", to the inside, the company screams "target!".

And it's never the manager who is at fault. He sets a target of 50-60-70 calls/mails/chats per day according to "expected volume", and you're expected to meet it, or you're "underperformig". I once told my manager:

"OK. I'll meet the target of at least 70 calls this day, and all your other stuff like taking name, addrss, ectetera, educating customers, explaining how devices work, walking them through device installations, IF you can show me how. Sit at the phone. Take into account ALL stuff we are expected to do AND all of your other rules, and then, MEET YOUR OWN TARGETS. If you can do it... I will do it as well." He never took me up on the challenge, and I never heard one more quip about not meeting a target as long as my customer satisfaction was "in the green".

Believe me, I know how this shit works, if you're in between the customer and the manager.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Because the quote seems to make a clear distinction between "managers" and "employees".

The 'employee' who gets the letter may be a manager, or may not be. There's nothing to indicate that an INAPPROPRIATE PERSON is being asked to respond.
The escalations, as stated, are ALL to managers, as it would be pointless to 'escalate' to a co-worker peer.

Because I worked as a customer service rep in the past, and know how this stuff works.

So you're projecting.

Some CSRs meet the high targets and give excellent service.
SOME of those that don't are not being subjected to unfair goals, some are just making excuses for under-performing.
Your challenge to your manager (well, in general at least...maybe not in your specific case) was pointless, because the job and skills of a manager is not necessarily the same job and skills of those they manage.
Should a quarterback only have to throw the ball as well as the coach?

And, the effects of unfair or conflicting policies are not restricted to laborers. Managers and executives often suffer for things that are out of their control. Even CEOs get ousted because of the misinformed and unreasonable rantings of the media.

There is nothing in the quote to suggest any unfairness or abuse. It's a Rorschach test if anything. I see a bunny.

I'm looking forward to reading the book.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by ApK

Your challenge to your manager (well, in general at least...maybe not in your specific case) was pointless, because the job and skills of a manager is not necessarily the same job and skills of those they manage.

That's the entire point of the challenge. There are a lot of managers that have NO fracking clue of WHAT they are managing. They set targets without ever having tested if they can be met reliably, either by trying it themselves, or having a reliable employee test it.

There is nothing in the quote to suggest any unfairness or abuse. It's a Rorschach test if anything. I see a bunny.

Except for the fact that someone receiving a "?" e-mail seems to freak out of his mind. That alone signals to me that there is a "it's never good enough"-culture at Amazon, at least at some levels.

[cfrizz]

Both Kat & ApK have made good points and both of you are correct in your thoughts.

Most CS is a bunch of BS speak to the outside world of the importance of the customer but internally it's ALL about numbers. They know full well that most can't either meet the numbers or provide better CS to people all at the same time. This gives them the reasons they need to deliberately keep their staffs salaries where they want them to be.

I believe it is called the Bell Curve with the majority falling right in the middle.

From what I gathered reading the article the ? email went to the supervisor/manager to investigate and provide and explanation.

[fjtorres]

Take the one example presented in the article:

One of the more memorable escalations occurred in late 2010. It had come to Bezos’s attention that customers who had browsed the lubricants section of Amazon’s sexual wellness category were receiving personalized e-mails pitching a variety of gels and other intimacy facilitators. When the e-mail marketing team received the question mark, they knew the topic was delicate and nervously put together an explanation. Amazon’s direct marketing tool was decentralized, and category managers could generate e-mail campaigns to customers who had looked at certain product categories but did not make purchases. The promotions tended to work; they were responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in Amazon’s annual sales. In the matter of the lubricant e-mail, though, a low-level product manager had overstepped the bounds of propriety.

They had a process that made it easy for low-level managers to speak for the company. Too easy. It blew up in their faces. Bezos acted before it got worse.
Some things require short-circuiting normal channels; that one qualifies.
(Shrug)
A corporate CEO going nutters may be undignified but it seems to work, considering how often you see it among the most effective of managers. Maybe because it rattles middle managers out of their numeric stupor?

[BadBilly]

Originally Posted by ApK

And anyway, sometime it really IS the fault of an employee.
"I was only following orders" doesn't even excuse sworn soldiers in many cases, why should it excuse a customer service rep?

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.

Originally Posted by ApK

And, presumably Bezos would not be flagging a complaint if it was something that was in line with management's policies.

ApK

HA! You have obviously never worked in a customer-facing role in a large corporation. 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.

[BeccaPrice]

I had to get some cheapo condoms for my daughter (don't laugh - it's to make blood packs for a halloween production, and condoms make the best bloodpacks, but you've gotta get really cheap ones so they'll break easily), and I was really worried about what that would do to my Amazon browsing history (I found some that were the lowest rated, and described as being "cheap cr*p") but Amazon hasn't picked up on that at all, and all I see in my "since you bought x, you might be interested in y" list are books and other appropriate things.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by BadBilly

HA! You have obviously never worked in a customer-facing role in a large corporation. We're told to do "A" even though we don't think it makes sense and annoys the customers.

LOL... so true.

"My camera has a crack in the LCD-screen because I dropped it. I'd like to have that repaired."
- "Very well sir. Do you have your camera with you?" (*pulls up camera troubleshooting guide*)
"Yes."
- "Then please turn it off, and then turn it on again."
"Well, ok... It has now restarted."
- "Did this resolve the issue sir?"
"WHAT THE FRACK... YOU ^%@^#^ MORON."

Skip directly to then end of the troubleshooter: "I'm sorry to hear that sir. I have sent you an e-mail, with instructions on how to get your camera repaired."

If the manager was just listening in on that call, you'll probably get whacked for not following the troubleshooting guide. Hell, I got whacked for not actually pulling up the guide on the computer because I knew it on the top of my head.

"That's not a reason. The guidelines are that you must find the correct documentation before you start troubleshooting."

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