Impertinent questions are where better answers start

“Why must customers telephone to cancel?”

“Retention handles cancellations.”

“Why?”

“That is the procedure.”

“What does the call prevent?”

“Fraud.”

“How many fraudulent cancellations occurred last year?”

“I don’t know.”

“Who does?”

“Risk.”

Risk finds no recorded cases.

“What else does the call do?”

“It allows us to save the customer.”

“How many stay?”

“Eight per cent.”

“How many abandon the cancellation?”

“That is also counted as saved.”

“Do they remain active?”

“Until the next billing date.”

“What happens if the telephone step disappears?”

“We could lose those saves.”

“What happens to complaints?”

“We would have to test it.”

“What would count as failure?”

“More fraud, more complaints or customers cancelling by mistake.”

“Who checks those?”

“Risk, support and billing.”

The online route opens to a small group.

Cancellation completion rises. Fraud stays flat. Complaints about cancellation fall.

“Should calls remain for complex cases?”

“Yes.”

“What is a complex case?”

“Anything requiring discussion.”

“Such as?”

A list begins with bereavement, disputed ownership and accounts under investigation. Ordinary cancellation is absent.

“Who can restore an account cancelled by mistake?”

“Billing, within thirty days.”

“Is that explained on the final screen?”

“It can be.”

The next customer reaches the final screen in forty seconds.

“Any reason we cannot release this more widely?”

“Retention will want to discuss the eight per cent.”

“Are abandoned attempts still in that number?”

“Yes.”

The call ends at 15.24.

Behavioural principles

Behavioural ideas at play in this post

Short, plain-English explanations of the principles behind this post, with links to related books and examples in the archive.