Complex language and owning truth

[Jaguar]

Like when?

While posting to Julius.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Like when?

When comprehension or efficiency is necessary.

 

[Deprecator]

You are either trying to a. flaunt your language to signify intellect, b. confuse the listener or both.

lol is this a thing that people do? I try not to automatically presume that the intentions of another are sinister in nature; they are what they are and until they offer a reason to presume otherwise I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

At work a common question from a disgruntled customer is: "why didn't my order ship out on time?" Of course the explanation itself is meaningless; whatever the reason and whatever the explanation, the order didn't ship out on time and the only thing we're able to do now is reschedule. At the same time I understand why they ask because if we have no idea why the order didn't go out then what's to stop the same thing from happening again? Thus, it's not what you say that's important so much as it's how you say it. If a frontline agent answers the question with uncertainty, hesitation or doubt -- or worse yet, if they outright confess that they don't know why -- then it's a surefire way for the customer to ask to talk to a supervisor/ manager, in which case I then get to take over the call. Because the explanation itself is often irrelevant, in some cases a great way to "cheat" is to occasionally throw in the fancy use of technical jargon -- even if they don't understand everything you say, so long as you say it with enough confidence and authority then they are magically reassured that you know what you're doing and that the same thing won't happen again. Back this up with a few "internal investigations" and "quality reports" in combination with your fancy title and suddenly they're thanking you profusely by the time the call ends.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

lol is this a thing that people do? I try not to automatically presume that the intentions of another are sinister in nature; they are what they are and until they offer a reason to presume otherwise I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

At work a common question from a disgruntled customer is: "why didn't my order ship out on time?" Of course the explanation itself is meaningless; whatever the reason and whatever the explanation, the order didn't ship out on time and the only thing we're able to do now is reschedule. At the same time I understand why they ask because if we have no idea why the order didn't go out then what's to stop the same thing from happening again? Thus, it's not what you say that's important so much as it's how you say it. If a frontline agent answers the question with uncertainty, hesitation or doubt -- or worse yet, if they outright confess that they don't know why -- then it's a surefire way for the customer to ask to talk to a supervisor/ manager, in which case I then get to take over the call. Because the explanation itself is often irrelevant, in some cases a great way to "cheat" is to occasionally throw in the fancy use of technical jargon -- even if they don't understand everything you say, so long as you say it with enough confidence and authority then they are magically reassured that you know what you're doing and that the same thing won't happen again. Back this up with a few "internal investigations" and "quality reports" in combination with your fancy title and suddenly they're thanking you profusely by the time the call ends.

Well, yes, that's a bit of a different situation. Generally the important thing I want to know when I talk to customer service is that I'm being taken seriously and that things have started on a path towards resolution, and I don't necessarily expect an immediate resolution. That's not the case with most people, though.

In that case, you're responsible for their emotional state, and this is more of a priority than having them understand all the details of why this or that didn't work. It's not something I like doing, which is why I moved away from tech support.