>> continued from previous page
When All Else Fails
The likelihood of poor service is reduced when two parties agree from the start on service levels and when ongoing measurements provide a quantifiable standard. However, despite everyone's best efforts, poor service will occur, and you will need to act. The strategies individuals use for dealing with these situations are linked to personality type as much as anything else--again, there may not be a right or wrong way. Here are some general guidelines for action.
When service disputes occur, don't be passive. Some individuals place a high value on avoiding conflict, but when poor service is provided to your organization, you must respond assertively. However, it's important to distinguish between assertive behavior and aggressive behavior.
When you are assertive, you clearly articulate your service expectations and the consequences of a providers' failure. Aggressiveness--including the use of threats--often personalizes the situation. It won't serve your interests to be obnoxious, so try not to personalize your dispute; jerks often aren't taken seriously, particularly when they have track records as chronic complainers (see "How To Criticize Constructively," page 71).
A little bit of complimentary behavior when things are going well--a nice letter to someone's boss, for example--will ensure you get taken seriously because you'll be perceived as someone who doesn't cry wolf.
On the other end of the spectrum, it is understandable that many IT professionals, themselves service providers, will relate to the problems faced by a provider and therefore excuse poor service. But letting feelings of empathy interfere with sound business judgment is a serious mistake.
The most difficult decision you face when dealing with poor service is determining when to insist on escalation. Sometimes, people escalate too quickly, which might only complicate and delay the resolution of the service problem. If the individual with whom you are dealing can solve the problem, it is not a good idea to press for escalation, though a firm articulation that escalation might be necessary if the problem is not resolved quickly can be an effective negotiating tool. Just be prepared to follow through on your words.
A more common problem is a reluctance to escalate, particularly if you have a personal relationship with the service representative. By insisting on escalation, you are saying that you lack confidence in an individual's ability or willingness to resolve your problem. In some cases, however, it's the only rational course of action.
Often, a sense of humor or personal empathy can help, especially if the person with whom you're interacting really can't solve your problem. Approaching the situation in a team-oriented way may help too. Once you decide to escalate, recognize that you are obligating yourself to being able to explain the nature of the problem. That may require a fair amount of time and effort. And of course, make sure you document everything.
Service Termination and Legal Recourse
Sometimes, service disputes cannot be resolved even after they have been escalated to higher-level decision-makers. It is at this point that service relationships are often terminated, with or without the assistance of legal counsel. It is common in our litigious society for at least a threat of legal action to precede the termination of a service relationship resulting from a serious dispute. As is the case with escalation, legal recourse is an expensive proposition that can be very resource-intensive. Worse, it often has an element of risk, even in those situations where any individual with an ounce of common sense would recognize that your position is the correct one. As such, legal action should generally be considered a last resort. For more on the legal aspects of contracting with service providers, see "Let's Make a Deal."
A final footnote relates to the possible role of counsel as a resource for avoiding service disputes. In most organizations, service agreements are contracts, so it is not uncommon for standard operating procedures to dictate that the agreement be reviewed by your organization's attorney. There is usually no avoiding this process, even though it's frustrating when delays interfere with your ability to enter into a service contract. Unfortunately, attorneys can almost always find something to object to in a contract, and some seem to feel it is their responsibility to find problems even when none exist. Thus, you must develop a working relationship with your legal staff and adequately communicate your understanding of key service provisions and acceptable industry practices. Just be sure to allocate adequate time for this--attorneys are seldom able to get to your problem quickly, no matter how hard they try to provide high-quality service.
Dave Molta is a senior technology editor of Network Computing. He is also an assistant professor in the School of Information Studies at Syracuse University and director of the Center for Emerging Network Technologies. Molta's experience includes 15 years in IT and network management. Send your comments on this article to him at dmolta@nwc.com.
RSS
