Finovate Blog

Techniques: Email, Web inquiry, chat, instant
messaging, call back, co-browsing

 

Web self-service may be the key to cutting servicing costs online, but
email support is the key to retaining customers. Responsive support (chat,
email, and telephone) is preferred by about 70% of online banking users
according to Vividence . Concerned, distraught, or impatient customers
aren’t about to wade through FAQs looking for answers. They want immediate
assurances that their concerns are valid and will be addressed. Typically
that’s required a telephone call, but more and more users are turning to
chat and email options. What’s holding back email today is poor service. In
a recent Forrester survey, only 25% of respondents expressed satisfaction
with email service, a satisfaction rate barely one-third that for
traditional branch and phone channel.

Once financial institutions provide a user experience on par with
telephone and branch, email will dominate as the primary medium for service.
Fifteen years from now, telephone and branch service support will be distant
memories. The vast majority of users will fire off an email, instant
message, or Web inquiry without even considering any other option. There is
absolutely no question that electronic channels will eventually dominate,
providing many advantages for both consumers and financial institutions.

 

 

Web-inquiry Form

The design of the form used for customer inquiries
can impact the timeliness, effectiveness, and cost of your online support.
Make sure you’re not missing an opportunity to make future solicitations to
online customers with an opt-in question. You should also consider tagging
customers with cookies so you can better track future Web activity. Table
21, below, provides more details on form design.

 

Email Deflection

Not only can you deflect phone calls from your
call center and branches by the way of a Web-based inquiry form. You can use
the same form to actually deflect email messages as well. The key is having
the ability to parse likely search terms out of free-form text inquiries. In
the example below, Cloudmark, a provider of consumer spam filters,
applies search algorithms to the free-form question, “Is there a way to make
Cloudmark catch more spam?” (screen 1, below). Rather than sending
the query directly to customer service, the company first provides possible
answers to the question (screen 2, below). Users who still want to
ask the company the question can complete the longer Request for Help form
 According iPhrase, which supplied the search solution, Cloudmark has
been able to reduce email volume dramatically.  

Responding to emails or Web inquiries should follow a three-step process as
outlined in Table 22 below:

Table 22

Making Email Responses More User-Friendly

Phase 1: Immediate Autoresponse

•          Include bank name in subject field and from
  field
•          Thank customer for using e-service and explain the process
  and typical response time
•          Provide response-time estimates based on averages for that
  time of day and/or day of the week/month;
  extra credit: provide custom response-time estimates based on current
  email queue
•          Include links to appropriate FAQ sections
•          Reference telephone numbers for immediate support

Phase 2: Actual Answer

•          Use good formatting:
  – indent
  – physically separate ideas
  – white space
  – bullet points, lists, tables
•          Keep paragraphs and sentences short
•          Include “time received” and “time answered” date stamps
•          Include service rep name/email address for more personal
  feeling and to encourage customer to engage in a conversation until
  their question has been answered to their satisfaction
•          Include bank name in subject field and from
  field
•          Provide tracking number for the customer inquiries
•          If responses go to a secure mailbox within the online
  banking program, send an additional email to the user’s Internet
  mailbox(es) telling them that an answer is waiting (with a link to it)
•          Archive customer questions and your answers so users can
  refer to them later
•          Include intuitive URL and/or email address for customer
  comments and feedback, such as <comments.yourbank.com>, or
  comments@yourbank.com
•          Don’t forget to say, “Thanks for using our e-service.”
•          Add a telephone number for additional discussion

Phase 3: Follow-up

•          Follow-up with the customer at least once to ascertain
  their satisfaction with the answer and whether they have additional
  questions
•          Include a two- or three-question customer-satisfaction
  survey to quantify the work done by your e-service department as a
  whole, and each e-service rep as individuals
•          The simplest approach is to have the followup message
  originate from the service rep who handled the original message; an
  alternative approach is to have the followup come from a supervisor or
  “quality assurance rep;” you may want to test both approaches to see
  which works best
•          Encourage comments and feedback, either by responding to
  this message or entering comments anonymously at <comments.yourbank.com>
•          Telephone number for additional discussion or to make
  comments

Source: Online Banking Report, 3/04

 

The Importance of Response Times

Even though most online transaction times are measured in seconds, users
will still become frustrated if your system is slower than what they are
accustomed to. Search engines, the most widely used Web application, set the
expectations early on. Even as early as 1995 and 1996, search engines were
able to cull through millions of pages of data and deliver results in less
than 20 seconds. With the faster connections used today, search times have
shrunk even more. Banking information, secured behind various log-in
schemes, can take three to four times longer to access, but unless you
forget your password, retrieval times are still under a minute, an
acceptable information-retrieval wait period for most Web users.

Table 23

Acceptable Wait Times for eService

acceptable wait time in hours for an online
retailer’s customer service department to respond to an email or website
inquiry; survey conducted during holiday shopping season, n = 1019

Use	% of Total	% of Those with Answer	Top 10 Bank Results
4 hours or less	45%	53%	4
1 hour	24%	28%	2
2 hours	12%	14%	2
3 hours	6%	7%	—
4 hours	3%	4%	—
5 to 24 hours	38%	45%	2
5 to 10 hours	4%	5%	1
11 to 23 hours	5%	6%	—
24 hours	29%	34%	1
More than 24 hours	n/a	—	1
Don’t know (no answer)	15%	—	3

Sources: Harris Interactive, 11/03 (as cited by eMarketer); research
commission by RightNow Technologies; telephone survey fielded Oct. 2003,
respondents included 1019 U.S. adults age 18+ (511 men and 508 women)

Top-10 Banks: Online Banking Report tests 4/04

Acceptable wait times for human help online are quite different. Web users
have been relatively tolerant of slow responses to email queries, likely
because they use Web-based inquiries for less urgent questions. However,
users are beginning to become more demanding. A recent Harris Interactive
survey (see Table 23, right) found that more than one-third
(36%) of Web users expected a response from customer service within two
hours. If you remove the 15% who said “didn’t know,” the number is close to
half (42%).  

In our April 2004 test of the top-10 banks, only two returned an answer
within three hours. Washington Mutual, head and shoulders above the
rest, answered the question within four minutes, Fleet was second at
41 minutes. We received some response from all ten banks, although only
seven answered the question. The three non-answers: Wells Fargo
referred us to their call center; Citibank, apparently playing
Jeopardy provided an answer and made us guess what the question was, because
it clearly wasn’t the one we asked; and Wachovia sent an autoresponse
confirming receipt of the question, but we never got an answer. Most
surprisingly, not a single bank has followed up to see if we needed
additional assistance or perhaps wanted to apply for the account we inquired
about.

Overall, the banks have made great strides in the 4.5 years since our
last test. In 1999, the fastest response time was US Bank at 11 hours
(3.4 hours in 2004); this year the fastest response was Washington Mutual at
4 minutes, quite an improvement over its 19 days in 1999, where its
response was a snail-mailed packet.

In our most recent test, five (50%) returned an answer within 8 hours,
none did in 1999. This year, six (60%) beat the 24-hour threshold, only two
(20%) did so in 1999. Also, the quality of response was much better on
average. In 1999, only two banks emailed us an answer (three if you count
BankBoston), the rest either referred us to other departments or sent a
brochure in the mail. This year, six responded with answers, and only one
(Wells Fargo) tried to pawn us off on the phone center.

One area that needs improvement, identifying the bank name in the message
from and subject lines. Only five of the ten banks identified
themselves in the message header, the remainder used generic subject and
from lines making the messages look suspiciously spam-like.
                                                                                         8

 

Table 24

Large Bank Email Response Times

Source: Online Banking Report, 3/04 (questions submitted April 9, Good
Friday and Easter weekend)
and 10/99 (questions submitted Oct. 8-11, Columbus Day holiday weekend)

The question asked of each bank varied in the two tests:
In 2004: “Do you have a checking account that includes unlimited no-fee
transfers from an overdraft line of credit?“
In 1999: “I am relocating to [your city] soon and would like checking
information including pricing.”
*Time shown is elapsed time until an actual response was received, not
including autoresponses;
in both years, 3 of the 10 banks sent an autoresponse

**after 10 days

Table 25

Top-10 Banks: 2004 vs. 1999 Performance

Source: Online Banking Report, 3/04 and 11/99

Notes: (1) BankBoston answered the question in 22.5 hours; (2) Did not
answer question, referred to other sources of info

(3) No response from First Union

Source: Online Banking Report test conducted between 11 am and 1 pm
Pacific Daylight Time, on Friday April 9 (Good Friday);

Question: “Do you have a checking account that includes unlimited no-fee
transfers from an overdraft line of credit?

Columns: Home Location = location of Contact Us link;
Clicks Away = number of clicks to the inquiry form, starting from the
homepage; Complete Time = time to find and complete the
inquiry form, starting from the homepage; Popup = is the inquiry form
displayed in a popup window; Verify Email = is the user required to
enter their email address twice; Confirm = is user given a final look
at their info and question before submitting; Opt-in = is the user
given the option to opt in or out of future email marketing/service
messages; Required Fields = the fields that must be completed in
order to submit a question; Auto time = how long after we pressed
submit did it take to receive an autoresponse from the financial institution
(blank means no autoresponse received); Time to Answer = how long after
pressing submit before receiving an answer to the question; Quality of
Answer = our subjective evaluation of the answer including tone,
content, layout, and next steps

Legend: E = Email, N = Name, A = mailing address, T = Type of question,
Su = Subject of question, St = state of residence,
Z = zip code, A = complete mailing address; Customer = Customer or
non-customer, How = How did you find us?

Notes: (1) Wells Fargo’s contact page was very slow to download,
increasing the time by 30 seconds

(2) An extra click on one of the screens required to scroll down to the
desired area (only 3 screens to go through)

(3) Washington Mutual does not have a Contact Us link on its home
page; however if you click Search, you’ll see a Contact Us button in
the upper right hand corner

(4) Fleet does not have a Contact Us link on its home page;
however if you click Personal Financial Services, there is a Customer
Service tab on the far right, but still no Contact Us link

(5) Did not specify which fields were required

(6) Subjective evaluation of answer: A = accurate response and what to do
next; B = reasonably accurate response;
C = vague or incomplete answer; D = misleading answer; F = no answer or
wrong answer

(7) Wells Fargo made no attempt to answer the question, just referred
user to someone in the call center

(8) Citibank’s response 7 days later made almost no sense, having nothing
to do with my question; at first I thought it was a bad
phishing attempt; either it was automation gone awry, a service rep having a
very bad day, or I got an answer meant for someone else

 

Table 27

Example Service Standards

Source: Online Banking Report, 3/04

 

Example #1: Generic Normal Autoresponse

To:          Customer

From:     Yourbank Ebanking <service@yourbank.com>

Re:          Your question to Yourbank

Thanks for using our online service department.

This is an automatic message to tell you that we received your message at
10:12 AM Sept. 29 and have forwarded it to the proper department for a priority
response.

Most questions are answered within a few hours, but it could take up to 24
hours in certain instances.

Regards,

Ebanking Customer Support

(800) 123-4567

http:/www.yourbank.com/support

 

 

Example #2: Personalized VIP Autoresponse

To:          Customer

From:     Pat P. Smythe <pat_smythe@vipservice.yourbank.com>

Re:          Your question to Yourbank

Thanks for using online VIP service.

This is an automatic message to tell you that I received your message at
10:12 AM and we are currently working on a response. Within an hour you will
receive a either a complete answer or a preliminary response (depending on the
complexity of the request).

Please email or call if you have further questions. Regards,

Pat Smythe, VP – VIP Service

Phone Direct: (415) 555-1234          Toll-free (888) 555-9876

http:/www.yourbank.com/vip_service/pat_smythe

P.S. If for any reason you are not satisfied with my response, please feel
free to contact
Kim Bradford, VP & Manager VIP Service, (415) 555-6789, or kim.bradford@yourbank.com.

 

 

 

Example #3: Referral to Web-based form

To: Yourcustomer <yourcustomer@isp.com>

From: E-Service <eservice@yourbank.com>

Re: Your Question to Yourbank

Dear Customer:

Thanks for your email question received a few minutes ago. This is an
automatic response to let you know that we appreciate your interest in
yourbank.com. However, due to the volume of junk mail and spam coming to our
public mailboxes, we can only respond in a timely manner to questions submitted
via our Web-based form. Click here to go directly to that form (if you can’t
click on it, then type this address into your browser):

http://www.yourbank.com/askus/

Or if you prefer, customer service specialists are currently awaiting your
call at 1-800-yourbank. Generally, wait times are less than two minutes except
during the peak hours of 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM.

Thanks again for your interest in yourbank.com. Based on current volume, we
should be able to respond to your question within 24 hours. Thanks for your
patience.

Yourbank.com E-Service

(800) 123-4567

 

 

Putting a Face on E-Service

We are not enamored with the idea of video conferencing for customer
service. Even with ubiquitous broadband, we’re not sure users really want to
look at the customer service rep as he or she works through a problem (and
we are certain users don’t want anyone looking at them). There may be some
big-ticket sales situations, such as mortgage applications or other
large-dollar investments, where user confidence is increased by seeing the
salesperson.

However, we do think there is a place for static personal information
such as name*, direct email address, and individual Web area where e-reps
can put a human touch on e-service and build rapport with his or her client
base.

________________________________________________________

*For privacy reasons, reps may want to use pseudonyms, an acceptable
practice online.

Techniques: search, FAQs, help centers, tutorials, wizards, forums,
product selectors

The importance of Web self-service is growing
rapidly as financial institutions deploy ever more user-friendly and helpful
tools. In the last six months alone, online users interviewed by
Vividence have shown an almost 50% increase in their preference for
self-service options. Self-service now is the most popular choice among
financial website users, edging out telephone, live chat, and email/online
forms (see Table 13, below). Web self-service at financial
institutions still trails that deployed by online retailers and tech
companies, but those companies have fewer support options. However, we are
beginning to see impressive programs at banking sites, for example,
SunTrust, an early innovator in search tapping Ask Jeeves
for natural-language search years ago. The bank also implemented
SafeHarbor’s graphical-FAQ approach in early.

Table 15

Site Search Usage for Banking Product
Research

% of using site search feature

Age Range	Usage
18-28	39%
29-39	47%
40-57	51%
58+	31%
Approximate average*	45%

Source: Forrester, 3/04,
Percent of each age group using site search the last time they
researched a banking product
*average across all ages not listed, OBR est.

 

Search 

Although search has been the recognized killer app of the
Web since the early days, financial institutions have generally done a poor
job supporting search on their websites, although it’s improved dramatically
during the last year or two. Although there are still two top-20 banks not
offering search, that’s down from 5 last fall. Now that Google has achieved
verb status, you must pay attention to site-search. Recent Forrester
research shows that in the key 29- to 57–year-old segment, half used
site-search the last time they researched a banking product (Table 15). See Table 17 opposite for ideas on how to improve your site
search.

Searching is still hit and miss even at the most
sophisticated banks. We recently searched the top-20 U.S. banks for
“SEP-IRA,” a common savings plan for small business and self-employed
individuals. We found correct results at just eight, or 40% of the total (see
summary Table 16, below). Searches at Citibank, Chase,
Wells, Bank One, and Washington Mutual all failed. The
best results were from SunTrust (screenshot below), the only
top-20 bank using Ask Jeeves natural language search.

Depending on the question, iPhrase powered search at TD Waterhouse
delivers a link to a product area or an answer in a FAQ.

 

Table 18

Detail: Financial Institution Search Results

search for “sep-ira””

Source: Online Banking Report test, 4/7/03, 1 to 3 PM
Pacific time on broadband connection

(1) Location of the box for entering the search text, e.g.,
upper right means the box was positioned in the upper-right portion of the
home page, ‘click Search” means you have to click on a search link before
you get to the search box

(2) Did the search results return a link to product
information on SEP-IRAs, a retirement savings product geared to U.S. small
business owners, a topic of great interest in anticipation of the April 15
U.S. federal income tax deadline

(3) Excluding those with zero and Wachovia’s 1109

(4) Only six of 20 banks came back with an immediate good
result, the other 2 required a research within a different area; in total
just 8 of 20 banks were able to help me find SEP-IRA info

 

FAQs (frequently asked questions)

Table 19

Site Reference Material Used for Banking Product Research

% of using site feature

Age Range	Usage
18-28	35%
29-39	36%
40-57	33%
58+	16%
Approximate average*	32%

Source: Forrester, 3/04,
Percent of each age group using product description or educational material
pages the last time they researched a banking product
*average across all ages not listed, OBR est.

After search, the next most common method to research bank products is to
consult site reference material such as product descriptions, educational
material, and FAQs, which are especially important in self-service. As a
standard Web convention, users are accustomed to turning to the frequently
asked questions to get basic questions answered. More and more the FAQs
provide interactive, detailed, and authoritative support.  

Although many online retailers and Web-services companies force
users through the FAQ before displaying customer service phone numbers, that’s
not a recommended practice for most banks. At least not until you are absolutely
sure your FAQs deliver exceptionally reliable answers. Most customers still
expect good telephone support as part of a banking relationship.

FAQ sections have evolved from a bare-bones text-based area to
interactive knowledge bases stocked with graphical solutions and step-by-step
tutorials. Too see how FAQs should be built, look closely at SunTrust’s
HelpCenter, powered by SafeHarbor (see screenshot below).
Even complex technical answers are easy to understand due to the layout,
screenshot visual aids, and good copy writing.                       

HelpCenter excels at tech support, providing graphical instructions in place
of tedious text-based answers. Here are great instructions for how to enable
cookies in IE 6. Notice how few words are used in the instructions. Screenshots
handle most of the work.

Note: Related articles are posted to the right of the main tutorial.

Note: Feedback is solicited on each page to help SafeHarbor evaluate the
usefulness of its answers to each question. 
                                                                           

	Description	Examples
Preemptive	Bank solves or identifies potential problems BEFORE user raises the issue or is even aware of the problem	Alerts, instant messages, text messaging, voice messaging, pushed account information, satisfaction surveys
Self-service	Users solve their own problems online	FAQs, tutorials, calculators, troubleshooting modules, imbedded help, search, image & statement archives
Responsive	Bank responds to questions online	Email, Web inquiry, chat, instant messaging, call back, co-browsing

Source: Online Banking Report 4/04; partially adapted from a Mar. 31,
2004 presentation by Forrester’s, Catherine Graeber

 

Most people think of email when discussing electronic service. But email
is just one part, albeit an important one, when designing a comprehensive
e-service program. Electronic service consists of three distinct classes of
support:

•   Preemptive or proactive support: Services that provide
  warnings before problems arise. In the branch environment, it used to be the
  courtesy call when an overdraft situation was first detected. Online it’s
  the triggered account alert telling users their balance has fallen below a
  preset limit or an email confirmation when a deposit is made. These services
  are fantastic for customer satisfaction, although they could have a
  short-term negative impact on fee income.
•   Self-service or self-guided support: Self-service options are
  growing in acceptance as users begin to understand that high-quality
  Web-based support can deliver accurate answers in a fraction of the time it
  takes to walk through the problem on the telephone with one or more customer
  service reps. While financial institutions can deploy self-service options
  relatively inexpensively, resist the temptation to cut development costs to
  the bone. Bad self-service support can do more harm than good; driving users
  to the phone already in an agitated state after wasting time trying to find
  the answer online.
•   Responsive or reactive support: This category is most like
  traditional phone support. In theory, questions received electronically
  (email, Web form, or text-based chat) can be handled more economically with
  tools that provide preformatted answer templates for common queries. In
  practice, there is a substantial learning curve before cost savings
  materialize. However, many banks are beginning to see measurable call
  deflection among their online user base. A major credit card issuer told us
  that their online cardholders were making 30% fewer telephone calls, a
  dramatic cost savings. However, users may not be satisfied with e-service
  efforts which will slow adoption. For example, only 25% of users are
  satisfied using email for problem resolution compared to 69% satisfaction
  for the phone and 76% for face-to-face branch interactions

For 2004, we project growth of 5 million new U.S. financial e-service
households, about 15% fewer newcomers compared to the 6 million added in
2003. Also, the rate of growth will slow to 18% from 2003’s 27%. Because 10
million households use electronic customer service but don’t bank online,
it’s important to capture the email addresses of these users so you can
communicate with them electronically. Only one top-10 U.S. bank currently
allows users to opt-in for email communications even when the user is
already providing their email address in the course of making a web-based
inquiry 

Looking at the research, one is tempted to conclude that e-service is
less important than traditional phone and branch service. Customers are
relatively satisfied with their phone and face-to-face experiences at
financial institutions. According to Forrester, the traditional channels
enjoy an average satisfaction rate of 80%, nearly four times the rate of
e-service options which were in the low-20% range. Only the much-maligned
IVR (automated phone) service was lower at 12% (see Table 6, below).
More recent research shows that the Web is gaining ground in all areas
except problem resolution, where only 25% of respondents are satisfied with
the service received (see Table 7, below).

However, even though satisfaction trails other methods, online users
overwhelmingly prefer electronic channels when dealing with their bank. In
research released just this month, Vividence, a customer-satisfaction
research company, found that three times as many users prefer electronic
channels for service compared to the telephone. Jupiter Research also found
similar results in actual behavior at online retailers. It found that during
2002 year-end holiday period that three-quarters of respondents used email and
Web-based options in their initial attempt to contact an online retailer for
service (see column 1, Table 8, opposite).

Financial institutions should be enthusiastic about these consumer
preferences, given the potential cost savings. According to Gartner, email
service can save $2 per interaction compared to the telephone. Furthermore,
Web-based self service can drive costs down more than 80%, to less than $1 per
interaction (see last column, Table 8, opposite). As always, take these
research results with a grain of salt. It’s early in the learning curve for both
providers and users. Weaning users off high-cost delivery channels will be a
long-term process using both carrots and sticks.

 

Since 1995, e-service has been an important component of online banking
satisfaction. However, many financial institutions chose to defer major
investment in service capabilities on the theory that users were not
demanding it.

While that may have been true three or four years ago, it’s not the
current reality. Today, mediocre service puts you at risk of losing
sales, cost saving opportunities, and ultimately customers. Luckily,
expectations are still relatively low, so you have an excellent
opportunity to impress your customers

Table 2
Online Self-Service Evolution

Phase	Period	Typical Capabilities	Primary Market
Beta	1995 to 1998	Brochure and short FAQ	Outliers
Version 1.0 Novelty	1999 to 2001	Longer FAQ, email address, rudimentary Web-based inquiry, site search with poor results	Early adopters
Version 2.0 Utilitarian	2002 to 2004	Extensive FAQs, good Web-based inquiry, live chat in certain areas, site search with marginal results	Early mainstream
Version 3.0 Early mainstream	2004+	Deep and detailed online knowledge base with graphical tutorials, interactive Web-based, live chat in most high-value areas, site search with instant answers	All online households (70% in U.S)

Source: Online Banking Report,
3/04                                                      

 

Table 3
E-Service Benefits

Improved customer support

•          Faster and more convenient for experienced online users
•          Able to interact with the bank in quick bursts when
  questions arise; before the issue festers
•          Creates a written record of questions and answers to make followup more efficient
•          Potential for higher quality answers with links to more
  detailed information, attached documents, and so on
•          Potential for customer to interact with the same rep for
  follow-up questions
•          Customer can save or print answers for future reference
•          No more looking up account and phone numbers, then
  navigating tedious phone menus
•          Efficient and detailed incident tracking to ensure
  satisfactory problem resolution
•          User satisfaction of finding their own answers
•          Serendipity: finding useful related information you might
  never have inquired about (e.g., discovering Roth IRAs when looking for
  year-end tax info)

Better market data

•          Easier to categorize and track customer concerns
•          Provides a steady flow of user feedback that can be
  captured and tracked over time
•          Easier to route individual questions/comments so others
  (e.g., marketing dept.) can “hear” what customers are saying, unfiltered
  and in real time

Potential* cost savings

•          Deflect branch, call center, and email queries
•          Ability to handle some questions during off-peak times
•          Ability to route questions to lower-cost centers where
  language fluency is less of an issue (compared to telephone support)
•          Ability to outsource certain question types, such as tech
  support
•          Ability to automate answers to routine questions

Source: Online Banking Report, 3/04

*Since most financial institutions are early in the learning curve,
cost savings are mostly unproven. However, long term the impact is
expected to be dramatic.

Service Quality

No matter how much time you spend analyzing service quality, in the end it
all boils down to this: Satisfied customers receive products and services that
meet or exceed their expectations. Table 4 below outlines nine components of
online service quality.

Table 5

Customer Service Expectations Retail Banking

*relative ease of exceeding customer expectations using online service

 

Attribute	Expec- tation	Import-ance	Ability to Exceed*
Preemptive support	low	high	high
account alerts	low	high	very high
personal attention	very low	medium	very high
identifying potential probs	low	high	high
Self-service	medium	medium	low
saving time	medium	medium	low
convenient	medium	medium	low
quality of results	low	high	high
search results	medium	medium	low
maintaining privacy	high	medium	very low
“do it yourself” satisfaction	medium	medium	low
providing input to bank	low	medium	medium
venting	low	medium	medium
solving the problem	very low	very high	very high
Responsive support	low	very high	very high
email/web inquiry	medium	high	high
immediate autoresponse	low	medium	medium
response time	medium	medium	medium
thoroughness of response	high	high	low
personal attention	very low	medium	high
ability to escalate	low	medium	medium
efficiency (not restating)	low	medium	medium
providing input to bank	medium	medium	low
venting	medium	medium	low
solving the problem	low	very high	very high

Source: Online Banking Report estimates, 3/04

Because customer expectations are relatively low, there are numerous
opportunities to impress even your most jaded customers and even pick up share
from less-enlightened
competitors.                                                 
 

 

Making the case for improved online customer service is easy. Online banking
customers now prefer it almost 3-to-1 over telephone support (see Table 1,
below). Done right, e-service
can increase customer satisfaction, decrease support costs, and lead to
increased sales. What’s not to like?

The problem is that costs are front-loaded and benefits are difficult to
measure. Bottom line: You’ll spend hundreds of thousands or more in anticipation
of future, largely hidden, returns. That’s a tough sell in any environment, but
especially in the low-margin financial services arena.

What’s a banker to do? Start by demonstrating the reach of your website to
both online banking users and other bank customers. This requires an effort to
persuade non-online banking users to register so you can track them over time to
measure the entire impact of self-service.

Next, continually add self-service tools and content to improve the online
experience. You can do this in baby steps if need be. For example, add one
capability each quarter, such as an online tutorial
on how to pay bills. If resources are tight, look for college interns or
tap in-house volunteers to do the work.

Table 1

Service Channel Preference

percent of respondents preferring each channel, n = 2000

 

	Preferred Method of Support
Channel	2004	2003	Change
Any electronic channel	71%	68%	+3%
Email/online forms	20%	19%	+1%
Live online chat	21%	28%	(7%)
Self-service	30%	21%	+9%
FAQs	21%	12%	+9%
Online instructions/tutorials	9%	9%	—
Telephone	28%	31%	(3%)

 

Source: Vividence survey of online banking customers, Mar. ‘04 and Sept. ’03;
Question: “Which would you prefer to use most often?”, n = 2,000 both years

Another option is to outsource the entire process, including live tech
support if desired. Experts such as SafeHarbor, the company powering much
of Washington Mutual and SunTrust’s self-service capabilities, can
provide speedier implementation and state-of-the-art knowledge. In any event,
the day of the annually updated two-page FAQ are over. Customers expect and
deserve more dynamic help as they attempt to do business with you in cyberspace.

— Jim Bruene, Editor & Founder