Within the department there are a number of different ways that an appliance can be ordered. This is because some are stock lines at John Lewis and can be despatched within a number of days. Occasionally these may be out of stock but the company will expect an imminent delivery however a delivery date can not be disclosed at the ordering stage.
The final way that an appliance can be ordered is directly from the manufacturer. In the case of this happening no delivery date can be confirmed and the manufacturer will contact the customer with a date for delivery.It would seem that the Christmas temp employed by the department at this time was confused with these ordering systems and quoted a date for delivery even though it was out of stock. These mistakes are fairly easy to make as the ordering systems used in the department aren’t particularly user friendly.
This system can be improved dramatically to avoid such mistakes. For example if the stock screen shows that a product is out of stock then it should automatically go to the correct screen to order that stock with an explanation of what is happening. Currently the salesperson has to choose the correct method for ordering the goods.The employees in the department also need more than just the basic training that is often carried out on the shop floor through observation as not all possibilities with the system can be highlighted especially with the short-term contracts that the employees hold. Issue 2 It would seem that there has been a fair bit of confusion with this issue and the manager assigned to the case has given out the incorrect information to the customer. As stated in issue 1 an appliance can be ordered directly from the manufacturer as a one off order by John Lewis.
This was not the case with this machine it was a stock line that was out of stock. Which is evident as the Indesit Washer Dryer WDE12 is in fact displayed on the shop floor. However when looking up a customers Customer Requirement number on the CRS computer system it doesn’t display what kind of order has been set up. This is still not an excuse, as a manger in any department should know exactly what stock the department holds.This can be improved once again by a more user-friendly computer system and full detailed lists of stock that the department holds.
Issue 3 The customer was disappointed and felt that they had been lied to, however this was not a lie and the employee concerned had in fact left the company. The Department took on four part time Christmas temps to help in the preparation for the Clearance and for general help in this busy time period. These temps worked from mid November until towards the end of January when the Clearance is over. It would again seem that there was in fact a mix up when the customer described the employee on the second phone call. Another explanation could be that the person who took the may have been unaware of the departure of the members of because of the short amount of time that may have elapsed.Improved communication would create a better understanding of events happening in the department. The recent introduction of communication half-hour on a Wednesday morning has started to improve this however not all staff are present at this time. Issue 4 The customer was annoyed that the machine could not be delivered until the following Wednesday that was the next day despatch delivery to the customers’ area.
The customer felt that a special delivery should have been made in order to accommodate their week, especially after the inconvenience that the customer had been through already. What angered the customer was that the manager didn’t consider making special arrangements.In order to maintain good customer relations a special delivery should have been made, at the convenience of the customer. This would mean that the customer would not incur added costs through the loss of earnings from having to take a day off work to accept delivery of the machine. The manager should have taken into consideration the customers anger when suggesting how delivery would be made.
The assessment of face-to-face communication was carried out on two full time employees in the department. My colleague who had just joined the Partnership and wouldn’t be recognised by the staff in the Large Electrical Department carried it out. The performance was quite pleasing as both employees scored highly on most of the areas that were assessed. It was surprising that the time of day that the two assessments were carried out didn’t have an affect on how the Partners performed. One was carried out at 10:30 in the morning and the other at 15:45 in the afternoon.Both Partners were well presented in line with the Partnership Business Dress Code, a copy of which can be found in appendix 3 at the end of this report. They looked ready to deal with any situation that may arise upon serving my colleague.
The reason that one scored slightly higher was because the lower scoring employees Partnership badge looked like it had seen better days. Jane’s approach was extremely friendly with a big smile and she started by asking how the customer was before proceeding with the sale. This was extremely pleasing where as Raj seemed to approach like a hawk, which could be a bit irritating for a customer, however he scored highly as it wasn’t otherwise disappointing.They were both very confident as they have been with the partnership for many years and know what’s what.
This means they come across to the customer having confidence as they are used to procedures in the department as well as what they are selling. Their posture was also good the only thing that let them down was that they used the fixtures in the department to lean upon. This isn’t anything to worry about as it can be hard to stand upright for long periods of time. Jane’s body language was very good creating a positive feeling through energetic movements whereas Raj’s movements were more subdued.
The language used was good although a more extensive vocabulary could have been used. It does however depend on the kind of customer that is being served. The Partner also has to try and assess as best they can the way they need to talk in order to be best understood by the customer they are serving. Unfortunately they weren’t as polite as we expected they would. It was apparent when they were asked questions that they thought had obvious answers. This also had an effect on how well they were at keeping cool.
Jane’s listening skills were very good and you could tell that she was understanding the situation as she sympathised with the customer. Raj however wasn’t as good he wanted to put his thoughts and feelings across more rather than listening and understanding the customer.Raj’s compromising wasn’t very good as the customer needed delivery on a certain date but he said that there was no way that could be done. He didn’t explain that the customer could pay to chose the date and time of delivery. Jane however was very good when the customer told her that they had seen the same machine elsewhere. Jane explained about the “Never Knowingly Undersold Policy”. A copy of which can be found in Appendix 4, another way w John Lewis offers good customer services.
Trust was apparent in Jane more than Raj although both scoring highly. This could be because Jane is a female and can tend to be trusted more than a male.Their overall knowledge of the product on sale was absolutely superb and was able to answer most the questions asked from the top of their heads.
Jane did need to refer to a brochure on a couple of points. Overall this assessment reflects a positive aspect on the department. There are areas that can be improved upon slightly. It would need training to improve in these areas but perhaps just a chat with the manager to point out how they can improve to create a more or less faultless service.When assessing how well staff performed when communicating using the telephone the situation was in the form of a complaint rather than requesting information.
Once again on the whole the performance was very good using all the skills set out on the criteria well. One of the phone calls was conducted like a secret shopper so the person answering the phone had no idea that it was for the purposes of a report. The other assessment was conducted through listening in with the Partners knowledge and observing what was going on. The following analyses how well the skills were used.The posture of the partner was obviously only graded upon in the observation assessment and was fairly good.
The telephonist sat at a suitable height and sat in a fairly upright position to give good voice projection. However Peters voice also sounded very clear which also indicated that a good posture was maintained throughout the call. The language used wasn’t brilliant and was very basic in both cases. As with the face to face you have to be careful as the language used has to be understood fully by customers.
Therefore it is important to judge whether they will understand the more complex language. It raises the question of perhaps they misjudged the customer they were dealing with.