Join or sign in Register for your free TechRepublic membership or if you are already a member, sign in using your preferred method below. Use Your Email Use FacebookUse Linkedin

Delivering customer choice … by force

Locked

Let?s say you print an invoice with 2 pay slips on it and send it to your customer.
– The first one contains the normal invoice amount WITH a suggested additional service (for less or more money) included within the amount
– The second contains the normal invoice amount WITHOUT any additional services (at the expected invoice amount)
Hence the customer can choose to sign up for additional services or not at minimal expense to effort.

I call this ?Delivering customer choice by force? and it may become a popular method for those companies linking ERP to CRM and Output Management (or Enterprise Document Presentment – EDP)

With enormous take-up rates compared to normal inserts (pamphlets) my questions is this? ?How can companies not afford to deliver customer choice by force??

What are the technical problems involved when linking CRM and ERP systems together ? even from an external systems standpoint? Technology exists to do this at a reasonable cost so there must be another reason for the slow up-take. Comments please?.

I believe that this method will be prolific within a few years and may even spread into other forms when it becomes socially acceptable as a valid marketing / sales technique. Watch this space?.

Topic

Sheet, companies have been doing that over here for many years

In reply to Delivering customer choice … by force

nearly 20 years ago I got an invoice from NRMA for my road service membership pay $X for basic service, pay $y for silver service with added benefits of …., pay dollars $z for gold service with extra added benefits of …..

You write your check, circle the amount, and send it back. NRMA and many other service organisations have been doing this for decades here in Australia.

Only problem is it’s against the Law

In reply to Delivering customer choice … by force

Billing for services without a contract (either implied or actual) is called theft by deception.

A lot of the phone companies were doing this. Most of them have settled with the customers and are now working on their fines with the FCC.

Same thing happened with the utilities.

So CRM may be next, but the Justice Department will go after them for it.

It depends

In reply to Only problem is it’s against the Law

on what the bill says. I don’t remember the phrasing that the post office requires, but it’s something to the effect that you’re ordering services and are not required to pay unless you’re ordering the service.

The key is probably “socially acceptable”.

In reply to Delivering customer choice … by force

Sensitivity to social standards is key to social acceptability. There are some like you who don’t care about much except the gouge and your use of the word force is the key to grasping your attitude. The less of your sort of social grace we have the better. As a consumer I loath that sort of attitude and would resist it with my dying breath. I would boycott every product you ever offered or canvassed. I suspect there are many like me and maybe the sensitivity and decency of most people don’t allow them to behave like you.

The key is probably “socially acceptable”.

In reply to Delivering customer choice … by force

Sensitivity to social standards is key to social acceptability. There are some like you who don’t care about much except the gouge and your use of the word force is the key to grasping your attitude. The less of your sort of social grace we have the better. As a consumer I loath that sort of attitude and would resist it with my dying breath. I would boycott every product you ever offered or canvassed. I suspect there are many like me and maybe the sensitivity and decency of most people don’t allow them to behave like you.

International social standards

In reply to Delivering customer choice … by force

The input from Australia and the US on my post from Sweden has provided an international social/legal standard focus.

Apparently AMEX has been doing this for years internationally so there must be some form of agreed internal governance available. Can anyone shed light on what that may be?

The 2 bills method is of course a forced choice method, but are there any other examples of delivering customer choice out there?

Any comments?

I doubt there is an international agreement on this

In reply to International social standards

each company is responsible for acting according to the laws of the country it is in.

The laws of most countries, allows business to offer people specials and extras with their accounts. You just have to be careful how you set it out in the paperwork.

here in Australia, you get a bill for the service ordered. Some companies list extra services available and their prices below that. To utilise these, you normally have to tick a box and write combined value in the ‘Amount Paid’ box, which is usually left blank for you to do this.

[Author]

Replies