An interesting use of word play, but not one that I can say I agree with. On the Social Media side, I can see your point, not because of the "Samurai" but because Social Media is not a means to an end - it is a communincations channel. Customer Service is different and the use of the term Ninja may be over the top sometimes, but it makes a point - someone who is at the top of their game and respected for what they do. In the realm of business, Six Sigma (no I am not) has used the term "Black Belt" for years, clearly taken from the martial arts as well, no?
The pejorative use of 'suck' is actually much worse in my opinion. By definition, suck is "To draw (liquid) into the mouth by movements of the tongue and lips that create suction." - Not sure how that really puts a point on it either. I would have stopped here:
"No, your simply want to get to a point where your customer service efforts are like a bland, tasteless meal that satiates the customers' hunger without giving them diarrhea or heartburn. Your offerings might not have any Michelin stars or Zagat rating, but at least customers aren't going to throw up in the parking lot and call the health department. Were just aiming for a passing grade here."
I wholeheartedly disagree, professionally of course, with this thought - on so many levels. Customer's and the agents who use software deserve so much more.
Thank you, and agree.
We do only have one chance to get it right, so we need to take advantage.
Thanks for stopping by and adding to the conversation, I do appreciate it!
Your point is well taken that switching (ie, lack of loyalty) is very easy and becoming commonplace. The importance of service excellence is very important and will increasingly become a differentiator.
Cheers - Mitch
Sorry you feel that way, really. The title (minus the "analysis" word) came directly from the Focus post I referenced, not a lot of thought went into it. On that post people responded positively to my answer. I do appreciate the honesty, just wondering what you were expecting?
The analysis is that Social CRM is actually several markets, not one, as I stated.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We all learn a bit when people share. My take on the question, or the way I would approach it is a bit different. Social Media is a channel. Properly, Social Media is many different channels. Therefore, the question is not who owns the channel (It would be like asking who owns email), but what do you want to do through the channel.
The objectives need to be set above both parts of the organization and the strategy agreed to, before hand. Customer Service has been trained to listen, while Marketing has been trained to talk. There are benefits to both and they can each learn from eachother. The customer centric strategy is the part that needs work, not who "owns" a channel of communications.
Just my $.02
I appreciate your stopping by and the comment. I am not sure how the title is misleading, but apologies that it comes across that way. I was using the title of a question on Focus.com, as I said and I was analyzing the question as much as providing a bit of an analysis.
I agree that content is king, but context is queen. The Social - as it relates to relationships - CRM strategy is more than just sales and service. At the least, it needs to include marketing and possible public relations. I have seen good reason to include product managers and research and development as well. The social part is not only about the integration of new channels, but possibly the integration of new people. Letting more people from the organization participate in the conversation.