‘An organization without consumer focus is like an engine without a steering wheel.’ Many would have us believe that business organizations are highly customer focused. How else can they survive in a world where ‘consumer is king’? Consumer focus is the centrepiece around which industry ought to revolve. Surveys are commissioned to understand consumer likes and dislikes; research goes on to introduce new products and services that they would value. Businesses helpfully egg consumers on to discover new needs and satisfy them. Behind all this lies the simple principle – maximize value for money. To figure out where to stop in the trade-off between costs incurred versus value delivered, businesses have used ‘consumer focus’ as the pivot.

Who decides what constitutes best value for money? The consumer of course! To provide customers with good value for money, businesses need to keep asking, ‘Can someone else do it better?’ for each of their activities. And this must be asked not once, but again and again, because the answers change with changing consumer needs. Those who find that the answer is no longer yes, have two options – move or improve. Those that don’t ask the question often enough learn some harsh lessons in the field.

Consumer focus is a never-ending quest for consumers’ perception of value as the yardstick against which product or service offerings should be measured. And when it comes to measuring, business management has largely treated consumer focus as being synonymous with consumer satisfaction. Pick up any piece written on consumer focus and it tells you to maximize consumer satisfaction. And to maximize, one needs to measure.

There are several instances of instruments already developed and deployed to measure consumer satisfaction. For example, the SERVQUAL¹ instrument is based on the premise that consumer satisfaction varies inversely with the gap between customer expectations and experience on five parameters: (i) Tangibles (physical facilities, equipment, appearance); (ii) Reliability (dependability, accuracy); (iii) Responsiveness (promptness, willingness to help); (iv) Assurance (knowledge, competence, courtesy, credibility, security); and (v) Empathy (caring, attention, access, communication, understanding).

At a deeper level, it is not the experience but the perception of experience that matters, and this perception is highly subjective – the same product or service may be excellent for one and not-so-good for another, depending not only on their features, but also on consumer characteristics. Without going into methodological details, it is obvious that consumer satisfaction is a useful indicator of consumer focus, so long as products and services are of a nature where expectations can be defined and measured.

While SERVQUAL is fairly exhaustive in capturing what is known about measuring customer satisfaction, its real value is not merely in showing satisfaction levels as a report card, but also in offering a diagnostic tool to identify problem areas and address them from a consumer angle. For this purpose, SERVQUAL assumes, and rightly so, that consumers always know better. Business prospers if you listen to consumers, and to actually listen, you must believe that they know best.

 

In real life, however, it is not always easy to appreciate customer perceptions, expectations and experiences. Even when customers are identifiable in advance, the interaction with them is well defined, and the service is desired, it is fairly difficult to do exactly what customers want. Where customers are not identifiable in advance, e.g. for road usage, or not even born, e.g., for environmental protection, it is far more difficult. And where the service itself is not desired, e.g., imprisonment of convicts, consumer focus needs to be interpreted very differently from the way it is usually done. In such cases, it is difficult to listen to consumers; because it is difficult to engage them, or to be sure that the ones who actually get engaged are really the ones who also know best.

Whenever I think of consumer focus, three real life incidents etched in my memory come back to me as yardsticks for a holistic understanding of consumer focus from a societal viewpoint.

Let us now look at three stories narrated in first person and in two voices each to get two perspectives of the same situation.

 

Story I (1990): Seeing through her glasses. ‘Old age is a curse, but there’s a bigger curse I face today – ignorance. They say it is my fault if I didn’t know that the bank does not give money after 12.00. Pray how was I to know that? The sarpanch, kind soul that he is, told me that since I am so old and have no one to support me, the sarkar gives me 150 rupees every three months. I paid 500 rupees to the boy I met outside the sarkari daftar and he was kind enough to help me in getting all the paperwork done.

‘It took six months but at last I came to know that my money has come into the bank in the mandi and I can withdraw Rs 150 for the last three months. But do you know what the bank man said? "Bibi, you should have come before 12.00, the bank is now closed for the day; so you come on Monday." Why didn’t the sarpanch tell me, or that boy? Maybe they didn’t know.

‘But why did the bank man not tell me when I came to put my thumb impression that day on his papers? Surely he would have known. Today he said that I should have read the board outside the bank. Has he forgotten that I can’t read? Now I have to spend 10 rupees again on getting from my village to the bank. If I start early on Monday, maybe I can walk and save the 10 rupees. But I have to be fast if I have to reach before noon. Let me ask again till what time they will give money on Monday; I can’t read their board; I don’t even know what all they write on the board.’

 

‘What can I do? The cash counter is closed and the manager has left on a field visit. Poor woman! She has waited so many months for her first pension. But she came on a Saturday after 12.00 noon when I had already tallied my books. Should I give her Rs 150 and keep her withdrawal form? I could do the accounting on Monday, but I am not authorized to do so. If anyone finds out, I would face disciplinary action. Will the bank believe that I did it just to be nice to her? And if she forgets how much money she has taken from me, I have no proof. I think it is best to keep out of this. Or I could give her Rs 10 for the fare to ease my conscience.’

 

This story shows some aspects that the bank was concerned about at that time, like reducing waiting time, and transaction processing efficiency. The quality of currency notes dispensed, etc. were irrelevant for certain customers. From a business viewpoint, such customers, going back unserviced, is a non-issue because their accounts are not at all profitable. That aspect aside, what mattered here was the time taken to dispense cash, which could have been mitigated to an extent through prior information. While no one can deny the need for office routine, it is equally important for a service provider to push the extent to which it can cater to consumer needs, especially those of vulnerable sections. Within the context of SERVQUAL, this story shows the need for an additional parameter – that of prior information about the conditions of service.

 

Story II (2003): They don’t know why things changed. ‘My business is doing well – except for this minor irritant of keeping the verandah outside my shop clean. The municipality needs to be more efficient. I pay taxes for the upkeep of areas adjacent to my property, but I also need to hire a sweeper to keep the place clean. Isn’t that double payment for the same service? I should discuss with these guys and propose that they give possession of the verandah space to me. If I am the owner, I don’t mind spending on its upkeep. I can make more money by letting out a corner to some petty pavement seller. Good for me, good for the municipality too! I should get someone to take this up at their next meeting. I don’t mind if I have to pay a price, the money will be well spent.’

 

‘I thought shopping would be fun on a lazy Sunday afternoon. But look at this: the market is so congested, not an inch to put ones foot down. With so many sellers sitting inside the verandahs, it is so difficult to find the shop I am looking for, the whole place has changed so much. Why doesn’t someone do something about it? And pray who is that someone? Who allowed this passage be converted into another mini market? Maybe I shouldn’t worry about others; let me just see if I can avoid coming here. Maybe I could send the bai next time for the groceries and go somewhere else for the remaining stuff.’

This story illustrates the multiplicity of stakeholders in any situation. Sometimes their interests coincide, at other times they don’t. For business, categorization of external stakeholders into two groups is enough: consumers and others. For consumers the golden rule is to bend backwards. For those who are not direct consumers – one way is to do the minimum required by law, the other is to be proactive and do something more, which in fact could be a strategic investment.

 

Story III (2006): You can tell us what you think even if you don’t think. ‘What’s wrong with the boss? He’s been sitting on the suggestions file for three months. It is such a simple matter. We had invited suggestions from the public on how to improve our department services. We worked so hard going through the mountain of letters received. To be honest, some of them we didn’t read carefully, maybe some we didn’t read at all, but that does not matter. In the end we shortlisted some of the best suggestions received. Now all we have to do is select the best three out of this shortlist and give a prize to the senders. I don’t know why he is taking so long. We created a shortlist of six out of thousands in three months; he is sitting on just six for three months. Maybe he is worried about the prize. But that’s just worth Rs 500 and even if we have a stringent budget surely we can afford this much. Ram kasam, if he takes any longer even the senders will forget what suggestions they had given.’

 

‘I had stars in my eyes when I took charge last year. I am here to serve the public, and I must do what they want. So we placed this advertisement on our notice board downstairs inviting the public to give suggestions on how to improve our services. Of course, the public should be entitled to make decisions on matters affecting them. That’s what democracy is all about. What a fool I was! Ask me now and I’ll say public participation in decision making sounds too good to be useful. My juniors worked so hard dealing with the large number of letters we received. Well that was expected, though I must confess that I did sometimes doubt if anyone ever cared to read our notice board.’

‘I had thought a newspaper ad would be better but we didn’t have the budget, thank God. You ask the public for suggestions, great; but what do you do with them? People write all sorts of impractical things, and in contradiction to one another. I am sure if this suggestion, the one at number two in this shortlist, is implemented, there will be an uproar from some other group. And didn’t we already know their suggestions? I think I should just let this die a natural death. Next time they talk of inviting suggestions, I’ll remind them to first implement what they already know. They’ll call me a dictator, so be it. I hope those who sent in their suggestions didn’t really take it too seriously.’

Businesses need and want to do what their consumers demand. And when you ask consumers, who speaks up? Obviously the most involved, most dominant, most articulate of consumers. These are the kind of consumers who should be well looked after; they are the ones most likely to switch loyalties. It is safe to ignore others who prefer to stay passive, so long as they leave the purse strings loose. Of late, as a society, we have shown some inclination to change from being passive spectators to vocal protesters. More progress though is needed to channelize this inclination into constructive engagement and action.

 

Consumer focus is a good reference point for business organizations. But as one ventures into the difficult terrain of serving vulnerable constituencies, handling multiple and conflicting consumer needs, and managing different interest groups, business is looking for answers as well. And this is the terrain that we must learn to negotiate if we want to build a more equitable society.

 

* This article is based on the personal views of the author. FICCI does not necessarily subscribe to the views expressed nor has it sought to establish reliability of the information provided herein. FICCI will not accept any liability for loss arising from any use of this document or its content or otherwise arising in connection herewith.

Footnote:

1. V. A. Zeithaml, A. Parasuraman and L.L. Berry, Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. Free Press, New York, 1990.