Minor things that bother you

[thenetwork]

I rarely go into Dollar Tree, but there are a few little items I buy there.  Yesterday I needed some scouring pads.

It used to be "Everything's $1".  I knew that couldn't last forever, and maybe three years ago most of their stuff went to $1.25.  On this visit, I see that many items, including my packet of scouring pads, have gone to $1.50...a 50% increase in a fairly short period of time.

The wrapper on the scouring pads says "Made in China" and I suppose tariffs are the surface reason for the latest increase, because most of the junk that store carries is probably made there.  One wonders, though, if there were a trade settlement with China reducing those tariffs, if the prices would drop back to $1.25 or if they would just be left at $1.50.

Another complaint about Dollar Tree, at least our local one, is that they stopped carrying the boxes of Jujyfruits.  When you want candy that gets stuck between your teeth for a while, nothing beats Jujyfruits.

DT has quietly eliminated a lot of my go-to candies of late.  First, Bottle Caps...then Chewy Nerds.  They are also taking shrinkflation by storm.  Many of their 6-pack "bite-size" candy bars have been reduced to 5 or even FOUR-packs.

One of the newest Dollar Tree/Family Dollar combos opened up a couple of years ago on the outskirts of my town. They went out of business in early spring and the signs were yanked (The closing was likely due to DT and FD parting ways).

Not even six months later, in the SAME location, Dollar Tree (solo) is back with yet another Grand Opening!

Meanwhile at another former brand-new DT/FD combo about an hour away, all this store did was scrape off any and all Family Dollar references from the inside and outside of the building ad went on with their business.

[kphoger]

The system doesn't change if you don't suggest improvements. If everyone gets five stars, then management thinks everything is just fine and dandy.

Secondly, less individuals will pay attention to a one/five star review, since they either exaggerate sometimes minor concerns or gloss over actual failures (paid surveys) if they don't seem genuine.

My company contracts for work from a large corporation here in the area.  We are in competition with another contracting company.  There used to be three of us, but the third one got the boot from this market last year, because the corporate bigwigs in Atlanta determined that there should only be two of us, and that third contracting company had the lowest metrics of us three.

One of the biggest components of the metrics by which we're graded is post-visit customer survey scores.  Anything less than a 9 out of 10 counts as a 'passive', anything below 7 counts as a 'detractor'.  So if your default score for good service is 8 out of 10, then scoring your tech visit that way actively hurts not just his metrics but also my company's standing as a whole.

Importantly, none of this is within my company's control.  The surveys are designed, sent, and evaluated by the company we do work for—not by the person who employs the field tech who actually provided service to you.  Hurting his score in this way only serves to damage his business as an individual employee and our overall business as a company, but it does nothing to hurt anybody at the corporation that actually designed the system.

Furthermore, not playing by the scoring rules as a form of protest actually encourages dishonesty on the part of the people being harmed.  A few years ago, we had a field tech who felt that he was getting the short end of the stick when it came to customer surveys, because several of them unfairly scored him lower than 'promoter' even though they had zero issues with the service he provided during his visit.  This affected his paycheck, because this dropped him lower on the tech ranker, and people higher on the ranker got routed better-paying jobs.  In response, he started having customers' e-mail addresses changed on their accounts to accounts that he was creating himself—so that he could answer the surveys himself and score himself a '10'.  That... didn't go well for him.  Eventually.  Because it took a few months for anyone to figure out what was happening.

[kphoger]

They'd also hand out milk

I never understood why schools were so hell-bent on serving milk to the kids. The majority of the world's population is lactose intolerant, and it's particularly high among minority groups in the US. Racist, I tell you.

We weren't in the majority of the world.  We were in rural northwestern Kansas.  As far as I can recall, there was one single black person in the entire town during the years I lived in that town.  Everyone else was white, and lactose intolerance among white Americans runs around 15%.  Of those, I imagine most have only mild symptoms, or else they already know by fourth grade that they should avoid drinking a carton of milk.

[1995hoo]

They'd also hand out milk

I never understood why schools were so hell-bent on serving milk to the kids. The majority of the world's population is lactose intolerant, and it's particularly high among minority groups in the US. Racist, I tell you.

It's a US government requirement that they serve milk—and specifically dairy milk—as part of the school lunch in order to receive federal subsidies, although I'm not sure whether it's required that the milk actually be given to every kid buying lunch whether he wants it or not or whether it simply has to be available to every kid (though certainly some school districts insist on doing the former).

When I was growing up I always brought my lunch, so I never had to deal with that requirement.

[hbelkins]

They'd also hand out milk

I never understood why schools were so hell-bent on serving milk to the kids. The majority of the world's population is lactose intolerant, and it's particularly high among minority groups in the US. Racist, I tell you.

I'm thinking campaign contributions from the dairy industry lobby?     

It's a US government requirement that they serve milk—and specifically dairy milk—as part of the school lunch in order to receive federal subsidies, although I'm not sure whether it's required that the milk actually be given to every kid buying lunch whether he wants it or not or whether it simply has to be available to every kid (though certainly some school districts insist on doing the former).

When I was growing up I always brought my lunch, so I never had to deal with that requirement.

I brought my lunch when I was in elementary school, and I always brought money for two cartons of milk. Sometimes I'd drink three cartons.

I rarely go into Dollar Tree, but there are a few little items I buy there.  Yesterday I needed some scouring pads.

It used to be "Everything's $1".  I knew that couldn't last forever, and maybe three years ago most of their stuff went to $1.25.  On this visit, I see that many items, including my packet of scouring pads, have gone to $1.50...a 50% increase in a fairly short period of time.

The wrapper on the scouring pads says "Made in China" and I suppose tariffs are the surface reason for the latest increase, because most of the junk that store carries is probably made there.  One wonders, though, if there were a trade settlement with China reducing those tariffs, if the prices would drop back to $1.25 or if they would just be left at $1.50.

Another complaint about Dollar Tree, at least our local one, is that they stopped carrying the boxes of Jujyfruits.  When you want candy that gets stuck between your teeth for a while, nothing beats Jujyfruits.

DT has quietly eliminated a lot of my go-to candies of late.  First, Bottle Caps...then Chewy Nerds.  They are also taking shrinkflation by storm.  Many of their 6-pack "bite-size" candy bars have been reduced to 5 or even FOUR-packs.

One of the newest Dollar Tree/Family Dollar combos opened up a couple of years ago on the outskirts of my town. They went out of business in early spring and the signs were yanked (The closing was likely due to DT and FD parting ways).

Not even six months later, in the SAME location, Dollar Tree (solo) is back with yet another Grand Opening!

Meanwhile at another former brand-new DT/FD combo about an hour away, all this store did was scrape off any and all Family Dollar references from the inside and outside of the building ad went on with their business.

It's not just the Dollar Trees doing shrinkflation on fun-sized candies. Hershey seems to be the worst; I recently saw a four-pack at my local grocery store. At least M&M/Mars seems to still do five or six bars to a package.

All of the FD/DT combo stores in my area are still dual-branded for now.

[1995hoo]

It's a US government requirement that they serve milk—and specifically dairy milk—as part of the school lunch in order to receive federal subsidies, although I'm not sure whether it's required that the milk actually be given to every kid buying lunch whether he wants it or not or whether it simply has to be available to every kid (though certainly some school districts insist on doing the former).

When I was growing up I always brought my lunch, so I never had to deal with that requirement.

I brought my lunch when I was in elementary school, and I always brought money for two cartons of milk. Sometimes I'd drink three cartons.

I never bought milk. In elementary school, I had a Thermos in my lunchbox, though this many years later I do not remember what my mother put in it for me to drink (may have been 2% milk, but I just don't remember). In junior high and high school I brought a can of soda.

If my mother gave me milk, it would have been 2% because that's the only type we ever drank. To this day I find the other grades revolting, especially whole milk and skim milk (but I will buy a small bottle whole milk when I need it for a recipe).

[kphoger]

I'm thinking campaign contributions from the dairy industry lobby?     

While it's possible (likely?) that the dairy industry campaigned hard to make milk a required part of the National School Lunch Program, the fact is that schools have to give students milk in order to get those federal dollars.

For what it's worth, this sort of thing is why my wife does not apply for reimbursement for meals provided in her home daycare:  way too many requirements—which must be tracked, by the way—to be worth it.

[SEWIGuy]

In Wisconsin in elementary school, we would also get a milk break in the morning. I didn't know until just a few years ago that this was very much a Wisconsin thing.

[kphoger]

In Wisconsin in elementary school, we would also get a milk break in the morning. I didn't know until just a few years ago that this was very much a Wisconsin thing.

Only because the USDA nixed the idea of cheese curds and a Pabst Blue Ribbon instead...

[bugo]

The system doesn't change if you don't suggest improvements. If everyone gets five stars, then management thinks everything is just fine and dandy.

Secondly, less individuals will pay attention to a one/five star review, since they either exaggerate sometimes minor concerns or gloss over actual failures (paid surveys) if they don't seem genuine.

Surveys and reviews are usually a limited diagnostic tool at best, since they cannot encompass all possible breakdowns and weak points when measured against cost-cutting of labor, reduced morale, standards reviews, or the use of inferior products.

The constant bombardment of surveys makes me not want to fill them out. I used to, knowing that a pleasant survey can buttress a grouchy customer (although it sometimes takes 5-10 nice ones to statistically eliminate one crappy one). I'll fill out a good one if an overwhelmingly great service was performed beyond the call of duty, and write out a real email to a customer specialist if they truly messed up (this way you can provide support details, photos, documentation, screenshots).

That wasn't the case in any of the call centers I've worked at. Less than 5 stars is the same as 1 star.

[formulanone]

The system doesn't change if you don't suggest improvements. If everyone gets five stars, then management thinks everything is just fine and dandy.

Secondly, less individuals will pay attention to a one/five star review, since they either exaggerate sometimes minor concerns or gloss over actual failures (paid surveys) if they don't seem genuine.

Surveys and reviews are usually a limited diagnostic tool at best, since they cannot encompass all possible breakdowns and weak points when measured against cost-cutting of labor, reduced morale, standards reviews, or the use of inferior products.

The constant bombardment of surveys makes me not want to fill them out. I used to, knowing that a pleasant survey can buttress a grouchy customer (although it sometimes takes 5-10 nice ones to statistically eliminate one crappy one). I'll fill out a good one if an overwhelmingly great service was performed beyond the call of duty, and write out a real email to a customer specialist if they truly messed up (this way you can provide support details, photos, documentation, screenshots).

That wasn't the case in any of the call centers I've worked at. Less than 5 stars is the same as 1 star.

It wasn't the case with my paycheck either: Below 90% may as well have been a fail, had to hope for several more glowing surveys to boost your average above 95%. Although I still get surveyed now, it's entirely out of my control and only once in 15 years has it even been brought up (in fact, all 8 of us on the team got 1-star ratings so it was just a survey in the hands of a psychopath, so it was a wash).

It's really ought to be a small fragment of your bonus, not a threat of deduction. Again, I just stopped filling almost all of that out because it's usually a crummy diagnostic tool if someone has a grudge or ridiculous expectation but giving a top score for average work is also just as bad.

I've essentially stopped playing the "90% = Shit" game because I know full well how terrible that game has become. So I can't hope to destroy that system by making the bar even fucking higher.

[Scott5114]

Maybe fill out a negative review but consistently refer to the person helping you as "the manager"...

[kphoger]

I've essentially stopped playing the "90% = Shit" game because I know full well how terrible that game has become. So I can't hope to destroy that system by making the bar even fucking higher.

Maybe fill out a negative review but consistently refer to the person helping you as "the manager"...

In the case of the business I work in, a person can score the technician as a '9' or a '10' but then leave scathing comments about whatever else is bugging them about the company.  That way, the technician is not harmed by a poor score, but someone will still read the comments.  (And yes, someone does read the comments.)  The problem is that this has to be explicitly suggested by the technician in order to avoid an unfair bad score.  This is not helped by the fact that the wording of the customer survey asks about your experience with the company and service even though it actually directly reflects on the individual technician that day.

[Scott5114]

I've essentially stopped playing the "90% = Shit" game because I know full well how terrible that game has become. So I can't hope to destroy that system by making the bar even fucking higher.

Maybe fill out a negative review but consistently refer to the person helping you as "the manager"...

In the case of the business I work in, a person can score the technician as a '9' or a '10' but then leave scathing comments about whatever else is bugging them about the company.  That way, the technician is not harmed by a poor score, but someone will still read the comments.  (And yes, someone does read the comments.)  The problem is that this has to be explicitly suggested by the technician in order to avoid an unfair bad score.  This is not helped by the fact that the wording of the customer survey asks about your experience with the company and service even though it actually directly reflects on the individual technician that day.

But, of course, every company is going to handle this differently; in some companies a 9 is still considered unforgivable, and there's no guarantee that anyone looks at anything other than average numbers. Which turns the whole thing into a navel-gazing exercise by management. Meaning it's a waste of time for everyone involved.

So it would seem like Rothman has the right idea in general—from a customer's perspective, the only winning move is not to play.

[kphoger]

So it would seem like Rothman has the right idea in general—from a customer's perspective, the only winning move is not to play.

From the customer's perspective, nothing they do on a survey causes them any harm.  They can score everybody a zero and make up lies on the survey, and in fact they might even get extra service that way, if a manager ends up calling them to ask how he can make it right.  The customer can play by the new survey rules, or they can score the employer lower as a form of protest, but nothing bad will every roll back to the customer either way:  the employee and/or the company is the only one that might suffer.

And nobody who is actually designing these surveys and the scoring systems will be negatively affected either.  If anything below a 5 out of 5 is a fail, and you score a really good employee at a 4, the people in charge of these things aren't going to stop and say, Whoa, you know what, I think Kayla actually deserved better than what she got, maybe I ought to rethink how these surveys work.  No, in fact, they'll just see all of the employees scramble even harder to make sure everyone gives them a 5, and they'll figure it's a success, because the employees are taking care of their customers better.

[Scott5114]

From the customer's perspective, nothing they do on a survey causes them any harm.

It wastes a lot of time and doesn't actually get you anything in the short-term. Unless you just really like answering questions like "I would tell a friend my service today was sweltering. Strongly agree - Fervently agree - Stalwartly agree - Mostly agree - Partly agree - Neither mostly nor partly agree - Agree to disagree - Somewhat don't agree - Partly somewhat don't agree - Partly disagree - Mostly disagree - Partly mostly disagree - Disagree"