It’s the transparency, stupid

For over a month some of the most heated issues on Get Satisfaction have been around Facebook and its enforcement policies. Many people have reported the same thing: a sudden disabling of their accounts, no substantive information about why they’ve been blacklisted, and no process for redress. More recently, people have begun posting their email correspondence with Facebook, showing the same generic form response to every inquiry. Throughout this crush of communication from users here on Get Satisfaction the company itself has remained silent.

Satisfaction is a neutral party in all this: our goal is to help customers and companies communicate better with one another. In most cases this just means providing a better platform for everyone to talk. In this Facebook issue, we’ve gone a step further by stirring the pot on behalf of the frustrated users, culminating in a heads up I sent to TechCrunch.

This isn’t because we think the company’s basic policies are wrong. In all likelihood they’re in the best interest of their core community, and we’re all for enforcing standards of behavior in online communities. We do it all the time here. However, we are and will always be tireless in advocating for open communication between companies and their customers because this is how long-term, trusted relationships are built. In this case, Facebook’s “opaqueness,” as TechCrunch describes it, is creating real alienation amongst users. We think there’s a lesson here for all companies.

We’re not so naive that we think that a company like Facebook can or should reveal everything about its internal systems, nor discuss private issues regarding individual accounts out in the open. But by reinforcing the image of itself as an impenetrable fortress, where all communication is allowed only on its terms, Facebook sends the message that it’s afraid of its own users. Now granted, some of its users may in fact be dangerous (and we’ve met a few that fit that bill, certainly), but for the rest of us who are investing in Facebook with our time we should expect more. Facebook should be speaking to us in a human voice, tell us where they’re coming from, listen attentively when we want to share, and sometimes engage with us on our terms. Because businesses depend on the goodwill of their users to make things work, they need us to build their business.

The goodhearted, hardworking customer service team at Facebook doesn’t deserve to be villainized for doing what it takes to keep their delicate business running smoothly. But it is time that companies recognize that there are hard costs incurred when they choose to only present a closed, institutional public face.

How much more productive would it be if Facebook posted a response in Satisfaction that helps people understand the company’s actions better? Perhaps something like this:

“Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to share their experiences here. It helps those of us here at Facebook to understand how we can do a better job, and we are deeply sorry when we make mistakes that inconvenience our users. Please know that we’re working overtime to protect the fun, safe environment that we’re known for. Consequently, when it comes to our terms of use we generally err on the side of enforcement, but we are careful to review each case if users appeal the action (by sending a note to appeals@facebook.com). This can take some time, of course, and we appreciate your patience if you find yourself in this position. We have every interest in getting non-offending users back into their accounts as quickly as possible.

Finally, we will try harder to communicate more frequently here about the ongoing changes we’re making to improve your experience. Even if things don’t always work perfectly we’re committed to working with you over time to make Facebook all it can be. Once again, thanks for caring enough to express yourself about Facebook!”

In the meantime, we here at Satisfaction continue to welcome Facebook’s participation in the discussion.

The Name Game

iwantsandy_207×207.gif

I want Sandy, the e-mail virtual personal assistant, has a fun name. I don’t always want that in a product.

When I see products branded with “people” names, I get a little suspicious. I still don’t trust Jack, the FM radio station format that pretends to be all about variety. I was initially suspicious that Drobo, the world’s first storage robot, might go rogue and decide to trash my collection of MXC TV episodes. Don’t even ask me about Jeeves. That guy’s a quitter.

But, not Sandy. She’s fun. Maybe it’s the fetching Archie’s comic fashion style she sports. In my mind’s eye, I imagine Sandy speeding down a sunny, tree-lined street in a cherry red 1960 Corvette, stopping only to take dictation — when I have an appointment to make, of course.

Apparently, everyone else has a vision of what Sandy does in her off time, too. The discussion on Satisfaction one morning earlier this week was all about how Sandy had neglected to send her morning reminders to some users. This spurred some speculation that Sandy had gone AWOL from her job:

• “Hey Sandy, are you on strike? No daily digest this morning or reminders.”
• “Sandy, are you OK? I’m worried about you (but relieved that it isn’t only me that you’re shunning).”
• “Personal day? Kid’s got the flu? Snowed in?”
• “Has Sandy quit?”

In all, 48 replies by 21 participants over the course of just a few hours added up to a bunch of disappointed people.

Thankfully, the disappointment was short-lived.

The CEO of I Want Sandy, Rael Dornfest, jumped into the conversation: “I am so terribly sorry to be so late in replying to this thread. We seem to have had a problem with a load balancer (a system that routes e-mail from the outside world to our e-mail servers), which caused some portion of e-mail to Sandy to be deferred.”

Big points to Rael for acknowledging the problem and giving reasons behind the problem. That is what people in the business world call a “best practice” — it’s something that doesn’t happen as often as it should.

Not thirty minutes later, the problem was fixed, and Rael was back with more info: “Once again, I’m sorry for the no-show this morning. If you’re a new client and this was to have been her first day on the job, rest assured that this is in no way the norm — please do give Sandy another chance… I appreciate your patience and (under the circumstances) rather good humor.”

Even Sandy’s boss can’t help but talk about Sandy like she’s a real person. The fact that everyone cottons so well to this “Sandy” character seems like a good indication that branding with a “real” name might just work in this case.

I think it’s a testament to the growing popularity of Sandy that so many people felt stressed out when they woke up one morning to find Sandy missing.

I personally think Sandy deserves a raise.

How about you?

• What’s your opinion of Sandy?
• What’s your favorite or most despised brand with a “real” name?

[ I want Sandy is on Satisfaction ]

Tweet tweet.

As very active (some would say “addicted”) users, we’re all pretty happy to announce that Twitter is now using Satisfaction. Got a question for the Twitter community? Ask away!

Satisfaction this week

HOT TOPIC
Timbuk2
Timbuk2 Travel: Want to help us design our new travel line?
A few weeks ago Timbuk2 started soliciting ideas for their new travel line from their community on Satisfaction. They’ve received over 70 replies so far and the ideas are still rolling in. Their design phase ends October 31 so if you’ve got that brilliant idea that they need to hear, jump into the conversation now! So far the “People’s Pick” is from user, Jahue: “I would love to see a tough laptop compartment that could handel [sic] having another persons carry-on on top of it. I would also love to see lots of external pockets for those items that need to be gotten to quickly, such as ( camera, phone, ipod, psp, passport, tickets, earphones, pen/pencil, etc ) I currently travel with my commute and it works well, exept I am always worried about the amount of padding in the laptop compartment, and not having enough room for a complete change of clothes. Thanks”. Timbuk2 just doesn’t cease to impress us with their transparency and eagerness to embrace their community.

NEW COMPANIES ON SATISFACTION
photophlow
photophlow is real-time communication with Flickr photos.
photophlow is doing a private beta right now so you have to enter your email address and hope for an invitation, but the guys from photophlow are already really active in their Satisfaction site which to me indicates that they are excited about interacting with their user community. So if you’re lucky enough to have been invited in, you can get all your questions answered and share beta feedback with them there. And if you’re not in the beta yet and wondering what the heck it is? They say it’s “a fun way to share flickr photos in real time. invite your friends, search together, chat and comment all at once.” Sounds promising. I signed up for an invite. Fingers crossed!

COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT TIP
Google
Don’t be afraid to say you’re sorry. A Google customer was pretty pee’d off earlier this week about a losing two hours of work using Google Docs on Opera because, as it turned out, the two weren’t compatible but there was no warning that saving the work wouldn’t be possible. I was so inspired by how the Google rep handled the situation. Words like “We have confirmed this bug. And you are right, it’s a bad one. Thank you very much for being the first person to report it” — And the topper: “I’m very sorry for your earlier data loss. It was entirely our fault” put a smile on my face and send a chill up my spine — in a good way. Historically, I think companies have been afraid to admit when they’re wrong for fear of some kind of liability. IMHO, admitting you’re wrong mitigates risk rather than increasing it. It can also turn an angry customer into a loyal and grateful one, potentially making them a great source for the network effects of word of mouth marketing. Plus, it’s just the right thing to do.

Freakonomics gets it right, even when they get it wrong

A few months back I gave some unsolicited advice to Digg after its users rebelled against the company’s decision to comply with a DMCA takedown notice. My point then was that Digg could have avoided relinquishing control of their business if they’d defaulted to greater transparency; specifically they should have engendered a dialog with their customers prior to making their decision. My point was that this transparency and conversation would actually enable them to retain *more* direct control over their business then they could by maintaining an opaque process. As it turned out, they were coerced into reversing their business decision, effectively ceding the management decision to an angry mob of users.

Digg is doing just fine today. In fact, their traffic seems to be significantly up since then. The temptation is to conclude that Digg was well served by their decision. I worry that they’ve set themselves up for unnecessary future power struggles with their own hyper-empowered users.

Last week we saw a counter-example unfold on the Freakonomics blog. This most popular of economics blogs recently moved to the New York Times, and one of the changes was that its formerly full RSS feed had now become a partial feed (i.e. people reading the blog in feed readers were suddenly viewing excerpts rather than the full article). This created a torrent of resistance from many long-time readers: “Please fix the partial feed problem. They’re just plain rude and I’m afraid I’ll have to unsub from your blog if its not fixed.”

The unbridled frustration from readers continued for weeks (albeit with a fraction of the vitriol as Digg’s users), and the Freakonomics writers posted twice in response, explaining that they were examining the issue closely. Via the blog comments and all over the Web, people took the opportunity to express themselves at length for and against the truncation. Finally, Freakonomics’ Stephen Dubner published a post explaining the blog’s final decision: against the wishes of the most vocal users Freakonomics would be sticking with the excerpts. Importantly, he prominently mentions (even links) to the critics:

Are there strong and sane opposing views on this issue? Absolutely. You can read, for instance, what TechDirt wrote about full feeds potentially creating more site traffic, not less. There’s another interesting view at Online Spin and another at Poynter.org.

While I agree with TechDirt that the decision to truncat feeds are short-sighted and silly, I do think that Freakonomics exemplified a winning strategy: they engaged users in a conversation about the issue and then, after due consideration, made the decision that they felt was right for their business. Like Digg, Freakonomics is nothing without its readers, but its owners are also the only ones responsible for keeping the site a going concern. By being inclusive in the process they respected their readers, even if their decision didn’t please them all.

Now I bet their traffic will go up. Just like Digg’s.