Targets

[iSon]

This topic is inspired from a bit on the BBC Have Your say website (http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread. ... 1211131807) which talks about the 'minimum' speed that Royal Mail posties should walk at to get the deliveries to customers on time.

This isn't unique to this industry, with many jobs now turning to targets to help regulate the amount of work their employees should do. I've been fairly fortunate in working in the media because that's fairly creative and you'll only do as much as what you can and almost you regulate your own work because you take pride in it. But I have spent time working in retail which is dominated heavily by sales and performance targets. OK, you're not always penalised for not reaching the required output but it is very much drilled into you at the start of every day that you should sell sell sell. As a result you get bored members of staff asking people at the till "have you seen our 3 for 2 offers?" Which in my opinion is going to make no difference at that point anyway!

So, is your job dominated by targets or are you allowed to work fairly freely? Do you think they do any good at the end of the day? I don't doubt it will help highlight some of the more slack workers - but is that the future? Is work going to become just one big elimination show where the people at the top of tree stay on and those that struggle for whatever reason are booted off for the next person to come in and join the treadmill at minimum wage?

[Gavin Scott]

For many in sales - and certainly for myself for a period of time - my remuneration was based on bonuses attained on sales delivered. That is to say, a lower basic wage, topped up by commissions on sales. If you didn't do the business your bonus was small and therefore your monthly salary was poor.

I worked that way for a number of years, and it really takes it out of you after a while. If you had a great month, you couldn't sit back and enjoy it, because it became expected. If I turned over £500K they wanted £750K. If I did £750K they wanted £1M... and so on - although I have to say I struggled beyond that point.

I always seemed grossly unfair that we would be subject to the peaks and troughs of the market - and certain points in the year are slow for the industry.

Speaking with an ex-colleague the other day, he was telling me that the company have appointed *yet another* manager, who has announced an overhaul of the bonus system - now basing payments on ultimate profitability rather than turnover. He's being screwed over in this respect, as some of the gigs/events are taken at a loss, or with wafer-thin margins, based on the company wanting "prestigious" clients and the potential for new business on the back of it.

Glad I'm out of it.

That said, I don't think targets are a bad thing in principle. Something to strive for and a deadline to be met can really focus the mind and help with motivation. However, if its a tool by employers to minimise paying hard-working staff then that's a different story.

[nidave]

I do Product Support for a large software company - we don't have any targets - calls last as long as it takes to get the customer sorted and leave happy. We don't have any minimum number of calls we have to get through. Just do our best to help as much as we can.
He have got in place some call handling guidelines - basic things like asking their name and asking if there is anything else we can help with . This is is part of our call quality feedback score and might sound stupid but it actually helps wrap up the call with a customer. instead of saying things like OK? to bring the call to a close.
We also try to explain things fully to the customers and give help and advice on not just the software but some of the legislation where we can.

[DAS]

I work for a telecoms company and ISP and essentially look after network incidents and make sure stuff happens. When I'm doing this role I don't take customer calls but make plenty of them to various people, sometimes customers to get an idea of what's happening, but mostly techy people. Yet I'm lumped in with the department-wide target of wrapping up a call within 2 minutes. Now, what am I supposed to do? "OK, cheers Brian, it's all interesting what you're telling me and I need a few other questions answered, but let me hang up and give you another call in a couple of seconds". I understand the rationale behind the target, but my irritation is where no common sense or logic is applied to a target when it comes to the analysis. In the same way I have to type "Structured Info N/A" each time I raise a ticket so as to avoid the merciless macro they run to pick up any slack call handler people. Rah.

[Mr Q]

I've got to say, I think 'targets' and commissions-based remuneration in a retail setting can be counter-productive. When I go into a store, I hate to be pestered by staff members asking me if I need help. That just tends to make me want to leave quicker, and less likely to make a purchase there. Don't get me wrong: there are times when I'll go shopping and will want assistance. As long as I can identify a staff member who I can ask for assistance, then I'm happy. But I don't need to have five different people in the store trying to "help" me in order to secure a sale.

I was having a chat with one of my lecturers earlier this year, and he was telling me about a recent experience he had trying to buy a laptop. Now, he had seen a reasonably cheap but simple laptop being advertised, and decided to buy it. Of course, he went into the store, and the staff member who assisted him just wanted to sell him another more expensive, high-tech laptop. So he basically dismissed the staff member, looked at some other stuff in the store, and came back to be served by another employee. Same deal - they wanted to sell him something bigger and better. So again, he went and looked at some other stuff. He then found another member of staff who wasn't doing much of anything (and hadn't already bugged up), and straight up asked him if he could sell him something without trying to upsize it or sell him other stuff. The staff member obliged, and he got the commission.

I'm sure on average retail staff do end up better off by trying to push their products to customers. Ultimately if it didn't work, employees wouldn't do it and employers wouldn't find much merit in imposing targets or topping up pay with commissions. But as a customer I find it makes the shopping experience more painful than it needs to be.

[timgraham]

Arguably there's a balance between hiding from customers and chasing them down, though - if you're skilled and subtle enough to strike a happy medium then you're more likely to get the sale. Consequently people who are genuinely better at the job, not just at trying to sell someone a product they don't want, are rewarded.

[cdd]

When I go into a store, I hate to be pestered by staff members asking me if I need help. That just tends to make me want to leave quicker, and less likely to make a purchase there.

On that note, what are you supposed to do if such a "helpful" staff member still lingers after politely responding that you're "just browsing, thank you"? Apart from running away, of course. It doesn't happen often but it does happen, I find it hard to browse with someone following me like a shadow and chatting about things I look at. And the last (and only) shop assistant I directly told "could you not talk to me please?" gave me the SERIOUSLY OFFENDED treatment (and, what is worse, didn't stop talking).

The logical thing to do is to leave the shop I suppose, but often I need something there.

[Gavin Scott]

When I go into a store, I hate to be pestered by staff members asking me if I need help. That just tends to make me want to leave quicker, and less likely to make a purchase there.

On that note, what are you supposed to do if such a "helpful" staff member still lingers after politely responding that you're "just browsing, thank you"? Apart from running away, of course. It doesn't happen often but it does happen, I find it hard to browse with someone following me like a shadow and chatting about things I look at. And the last (and only) shop assistant I directly told "could you not talk to me please?" gave me the SERIOUSLY OFFENDED treatment (and, what is worse, didn't stop talking).

The logical thing to do is to leave the shop I suppose, but often I need something there.

That's not logical.

"Would you mind if I just browse and I'll come and get you if I need you?" - they can't really say no to that. There's no point in pussyfooting - if you leave your reply open to interpretation then its their job to pursue you further.

The same technique works with telesales staff trying to set up appointments for reps to visit the business. I simply point out that I understand that they are paid by the appointment, so if they leave me their contact details I'll be sure to arrange an appointment via them.

Works every time for me.

[rts]

I used to work in a call centre, for my sins. Obviously we had our spiel to get out, and the purpose of the call was to get a Direct Debit set-up for charity X, whatever we may be calling on.

However bad the call was going, and how dismissive the person on the end of the phone, we had to ask three times, be it for a one off payment, arrange a visit, set up a DD etc.

Faliure would result in a bollocking.

If the phone went down before the three asks, that would be logged as a "Hard No" - if the person stayed on the phone for all three asks but still said no, that would be logged as a "Soft No".

It was not uncommon for Soft No's to be called a month later, as statistically 20% of these ended up saying yes.

If a person was belligerent or rude, callers would often set them up to be called again, to be vindictive/spiteful. Sad but a truth.

So whatever the rights and wrongs of the call, however irritating, stand your ground, kill the conversation dead (Hard No) and politely ask to be removed from their database.

They can't argue with that.