How to Balance Standards - Work and Personal
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
- provide quality technical work, and that means quality from a professional standpoint, not a corporate one
Again, is this in writing from the company?
No, their standards are the corporate ones. I meet those and exceed them. But by doing that, I've built the long-term business and I've got a huge list of customers as proof of that.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
Also, I told my tech supervisor that when I sign off on a computer, it's my name and reputation that I'm signing off on. Yes, the tech work is done at my retailer. But customers come back asking for me, many times years later. It's because I don't do shoddy work and I take the time to do it right, as well as engage the customer in a beyond-the-superficial manner.
Are you signing off that it is "perfect" or that you have met company standards? Signing off is not a generic exercise. That your customers come back asking for you is, again, a red herring. They are not your customers, they are the business' customers. The company is your customer, are they telling you, in writing, that what you are doing is perfect and not to listen to the tech manager? If not, you are making assumptions that have no foundation.
If you are only signing that your job is done, your reputation is still intact. Are they asking you to sign off on less than meeting their minimum standards?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Also, I told my tech supervisor that when I sign off on a computer, it's my name and reputation that I'm signing off on. Yes, the tech work is done at my retailer. But customers come back asking for me, many times years later. It's because I don't do shoddy work and I take the time to do it right, as well as engage the customer in a beyond-the-superficial manner.
Are you signing off that it is "perfect" or that you have met company standards? Signing off is not a generic exercise. That your customers come back asking for you is, again, a red herring. They are not your customers, they are the business' customers. The company is your customer, are they telling you, in writing, that what you are doing is perfect and not to listen to the tech manager? If not, you are making assumptions that have no foundation.
If you are only signing that your job is done, your reputation is still intact. Are they asking you to sign off on less than meeting their minimum standards?
No, I'm signing off that the work is completed to both the company's standards and mine.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
No, their standards are the corporate ones. I meet those and exceed them. But by doing that, I've built the long-term business and I've got a huge list of customers as proof of that.
You have a long list of customers that are proof that you did something that we can't establish was good. Stop talking about making money, having customers, going above and beyond, etc. Those are assumptions that are unlikely to be true. You are injecting them as red herrings - they have no place here in the discussion. It doesn't matter at all that you have this list of customers or why you have them. Unless you can accept that those aren't your customers and "above and beyond" for someone that isn't your customer does not equate to above and beyond for your customer, the business, you can't state these things.
You may be correct, but what you are working on here are purely assumptions and not applicable to the case at hand. You seem to be very confused as to where your responsibilities lie. You are part of the business, not an independent consultant.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
No, I'm signing off that the work is completed to both the company's standards and mine.
Where does it state that it is to your standards? Is that in writing? Unless it is, I feel you have made this up completely because you want it to be the case.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
No, that's policy. We push for warranties and tech work because it's very profitable for the company, and honestly it's also in the customer's best interest. Also, we are to make customer's happy because that affects CSAT scores and the like.
Warranties are never in a customer's best interest. The company couldn't make money if they were. Warranties screw customers more than anything most shops sell.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
No, I'm signing off that the work is completed to both the company's standards and mine.
Where does it state that it is to your standards? Is that in writing? Unless it is, I feel you have made this up completely because you want it to be the case.
There is nothing in writing about that Scott. But the difference between shoddy and good tech work in many cases isn't spelled out word for word at most companies. But someone who's technical can tell the difference.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
My comment was that customers don't know what they really want or need. They have needs. They have wants. My job is to find the best solution to address those. But I will almost certainly never do what the customer wants when they come in, unless they are really adamant about it. The reason is that customers just don't know. That's why they came to see me in the first place.
Obviously, but they are also violating the social contract of sales - asking for technical advice from a sales person. They know that they are doing this when they go in. It's just part of the social structure. When you go to a store and "ask for advice", you know that you are not getting good advice except for within a very carefully defined, socially accepted window and that even that is coloured by margins, stock levels, etc. There is no social obligation for you to do anything beyond push the products the store tells you to push, none. Not even the slightest. The store may decide that they want you to do more, but that is purely and unequivocally between you and them.
You are correct, if they knew what they wanted or needed they would not be in the shop at all. That's a tough position, but you are a sales person and you have an obligation to your employer to attempt to sell what they want you to sell. It's that simple. The "customers" of the store accept this obligation when they solicit free advice from you - they know that that advice is paid for by the sale and that your obligation is to making money for the store. Now, why anyone would still ask for that advice is beyond me, but everyone is aware of the relationship and what it means for you, for them and for the kind of advice that can be given.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
No, I'm signing off that the work is completed to both the company's standards and mine.
Where does it state that it is to your standards? Is that in writing? Unless it is, I feel you have made this up completely because you want it to be the case.
There is nothing in writing about that Scott. But the difference between shoddy and good tech work in many cases isn't spelled out word for word at most companies. But someone who's technical can tell the difference.
And that matters why? You are signing off to the company's standards. Nothing suggests otherwise. You have decided to inject something that doesn't exist and use it as an excuse for doing a different job than the one mandated, right? That technical people can tell the difference has nothing to do with the situation. You are signing off that X was done. Was it done? yes or no. That you really want it to also mean Y doesn't mean that it does mean Y nor that you have any place in defining that.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
My comment was that customers don't know what they really want or need. They have needs. They have wants. My job is to find the best solution to address those. But I will almost certainly never do what the customer wants when they come in, unless they are really adamant about it. The reason is that customers just don't know. That's why they came to see me in the first place.
Obviously, but they are also violating the social contract of sales - asking for technical advice from a sales person. They know that they are doing this when they go in. It's just part of the social structure. When you go to a store and "ask for advice", you know that you are not getting good advice except for within a very carefully defined, socially accepted window and that even that is coloured by margins, stock levels, etc. There is no social obligation for you to do anything beyond push the products the store tells you to push, none. Not even the slightest. The store may decide that they want you to do more, but that is purely and unequivocally between you and them.
You are correct, if they knew what they wanted or needed they would not be in the shop at all. That's a tough position, but you are a sales person and you have an obligation to your employer to attempt to sell what they want you to sell. It's that simple. The "customers" of the store accept this obligation when they solicit free advice from you - they know that that advice is paid for by the sale and that your obligation is to making money for the store. Now, why anyone would still ask for that advice is beyond me, but everyone is aware of the relationship and what it means for you, for them and for the kind of advice that can be given.
I'm not told to push any specific computer or brand or anything. That's left up to me. As long as they buy it from my company, the company doesn't really care what I sell them.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
But the difference between shoddy ....
If shoddy is the guideline and all you are asked to do is confirm that shoddy was done, that's all your signature implies.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
I'm not told to push any specific computer or brand or anything. That's left up to me. As long as they buy it from my company, the company doesn't really care what I sell them.
As long as that is policy, that's great. Seems odd that that is policy and someone is complaining about it.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
So should I just shut up and sacrifice what consider to be the "bar" of where the quality should be at simply because I'm told to or, as long as I'm still doing my job, should I stick up for doing things the way they should be done?
Yes, the bar is set by the store, not by you. Unless the store has asked you to raise the bar or you ask the store and they agree that you can raise the bar, you are not to raise the bar. In fact, when you think about who your customer is, you may not be raising the bar. What is valuable to the company is up to them to decide. Providing better service to the customers is easily not in their interest.
This can be complex. It can be as simple as doing too good of a job that they cannot repeat makes other stores look bad or makes it difficult to hire the staff that they need. Doing a great job with one tech doesn't always work out well. The store has to look at a much bigger picture than you do and what seems like a great job to you might be detrimental to the company as a whole, even if it helps your store do better temporarily.
There is a grey area here. You say "as long as you are still doing your job" and "not doing what you are told to do." The two don't really overlap. If you are being told to do something by someone with authority, that is your job. If not, you've not been told what to do.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
But the difference between shoddy ....
If shoddy is the guideline and all you are asked to do is confirm that shoddy was done, that's all your signature implies.
People come to our store because they know that we've always done above the minimum required. This has been critical to building our long-term business.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
People come to our store because they know that we've always done above the minimum required. This has been critical to building our long-term business.
This may or may not be true. However, let's assume that it is is completely true.
Even assuming it is completely true, it is also completely irrelevant. This does not have any bearing, whatsoever, on any component of this discussion. It is a red herring.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
People come to our store because they know that we've always done above the minimum required. This has been critical to building our long-term business.
This may or may not be true. However, let's assume that it is is completely true.
Even assuming it is completely true, it is also completely irrelevant. This does not have any bearing, whatsoever, on any component of this discussion. It is a red herring.
How is it a red herring? We've built the store's business on a certain concept. It's what has led the store to continue to do better and better, which is better for the store, and the company. And stores compete, so if we do better and it makes it so someone will come to my store instead of one of the other local stores, that's viewed as a success by the company.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
And stores compete, so if we do better and it makes it so someone will come to my store instead of one of the other local stores, that's viewed as a success by the company.
I think the key questions to ask with this are
A) If this is how the store operates, why does the tech supervisor disagree with you? Why is he alien to the culture?
B.) Does the Manager encourage this behaviour? Has he written this down in the guidelines?
C) Is Management at the regional level behind this? -
@handsofqwerty said:
How is it a red herring?
Because it is all assumption. And it is obviously a huge assumption because this entire conversation is about how the store officially does not support that. So clearly this is an assumption of value coming from you, not the company, or else there would be no question here.
You have decided that getting return customers, based on this behaviour, to this one store is what the company as a whole sees as valuable. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But their behaviour says that they do not and you seem addicted to feeling that it does. Unless it is in writing, you must assume that your assumption is wrong. There is no action from the business that supports your hypothesis.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
And stores compete, so if we do better and it makes it so someone will come to my store instead of one of the other local stores, that's viewed as a success by the company.
If that is true, why is someone trying to keep that from happening and why hasn't the store manager or regional manager or higher stepped in? Unless they have, you have something wrong in your assumptions.
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
@handsofqwerty said:
And stores compete, so if we do better and it makes it so someone will come to my store instead of one of the other local stores, that's viewed as a success by the company.
I think the key questions to ask with this are
A) If this is how the store operates, why does the tech supervisor disagree with you? Why is he alien to the culture?
B.) Does the Manager encourage this behaviour? Has he written this down in the guidelines?
C) Is Management at the regional level behind this?A) It used to. He is alien to the culture because he's only been in the store 3 months. But this was all started long before I started back in 2010.
B) The old manager, who was the foundation of the store, did. The current actual manager in the position hasn't really voiced an opinion yet.
C) They are behind our results, but are totally ignorant to our methods, as they are at the district level (our DM is a totally incompetent idiot too).
