Citibank Singapore a) locking your wall down so customers have to post comments against your posts (increasing your engagement rate) is a pretty “poor show” b) Deleting peoples posts is worse (How do you think that your copy “This thread will be removed as it is no longer required for reference.” makes a customer feel? c) The fact that you still have not fixed your internet banking site so that statements actually render and can be downloaded more than 1 week after being alerted of the problem – sucks
This picture was captioned with harsh facts as above. Do social media platforms have the power to improve customer service? Take this given scenario as an example. A disgruntled man expresses his anger towards Citibank on their Facebook page with a screenshot for proof of their inefficiency. A friend of this man shares this on Facebook, Twitter -or any other means for that matter…and users of social media platforms would know about this as the information spreads.
This would taint the image of Citibank with so many people informed about its negative side. To counter the tainted reputation, Citibank would then naturally be encouraged to manage the consequences through better customer care. This motivation without much choice serves as dual benefit for Citibank’s reputation as well as to maintain customer relationship and loyalty.
I’m sure most of you would have heard of SingTel customer Mr Kave Goh’s sky high mobile phone bill of $349,243 -enough to buy a house! (As below)
It went viral on Facebook and even had appearances on news channels. Indeed it was a ridiculously steep figure on a phone bill; however, it was concluded that Mr Goh was liable to pay $14,000 (still a steep phone fee). $336,000 incurred on data charges was fortunately covered by the plan he had.
I reckon SingTel placed more attention on this issue (their concerns on the $336,000 mainly) post media publicity to maintain their reputation and rid any negative judgements from the public. Social media does have its positive impacts, huh 🙂
millersahirah 