I’m actually fairy impressed PSA made a mistake of this caliber.
And I’m appalled at how they are handling this, assuming everything reported here is true.
What they (PSA) have in front of them is a customer service opportunity to recover from. Rather than follow the standard customer service model of:
Listen to (or recognize) the problemApologizeFind a solutionRecord and/or follow up
Granted, that model has some variations on how it should function, but the point is this:
Listening/recognizing the problem:
Obviously the first place they went wrong. This should have never gotten past two experts plus a guy giving a grade. I can’t fault them too much here, they are human. But to have literally ALL of your safeguards fail is very odd. However the rest of this process (from the data we have available) is just a catastrophe.
Apologize:
Plain and simple: does not exist. The email sent was mechanical, and lacked any form of empathy for the client. Additionally the response given by the customer service manager was more of a command than anything. If you want to have a customer run from you this is a really great email to send. Additionally PSA has done a wonderful job of inconveniencing the customer without so much as a “were sorry”. You would be amazed at how far those two words go for people.
Find a solution:
In this case, PSA only offers one alternative and that is to return the card at the inconvenience of the customer. The customer should not have to place a card into a mailer (paid for or not) and then have that card returned to them in a state of decreased value. It’s great they are offering to refund the grading price. That is the right call, but there is no offer to refund the shipping (small as it may be, but it’s an opportunity). PSA could have approached this much differently but they simply decided not too.
Record/Follow up:
Does PSA have anything in place to keep this from happening again? Will a policy be enacted and communicated to customers? I can’t answer this, but I’m going to say no as I doubt PSA will want to admit fault of any kind. Additionally to hear that PSA will simply hold additional orders by this customer and will ban them from future use is a true slap in the face. THE CUSTOMER DID NOTHING WRONG! It is important for me to keep in mind I don’t have first hand evidence that this is the case (but I do trust PFM’s Intel on the matter) I have to bite my tongue here a little bit and simply keep in mind the possibility that this is not the case and I would really like to think that it is.
So how should this have been handled?
Here’s free advice PSA:
A screw up of this caliber is unusual, as such you can’t treat it like you would a usual mislabeled label. There is a difference between a simple error and a true falsification. You can’t run a correction on a news story that is entirely falsified, you have to admit to the falsification. A different approach is 100% necessary as you’ve taken your credibility and put it on the line.
The first thing that should have been done is a phone call needed to be placed. A human needed to be involved and not an electronic screen. I realize a phone number may not have been available, at which point an email would have been the correct measure, but the email has to have a different tone. Not: “Your order is wrong, you fix it at loss to you” tone. A tone of: “We are reaching out over an error we have made, we would like to call you at your convenience to fix this matter, thank you for your time.” When you humble yourself, people react differently it really does work that way, people will level with you.
On the solution front a lot of opportunity exist here. PSA can request the card back, there is no reason they can’t. However, they failed to realize they are putting a customer out, they need to offer more than the minimum. The following options could have been easily taken:
- Offer a refund on grading, return shipping and insurance and a promise of an expedited return.- Credit towards the customer’s account. Let the customer tell you what they think a credit amount is worth. It tends to be reasonable.
- All of the above with a guarantee of constant updates and communication to the customer.
- A damn apology- Free membership (free grades included)- Credit towards any PSA merchandise (and yes, free shipping)
Everything I mention here is an absolute drop in the bucket to PSA it costs them almost nothing to do anything I’ve mentioned above. And it shows the customer that they give a damn, probably the most important part.
**Follow up:**Another simple thing to do that they have royally screwed up here: send a thank you note, or a thank you call. Cater to someone you have wronged. It’s okay to admit a screw up.
Here’s what I don’t understand, assuming again that everything PFM has posted is accurate: They took their ball home because they were losing the game, the way a five year old does.
Lets put this into perspective: You go to a pizza place and order several pizzas. They don’t make one of the kinds of pizza you request due to their policy, but then make it anyway for you. As soon as they give you said pizza, they realize they are not suppose to give you that pizza as per policy. They ask for it back, only offering you a new pizza (that you have to wait for) that is not the one you ordered. You refuse, as you have what you want. As a result, the pizza place takes all other orders you have placed for additional pizzas and stops them. They then ban you from the restaurant because they made the wrong pizza.
Does that process make sense to anyone? I find it so hard to believe that a company would do something this stupid. The real problem here more than anything, is there is no check for PSA’s behavior. PSA pizza makes the best pizza in town, nobody can compete with them so you MUST go to this pizza place. You’ve got BGS bagel pizza down the road but it’s not as good, and you won’t be as “full” at the end of your business with them.
I hope more than anything this issue gets resolved in a way that is satisfactory to all parties. But it makes me nervous to see PSA exercise this kind of power, and be unwilling to admit fault.
