#FAIL. Blunders are bound to happen when corporations engage with consumers on social media. Social media has enhanced corporate communications by providing a platform for both buyers and sellers to dialogue with one another (Kerpen, 2011). For the first time, companies can be authentic, as well as humanize its brand (Kerpen, 2011). In order for companies to demonstrate its authenticity, it is very important for the company to LISTEN to its consumers, before reacting (Kerpen, 2011).
 |
| photo credit: (Darthmarkh, 2013) |
Bank of America is not the first corporation that comes to
mind when an individual thinks of a humanized brand. And unfortunately, the
bank did not do themselves any favors in July of 2013.
An Occupy Wall Street activist, who was
disgruntled and protesting in front of Bank of America in Manhattan, took to
Twitter when a New York City Police officer barred him from chalking Bank of
America’s side walk (Weissman, 2013). However, Bank of America understood these
tweets to indicate that a customer needed help with his Bank of America
account. From there, the events unfolded in a bizarre robot-esq fashion.
Interestingly enough, according to Digiday,
Bank of America insisted that the bank has a team of social media service
representatives who are responsible for assisting and understanding customers’
needs (Weissman, 2013). At first, it appears that automatic replies were
at fault. Yet, in an effort to seem as authentic online as possible, the
company insisted that the tweets came from real customer representatives (read conversation here).
The
irony of the situation is that if Bank of America had simply accepted that
these tweets seemed robotic and that a human error was
made, wouldn't the company appear to be more human, rather than
insisting that these strange, auto-replies came from real users?
What is more important for a company, truly being authentic or insisting that
the company is authentic?
For Bank of America, the
negative ramifications for being inauthentic were ridicule, shame, and making
Digiday’s list of The 5 Worst
Brand Twitter Screwups of 2013 (Weissman,
2013). Of course, there
are worst things to be accused of and banks are restricted by multiple
regulatory and compliance factors when interacting online (The Financial Brand,
2013). The bank did appear to be out of touch and inauthentic, and as result it
was the butt of a few jokes online. However, on a positive note, Bank of
America is attempting to connect, engage, and more importantly help its
customers online (The Financial Brand, 2013). Yet, the bank simply failed Kerpin’s cardinal rule of “Listen
first, and never stop listening” (Kerpen, 2011, loc. 257).
References
Darthmarkh. (2013,
July 6). Just got chased away by #NYPD 4 ‘obstructing sidewalk’ while
#chalkupy-ing with @CyMad0X outside @bankofamerica HQ. [Tweet]. Retrieved from:
https://twitter.com/darthmarkh/status/353602262410620929/photo/1
Digital Strategy
Consulting. (2013, July 19). Twitter fail: Bank of america ‘bots’ revealed as
humans. Digital Strategy Consulting. Retrieved
From: http://www.digitalstrategyconsulting.com/intelligence/2013/07/twitter_fail_bank_of_america_bots_revealed_as_humans.php
Kerpen, D. (2011). Likeable social media: How to delight your
customers, create an irresistible brand, and be generally amazing on facebook
(and other social networks). [Kindle Version] Retrieved from Amazon.com
The Financial Brand.
(2013, July 17). BofA’s ‘tone deaf robot’ replies to consumers with boilerplate
tweets. The Financial Brand. Retrieved
from: http://thefinancialbrand.com/31832/bank-of-america-occupy-automated-twitter-replies/
Weissman, S. (2013,
July 11). Bank of america’s epic twitter fail. Digiday. Retriecved from: http://digiday.com/brands/bank-of-americas-epic-twitter-fail/
Weissman, S. (2013, December
10). The 5 worst brand twiiter screw-ups of 2013. Digiday. Retrieved from: http://digiday.com/brands/top-twitter-fails-2013/
Catherine,
ReplyDeleteDave Kerpen mentions that “many large companies have a hard time being authentic in their interactions with customers” (Kerpen, 2011, p. 96). Kerpen continues “As organizations get larger, it becomes difficult to manage higher volumes of staff and clients” (Kerpen, 2011, p. 97).
This highly awkward Twitter exchange highlights the above points. Bank of America had a real opportunity to engage with a frustrated individual in a meaningful way. And, quite possibly, put a human face on a mega-company. Instead, it stood by its position that this exchange was done by humans. If that is true, it only reinforces the robotic-like nature of its customer services representatives. Ultimately, making Bank of America look worse than it already did.
A frustrated individual reaches out on social media after making a statement with chalk on a sidewalk in New York City. This is not typical customer behavior. Therefore, the individual’s behavior demonstrated his high level of frustration. The least Bank of America could have done was to ask to speak with him offline to discuss the matter. Listening to him would have cost the company little and diffused a situation which reflected poorly on Bank of America. “Social networking, done well, is authentic and real” (Kerpen, 2011, p. 97) not fake and forced as it ultimately appeared.
In his discussion on optimizing social networking pages, David Meerman Scott emphasizes the need to “be authentic and transparent” and “don’t try to impersonate someone else” (Scott, 2013, p. 271). In this example, Bank of America fell short on both points.
If you were on the social media strategy team for Bank of America at the time of this tweet, what would you suggest the customer service rep do?
References:
Kerpen, D. (2011). Be Authentic. In Likeable social media (1st ed., pps. 96 & 97). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Scott, D. (2013). Social Networking Sites and Marketing. In The New Rules of Marketing and PR (4th ed., p. 271). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kim - great comments! You hit the nail right on the head - Bank of America could have saved themselves at two points during this exchange. First, read the context of the comments and offer to take the discussion offline. Or, admit the error, apologize, and move on! Why stand by for further criticism?
DeleteIf I were a Bank of America Social Media Strategist,and not a robot, I would have looked for context clues and responded accordingly. Ultimately, the conversation should have been taken offline - no need for the digital world to be involved. Although, hindsight is 20/20.
Thoughts for the group? Would anyone else have reacted differently?
I agree, honesty is always the best policy. We understand mistakes, and understand that the online forums are a learning curve for all businesses and they may not always know the best way to fully use the new tools. The Twitter comments that followed and bash in reputation could have been avoided by just explaining the truth and showing customers that Bank of America will make efforts to fix the issues going forward. Engagement, interaction, and responding to feedback from customers not only satisfies the customer but provides true insight into areas that need attention for Bank of America. Bank of America should welcome any methods that can be used for tools of improvement.
DeleteI agree, Kelly, great insight. It is always easier to forgive and move on. We all make mistakes, especially online. It is a new environment that we are all learning to navigate. I still find it very interesting that the company would rather pretend to be authentic, rather than be authentic and humanize the brand by stating what happened, apologizing, and moving on.
DeleteCatherine,
DeleteI fully agree with your suggestions as to how Bank of America (BOA) should have responded. It may have been a blip on the social media radar, but a blip is certainly better than what it turned into. By choosing to stand by their initial statement that it was human error, it further fueled just criticism. If that was in fact a real human response, then perhaps more in depth training would be a good place to start! In my opinion, it was a autobot response. But, they (for some reason unknown to me) did not want to admit that. To your point, Catherine, if BOA had just admitted the mistake, then BOA could have easily moved forward relatively unscathed.
Kim
Exactly! The approach BofA used is mind-boggling. Hopefully, BofA (and other companies) learn from this mistake and will err on the side of honesty next time.
DeleteCatherine,
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of a bank and social media I think of the negative ramifications that can quickly spread when topics on distrust arise. Social media allows for good news to travel fast, and bad news even faster which can drastically effect a company’s reputation. As Kerpen mentions “it is virtually impossible to hide the truth.” (2011, p109) therefore companies like Bank of America need to understand that transparency is the best way forward if they want to continue future success. As you reference the point of social media channels if used effectively is engagement, interaction and honest communication between company and consumer. This line of two way communication would help keep customers loyal to Bank of America had they fully utilized the tools and not lied about their automatic response method. Again as you said customer need should be a main priority and true authenticity a key goal not pretending it is. In my post I references Starbucks as a company that uses social media effectively, as Zog Digital explains Starbucks aim to “customize a unique experience: Consumers want to feel like valued individuals, not disposable dollars.” Bank of America could learn from this attitude, understanding the importance of each customer and respecting the relationship they have with them. Any form of lying from a Bank will inevitability lead to downfall in reputation.
Reference
Kerpen, D. (2011). Likeable social media: How to delight your customers, create an irresistible brand, and be generally amazing on facebook (and other social networks).
Zog Digital
http://blog.zogdigital.com/2013/01/24/6-reasons-starbucks-excels-at-social-media-marketing/
Exactly, Kelly. I think it is very important for corporations, public figures, and individuals to be transparent, authentic, and honest when communicating online. If nothing else, the Internet is generally permanent, and what is written, is there forever. And, as you mentioned, it can lead to a downfall in reputation if you don't understand what you are writing.
DeleteStarbucks is a great example of a corporation that is mostly effective, but do you think it is possible for a corporation that large to be truly transparent and authentic?
To your point, Catherine, I do think that it becomes increasingly difficult for large corporations to maintain a real sense of authenticity, honesty, and transparency, particularly online. All the more reason to focus on it and make it a priority.
DeleteIt takes great skill to be authentic - when you're too big to fail!
DeleteHi,
ReplyDeleteI posted my comment to your blog twice but it is not showing up.
Do you need to approve it first?
This is the third posting. It's afternoon on Sunday for me. Hopefully this one sticks.
DeleteThanks
YF
Hi - No, I don't have to approve post! But, I only see these two postings? I did receive an email about your original posting - but I don't see it anywhere and I haven't had to approve anything. Did you maybe "preview" it and not publish it?
DeleteI'm trying again and will post in forum. I have no idea why this is not working
DeleteThis is crazy! I keep receiving email notifications about your post - but they aren't appearing. Maybe just reply to this thread and see if it post? Sorry!
Deletefyi - I also received email notifications that you had posted to Catherine's blog multiple times.
DeleteThis is Yana's Post (from the Forum in iLearn):
ReplyDeleteCOMI 610 Student Blog YF has left a new comment on the post " To Be Authentic, Or Not To Be... ":
Reading your post made me think of outsourced customer service centers, specially those that use staff that speak English as a second or third language. I am sure you can relate to having something lost in translation when your customer service call is routed to a non-native speaker. Looking around online for the topic of outsourced social media branches of customer service centers, I came across several interesting articles and comments that could account for the robotic response of BofA however, the following excerpt from and IDC report I thought was quite insightful.
For example, let's assume that there is a scripted response for social media forums for one issue in particular; watch the trends of the buyers who received that response. Observe how those customers behave and their levels of customer satisfaction and loyalty to get a sense of the effectiveness of that interaction. It's tricky because you’re learning this in front of an audience, but the more it is monitored and analyzed, the more best practices will emerge. To a certain extent, processes and responses will need to be scripted, but the pitfall to watch out for will be giving off the canned and scripted vibe in a forum that prides itself on genuine, personal conversations. Putting a casual tone on the scripted responses is one way to quell that concern, but this is one of the areas that must be constantly monitored, assessed, and revised by real people, not an automated analytics technology (Stevenson, 2011).
The full report is available on line at http://www.liveops.com/sites/default/files/uploads/lo_idc_social.pdf
Stevenson, M. (2011). Social Media Services Trends in Customer Care Outsourcing. Framingham: IDC.
This was very interesting - thanks, Yana!
DeleteThis report provided some great insight to consider when companies are developing social media plans. After this incident, Bank of America should re-evaluate how it communicates on social media. Much like personal selling, allowing social media representatives to respond to customers in real-time is a good thing, however messages and sales pitches can be misinterpreted. By having a plan and/or policy in place, larger corporations might be able to control and deliver a clear and concise message.
Well said, Catherine. Having a social media plan and/or policy in place for such circumstances would have possibly eliminated this misunderstanding. To Yana's point, if this was an outsourced scenario, mastering the English language and its ambiguities is paramount. Canned auto responses do not work if you are trying to portray your company as authentic. Scripted responses are a necessity to a point, but in order to have a real authentic online conversation, the customer service reps on the other end need to be able to be present in the conversation and fully understand what is being said.
DeleteAgreed, but it's easier said than done.
DeleteWhen a company gives an employee freedom to pitch, communicate, or engage customers (or potential customers) in real-time, it becomes very difficult to control the message. Developing a plan or policy is a good first step, but proper training of customer service representatives or sales professionals is also needed.
Hi Catherine!
ReplyDeleteI had completely missed that while it happened to Bank of America, that's a fun read. I think you're completely correct that authenticity is key; consumers aren't as stupid as some companies want to believe and they will take companies to task for trying to trick them.
Very different tone than just auto-responding "helpful" to messages, but the issues that Coke has had after their #MakeitHappy campaign was hijacked by Gawker show that auto-responses are a bad idea in general. If you didn't catch that, at the Super Bowl Coke aired an ad about bringing positivity to the internet, and that people should send negative Tweets to their "Make it Happy" bot that would then create happy images with the words. It didn't take long for internet site Gawker to create a bot to Tweet lines of Hitler's Mein Kampf to Coke, who then dutifully posted it to their wall in the form happy dogs and peppers wearing jaunty hats while drinking coke (Monllos, 2015). The media derision at a mainstay global company making that kind of mistake has been incredible.
Back to Bank of America, I would imagine that a lot of the issue stems from the social media handlers being handed a script they are required to follow. There probably are real people on the other line. But I'm sure we've all encountered "customer support" at some companies who were only allowed to read from a certain block of responses and you had to speak to a manager to get more than that. I would expect that the social media people were only allowed to copy and paste from a Word doc and add their initials at the end, hence the identical, robotic replies.
Have you seen any signs of improvement from the bank, or at least a removing of the silly copy+paste responses?
References
Monllos, K. (2015, February 4). Tricked Into Quoting Hitler, Coca-Cola Suspends Automated Tweet Campaign. Retrieved February 10, 2015, from http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/coca-cola-suspends-makeithappy-social-campaign-162775
Hi Harley! Thanks for sharing. Even before the Coke incident went downhill, it seemed like a recipe for disaster. The intentions were good, but I could see the potential for something bad to happen. It's almost comical - companies continue to forget that to appear authentic and transparent online, you have to be human, as well as authentic and transparent online.
DeletePersonally, I have not read about further disasters for BofA. I believe the bank has learned from this mistake and has taken its Tweets seriously. Although, only time will tell.