iaabraham
Member

Subpar service = credited with connects?

I recently opened a ticket with CS regarding the missing language verification on our profiles. I was unhappy with the engineering team's time to fix it, as well as CS's communication during the bug (didn't bother to update me, and they came back to me long after the bug had been fixed). 

 

I made this clear in my rating for the ticket. Now I've just received a message from "High Value Support", saying that to make it up to me, they've credited my account with 20 connects. In exchange, they'd like me to change my rating from "bad" to "good".

 

But it's not good. I am increasingly dissatisfied with CS and the Upwork service in general, and I feel that this should be reflected in my rating so that they sit up and take notice.

 

I appreciate the connects (not that I needed them - I have more than enough because of the low-quality jobs out there!), but I don't see how it fixes the problem; in fact, I see it as a mild form of bribery.

 

I've read before, from mods, that the fixes of some bugs only get implemented when the next update is rolled out. I think that is unacceptable, as bugs should be attended to as soon as possible. Also, my experience with CS has been getting worse and worse: sometimes they don't even read the question and answer with something completely different, marking tickets as solved when they're not, and generally poor communciation.

 

So I don't see how more connects is going to improve the service. 

 

I guess I'm just semi-ranting, wondering if anyone else has been offered more connects to change their rating, or if I'm being too hard on CS and the team (which I really don't think I am, especially judging by other complaints in the forums).

14 REPLIES 14
oquintela
Member

I have been offered 10 connects to compensate for the lack of resolution to an issue now affecting more than one of my contracts: my name/contract doesn't show on the client's page profile. In a way, I understand the idea of compensating me, but at the same time I find it a strange, highly questionable practice. Furthermore, since connects were introduced, I never spent more than 10-15, so I really don't know how having more connects can compensate me in any way.


@Olga Q wrote:

I have been offered 10 connects to compensate for the lack of resolution to an issue now affecting more than one of my contracts: my name/contract doesn't show on the client's page profile. In a way, I understand the idea of compensating me, but at the same time I find it a strange, highly questionable practice. Furthermore, since connects were introduced, I never spent more than 10-15, so I really don't know how having more connects can compensate me in any way.


Giving connects to apologize and promote future good will is ok, in my opinion. Asking for something in return after giving them is wrong, especially when nothing has changed.

 

This company made millions of dollars; then they decided to merge. This merge has ruined the careers of many freelancers, fighting to make a buck and earn a living. I dont think a business making bad business decisions should be given any slack, especially when there are plenty of beta testers giving them free advice on how to fix their site (all of the clients and freelancers posting problems in the forums).

cclapper
Member

I agree with you...giving you connects to change your rating is a bribe. The connects should be an apology for not performing well and they should do better in the future. The fact that they try to bribe you actually lowers my opinion of Upwork, if that is even possible. I am pretty disgusted with the whole thing as it is.

 

I havent been in your situation, but if I were, i think i would tell them to keep the connects and the rating will stand. If an improvement in service was seen, i might go back and change the rating then.

iaabraham
Member

Thanks for the input Olga & Cathleen.

 

- I know the word "bribe" is very strong, but that's how I felt about it. The message was very nice in general, and they apologized, but it doesn't change the fact that the service has been disappointing since Upwork was born and is steadily declining. I agree about telling them to keep the connects and only changing the rating when the service improves. 

 

- I've worked in CS before, and we've also offered compensation (not necessarily monetary) to make up for any unhappiness. However, we only asked people to change their ratings once they had indicated that they were completely satisfied with the service. (Many times we didn't even ask them to change a rating - they did it on their own after reaching a resolution with us.)

 

I wish I could copy the message here, but that's against the rules. To be fair, they didn't phrase it in a way that sounds like an "exchange" or "bribe" - I just don't like the whole idea of it: offering connects as an apology (rather work on improving!!) and then sneakily suggesting a rating change at the end of the message.

I don't know if I'd go all the way to "bribe", but CS should understand that just because they FINALLY address an issue doesn't mean the CS experience was magically transformed into a good one.  The goal of CS should be to address the issue appropriately the very first time it was brought to their attention.  If it wasn't addressed properly the first time, it's bad customer service.  You can't change that.  You can offer compensation for our troubles, but that doesn't make CS great.  

 

 

addressing issues on the first go= good CS

requiring nastygrams to get any type of appropriate CS response = bad (even with connects as compensation)

 

 

 

I suspect that CS is harassed the same way we are about client feedback.

 

Remember your rating the agent not the outcome of an issue.

 

Often they forward issues to someone else but I bet the feedback is for just the agent only.

 

I've even seen them have to explain on the feedback page exactly what your are rating. Dreadful that they do this to us and the CS agents.

I understand Jean. In this case, I was unhappy with both CS and the engineering team's performance (although more with the latter). I made this very clear in the written feedback, and by the response I got, they were aware of that. The system is indeed dreadful.

Jean,


They use Zendesk for thier tickets, the feedback goes to whoever the ticket is assigned to. So if the ticket is mine then I get the feedback.

 

And on the topic on hand I had a ticket open three months that they finally resolved but I didn't get any credits, but several other people I know have. I suppose cause I am a major pain when it comes to a ticket being open that long... he he...

 

I could care less I very rarely use all my connects so it would be a waste of good connects.

[OT sort of]

Along similar lines: I once had a major issue with my bank. The bank said one thing. I said another. Letters became acrimonious and accusatory. In the end the bank saw the error of its ways, but it never apologized in so many words. One day a massive delivery truck pulled up outside my gate (I live in the country where roads are about two yards wide) - I signed for the smallest box of (admittedly expensive) Belgian chocolates, attached to my bank's compliment slip.

 

Two years later, the same thing happened - more correspondence. I waited. Sure enough the delivery truck shows up with a whole lot of perfumed teas (which I do not drink - at least, not the perfumed kind) packed in pretty boxes, and attached to the bank's compliment slip.

 

There has to be a moral to the story somewhere . . .

 

 

Exactly Nichola. EXACTLY.

"In exchange, they'd like me to change my rating from "bad" to "good""

 

Isabelle Anne,

 

as you may know by now, few things leave me speechless on here - but this comes very close...

Isabelle Anne,

Yes, I posted a while back on being likewise asked to change my rating after the fact. It was a sour note at the end of an otherwise exemplary message acknowledging the original CS's incompetence (in this particular instance) and need for retraining. No connects were offered.

My reaction is the same as Julianne's: An apology and the promise of corrective steps for the future does not retroactively change a bad experience. I'll add that it is unprofessional and rather weasely for a supervisor to suggest that it does, in a blatant attempt to improve his own (unit's) stats.


Best to all,
Michael

kochubei_valeria
Community Manager
Community Manager

Hi Isabelle Anne,

 

I apologize that you had a negative experience with the Customer Support and I shared this thread with our team leads. We want to make sure that every bad customer experience is addressed and do anything possible to change it to a positive. That's why you received the message from the supervisor. In no way it was intended to make you feel like you are pushed or "bribed" to change your feedback. The team assured us that they are going to revise their communication with customers in such cases.

~ Valeria
Upwork

Thank you Valeria, I appreciate that.

 

Like I said earlier, the message to me wasn't phrased in a way that made it sound like a bribe. It's just that despite so many complaints, CS seems to be getting worse (well so does the Upwork service in general), and adding more connects to my account in no way changes the "bad customer experience" to "a positive".

 

If they really want to address the problem, then they have no choice but to actually listen to the feedback that we give (especially in the forums) and improve.

 

Before oDesk became Upwork, I actually thought CS was pretty good. Now it just seems that representatives' communication skills are worsening and that they are in a hurry to mark tickets as "solved". Not to mention that there are a few too many cases where the information/advice that they give conflicts with what a mod or other resource says. Maybe that's necessarily their fault - perhaps poor training or ineffective coordination within the company?

 

This is why so many of us come to the forums to get our issues resolved, which makes for a terrible system. Anyway, I look forward to seeing how they will "revise" their communication and perfomance in general.