Customer Service Policies

[webny99]

Personally, when I look at Google reviews, I sort them by "most recent".  If I had been looking for a barber shortly after you left that one-star review, then I certainly would have taken your rating into account when deciding where to go.  I do of course give more consideration to bad ratings with comments than to bad ratings with no comments, but I do give both consideration—especially when they're recent.

I'm curious to know if others here sort and analyze reviews in this manner too, or if not, how they sort and analyze them and why.


I thought of this last night when... stay with me here... there was a crash on I-490 between Exits 19 and 20, which happened to be the third crash on that exact segment in the past week. I got to thinking that, if someone blew in from outer space (or, you know, even just out of town) a week ago and had no previous context, they'd probably think that was a treacherous, high risk stretch of highway that should be avoided. In reality, it does have accidents on occasion, but historically, it's not significantly more dangerous than any other stretch of highway in the area, and I probably wouldn't even put it in the top 5 crash-prone freeway segments.

But if one only had the recent data, one could end up coming to a biased conclusion. I know that having knowledge of three crashes in one week is still informative. It could even be an indicator of changing traffic patterns that could change future accident rate projections. And I certainly understand that this doesn't necessarily have a one to one application to Google reviews or any other review platform. But I'm putting it out there anyways because I figured it was food for thought.


PS: In an effort to broaden discussion and move on from my original anecdote, I have changed the subject title to "Customer Service Policies"

[kphoger]

I think you understand where I'm coming from, then.  In general, I consider the most recent reviews to be the ones that most accurately reflect what the business is like now.  A good or bad review from five years ago doesn't matter a whole lot to me because, not only might they have gotten better or worse since then, but who knows if it's even the same management anymore.

[JayhawkCO]

Personally, when I look at Google reviews, I sort them by "most recent".  If I had been looking for a barber shortly after you left that one-star review, then I certainly would have taken your rating into account when deciding where to go.  I do of course give more consideration to bad ratings with comments than to bad ratings with no comments, but I do give both consideration—especially when they're recent.

I'm curious to know if others here sort and analyze reviews in this manner too, or if not, how they sort and analyze them and why.


I thought of this last night when... stay with me here... there was a crash on I-490 between Exits 19 and 20, which happened to be the third crash on that exact segment in the past week. I got to thinking that, if someone blew in from outer space (or, you know, even just out of town) a week ago and had no previous context, they'd probably think that was a treacherous, high risk stretch of highway that should be avoided. In reality, it does have accidents on occasion, but historically, it's not significantly more dangerous than any other stretch of highway in the area, and I probably wouldn't even put it in the top 5 crash-prone freeway segments.

But if one only had the recent data, one could end up coming to a biased conclusion. I know that having knowledge of three crashes in one week is still informative. It could even be an indicator of changing traffic patterns that could change future accident rate projections. And I certainly understand that this doesn't necessarily have a one to one application to Google reviews or any other review platform. But I'm putting it out there anyways because I figured it was food for thought.


PS: In an effort to broaden discussion and move on from my original anecdote, I have changed the subject title to "Customer Service Policies"

As with anything, the plural of anecdote is not data. There is nuance to all things, so if I'm planning on spending a decent amount of money on something, I'll research it thoroughly and read a lot of reviews, not just the first presented to me, and not just the most recent either. That said, for some things I will weight more recent reviews more heavily.

An easy example. I lived in Seattle for one year back in 2006-2007 and I worked at a really good restaurant there that was known for being one of the best in town. We were always insanely busy and it was one of those places where it was difficult to get a reservation. Reviews of this restaurant were pretty universally high. Last time I was in Seattle, I took my wife there and was really depressed to see the state of the place. The exact same decor was there, lots of it dirty and chipped/dinged. The food wasn't particularly great either. I happened to see one of the managers there and remembered him from my time working there -- he was one of the worst servers at the time. I glanced at Google reviews and noticed it was all the way down to a 4.1 and a lot of the recent reviews mentioned the same things I saw. If you were looking and saw 4.1, you'd think, "hey, that place has to be above average", but given that it used to be at a 4.8 or so, you now know the current state.

[SEWIGuy]

I think you understand where I'm coming from, then.  In general, I consider the most recent reviews to be the ones that most accurately reflect what the business is like now.  A good or bad review from five years ago doesn't matter a whole lot to me because, not only might they have gotten better or worse since then, but who knows if it's even the same management anymore.

I actually also look to see if a poor review is an outlier - perhaps written by someone who has trouble dealing being late and having the place actually enforce their stated policy for being late.

[kphoger]

I actually also look to see if a poor review is an outlier - perhaps written by someone who has trouble dealing being late and having the place actually enforce their stated policy for being late.

Absolutely.  You can usually tell the difference between someone who is impossible to please or a true problem customer, someone who appears unable to grasp the fact that some things are beyond the company's control, someone whose problem was likely to be a rare occurrence, and someone whose bad review is actually worth taking into consideration.

[webny99]

I actually also look to see if a poor review is an outlier

I hope you do the same thing for positive reviews, because many businesses heavily incentivize positive reviews.

You can usually tell the difference between someone who is impossible to please or a true problem customer, someone who appears unable to grasp the fact that some things are beyond the company's control, someone whose problem was likely to be a rare occurrence, and someone whose bad review is actually worth taking into consideration.

A rating posted without a review doesn't tell you any of those things. In fact, it doesn't tell you much of anything.

[kphoger]

You can usually tell the difference between someone who is impossible to please or a true problem customer, someone who appears unable to grasp the fact that some things are beyond the company's control, someone whose problem was likely to be a rare occurrence, and someone whose bad review is actually worth taking into consideration.

A rating posted without a review doesn't tell you any of those things. In fact, it doesn't tell you much of anything.

Correct.  Your one-star review, therefore, leads one to believe you think the business is truly awful, but without any additional information that might lead one to treat your review as an outlier or otherwise worth disregarding.

[webny99]

If you were looking and saw 4.1, you'd think, "hey, that place has to be above average",

I wouldn't. 4.1 is closer to what you might expect for an average fast casual or fast food joint, but below average to poor for a good restaurant, especially a high end one.

For comparison, my local Wendy's is also currently rated 4.1 stars... and that's Wendy's. You know what you're getting, but the level of expectations are very different from a restaurant where you'd expect to spend $50+. Meanwhile, Black & Blue Steak and Crab, a fairly high-end restaurant in Pittsford, is currently rated 4.6 stars.

[JayhawkCO]

If you were looking and saw 4.1, you'd think, "hey, that place has to be above average",

I wouldn't. 4.1 is closer to what you might expect for an average fast casual or fast food joint, but below average to poor for a good restaurant, especially a high end one.

For comparison, my local Wendy's is also currently rated 4.1 stars... and that's Wendy's. You know what you're getting, but the level of expectations are very different from a restaurant where you'd expect to spend $50+. Meanwhile, Black & Blue Steak and Crab, a fairly high-end restaurant in Pittsford, is currently rated 4.6 stars.

To this day, I can't imagine taking time to rate a Wendy's on Google. It's fuckin' Wendy's.

[SEWIGuy]

I actually also look to see if a poor review is an outlier

I hope you do the same thing for positive reviews, because many businesses heavily incentivize positive reviews.

Of course!

[kphoger]

I usually filter Google Maps locations by 4 stars and above, 3.5 stars only if I really really have to.  Anything below 3.5 stars on Google is going to be really sketchy.  Below 3 stars, and reading the reviews should be done for entertainment purposes more than anything.

[webny99]

A rating posted without a review doesn't tell you any of those things. In fact, it doesn't tell you much of anything.

Correct.  Your one-star review, therefore, leads one to believe you think the business is truly awful, but without any additional information that might lead one to treat your review as an outlier or otherwise worth disregarding.

Serious question: is that a problem?

[kphoger]

Serious question: is that a problem?

If you want people to not patronize that business, then no.  But if that wasn't your intention, then yes.

[webny99]

To this day, I can't imagine taking time to rate a Wendy's on Google.

I'm actually going to contradict myself just a bit here: while this is true, there is some degree of variance from one fast food location to another. I've been to the 4.1 star Wendy's location a number of times, and it's always met/exceeded my expectations, with perfect order accuracy, fairly quick service, and no quality concerns besides, you know, it's Wendy's.

Upon checking now, most other Wendy's in my area are rated in the 3.4 to 3.9 range, so I think the 4.1 rating is reflective of that.

[kphoger]

Oh yeah, there's a Wendy's location I can think of, across the street from a large hospital, that does an excellent job of processing orders quickly and accurately.  At least, it did before COVID;  we haven't been back more than once or twice since then to know if they're still rock stars.

[webny99]

I usually filter Google Maps locations by 4 stars and above, 3.5 stars only if I really really have to.  Anything below 3.5 stars on Google is going to be really sketchy.  Below 3 stars, and reading the reviews should be done for entertainment purposes more than anything.

It does also depend on the type of establishment being reviewed. Some places get review-bombed, and those are usually very entertaining to read. And some low-rated places are preferably avoided but essential, such as most airports and train stations.

Serious question: is that a problem?

If you want people to not patronize that business, then no.  But if that wasn't your intention, then yes.

Except that (1) I don't care at all if others patronize the business or not, and (2) I don't think an individual rating has much impact on whether they will or not, nor should it.

[hotdogPi]

And some low-rated places are preferably avoided but essential, such as most airports and train stations.

Headquarters of places (e.g. National Grid, Xfinity) often get low reviews. Some of them are legitimate (bad customer service call), while others are just reviewing the company.

My personal favorite is this, with a perfect 5-star rating with four reviews: the WCRB tower.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/WCRB-FM+transmitter+site/@42.6538649,-71.2193722,17z/data=!4m8!3m7!1s0x89e3a7a309a80af3:0xc23b77e832ba93eb!8m2!3d42.653861!4d-71.2167919!9m1!1b1!16s%2Fg%2F11bw67jpnz?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDMwMy4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

"Great view from the top of the tower"

[kphoger]

I usually filter Google Maps locations by 4 stars and above, 3.5 stars only if I really really have to.  Anything below 3.5 stars on Google is going to be really sketchy.  Below 3 stars, and reading the reviews should be done for entertainment purposes more than anything.

It does also depend on the type of establishment being reviewed. Some places get review-bombed, and those are usually very entertaining to read. And some low-rated places are preferably avoided but essential, such as most airports and train stations.

Motels are the best.  There used to be a Motel 6 location here in Wichita that, before it was torn down, was the most entertaining compendium of Google reviews.  Every other review mentioned drug deals in the hallway, prostitution, and/or the pervasive smell of urine.

Also, people leave reviews of places they've never been, way out in the middle of nowhere in far northern Canada or whatever, just for fun.  Example:  this 4.6 star rating means nothing, which you quickly discover from reading the reviews.  Finding such review-bomb locations is kind of a hobby of mine.

[Scott5114]

For the purposes of determining if I want to actually spend money on something, I typically read the one- and two-star reviews to see if there's anything there that actually sounds like a plausible thing that could happen to me. If it's just entitled people complaining about dumb stuff, or if it's complaining about something that isn't relevant to me (e.g. a feature I don't care about doesn't work well), then I feel more confident spending the money. Of course, if it's something that sounds like a legitimate problem with the business that could affect me, I might search alternatives.

Looking at reviews for entertainment purposes...there's nothing better for that than Nevada brothels (especially the ones in Pahrump, which get the clueless Vegas tourists, who are more inclined to go in with expectations than someone going to one in Battle Mountain or whatever).

My wife occasionally listens to the Your Stupid Opinions podcast, where two comedians go through the reviews of selected businesses and make fun of the reviewers and/or the businesses. It's pretty funny.

[vdeane]

For comparison, my local Wendy's is also currently rated 4.1 stars

That's pretty good for a Wendy's or any fast food.  I usually find that places like that are 3 point something, so it's reflected in a difference in the rating, not what the rating means.

I don't care at all if others patronize the business or not,

The business sure does, however.

[jeffandnicole]

Rarely am I looking at reviews for local places.  There's a few places where, if I were traveling, I would never stop there based on the reviews. But when they're local to home, I don't give it a second thought.

[webny99]

For the purposes of determining if I want to actually spend money on something, I typically read the one- and two-star reviews to see if there's anything there that actually sounds like a plausible thing that could happen to me.

In my experience, this method of skipping straight to the bad reviews first seems to be more common than kphoger's method.

[webny99]

For comparison, my local Wendy's is also currently rated 4.1 stars

That's pretty good for a Wendy's or any fast food.  I usually find that places like that are 3 point something

Agreed on that.

it's reflected in a difference in the rating, not what the rating means.

I am not entirely sure what this means.

I don't care at all if others patronize the business or not,

The business sure does, however.

Of course they do, as they should, and I am not disputing that. I do however dispute the notion that a single rating with no content has any meaningful or measurable impact on whether others patronize the business.

[vdeane]

it's reflected in a difference in the rating, not what the rating means.

I am not entirely sure what this means.

Exactly what it says: instead of a 4.1 meaning something different for a fast food place than for a more upscale place, instead the fast food place is more likely to just have a lower rating.  I've noticed this with hotels, too.  People seem to be very bad at adjusting their expectations for the type of place they're patronizing.

[kphoger]

People seem to be very bad at adjusting their expectations for the type of place they're patronizing.

Such as...

Man, my experience at this Fazoli's was nothing like what I've come to expect from Macaroni Grill.  One star!

Man, this Macaroni Grill blows Fazoli's out of the water!  Five stars!!!!!