A few months ago, I had an issue with my ADT alarm system. The back door was not set on delay, so when my husband would get up in the night to let our dog out, we would inevitably set off the alarm. I called ADT to ask where in the owners’ manual I could find the instructions on setting a delay to that door that would allow us to input the security code. I was informed this could only be done by having a technician come to the house, and that trip would cost more than $100. Well, being interested in social care, I wondered if voicing my frustration with this reality would help ease this situation.
When I reached out to ADT on Facebook, they responded quickly. The very next day there was a technician at my house, free of charge, correcting the situation for me. Some worry that this behavior trains customers to go straight to social media and air their concerns in public, where companies traditionally don’t want them aired. While I do see (and worry about) this point of view, I also can’t shake the feeling of warmth and loyalty that arises from the knowledge that when I felt wronged (whether I was truly wronged or not), that ADT created in me a feeling that I mattered. ADT linked their brand name with a good feeling in my brain and it cost them a little more than $100. Isn’t that what brand marketers strive to do?
Though I’m not sure yet whether this is the right or wrong way to do it, I did stay with ADT and spend more money on a system upgrade a few months later.
Where do you stand on this issue? Should social care interactions get top priority and first-class treatment?