Recently, during celebrations marking Mangochi Diocese’s 50 years of existence, State President Lazarus Chakwera urged Malawians to learn to motivate each other. For such sentiments to come from a Head of State, he must have noticed that these elements are in short supply in our society. Compliments are an embodiment of courtesy. They show that one acknowledges someone’s achievements.
Suffice it to say that expressions of appreciation —be it in a family, group or at the workplace— help in motivating people, enhancing one’s self-confidence and self-esteem as well as improving communication and relationships.
Even corporate entities feel good when they are appreciated, especially whenever they live up to the expectations of their customers or stakeholders.
At this point, allow me to share my experience with a utility company in Malawi- Electricity Supply Corporation of Malawi (Escom). On Wednesday last week, around 6 o’clock in the morning, lights went off at home. I checked at the mains for any possibility of a switch tripping off. Some exchange of information on the neighbourhood WhatsApp forum revealed that a handful of houses within our neighbourhood had experienced a similar fault. I immediately reported the fault to Escom and was given a reference number for easy follow-up should they take long to attend to the fault. Around 11am, I got a call from the Escom crew, who informed that they were within the neighbourhood and wanted some direction to my house. After attending to the fault, I was advised that, before reporting a fault, it was important to verify whether there were enough units or not, which I felt was an important tip. I am not sure whether this was a polite way of telling me that although this was an electrical fault, I didn’t have enough units and that there was a possibility that within some hours I was going to experience another ‘fault’!
- Advertisement -
A day later, I received a call from the customer care services department of Escom to follow up on whether I had been assisted. After informing him that I had been assisted, he said all he wanted was to verify the information before closing the matter. I felt this was a good display of customer service, especially by a government agency.
- Advertisement -
Of course, I am aware that there are many institutions of similar nature out there who are delivering equally commendable services. But from a customer’s perspective, I believe there are some take-home messages that service organisations could pick from Escom.
Firstly, the company has dedicated functioning lines for customer service. There have been occasions where corporate entities would advise customers to lodge complaints, only for one to find that such lines are not responded to or are out of order.
Secondly, instead of the usual ‘tamva (we have heard)’ responses, Escom personnel record complaints and assign them a proper reference number. With this arrangement, customers are not bothered with questions like: “To whom did your lodge your complaint?” when following up their complaints.
Thirdly, according to Escom’s Customers Service Charter, faults are attended to within 24 hours. On this particular occasion, Escom did just that. Matching promises and action is very important if any corporate entity is to gain trust and credibility.
- Advertisement -
Fourth, follow-ups on complaints are important if any corporate entity is to get genuine feedback. Customers feel good when someone picks up a phone just to make a follow-up on their complaint to ascertain whether they have been attended to or not. It shows that such an institution cares. Besides, any matter or complaint must reach its logical conclusion. Escom should, therefore, be commended for this good display of customer service.
Unfortunately, over the years, the company’s corporate reputation has suffered from negative publicity. By definition, corporate reputation is the aggregate representation of an entity’s previous actions and results that defines its capacity to deliver valued outcomes to its stakeholders. That means once consumers have collectively agreed that a particular corporate entity doesn’t live to their expectations, it is a tall order to reverse this trend. But this shouldn’t be a deterrent.
According to reputation experts, there are about three levels of information processing that help customers form impressions about a company. Firstly, there is information processing at primary level based on personal experience. Secondly, there is information processing at a secondary level based on what friends or colleagues say about an institution or a product and, then, information processing at the tertiary level, based on mass media information, including paid advertising and unpaid-for publicity. All these parameters have a bearing on corporate reputation.
Therefore, institutions— be they public or private— should always ensure that reputation issues are an in-built thing. The reason is that recovering reputation is considered far more difficult than building and maintaining it.
Above all, institutions should speak with one voice when it comes to safeguarding their reputation. Whatever is said should match with their actions. Reputation is not about rhetoric.
