Get Satisfaction, a third-party customer service app/community, allows customers to offer feedback, make suggestions, get their questions answered, and generally get help with a product or service.
A good idea
Building support/community infrastructure is a pain point for a lot of companies. The help section, forums, FAQs, and whatever else you have to build to offer comprehensive customer support is a big undertaking. It’s often the last thing you want to do after you’ve just worked for months on a product or service.
So for those companies that would prefer to outsource this infrastructure to a third party, or use an alternative sanctioned support outlet in addition to their own, Get Satisfaction is a handy service.
But…
But if you prefer to provide great support on your own site with your own forums and your own help section and your own feedback mechanisms and your own FAQs, well, Get Satisfaction doesn’t play fair.
If you fail to subscribe to Get Satisfaction’s way of doing things, Get Satisfaction suggests to your customers that you’re “not yet committed to an open conversation.” That’s unfair and unreasonable. Just because we don’t team up with Get Satisfaction it doesn’t mean we’re not committed to an open conversation.
They make something look official that is not official
A screenshot of the 37signals Get Satisfaction page…which we have nothing to do with.
That’s not the only shady area for Get Satisfaction. The site also hosts, without permission, company support pages for over 14,000 companies. They’ll use your logo, title the page “Customer service & support for [COMPANY NAME HERE]” and generally make it feel like an officially sanctioned place to get official support from the company in question. The problem: It’s not official at all. That’s misleading.
The heavy handed tactics used by Get Satisfaction seem to indicate that their long term plan is to own every company’s customer support experience – whether it has your permission or not. Google searches for “[COMPANY NAME] support” will end up linking people to a Get Satisfaction page. If that’s not the offical support home for that company, who winds up winning? It’s not the company. It’s not the customer. It’s really only in the best interest of Get Satisfaction.
They also have a certificate-like customer-company pact agreement that they’d like you to sign. And if you don’t, they’ll make an outlandish claim about your lack of commitment to your customers. Here’s an image they put on our company page on the Get Satisfaction site:
Can you believe that language? “37signals has not yet committed to open conversations about its products or services.” WHAT?! We haven’t committed to open conversations about our products or services because we haven’t signed Get Satisfaction’s pact on Get Satisfaction’s site which generates Get Satisfaction’s income? That’s awfully close to blackmail (or a shakedown or a mafioso protection scheme).
Get Satisfaction doesn’t get to decide what our pact is with our customers. We provide excellent, in-depth, one-on-one, customer service everyday. Suggesting one company is committed to customer service because it signed a third-party pact, and another company isn’t because it didn’t sign a pact, is a false, reductionist view of what it really means to care deeply about providing great support. And care deeply we do.
What’s open about it?
If Get Satisfaction believes in open converations, then it should open up and link to 37signals’ existing and extensive support site. If Get Satisfaction wants customers to get answers then why doesn’t the site link up our official customer support pages? Our help sections with illustrated how-to’s and video tutorials aren’t linked up. Our forums with thousands of posts and responses aren’t linked up. Our Twitter account isn’t linked up. Our billing questions form isn’t linked up.
We shouldn’t be forced to scour the internet finding sites that claim they are doing support for us when they’re not. It’s not fair to us and it’s not fair to customers to make something look like an official support site when it’s not. This should be entirely opt-in for a company and it’s not. In fact, it’s worse than that because if you don’t opt-in, they make negative claims about your company’s commitment to customers.
The implication here is that the only place to get support is on Get Satisfaction’s site. How is that a “commitment to open conversations”? Their brand of “open” means “only on Get Satisfaction.” It’s like saying we’re not committed to giving out ice cream just because we offer chocolate instead of vanilla. Trust me, we’re giving out plenty of ice cream every day.
At the very least they should allow companies with existing support infrastructure to claim their Get Satisfaction page and automatically and instantly redirect customers over to the official support site. Otherwise, they’re just setting everyone up for broken expectations. When customers see a “support site for 37signals” and an open text field, they’ll post their concerns and they’ll get pissed when they don’t hear back. I would be too! But that’s entirely unnecessary and actually harmful to the mission of getting customers the support they need. Again, the only true beneficiary is Get Satisfaction.
$1200/year to get rid of competitor’s ads
Lastly, if you don’t want your competitor’s ads showing up on your (un)official Get Satisfaction support page, that’ll cost you a minimum of $1200/year. As if the threatening language and false accusations weren’t enough, now there’s extortion too!
I recognize that conversations and questions are posted all over the web. And I recognize that it’s our job, as a company, to do the best we can to answer those questions wherever they may be. And we do our best. We comment on other people’s blogs. We respond on Twitter. We respond by email. But its ridiculous that Get Satisfaction shimmies itself into the middleman role and claim priority over our own customer support infrastructure. If we don’t play by their rules and sign their pacts, then they make declarations about our commitments to our customers. I don’t think that’s fair and I hope it changes.
In fact, here’s the pact I’d like to see from Get Satisfaction:
If a company decides not to use Get Satisfaction, Get Satisfaction will refrain from saying that company is “not committed to an open conversation” or anything along those lines.
Get Satisfaction will not give customers the false impression that a site is official by using a company’s logo, name, or anything else that makes the page look like an offical company offering.
Get Satisfaction will allow companies to provide links to their actual offical support offerings even if those are located somewhere besides the Get Satisfaction site.
Get Satisfaction will allow companies who prefer not to use Get Satisfaction, or decide to stop using Get Satisfaction, a way to instantly and automatically redirect to their own support site or support service provider.
We hope these changes come quickly.
Update: Comment thread contains responses from Thor Muller and Eric Suesz and Thor (again) of Get Satisfaction.
Don Schenck
on 31 Mar 09Wow.
Just … wow.
Bad form.
Tobias Roediger
on 31 Mar 09So I should stop telling clients that they should sign up for Basecamp if they know what’s good for them…?
:D
Shady shady tactics there.
Brian
on 31 Mar 09Amen on this post.
I think I will build the (un)official support forum for Get Satisifaction and see how they like it.
I’ve sent the link to this post to [email protected]
Phil Dokas
on 31 Mar 09Poignant especially since you guys commonly respond to my emails to your support accounts not within hours but within minutes and they were personal emails with the exact answers I was looking for. Thanks for writing about this, this was very enjoyable.
Ryan
on 31 Mar 09Wow, that’s unbelievable and flat-out wrong. They seriously need to fix that. I had no idea Get Satisfaction was so devious!
Jason Carlin
on 31 Mar 09Boy did you miss the boat on this one.
“But if you prefer to provide great support on your own site with your own forums and your own help section and your own feedback mechanisms and your own FAQs, well, Get Satisfaction doesn’t play fair.”
Seriously? If you prefer to do that, go right ahead. That, to me, sounds like a perfectly good alternative to using the GS service. I doubt GS would stand in your way.
As far as making something look official when it’s not… I couldn’t disagree more. The power of GetSatisfaction lies with it’s user experts as much as it does with company representatives. This is a place where other users are likely and motivated to answer your questions and I believe that the page’s graphic and information design get across the appropriate level of official-ness.
And finally, your claims of “extortion” and “threats” are near comical. Is this Gawker all of a sudden? Are you offended every time a site offers an ad-free premium version to the clients?
Also, you misquoted the Company-Customer Pact. Bam.
Dhrumil
on 31 Mar 09You can tell the true intention of a company by the way they present their call to action.
Ryan
on 31 Mar 09Also, for the record, 37signals has always answered any questions I’ve had extremely fast and have been very thorough in doing so. And aside from support, Jason himself has responded to me on a general comment that didn’t even require a response.
The deeply care about their customers, and it’s blatantly obvious.
Richard B
on 31 Mar 09Their homepage says, “So far, we’ve helped: 14,748 companies”
Maybe that should say, “So far, we’ve helped (ourselves to): 14,748 companies”
Garrett Dimon
on 31 Mar 09As a paying user and huge proponent of what Get Satisfaction is doing, I have to admit that I never looked at it this way. I agree that these are valid points, but the post comes across as assuming that company’s motivation is selfish at best, malicious at worse. In my interactions with the folks behind the company, that couldn’t be any further from the truth.
The goal is to provide a place for conversations to happen because there are so few companies who have embraced open conversations with their customers. The goal is to help customers. Nobody’s perfect, and they have room for improvement, but flatly denouncing it as heavy handed comes across as sensationalizing.
Chad Garrett
on 31 Mar 09I’m not one to support the idea of frivolous lawsuits or anything, but take them to court and kick their butts. Somebody’s got to do it. At least threaten some pseduo-legal action. Using your copyright; No, your trademark – that’s illegal.
Mason Hastie
on 31 Mar 09Can’t you guys, and anyone else that doesn’t have an agreement with GS sue for trademark infringement?
Carl Jansen
on 31 Mar 09Don’t you have an IP attorney? They cannot use your logo or images/website without your permission, and certainly can’t modify them. Go to http://www.fbi.gov/ipr/ and get advice on copyright infringement remedies…..Sheesh! It’s amazing how little people understand the laws that protect them; quit whining and use your education!
ML
on 31 Mar 09I doubt GS would stand in your way.
GS doesn’t stand in our way. But it does stand in the way of our customers. Customers have questions. We provide answers at our site. Yet GS will not let us link to our support offerings at the GS site. Why is GS acting like it must be the broker and badmouthing us if we decide to provide support independently instead of through its service?
The goal is to help customers. Nobody’s perfect, and they have room for improvement, but flatly denouncing it as heavy handed comes across as sensationalizing.
1. The goal is also for GS to make money, no? 2. Jason mentions the positive aspects of what GS is trying to do at the top of the post. If the goal is to help customers, we have answers at our site. GS should point them to these answers instead of trying to own the conversation.
James Stone
on 31 Mar 09Companies should have the opportunities to opt out, especially if the ‘not yet committed’ tag line is being used. Outrageous.
J
on 31 Mar 09The goal is to provide a place for conversations to happen because there are so few companies who have embraced open conversations with their customers.
That’s a fair goal, but this isn’t an “open conversation with their customers” – this is an unofficial site using company trademarks and language that makes it seem official. And then profiting off those trademarks and brands and product names.
Jeff
on 31 Mar 09The pact you propose is good, except for that last item.
What’s to keep a company with crappy support (hello, Adobe!) from simply redirecting you to their crappy site? The whole point of GS is to stand between the customer and companies who suck at customer service. Links are fine, redirects are unacceptable.
Steven Sacks
on 31 Mar 09Here’s the solution.
What Get Satisfaction has written about your company is what the law might consider libel. Have your attorney send them a cease and desist letter. If they ignore it, file for an injunction to prevent them from posting what you can prove are lies about your company. Your reputation is on the line and you can be directly harmed (a suit for intentional business interference would be very strong) Unless GS is stupid, they’ll change their wording immediately.
More effective: Find other companies that feel the same as you and join forces.
As to their advertising strategy, that’s hardly extortion. If I google for Online Project Management, I see you and a bunch of your competitors. You’ll have to let that one go.
Jerry
on 31 Mar 09What a joke? Do they really think they are going to win with this business model? They must be kidding.
Kevin
on 31 Mar 09I agree…. The language needs to change. This is wrong.
If they were to simply have a large group of a company’s customers in an area. That is enough to make companies want to pay them. The way they are doing it is black mail. Lame!
Thor Muller
on 31 Mar 09Gosh, we messed up on the wording of that badge and are changing it pronto. The wording on that badge was actually intended to explicitly state that the space was NOT OFFICIALLY SANCTIONED by the company, but that doesn’t come off at all. The idea is to encourage openness, and provide a badge for companies that want to be associated with it. This was just unfortunate phrasing (one small part of an ongoing redesign effort), and doesn’t reflect our values, as I think many, many people and companies who’ve used our service can attest.
Our whole business is based on honest, and open conversation whether they do it on our site or their own sites. All the customer communities on our site are driven by customers, not us. We even provide a free “message from the company” tool that allows a company to point users to their own preferred support channel (see http://getsatisfaction.com/newrelic for an example).
Thanks for the feedback, and I’m sorry for the hassle.
Garrett Dimon
on 31 Mar 09ML – Of course it’s about making money, but they aren’t trying to “own” the conversation by any means. You can add links to all of your external stuff without paying them a dime. They might do a poor job of emphasizing it currently, but that’s a far cry from trying to own the conversation. Questioning their motivation is simply a poor assumption.
Offering constructive criticism is one thing, but attacking a company so publicly based on presuming to know their intentions and motivations doesn’t make for an informed argument.
Can they improve? Yes, sure. Was this level of sensationalizing and assumption necessary to make that happen? Not at all.
nickd
on 31 Mar 09i find it very interesting that they have a testimonial from zappos, widely known for their fantastic customer service.
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09As to their advertising strategy, that’s hardly extortion. If I google for Online Project Management, I see you and a bunch of your competitors. You’ll have to let that one go.
But you don’t see 37signals logos (company or products) and a page title that says “Customer Service & Support for 37signals”.
Google is not acting as if the search results are a 37signals property. Get Satisfaction is.
Coudal
on 31 Mar 09Plenty of the posts at GS sure seem like they were written to the company listed, which makes me think that the posters thought they were in an official or sanctioned support forum.
I’m all for talking about anything anywhere but the implication that if a company hasn’t signed up with GS then they are not “committed to open conversations about its products or services” is total bullshit. It’s misleading and certainly not “open.”
NotGettingSatisfied
on 31 Mar 09I know some of the GS people a bit and don’t attribute malicious intent to them. But, having found a GS page for a previous company where I managed support and having contacted them to take the GS page for our company page down I was not at all pleased with their process nor how difficult they make it to find answers.
In a perfect world all companies would have the time and resources to do these things but these days, startup or large enterprise everyone is resource constrained and so having yet another place to monitor is not always an option. GS do not get that clearly enough IMO.
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09You can add links to all of your external stuff without paying them a dime.
After you sign up for an account, yes. They are forcing every company to set up an account on Get Satisfaction in order to link to their proper support page? You have to give them your name, email address, etc. That’s a ridiculous demand.
Jeffrey Gardner
on 31 Mar 09Damn, how’s the back of your hand feeling Jason? Ker-Smack.
Brock
on 31 Mar 09You could win an injunction against them in no time whatsoever. There is no question that they are using your copyrighted logo (with no possible fair use claim that I can see) and your trademarks to imply a non-existent official position with your company.
Sue their asses. This is not acceptable.
Daniel Craig Jallits
on 31 Mar 09I would feel more confident if Get Satisfaction would verify a point of contact at a company first before offering services for that company. It would be much like how Facebook verifies a user is a member of a certain domain (like my company domain name) before they create a new network that covers that domain. I mean how am I supposed to know that there is a Get Satisfaction page for my company. I am not notified of its existence, and I sure as hell do not have time everyday to check. Did that make sense?
Also, Get Satisfaction is trying to force its way into being the Better Business Bureau for the web, and they are using the same heavy handed tactics.
Rolf
on 31 Mar 09Hi,
I do have to look at the GetSatisfaction-site because a software company which makes a product I use, chose to use this site to channel their support. I am not happy with it, the whole look, sorting, funny faces (my mood) etc. Unfortunately they still prefer to use it.…
Rolf
David Kaneda
on 31 Mar 09I had thought that those pages on GS were legit as well, and never even noticed the sticker. I have been using GS to field Outpost support, but have long been contemplating its usefulness. This may put the nail in the coffin.
Jon Gretar
on 31 Mar 09My biggest beef with Get Satisfaction is that it’s a horrificly bad support site. It’s a confusing mess of “Oooh. I know..” ideas glued together with bad graphic design. It’s noisy, unpersonal and irritating. And it really offers nothing new.
Brian
on 31 Mar 09Another fun and shady practice: defaulting the company URL field to getsatisfaction.com/companyname with no way to redirect it to the actual address.
Maybe that’s one of the features of the paid accounts.
Trace
on 31 Mar 09This is great news for their competitors.
John
on 31 Mar 09Well said. Everyone knows GetSatisfaction is doing that for the SEO and for their own pocketbook. I don’t blame them. I wish I thought of it first :).
It is shady. Now the question is, how do they respond?
If I was them I would implement a redirect free of charge and keep the page ad free.
Only about 5% of the companies on there are probably going to be smart enough like you to figure out what’s going on. I would do everything to placate that 5% so they can make tons of money off the ignorant 95%.
Jeff
on 31 Mar 09Here’s my single anecdote: I had a licensing issue with an Adobe product. I couldn’t get Adobe to help me with it. I called their support line. I emailed them. I talked to supervisors. Nothing helped. I wrote a single message on GS, and my issue was resolved within 24 hours.
If they are positioning themselves to be the BBB of the web, more power to them.
Stewf
on 31 Mar 09Looks like you and a few other recent commenters missed it. GetSatisfaction’s response is in Thor’s post about 15 comments up. The badge copy was a mistake. A big one. But truly not in line with the company as I know them.
Adam
on 31 Mar 09“We even provide a free “message from the company” tool that allows a company to point users to their own preferred support channel (see http://getsatisfaction.com/newrelic for an example).”
Not good enough Thor, you need an “Official Support Site” logo and link out. That message is tiny took me a whle to find when I knew it was there.
Steven Wagner
on 31 Mar 09We are using them, and are very satisified. The service is great and when compared to other products is within line.
Now for using your logo and stuff, you are a true hypocrite. You use to do your version of other company’s website pages for your own self-promotion. http://www.37signals.com/better/fedex/
So to call for the pot to call the kettle black is your own bullshit!
Eric Suesz
on 31 Mar 09Hi, Jason. I’m the community manager at Get Satisfaction. I have to say ouch. It sure doesn’t feel nice to be so aggressively lambasted by a company whose products (and design chops) I admire so much, but that’s the way it goes on the Internet.
I think that what we’re really looking to do is help companies who are perhaps less advanced than 37Signals at reaching out via numerous channels on the Internet to provide better customer service. We certainly don’t want companies to feel like they have to participate on our site. We love it when they do, but we absolutely understand that not everyone subscribes to our way of thinking. If you need help directing people away from our site and toward yours, please call on me. We have a Company Message feature that is specifically designed to let companies direct customers toward their “official” help site.
We definitely appreciate feedback like this, and I’ll make sure everyone on our team gets the message. If there’s ever anything I can do to help, please call on me. I’ll do my best - in the spirit of great customer service - to hopefully help you get some level of happiness: eric [at] getsatisfaction [dot] com.
anonymous coward
on 31 Mar 09This isn’t necessarily IP infringement.
Get Satisfaction uses your logo in an index fashion, much like Google may use your name, slogan, or logo in text and image search.
This is not a cut-and-dry case of infringement.
Not to mention… most logos are just rip-offs of typefaces LOL
Phil Nelson
on 31 Mar 09It seems like this whole dust-up could be solved by doing a couple of things:
1) GS providing text that clearly states “this is not an official forum of support for this company” somewhere near the top of the page, made conspicuous to the user.
2) Rewording that awful badge.
No?
pListOFF
on 31 Mar 09How’s this one… I know, FOR A FACT, that someone not working for a certain company has set up a GetSatisfaction page for the company! And they’ve posted at 2 questions and a single product (made by the company) is listed.
This makes it look like the company set up the page but “has not yet committed to open conversation about its products and services”. This sounds legally actionable. Any takers on the subject?
Brock
on 31 Mar 09@Steven Wagner:
Straw man alert! In the linked page, 37signals was in no way stating or implying a relationship or connection with FedEx — in fact, they went to some length to ensure that was clear — which is what makes this situation so different. Their use of FedEx’s workproduct is an entirely defensible fair use.
Happy
on 31 Mar 09The Better Business Bureau handles businesses which have not signed up with them in a less damning, but similarly unsettling way:
“Accreditation This company is not an accredited business. This fact does not disparage the company in any way. “
Ian Parker
on 31 Mar 09Not only are the above-mentioned issues a poor way to do business, but the Get Satisfaction site is additionally seen as a blog/wiki by most web filters which means that you cannot access their site from certain company networks. Yet, I can access the 37signals support site.
Mauricio Gomes
on 31 Mar 09Very good points Jason. I hope you guys fight the good fight for the rest of us.
This problem is likely to only get worse because GS competitors will soon spring up everywhere.
Sean Cordova
on 31 Mar 09I hate bullies! What they are doing is wrong. Sue them!
Daniel Tenner
on 31 Mar 09I think it’s quite bad form to publicly attack another company like this without discussing it in private first. I see no indication that there was any communication between 37Signals and GetSatisfaction prior to this very public post.
I’ve had this kind of thing done to me before, and I think it’s really out of order. Essentially, 37Signals have decided, in this case, to trade politeness and “being good” for making a big noise and getting some page views and attention.
It’s easy to criticise people publicly without trying to understand what’s going on first. I’d love to say that I expected better from 37-Signals, but considering that this blog has been so focused on generating page views through negative disagreement, I’m not all that surprised that you do this as well.
Here’s a challenge for 37-signals: Why not try to do positive things, rather than frame everything as a confrontational disagreement? Yes, being an arse generates page views, but so do other undesirable behaviour. Is that really the way you want to go in the long term?
Grant
on 31 Mar 09Up to this point I, as a consumer, had made the assumption that if a Get Satisfaction page existed for a company, it was sanctioned by the company. Now I feel a bit naive.
Aaron Steele
on 31 Mar 09@Eric Suesz
Regardless of how I personally feel about GS, it is impressive and welcoming that you would post your thoughts here, especially in such a potentially harsh environment.
Tim
on 31 Mar 09Get Satisfaction is simplifying their environment by supporting just one forum and help section … and that’s their forum and their help section.
What’s wrong with that?
Once upon a time, 37signals use to proclaim how simplifying things the best approach.
It’s not like you can run any of 37signals products on your own server.
Narendra
on 31 Mar 09Disclosure: I recently made a small investment in Get Satisfaction.
Jason, wouldn’t you normally contact a company to ask about wording and policies before doing a line-by-line attack? It isn’t like this small universe of companies is that big.
this mat
on 31 Mar 09This is interesting.
While I can definitley see the issue, and don’t disagree that things seem unclear and worded very poorly, I can still see the value in such a service.
From the looks of things, I think it should rely more on letting the community of “unsanctioned” businesses run their Q/A. There is nothing wrong with having an unofficial forum/community, but it needs to be clearly presented as unofficial, and judging by the current questions, it doesn’t look like that is really the case.
Maybe the benefit of a doubt can be extended, it could have been an honest mistake or misunderstanding in how they came across, I could still see great value in a helpful community, though the brand of third parties who don’t partner with them needs to be preserved.
haydesigner
on 31 Mar 09Daniel Tenner: “I see no indication that there was any communication between 37Signals and GetSatisfaction prior to this very public post.”
Well, Daniel… did you happen to know if there was any communication initiated by GetSatisfaction prior to THEM putting up a page in 37Signal’s name?
If that really is your idea of a valid rationale, it is very, very weak.
Justin Knowlden
on 31 Mar 09Boo hoo and Wah! I’d rather use an independent reporting site and have you support my claims there.
foresmac
on 31 Mar 09@anon:
“Not to mention… most logos are just rip-offs of typefaces LOL”
Um, you clearly have no idea what logo design is or how it is done.
“Get Satisfaction uses your logo in an index fashion, much like Google may use your name, slogan, or logo in text and image search.”
Except the use is this case isn’t like an index. The use makes it look like an official support site for 37Signals, which it is not. No one is confused that a page of content linked to by Google is somehow an official company website.
Wayne Schulz
on 31 Mar 09The site is awful to navigate too. I’ve wondered why anyone would ever point their support area over there as I’ve seen several officially do.
Mark
on 31 Mar 09Sorry 37signals, but hosting a support forum on a site you control where you can yank any post at any time for any reason, is not open.
Other than that, great points. Totally lame of them to make their pages pose as official company-sanctioned pages. Trademark law should cover this, no?
Thor Muller
on 31 Mar 09We just released several changes to the top of each customer community area.
1. The badge now says “No one from [COMPANY NAME] has sponsored, endorsed, or joined the conversation yet. ” This is what it said a week or so ago, before we messed it up in the midst of a big redesign effort.
2. We are now displaying: “Unofficial” in front of the words “Customer Support Community for [COMPANY NAME]” whenever a company representative is not involved
So to review, here’s your suggested checklist of issues to address:
DONE: "If a company decides not to use Get Satisfaction, Get Satisfaction will refrain from saying that company is 'not committed to an open conversation' or anything along those lines." ADDRESSED: "Get Satisfaction will not give customers the false impression that a site is official by using a company’s logo, name, or anything else that makes the page look like an offical company offering." [note, we still use the logo if a customer has uploaded it, the same way they may use it on a Wiki page, for the purposes of identification alone]PREVIOUSLY DONE: “Get Satisfaction will allow companies to provide links to their actual offical support offerings even if those are located somewhere besides the Get Satisfaction site.” This company message feature is readily available for any company via their admin page.
PREVIOUSLY DONE: Get Satisfaction will allow companies who prefer not to use Get Satisfaction, or decide to stop using Get Satisfaction, a way to instantly and automatically redirect to their own support site or support service provider.
Jason, given your reach, I’d appreciate an update to your post reflecting our quick resolution. Of course, we’re actively refining everything so I don’t consider the conversation over, but I’d hate for people to get the wrong idea about what we’re about.
Chad Thornton
on 31 Mar 09I’d have to agree with Daniel Tenner above. This post feels a lot like linkbait, and this is hardy the first time I’ve seen negative posts like this on the 37Signals blog.
People know who you guys are, so I doubt anyone is refusing your calls. If you have an issue with someone, take it up with them privately first without being an internet crybaby about it. If the change you’d like doesn’t happen, then have at it from your pulpit…
Daniel Tenner
on 31 Mar 09haydesigner: “Well, Daniel… did you happen to know if there was any communication initiated by GetSatisfaction prior to THEM putting up a page in 37Signal’s name?”
Did GetSatisfaction publicly attack 37S and call them unethical blackmailing bullies?
No.
mg
on 31 Mar 09Hah. That’s funny.GS 37Signals page now says “Unofficial Customer Support Community for 37Signals” whereas the others still say just “Customer Support Community for Apple”.
oops, now 37Signals has disappeared all together.
Matchu
on 31 Mar 09Jason,
I appreciate that you linked down to the comments from Get Satisfaction. Really. To see their nice, happy response made me feel a lot better about the situation.
However, judging from some of the comments beneath theirs, many have not yet noticed GS’s response, and are still jumping on your pretty much resolved bandwagon. I’d feel even better about the situation were GS’s comments made more obvious somehow: moving the links to the top of the post, or direct quotes, to name a couple solutions.
Thanks for your quality blogging! I love SVN, and I would be very grateful to see this tiny tweak in this post – thanks in advance!
Mike Rundle
on 31 Mar 09Give me a break! They’re pissed off! What would you rather have them do? It sounds like they’ve been quite pissed off about this issue for awhile and recently something sparked Jason to write this entry.
If you look at it from 37signals’ point of view you’ll see exactly how they feel, and not one iota of that feeling is positive. So, no, a positive blog entry wasn’t in order. They own this site, they write what they want, and you don’t have to read it if it doesn’t give you the warm fuzzies.
Happy
on 31 Mar 09Instant improvement:
“No one from [company name] has sponsored, endorsed or joined the conversation yet. “
That seems fair.
Erik Dungan
on 31 Mar 09We considering moving to GS for support (after realizing customers wont use wikis). We decided against it after not being impressed with the GS support sites I browsed.
In the end, we built a simple Rails-based support app. It’s been open-sourced if anyone wants to check it out or fork it:
http://github.com/bigfolio/big-help/tree/master
Owen Waring
on 31 Mar 09Quick Fix Solutions for GS:
1. A nice big “opt out” button in the sidebar takes you to a customer service form where you vet your company credentials and get the page deleted
2. Stop using logos without permission. Period. This should absolutely be opt in to registered users and could get you in legal hot water down the road. As a designer I find this abuse of brand unconscionable.
3. Major rewording of the “commitment” badge on the upper right. The minor changes mentioned earlier in this thread are not enough, as they are still misleading (just adding the word “officially” doesn’t cut it). Anything mentioned there should make it clear that you are a third party vendor.
4. Return here and re-engage the discussion when these features are implemented. People will see your commitment to customer service and ethical practices goes beyond rhetoric. Bonus PR boost ;)
Daniel Tenner
on 31 Mar 09Mike Rundle: “Give me a break! They’re pissed off! What would you rather have them do? It sounds like they’ve been quite pissed off about this issue for awhile and recently something sparked Jason to write this entry.”
Sure, they’re pissed off. And as everyone knows, the right thing to do when you’re angry at someone is to walk over to them during lunch, pick up their plate and throw it in their face.
Well, that’s the way it is in kindergarten, at least. I hear people develop this weird and fantastic ability to resolve conflicts without making a huge fuss, when they grow up. Well, some people do, anyway.
BJ Neilsen
on 31 Mar 09I am somewhat speechless that GS would think that they could “get away” with this kind of overtaking of a company’s IP.
Just went to the page on GS and it now says “Unofficial Customer Support Community for 37signals”, and the pact language has been changed to read: “No one from 37signals has sponsored, endorsed or joined the conversation yet. Employees may sign up here.”
You’ve got to give them credit that they moved quickly on this, but still…. not committed to an open conversation? Come on GS, that was just begging to get flamed.
Luckily, 37s has an enormous following from smart-minded people who are more than willing to give this argument clout. I wonder if there were other smaller companies who were also angry about this but weren’t able to get anything done.
Genius
on 31 Mar 09there’s no such thing as bad publicity. you either blend in or polarize people. If someone loves it, it gets shared. If someone hates it, it gets shared. My bet is that more people will know about GS now and probably will forget the negative aspects if it suits their company well. You probably helped them more than you wanted to.
I wonder if FedEx enjoyed the 37s redesign way back when. http://www.37signals.com/better/fedex/
Matchu
on 31 Mar 09NOTE TO FUTURE COMMENTERS:
Please press control-F, and search for comments from Thor Muller and Eric Suesz before making your response. Get Satisfaction has already made an effort to solve the problem and responded here ;)
JF
on 31 Mar 09Jason, given your reach, I’d appreciate an update to your post reflecting our quick resolution.
Sure. Once the dust settles we’ll review the changes and put up a follow-up post. I assume some stuff is still in flux. We did link up your comment replies at the end of the original post.
Thanks for chiming in quickly as well.
Vincent
on 31 Mar 09Could you please fix the comment links ? They currently link to your administration section. Could you change them to link to the public page instead ? Thanks :-)
Matchu
on 31 Mar 09Could the linked-up comments be more obvious, please? 98% of responses since the link-ups entirely missed the links.
J
on 31 Mar 09I’ve had this kind of thing done to me before, and I think it’s really out of order. Essentially, 37Signals have decided, in this case, to trade politeness and “being good” for making a big noise and getting some page views and attention
Ha!! Get Satisfaction is all about having conversations about products and services and companies out in the open. That’s what is happening here. Right in line with GS’s open mantra.
Charlie Park
on 31 Mar 09I agree with Jason’s general attitude — I’d rather deal with my customers in a one-on-one format (e-mail, twitter, sometimes phone), and customer service is at the top of our priorities, so I’d rather not use Get Satisfaction for my company. But, I’ve dealt with plenty of companies with poor (or no) channels for communication, feedback, etc., and I can absolutely see the value in Get Satisfaction’s product.
The irony in all of this is that Jason’s point is that companies with the resources to provide good customer service directly shouldn’t be forced to use someone else’s site to do customer service, that driving content to a third-party site doesn’t further the conversation in a productive way. But Get Satisfaction has the resources to provide good customer service directly … by posting a complaint at Get Satisfaction. Jason, by posting this here, as opposed to at Get Satisfaction’s Get Satisfaction page, you’ve undermined your argument. (An alternate perspective from Jason could be that as customers — voluntary or not — we should be able to address a company via whatever channels are most convenient to us (say, in a scathing post on our own blog), and the Good Company would respond. I appreciate that point, and would love to see a world where more companies respond directly on our own blogs. But, again, isn’t that (enabling customers to address the company how they want) the service that Get Satisfaction offers? That it would give customers more of a voice in the conversation, especially when “the proper channels” aren’t clear.)
Bottom line: I agree with Jason’s point, that Get Satisfaction should have more options for companies who actively choose to not use their service. But I think the best course of action for him to have made that point would have been to post it to Get Satisfaction directly, rather than writing it up here.
On preview: Looks like Daniel Tenner and Narendra have already said much of what I was trying to get across.
Jeff
on 31 Mar 09I’m a total 37s fanboy, but I have to say that Get Satisfaction is coming out of this looking pretty great. And 37signals is looking unprofessional, hotheaded and bullying.
Happy
on 31 Mar 09J: You obviously have not read the GS ccpact. Take a read and see if you still think 37signals’ approach is “in line with GS’s open mantra”. It really doesn’t matter if it is, or isn’t, but I thought I’d point out for clarity and conciseness that it is not.
http://getsatisfaction.com/ccpact
“Be understanding. Show the respect and kindness to company reps that you’d like shown to you.”
“Share issues directly, or through a forum where the company has an opportunity to respond, so it can work with you to solve problems.” – Writing on my blog is not a forum where I would the expect the company to have an opportunity to respond.
“Recognize the problems will occur, and give companies the information and time required to competently address issues.” – How much time did they give? 0 seconds.
“Give companies the benefit of the doubt.”
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09Ric
on 31 Mar 09Up to now, I had been a little bit concerned that by not using GetSatisfaction, our company would be seen to be uncommitted to support.
However, I don’t think that GS are necessarily as bad as this artlcle makes out. They have at least seemed to be quick to respond to Jason’s comments. This post could be very damaging to them, unless there’s an equally public update.
Jason: it’s great that you alerted us (and perhaps more importantly, GS) to the problem, but everyone makes mistakes and a little bit of bad press can undo a lot of good work. I know how bad I’d feel if this had been about my company.
David
on 31 Mar 09To those who are criticizing 37S for airing all these grievances here instead of calling GetSatisfaction first: do you not see the contradiction? Why are you not asking if GetSatisfaction called 37S before creating a customer support page for them? I think this post is entirely appropriate. If Jason and 37S felt they were harmed and misrepresented on someone else’s site, why should they not use use their own site to defend themselves? If GetSatisfaction is stung by this, I say it’s a lesson they deserve to learn the hard way. Good for them for responding quickly and trying to make good, but better for all concerned for them to do a PR fire drill like this than for 37S to sue them.
Behold the First Amendment in action, everyone! A noisy, raucus, marketplace of ideas! The best cure for bad speech is more speech! I love it dearly.
Jason
on 31 Mar 09Eric Suesz has posted a wonderful response. Now it is up to 37 Signals to create an effective dialogue at this point. Else, they choose to continue knee-jerk drama or actually work towards a remedy that is fair and beneficial for both companies and helps both their customers. As I imagine both companies share that goal; to provide great support and build strong communities.
Brian Oberkirch
on 31 Mar 09The problem with this post is that valid, interesting points (official/unofficial answers; company identity consolidation; the intertwingling of good know how on products) are shouted down by outrageous lingo. Blackmail? Extortion? Mafioso? The 37s are known for the care, feeding and responsible use of words. This post won’t do much for that rep.
The requests in the end are, for the most part, solid. You’ve already seen Thor respond that to that effect. And I prefer a public airing as opposed to back channel. Let everyone learn from the issues raised.
But, instead of solid discussion about how customers get useful information in a distributed world, the headline will be “Fried Pisses In Get Sat’s Cheerios”.
I expect more from a company that has methodically taken the time to explain its thinking about design decisions. I’ve learned a lot from this blog. Just not today.
Happy
on 31 Mar 09JF says: “We shouldn’t be forced to scour the internet finding sites that claim they are doing support for us…”
Similarly, Get Satisfaction – or any company for that matter – shouldn’t be expected scour the internet to find blog posts that rip on them.
I’m curious: Why not simply go straight to Get Satisfaction with your complaint?
Jacques Marneweck
on 31 Mar 09Maybe remind end-users that they should not be uploading company X’s logo or adding it to the get satisfaction site should maybe also in order?
Walt Kania
on 31 Mar 09Curiously, ‘Get Satisfaction’ has a complain/gripe section on their own site. (‘Support’ on their home page.)
They have 129 pages of complaints.
Most of which they appear to ignore.
Fail.
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09I smell a whole lot of “it’s not fair” in this post.
Doctor Fegg
on 31 Mar 09GS would go up in my estimation if they also added “Unofficial” to the beginning of the page title tag.
If I Google for ‘37signals customer service’, my eye flicks over the page titles first – they’re big and bold. “Customer service & support for 37signals” sounds official.
Alternatively, adding “at Get Satisfaction” to the end of the title tag would be an improvement, though not as clear.
Tony Haile
on 31 Mar 09Jason, I can see why you’re mad but think you should save your powder for companies other than get satisfaction.
In this comment thread they’ve been quick to acknowledge errors and offer a quick change. That’s the mark of a great company that listens.
As to this idea that they are trying to pass themselves off as the official support site for companies, I think that’s BS. As someone who has used GS for their company for some time, the whole point is not just to provide a better level of customer service between company and consumer but to crowdsource the conversation so that fans and customers of the company can help each other out.
Certainly 37 signals has a huge range of ways that it can interact with its customers and should be applauded, but let’s face it part of 37 signals success is that they are something of an outlier in this regard. For the vast majority of companies, GS provides a fantastic service that complements their own customer service efforts.
GS are a good company and great people, they’ve listened to the feedback here and are making changes. Can we go back to slagging off bankers now?
Vance Lucas
on 31 Mar 09I recently setup a Get Satisfaction page for my own startup, InvoiceMore. After using it a bit, I found it was far too restrictive and costs far too much at even the first pricing tier for my little MicroISV operation (maybe smaller startups aren’t their target market?). That alone prevents me from ever using it seriously or even wanting to grow into it.
I would encourage anyone currently weighing their options to try UserVoice. I switched, and like it much much better. It’s much lighter and more user friendly, and has a much lower “first step” tier for smaller startups like mine. And no, I’m not affiliated with UserVoice in any way – just a happy customer.
And like you have pointed out in this post about the SEO stuff they’re doing, I have started getting hits to InvoiceMore from my abandoned Get Satisfaction page, and it ranks #1 for “InvoiceMore Support”. I too find this a bit irritating and misleading. I really think that stuff should be optional so companies can choose whether or not they want their visitors to end up there.
Eric Suesz
on 31 Mar 09Actually, Walt Kania, to clarify: You’re seeing 129 pages of topics about our company, Get Satisfaction. Some have complaints in them, for sure, but most are questions, problem, and ideas about our service and how to use it. We’ve responded to nearly every single one. We aim to respond to every single one.
Hari
on 31 Mar 09I am glad this ticked off 37signals, now this issue is getting the needed discussion and attention.
@Daniel Tenner
Creating blank pages for companies that have not signed up is wrong, especially on a sensitive issue like customer service, where absence means negative. This should STOP.
This would be a policy change on the company’s part and is not going to be made on a one-person’s call to that company. That is why, it is important and I am glad that Jason posted this and gathered a broad support which is what would be needed to make broad policy changes.
That badge message blows the top off the lid and is outrageous.
Oltmans
on 31 Mar 09I don’t really like the way 37signals attacked them. These guys have responded well and have quickly resolved issues. You should have first contacted them. Companies should help companies. Have 37signals never made any mistake? You sure have. Keeping your experience in view you should help companies by first emailing them and given your stature I’m sure people will resolve messy issues before getting killed/bashed publicly. I don’t consider THIS as help.
Scott Fleckenstein
on 31 Mar 09Good point Doctor Fegg, I’ll make that change right away.
Gustavo Beathyate
on 31 Mar 09GS is looking great and 37S is looking bad now? WHAT? What if the people GS pissed off didn’t have this reach? Do you really think GS would have responded so quickly? I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t even care, they only reacted because the post came from 37Signals.
I’m really glad for this post.
DHH
on 31 Mar 09Brian, that language adequately reflects the feeling we have when we discover a site that is accepting questions and requests from users who expect an answer there - and will be disappointed when they don’t get it - is taunting the conversation with words like “we haven’t committed to an open conversation” and then have a price tag to make that go away.
GS’ is certainly helping to turn that image by being quick to respond here, but that doesn’t really change how the situation arose.
Ken
on 31 Mar 09“We comment on other people’s blogs. We respond on Twitter. We respond by email.”
But not USENET?
FAIL.
me
on 31 Mar 09Getsatisfaction made a support page for our company also without our permission and put up our Trademarked logo there too. After investigating it seemed to me that it wasn’t one of our users who made this page, but it was actually a Getsatisfaction employee adding popular brands to their website to use their Trademarks to bring them more traffic. I’m feel confident if we got a subpoena for the IP of the user who made the page we could prove this.
If anyone wants to do a class action post here and I’ll contact you. I’d be glad to join and even donate $25k to fund part of it.
Our Trademark and copyrights have been damaged by this shitty “Get Shitisfaction” company also. Actually that’s a good domain. Getshitisfaction.com, someone should register it.
JF
on 31 Mar 09...For the vast majority of companies, GS provides a fantastic service that complements their own customer service efforts.
No question about it. This is why I said it was a good idea at the beginning of the post.
But what’s not a good idea is creating public customer support pages with a company’s logo(s) without a company’s permission and not letting that company opt-out entirely if they don’t want to use that system.
Get Satisfaction effectively opted-in thousands of companies to their system without permission. Further, they didn’t let these companies know after the fact, so customers may have been posting questions and not getting responses. That makes it look like a company isn’t paying attention to the “Customer Service & Support for [COMPANY NAME HERE]” page.
Larry
on 31 Mar 09GS’s defenders here are coming off as a little naive. Their wording and their tactics weren’t slipped in accidentally by someone’s dim-witted nephew while the grown-ups weren’t watching. “Oops, gosh, we didn’t even realize…” Come on now.
The business plan is fairly clear: give customers a place to vent about a company, and maybe the company will pay money to control the conversation (never mind if there’s already a place for that conversation). To that end, they use the company’s logo and (until a few minutes ago) stated outright that if the company hadn’t signed up, they weren’t committed to a conversation about their products and services. I think you lose any claim to “the benefit of the doubt” when you employ such shady tactics. Does anyone think the wording was accidental?
As for the suggestion that Jason should have gone to their forums…maybe, if he was just a disgruntled consumer. But this wasn’t a company that he had purchased anything from—they were a competitor misrepresenting him to his customers. Something louder was justified in my opinion.
Eric Suesz
on 31 Mar 09FYI: We take your feedback very seriously at Get Satisfaction and always want to be responsive to complaints. We’re hosting a live Webcast to answer any questions you have about our intentions and our services.
Join us at 2 p.m. PST right here: http://www.getsatisfaction.tv/
E
Eric Suesz Community Manager Get Satisfaction
Milen
on 31 Mar 09Just allow companies to totally opt-out of GS (either with a redirect or just remove their forums from there). This way whoever is not happy with GS won’t have gripes with them and whoever likes their solutions will probably pay / use them.
At the end of the day, GS is hurting the companies which actually provide their own hosted solutions (assuming the companies’ tools are adequate enough).
Jarin Udom
on 31 Mar 09Jason, spot-on article.
Thor, awesome job reacting and responding :)
fred
on 31 Mar 09Someone should make a complaint board for getsatisfactuon so they have to go there every day to protect their rep using some horribly lame inneficient interface.
anon
on 31 Mar 09Amen – we run a company that provides amazing support and I always hated seeing something pop up on that site. Thank you for using your influence to call them out.
Mike Stanley
on 31 Mar 09While the change in language on the badge is good, I think one small edit would make it even better.
“No one from 37signals has sponsored, endorsed or joined this conversation yet. Employees may sign up here.”
Happy
on 31 Mar 09@Milen – “Just allow companies to totally opt-out of GS”.
You are directly endorsing a model of internet discussion in which people should only make comments, questions, and complaints about a company’s products on that company’s ‘official’ site. That would just be a dumb idea. And, btw, JF would be in-violation of that idea by entering his complaint here instead of on GS support site. Why not extend your idea to an opt-out of 37signals/svn, or opt-out of Twitter?
Michael Brian Bentley
on 31 Mar 09I think 37Signals has approached this problem in a fashion I would not have taken. I would first send GetSatisfaction a letter on official letterhead, signed by a member of the executive management team (and read by legal counsel), instructing GetSatisfaction to remove the site for 37Signals by a specified date. If the site isn’t removed by then, 37Signals would be forced to escalate the problem. I would make it clear in the letter that 37Signals does not use GetSatisfaction, does not intend to use GetSatisfaction, is fully capable of providing its own customer support mechanism, and the GetSatisfaction site for 37Signals sends a confused signal to the customer base that 37Signals considers detrimental to the working relationship between 37Signals and its customers.
Garrett Dimon
on 31 Mar 09Personally, I don’t think anyone is seriously disagreeing with the message. The points are all valid. The problem was with the delivery of the message. Publicly accusing a company in this way isn’t helpful.
The results, GS making improvements to their service, will be the same if Jason had brought these issues forward in a more productive, less accusatory, or sensational manner.
Unsurprisingly, despite the tone of the message, Thor and Eric have been entirely gracious and responsive in their comments and actions. That behavior, in my experience, is clearly indicative of what GS is about.
Instead of jumping to conclusions and starting a witch hunt, these changes could have just as easily happened in a more productive manner with a simple email.
This post was sensationalized based on a presumption of guilt. Words and phrases like “extortion”, “heavy-handed” imply that GS and their actions are malicious. That’s not only inaccurate, but unnecessarily inflammatory. That’s where this post fell short.
Robbie
on 31 Mar 09The strongest reason this deserved a scathing blog post and not a one-on-one conversation with Get Satisfaction, or a post to their site, is that GS had allowed customer feedback to pile up in a black hole on the unofficial, unsanctioned GS support page for 37signals under that misleading page title. No discreet conversation can make up for the sense that a bunch of 37signals customers have been left hanging because of GS’s tactics. That understandably breeds anger, and it calls for something more public. The GS page should not only have said “37signals has not yet joined the conversation”, it should not have let people leave comments.
37signals is right to state that they should not have to patrol the Web looking for companies that provide confusing crowdsourcing services. That is completely different from Get Satisfaction (and every other company) being responsible for patrolling the Web looking for feedback.
By the way, I’m a fan of both companies and use services from both for media production company.
Chris Dary
on 31 Mar 09Major props to Get Satisfaction for such a quick response to the concerns. I love when a company can see valid criticism and be objective about it, and improve.
Eric Suesz
on 31 Mar 09I don’t want to come off as defensive, but I think it is important to clarify that anyone can add a company to Get Satisfaction. Most are added (about 90%) by employees of the company. The rest are added by everyday Joes who feel like talking about a company and its products. We do not seed companies on our site as has been suggested. The idea is to give customers a voice where they may not have one.
Also, Get Satisfaction is not a complaint site. We definitely don’t want to be seen as a complaint site. There are enough of them already, and I think we can all agree that they are uniformly annoying and negative. Rather, we intend to be a site where people can get connected with other people who can help them. If that’s an employee, awesome. if it’s another customer, great. Sometimes, it is no one.
Scott Raymond
on 31 Mar 09As I see it, the best aspect of Get Satisfaction is that companies needn’t opt in, and can’t opt out. When 37zappos can be my telco, cable company, ISP, and airline, I’ll have no need for Get Satisfaction (or the Better Business Bureau). Until then, I’m glad they exist.
anon
on 31 Mar 09FWIW I contacted Get Satisfaction with some of this exact feedback last summer (their employees setting up pages for companies) and clearly nothing changed until now.
Anthony Feint
on 31 Mar 09regardless of what has been said in the comments, I for one don’t want to be association the GS – what they are doing is shady and wrong “has not yet committed to open conversations about its products or services.” – how do you know they are not using other forms of customer service which are just as open.
Our startup was a partner with GS until I read this article.
GS you have lost a customer – i am moving to uservoice
J
on 31 Mar 09Eric, you can’t continue to take the “it’s not our fault” position. You are hosting these support pages. You are generating revenue off these support pages. You are allowing a company trademark to be displayed on for-profit pages without the permission of the trademark owner. Still.
john Corbin
on 31 Mar 09Angie’s list does pretty much the same thing as these guys. If you don’t buy an ad from them, they promote negative reviews to the top of the queue. Blackmail. Pure. And. Simple. But hey, Even Congress and Obama do it… why not everyone?
Arik Jones
on 31 Mar 09@Ken,
I hope you’re being sarcastic cause USENET is not that useful for support.
Gary
on 31 Mar 09GetSatisfaction has always had a rather underhanded approach to growing their business. They started by brand hijacking and violating trademarks.
From there, they copied the feedback tab widget from UserVoice. But that’s not all, they continued to mimic UserVoice’s enterprise foray – and blatantly copied their UI with the latest GS update.
GetSatisfaction steals brands… Steals competitor’s gameplans & innovation. They suck.
If you want to see what GetSatisfaction is going to do next – Probably be best to watch UserVoice!
So glad SVN finally said what should have been said a long time ago!
michel
on 31 Mar 09its amazing how many people turn this around on 37s
They did not start bad-mouthing an other company they reacted when another company put up a page that put a negative light on 37s. the only solution to get this to change was to actually sign up and use the service “offered” by GS.
Terms like Blackmail, protection money and Mafia are although colourful absolutely true.
There shouldn’t be an opt-out there should be only opt-in for companies that actually WANT the service of GS
37s shouldn’t open communications with an unwanted middle man, the middle man should ask if they have permission to put up the page in the first place.
Its crazy how many people get swayed by smooth PR talk, this Muller guy shows up and he writes so friendly that suddenly he seems like the victim.
See through the PR speak and damage control by Muller and look back at what actually happened: GS had a page up telling 37s doesn’t give support.
Hillary Hartley
on 31 Mar 09You can’t opt-out of the internet…
GS is simply another user community that has taken off, and it’s successful because people get what they need from each other as much as from official employees.
I can understand complaints about seeming “official,” but they responded quickly to all your demands and are sincerely concerned with making things right. So take a breath. Let it go. And let 37s fans at GS help each other.
Milen
on 31 Mar 09@Happy
The reason why JF can afford to present his ideas here is well known – he’s got an audience.
I’m not saying that people should only get support at the official places. My original comment was directed specifically to GS because it tries to make it look like an official place to get support (when in fact it might not be).
If you have an official support channel / forums, it’s quite a bit of pain to chase around the web and find all the questions that you can possibly answer. Imagine what happens when 5 other clones of GetSatis get launched.
We use GS ourselves and we’ve got no major complains yet but eventually we would like to move on to a better solution which we’ve been developing. After the switchover, I can see a lot people going to the GS page from Google and not getting an answer because it’s no longer the official place to get support. This is the problem that should be addressed.
Ted Grubb
on 31 Mar 09@DHH
The message was intended to clearly distinguish participating and non-participating companies (This has since been copy edited to better convey that message.) The message changes when a company creates a FREE account as well as a premium account to let the community know that the company is involved in conversations on Get Satisfaction.
Robin Hood
on 31 Mar 09Nothing speaks louder than results. Can we get a blog entry on GM, Chrysler and AIG?
tank
on 31 Mar 09getsatisfaction pwned!
Brie
on 31 Mar 09It is disappointing to hear that Get Satisfaction pages are created for companies without their knowledge. I had wrongly assumed that pages were only created after a company has given consent. It is misleading to send a customer to a support page that is not sanctioned by the company. It seems like by doing that you are setting a company up to fail just for not using your product or service. GS should only create a page at the request of the company and/or explicitly state if a company is involved in the support provided by GC.
As a representative of a company that uses GC, I see the value of it. It is another avenue for customers to contact us and we like to keep that road as open as possible. Whether a customer choose to use our site information, Twitter, Get Satisfaction, or Facebook, we want to be there to help them. It is unfortunate to think that if we chose to stop using Get Satisfaction that it would become a liability for us.
The people at GetSatisfaction are good people and I do believe they have the best customer interest at heart, but there are some misteps and situations where they may be doing some customers a disservice. Get Satisfaction should only present company pages with active representatives. Customers receive the service they are looking for and companies can present another platform for customer communication, and Get Satifaction makes money the right way. Everybody wins.
David Robert Wright
on 31 Mar 09@Ted Grubb Regardless of the intent of that message, it is misleading. The message “no one from foo has sponsored, endorsed or joined the conversation yet” suggests that company foo is not committed to good customer service. The phrase “the conversation” implies customer service writ large, not the conversation on GetSatisfaction.
The message should say “Foo does not endorse or participate in the discussions on GetSatisfaction.”
this mat
on 31 Mar 09I have to admit, GS’ position on this makes a lot more sense to me if I think of them as a open community for businesses, and less like an official support site.
If I think of it as: “I made a 37s facebook group, complete with logo and everything, and called it ‘37 signals support group’”
instead of: “I seeded a companies information to make it look like an official support site… et cetera”
it changes meaning behind it drastically, to me at least.
I wonder if the intent and message behind GS’ site isn’t somewhat missed overall, after visiting their site, I see them more as a business centric stackoverflow than a ‘official support forum’.
Ted Grubb
on 31 Mar 09@David Robert Wright
Good point. I’m on it.
Ivan Road
on 31 Mar 09Clearly, Get Satisfaction has a HUGE communications problem, if so many customers, so many client companies, and so many 37 signals readers ‘misperceive’ their business. And piss off so many people.
Sorry, you have a bad business model if you have to spend so much time clarifying your position, and explaining yourself. Your home page is confusing. Your charges are confusing. Customers can post gripes and complaints for free. To answer them, a company has to pay money?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding your service. Probably.
So explain it better. I don’t get it You seem shady.
Ian
on 31 Mar 09I think that 37signals are afraid, what customers says about their “customer service”.
What I see on Getsatisfaction that is so many issues with “perfect, beautiful, simple” software made by 37s.
If you have a good product/good customer service – you don’t have to be afraid Getsatisfaction.
D
on 31 Mar 09Did Anyone Say “Class Action?”
Larry
on 31 Mar 09this mat, I think it’s strange to make them out to be Google Groups or Wikipedia. They’re not. They’re a company that’s trying to create value by leading your customers to their site in the belief that it’s an extension of yours.
It’s as if I owned a book store and someone opened a little office across the street, with a sign sporting my logo and the words “Customer Help”, then “invited” me to pay rent in the space. It’s dishonest any way you slice it.
Matt
on 31 Mar 09Just added a new life-goal to the list: never piss off Jason Fried. :)
I’m right with you, and this post is proof that 37 Signals takes customer service very seriously…rare these days.
I will say that I find it hard to believe that the language they chose was accidental during a major re-design phase. You don’t accidentally choose your words. Hopefully they’ll fix it, but saying it was an accident sounds like a cop-out to me. Just my opinion.
Les
on 31 Mar 09Based on the response from them, I think Jason should add their comments to the original post, rather that just linking to them.
Eric the .5b
on 31 Mar 09Onur
on 31 Mar 09I wonder what amazon thinks about its unofficial customer service page on GS.
this mat
on 31 Mar 09Larry,
Right, that’s all fine. I wasn’t trying to excuse the weird situation or anything of the sorts, I was going off the feedback I’ve seen posted that they may think of themselves differently than is being perceived by most.
It’s quite possible they weren’t intentionally misleading, especially with them so willing and quick to respond with action and clarity. But it’s quite possible their entire company message is a little obscure.
I’m just trying to give the benefit of a doubt. I’m a third party who’s not involved in the situation but I find the whole thing interesting.
Andrew Warner
on 31 Mar 09The uservoice.com guys have a different approach. They do much of what getsatisfaction.com does, but only with company permission. I’m not associated with them. Just have an interview with the founder coming up on site and I did my homework.
mikemike
on 31 Mar 09I have a small conficker website, and I just use Wufoo for contacts. I’ll never use GetSatisfaction now!
David Robert Wright
on 31 Mar 09@Ted Grubb Glad to hear it.
Let me make one thing clear: I think that it’s all right for GS to have this sort of page available, even for companies who did not opt in. However, it is imperative that GS make it very clear to its users that such pages are not the official support site. This must also be done in a manner that does not give the company in question a bad rap for not choosing to participate in this ancillary service.
Also, I have no doubt that GS provides a valuable service for companies who do not provide their own in-house support.
SH
on 31 Mar 09@Ian, re “I think that 37signals are afraid, what customers says about their “customer service”.”
This is unfortunately laughable. We make it very clear what our customers say about us in this post. We have nothing to fear regarding open communication with our customers, or anyone else. We’re happy to hear feedback from any customer, at any time.
What pisses me off, as the person who mostly manages our support, is the horrible customer experiences I’ve had to resolve because of Get Satisfaction. We aim to prevent bad customer experiences, we don’t always win, but we try our best. I try beyond my best most days, and with the rest of our team I’ve put in countless hours to improve our support daily. Anything that undermines that, including a misleading, misappropriated and unofficial means of achieving support is only going to result in a bad customer experience. That is not something we are going to be ok with.
We have always invited clear communication with our customers casually and openly. Is something wrong? Tell us. We’ll do what we can to make it right. Have a bad experience? Want to vent? Email me and I’ll listen and I’ll see how I can fix it. But, please, don’t post on some website out in the ether where I’m uninvolved and can’t reply appropriately or in a timely manner.
anonymous
on 31 Mar 09If they use their logo, sue them. That is what lawsuits are for. In fact, if you fail to sue them, you will lose any trademark claim you might have had.
I don’t see why people whine and complain so much. A basic cease and desist is pretty easy to draw up…
And their statement regarding your “commitment” to service? And running ads for competitors based on your site and web logos… well these have also been litigated and definitely have gone multiple ways.
Anton Crocek
on 31 Mar 09The name ‘Get Satisfaction’ suggests it is a place for consumers and end-users to have their problems resolved. Or at least to have their dissatisfactions aired.
It almost sounds like an extortion, or strong-arm idea. Come here, and bitch, and we’ll get those insensitive bastards to listen to you.
Which seems really odd, considering that they’re trying to attract companies as ‘customers’ to subscribe.
Trying to play too many conflicting goals against the middle here. Don’t see the value-add. I can see JF ansd 37 Signals irritation. Something is half-baked here.
Ryan
on 31 Mar 09To all of those who are saying “this post delivered the message entirely wrong”...
I think it’s fair to say that 37s won’t do everything perfect all of the time. This post was merely the result of a reaction to realizing that their customer support (something they take very seriously) was falsely represented at another site. That’s it. If they (er, Jason) felt the need to express his feelings (which may have been anger in the heat of the moment), then why not? Maybe one day he’ll look back and think, “maybe I shouldn’t have been so aggressive”. But maybe not. Either way, sometimes you can’t help but get emotional over things you’re passionate about.
While some think this post is hurting their “reputation”, what about the potential hundreds or maybe even thousands of customers that may feel neglected because they posted questions to the GS site? That surely isn’t good for the “reputation” either.
In the end, Jason responded to something that he saw as highly disrespectful and wrong. I’m sure GS understands his complaints (as seen in the comments above) and will do the best of their ability to resolve any issues.
We’ll see.
jonathan segal
on 31 Mar 09I haven’t read every comment made on this page but seems that this entire posting could have been avoided had GS perhaps been contacted first via email asking them to explain their position. If they ignored the complaint, then certainly there’s a reason to go open-season on them.
Jason’s post was pretty forceful but I’m satisfied that with the speed of GS’s explanation and actions following up. They certainly appear sincere.
William
on 31 Mar 09Seriously? You’ve used an incredible amount of loaded language here. From what I can tell, you base your rant mainly on misunderstanding.
I doubt it ever occurred to them that somebody would take a page on their site as official customer service. Indeed, I see they’ve already changed things to make it clearer that it’s unofficial. Did you guys try asking them before going ballistic?
Also, @Ryan, the “my rant is justified because I felt bad” line is fine for LiveJournal, but from the official voice of a company, it looks terrible to me. I hope Jason apologizes for going off half-cocked on this.
Jonni
on 31 Mar 09Pow! Right in the kisser…
Tobias Funke
on 31 Mar 09RRRRROOOOOAAAAARRRRR
Jeremy Chone
on 31 Mar 09Very good points.
As a user I never been fan of getSatisfaction. And, somehow, I am not surprise they are not playing fair with their customers and the community.
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09I haven’t read every comment made on this page but seems that this entire posting could have been avoided had GS perhaps been contacted first via email asking them to explain their position.
You mean if GS didn’t host and profit off of thousands of company support pages with registered trademarks without the company’s permission.
Anonymous Coward
on 31 Mar 09Hmmm, the tone of this posting sounds like 37signals are reacting out of suprise or shock at finding their GS page. That’s certainly how I read it, imaginging Jason writing this blog post before he’d completely calmed down. I could empathise with the though of discovering that a comapny was ‘intercepting’ customer questions resulting in poor service.
Problem is that unless someone seeded a very good fake 10 months ago, they didn’t just discover it: http://getsatisfaction.com/people/jf
Derek
on 31 Mar 09This is probably not the best thread to pick as my first post on 37S blog, but all I’d like to say is I like their style.
I like their style of business. I like their style of blogging. I like their style of saying what they really mean.
The web and most corporations should take a page out of their book. Bravo once again.
Dan Levengood
on 31 Mar 09The people at Get Satisfaction are really smart people, as evident by their quick reply and “fixes” to their product.
I have to 100% disagree with all of the commenters who are suggesting that Get Satisfaction didn’t realize their old business model, before this post, (opting in all companies, while using their logo’s, etc.) was going to get them in some trouble.
No Way! No way does the logic, coding, writing of copy, sales plan, etc. get executed without someone saying “hmm, is this really good business practice?”.
I don’t buy it for a second.
dan
Cameron
on 31 Mar 09haha. thats really misleading.
GS integrity = fail
Friendly Unicorn
on 31 Mar 09You know what would make us all feel better?
< BLINK >Sparkles!< /BLINK >
GetSatisfactionShouldGetLost
on 31 Mar 09Obviously GetSatisfaction was aware that the type of language they were using would reflect badly on companies that did not make use of their service. They respond by claiming that if only the companies that are maligned by this text had taken some action then all would’ve been resolved. This is a joke. GS has no business providing fake and misleading support pages for companies that have no direct relationship with them. I really hope someone sues them.
Anonymous
on 31 Mar 09@SH “Is something wrong? Tell us. We’ll do what we can to make it right. Have a bad experience? Want to vent? Email me and I’ll listen and I’ll see how I can fix it. But, please, don’t post on some website out in the ether where I’m uninvolved and can’t reply appropriately or in a timely manner.”
Kind of like this blog post?
zen
on 31 Mar 09While it’s nice to see that GS has finally changed, it’s quite obvious we have two camps here. The people who sided with GS definitely do not operate or own a business of their own. If you did, you will understand Jason’s/37signals’ frustration.
I do not believe in their “redesign” excuse. A site that claims to be open and is providing “customer support” services will not and cannot make such a huge mistake. It is obvious they want to pressure companies or give a negative impression of companies that do not want to sign-up with them. It’s not illegal, but blatantly aggressive (and why they did it could involve many reasons – because of the bad economy, running out of cash, lack of growth, etc but definitely NOT because it was a “redesign” error).
If they fail on something so fundamental (i.e. providing proper copywriting on their website), how can I trust my business to GS?
David Robert Wright
on 31 Mar 09To Jason’s critics:
Jason doesn’t owe GetSatisfaction anything. He did not agree not to criticize them publicly and he is within his rights to do so. His post is not a request for help from GetSatisfaction, so I don’t see how it is fair to say it is hypocritical that he did not go through GetSatisfaction’s customer support channels. In fact, he had no reason to expect that GS customer support would give him the time of day, as he is NOT a customer.
Jason did the right thing by airing his grievances publicly so that other companies would hear that GS might be causing them problems with customer support. If he had shared with GS privately while waiting to post this, other companies would lose goodwill and money in the interim. Even if GS had changed its policies based on this private feedback, other companies might never have heard that they previously had been caused problems by GS’ practices, and therefore never been able to take appropriate action to correct these problems that had been previously caused.
It is to GS’ credit that they have responded to this post, and hopefully this has been constructive for them. That said, it is disingenuous to say that Jason should not have posted this publicly, as he does not owe anything to GetSatisfaction, and it would have been no more productive for either party.
Sixcows
on 31 Mar 09I’ve never used the GetSatisfaction site, but after reading all of this I checked it out.
I examined several support pages (or whatever they call them), and it was completely UNCLEAR if they were official or unofficial support pages. The whole site still strongly suggests that this is an official way to get help from the companies represented on the site. Since this is not the case, their behavior seems dishonest and unethical.
Despite what their employees have said here in the comments, I see little that gets to my core confusion: they appear to be acting in an official capacity when, in fact, they are not.
I will not be using the service; I can’t trust a company that behaves like this.
Chuck Reynolds
on 31 Mar 09That’s why I use http://uservoice.com :)
Jeff Croft
on 31 Mar 09Just because you don’t “owe” anything to someone or some entity doesn’t make it okay to be a jerk. 37signals is a small business. GetSatisfaction is a small business. They exist in the same community. They have many of the same customers. They use many of the same tools. They’re (presumably) both being affected by a shit economy right now. They’re not competitors. You’d like to think these kinds of companies would be supportive of one another, especially in times like this.
Sure, 37 doesn’t owe GS anything. But they still could have opted to handle it in amore human, supportive, community-positive kind of way. Do they have to? No. Are they obligated to? No. Do they “owe” it to anyone? No.
But if you’re not a jackass, you’d do it anyway.
Ben
on 01 Apr 09Thor, while quick, your adjustments have not helped.
“No one from [COMPANY NAME ] has sponsored, endorsed, or joined the conversation yet. ”
This is wrong. It should be something like:
“[COMPANY NAME] has not been contacted about using getsatisfaction. Get in contact with them to suggest they use us for their support. In the meantime you can post a message here for users to contribute an answer, or use [COMPANY NAME]s existing support system.”
This at least gives the company the benefit of the doubt!
Giles Bowkett
on 01 Apr 09I work for ENTP, and we make Tender, which competes with Get Satisfaction to some degree, so I just want to emphasize this is NOT the official ENTP point of view – but I think what GS does there is probably litigable. You could make the argument that their default setting is to make legally actionable, inaccurate, and damaging claims against other businesses. Google actually does something similar – witness the lawsuits and blog posts about their bad handling of AdSense funds they owe people. I don’t think there’s any actual malice in it. I think in either case there’s naivete combined with a sense of entitlement which leads to actions which are not malicious but are not legal either.
Giles Bowkett
on 01 Apr 09Again as a postscript: that’s just my personal opinion. And I think the absence of malice is an important factor.
Alan Wilensky
on 01 Apr 09Who is Jason?
Tom Reitz
on 01 Apr 09Hmmm… as somebody who has been in business for himself for the last 20 years… I have to wholeheartedly agree with 37signals on this one. If get satisfaction wanted to use MY LOGO, they would need to PAY ME! Period. Otherwise, lawyers would be called.
Anonymous Coward
on 01 Apr 09Sarah’s lost her marbles: defending Jason’s decision to post vs. contacting or having a lawyer contact GS directly while simultaneously asking that for her benefit “please, don’t post on some website out in the ether where I’m uninvolved”. Funny.
Lachlan
on 01 Apr 09GS lacks integrity. The revisions to their site are disingenuous at best.
Since GS created the forum, it should be GS’s responsibility to link to the appropriate support pages for each company it purports to “Unofficially” represent.
It should NOT be incumbent upon 37Signals to join GS to provide those links.
Thor Muller: ” ... but I’d hate for people to get the wrong idea about what we’re about.”
It’s pretty apparent what GS is about thanks Thor.
Weixi Yen
on 01 Apr 09@SH
The only thing that is laughable is using http://www.37signals.com/support as a reference point to demonstrate “open communication.”
Look, you guys don’t have transparent customer service. That’s why people use Get Satisfaction. It’s simply a better model. Customers trust it more in the same way that you trust yelp rather than a restaurant web site.
strebel
on 01 Apr 09@Jeff Croft
Amen
Dinah Sanders
on 01 Apr 09As a customer of many products – some of which have good online support, but many of which don’t – and a fan of user-to-user support alongside official support, I really enjoy what Get Satisfaction is doing to provide a place where people can help each other out in a peer-to-peer way and the official representation of the company can either join in or not.
I find Get Satisfaction much easier to use than most companies’ support processes (where Get Satisfaction isn’t their official solution) and I like not having to re-learn a support tool every single time I have a new question or idea about a new product or service.
It has always been abundantly clear to me that the Get Satisfaction is a community space for people who use products & services to talk about them with each other, and that unless it explicitly says so, it is not the official point of support.
It has also been very clear to me that I can come in and create a new company or product/service section for something I want to discuss if it doesn’t already exist. If memory serves, I’m the one who created the section for Mozilla Thunderbird, obtaining the logo from a page where they offer them so their users can spread the word about the products.
Get Satisfaction does a far better job than any support interface I’ve ever seen at working toward resolution not ranting and providing an equal space for praise alongside problems.
My impression of this post and of Get Satisfaction’s response to it has been to drastically lower the previously highly positive impression I had of 37 Signals and their user community and to raise my positive impression of Get Satisfaction. The GS team communicated calmly, productively and patiently, without language full of ultimatums and threats. They apologized, clarified and made rapid changes to improve their service. The showed how a good company should work with their users and with the vendors used by their users. Good on them.
As was noted above: “You can’t opt-out of the internet…
GS is simply another user community that has taken off, and it’s successful because people get what they need from each other as much as from official employees.
I can understand complaints about seeming ‘official,’ but they responded quickly to all your demands and are sincerely concerned with making things right. So take a breath. Let it go. And let 37s fans at GS help each other.”
37 Signals may get a lot of design right, but Get Satisfaction is doing many many things right in changing the tone of communication between customers & companies into a more open communication space.
As has been noted in this thread, it’s a small world of people pushing radically new ways of offering products & services. 37 Signals and Get Satisfaction should be on the same side.
As I finish my comment I see “blatantly inflammatory” among the comments that might be removed. Might want to put that in the blog posting page too…
Dinah
Mark Ury
on 01 Apr 09(Reposting this from my comments on Garrett Dimon’s site):
The heart of the problem is that GetSatisfaction’s customer development is predicated on a lie of omission, along with a system that is actively designed to fudge the notion about who’s who in a brand’s support ecosystem. While the GS team has hopped in to “fix” things, what they’re fixing is a PR problem brought about by someone with the clarity and influence to explain their schema/scheme.
Get Satisfaction didn’t “goof up.” They exploited a niche—outsourced customer support—through deceptive tactics and got caught.
Drew
on 01 Apr 09The idea that you can “opt-out” is a red herring here. This is akin to the following conversation:
“Who are you and what are you doing in my house?” “Oh, hi, yeah, I’ve been camping out in your house while you were on vacation. I figured it was ok, because you didn’t tell me NOT to.” “I would have if I’d known. Get the hell out!” “Of course, but you’ll have to submit your request via certified mail… don’t worry, I’ll wait.”
I’m not sure why folks are so influenced by the polite tone of GS’s responses. They’re obviously smart enough to realize that if 37Signals starts breathing fire about company practices you KNOW are legally unsupportable, a polite and self-effacing response is the best damage control you can hope for. It’s not enough. They need to take off the blinders and understand why what they are doing is a problem, and then fundamentally change their methods or get their pants sued off.
Craig
on 01 Apr 09Interesting post & excellent rant.
Must have made GS think cause now your page on their site says “Unofficial Customer Support Community for 37signals”.
Robert
on 01 Apr 09I completely agree with the idea that GS holds companies hostage for ransom if they don’t agree to come to their table and meet their demands, so to speak.
This is one, of several, reasons why we have been building Site Remark. We needed a place to allow our customers to provide feedback about the various services that we are working on.
We’re opening up for beta this week to get feedback from users about what we can do better to serve them.
Evan
on 01 Apr 09Too many comments to read up on first, but I’ll add my experience to the mix.
I can’t stand registering for private forums so that I can get tech support from each and every piece of software that I use. 37Signals support forums are fairly inactive (cause you’re probably busy building really cool products), and I don’t think anyone has ever responded to any of my questions.
I’ve posted questions to Get Satisfaction (knowing full well that it isn’t “official”, because GS clearly states that you have no representatives there) cause its easier for me, and when someone someday gets around to answering those, then I’ll get an email notification about it :-) Yeah, I’m lazy.
Point being, you’ve got a long way to go on customer support, and rather than worrying about how other companies make themselves useful to your customers (yes, I LOVE highrise and have accounts for personal and work purposes), I’d be super happy to see you figure out how to engage your customers in a way that makes everyone happy (GS or no GS)!
Sergio B
on 01 Apr 09As an unofficial GS customer support representative I unofficially apologize for this terrible misunderstanding, we’ll make sure this doesn’t happen again.
Brandon Ferguson
on 01 Apr 09I gotta say I was really shocked at first at everything covered here but then was pleasantly surprised at how GS’s staff handled and addressed the situation. The suckers took action and took the critiques to heart. Well done.
Jesus A. Domingo
on 01 Apr 09Bottom line I think is:
Companies shouldn’t have support pages in GS unless the company signs up for one officially.
Going ahead and setting one up for a company even with good intentions, will have negative effects—simply put, it will mislead customers and direct them to incorrect channels for getting support. Making things worse, the company isn’t even aware that such support channel exists.
This should’ve been well thought out.
rates
on 01 Apr 09I don’t think it’s a good idea to use the get satisfaction service
Anthony Brown
on 01 Apr 09I love how some people are calling this post “link-baiting!” It seems nowadays, when someone posts quality stuff, pointing out something that people will really care about, it’s referred to as link-baiting.
This post is a perfect example of what the internet and company blogs should be used for!
It’s great to see a response come so quickly!
Scott Stawarz
on 01 Apr 09I have a question that seems unanswered from all the comments and the post.
Do we know the whole story?
Did 37signals ever contact GetSatisifaction to express their displeasure directly?
I guess Jason’s point, is should they have to? But, Shouldn’t we be human. Maybe, GetSatisfication just never received this point of view before. I have to say, I never saw this angle before this post. Garrett Dimon (way above in the comment list) states he never thought of GetSatisfication this way.
I totally understand Jason’s point, and I think they are valid points. It just seems from this blog post, that instead of handling this person to person. 37signals decided to go public and just blast the service. -
I seriously thought GetSatisfication was quick way to outsource your support requirements, and I was thinking of evaluating them for a future service or three.
Now, because a company blog (37signals) that I value the opinion of, calls them out, I will likely take a longer look at the details of whether to outsource my support or handle it in house.
I agree with some of the previous commenters, Get Satisfaction has a done a more than adequate job taking the critique on the chin and dealing with it.
Should 37signals type of critique be done publicly or privately?
Should 37signals even have to deal with it in the first place?
Jason K.
on 01 Apr 09From a business’s point of view: GS comes between a business and its community by default without the business’s knowledge, then puts the burden on the business to join GS’s conversation, regardless of any other conversations that may or may not already be facilitated elsewhere. Oh, and there’s money involved, to cloud moral lines just a little bit more…
From a consumer’s point of view: My concerns won’t necessarily be addressed… especially if the company in question hasn’t realized that GS exists. I feel as though I’ve done my part when I post on this official-looking customer support forum, then I get no support. Is that helping me?
Opting out of GS is not “opting out of the web”... it’s refusing to accept the default assumption that GS is a necessary customer-support intermediary. Props to Jason for the post, and for bringing this to light. Even if the people at GS are well-intentioned, it’s the very nature of its existence that’s unsettling. Tweak that existence (opt-in for businesses, emphasize its unofficial nature where applicable, forward customer concerns to businesses who haven’t yet discovered GS—let alone adopted it) and it can be a very powerful, very legitimate, very useful web community.
dr2chase
on 01 Apr 09I think 37Signals has approached this problem in a fashion I would not have taken. I would first send GetSatisfaction a letter on official letterhead, signed by a member of the executive management team (and read by legal counsel), instructing GetSatisfaction to remove the site for 37Signals by a specified date.
You’re an amateur. Trademark law pretty well demands that you go after them with legal guns blazing. The specified date is “instantly”, as in “cease and desist using our trademark and diluting our brand”. And probably, given that this brand confusion appears to be part of the business plan, and that there’s evidence in the comments above of such confusion, “see you in court”. The people I know who own trademarks, defend them extremely aggressively.
It’s wonderful to think of a community-run, uncensored, support site, but this is an outrageous abuse of trademarks. These guys could be in deep yogurt if even 10% of the trademark owners went after them; of course they fixed up their site ASAP. Why they ever did this, I do not know—it’s an insane business move, because the whole company got get sued into the ground. I cannot imagine a lawyer ever signing off on this.
Lorenz Pretterhofer
on 01 Apr 09Somehow I’m reminded of many, many Penn and Teller episodes, by this debacle.
Fine, GS’s people are pleasant and nice people. Fine, GS fixed all the major problems in the 37signals pages. Fine, most of this can be chalked up to bad copy writing.
Hell, maybe they’re even providing a better or at least competitive product against the many other potential solutions…
But that STILL doesn’t change the fact that they applied questionable business tactics and are continuing to do so to other less vocal companies, even applying SEO techniques to improve their Google results, and generally being…
...well lets just say, its Bullshit!
zen
on 01 Apr 09@Drew: hilarious!
The whole premise of an unofficial customer support forums doesn’t make any sense! You can call yourself a support community, a user forum or a user community, but not specifically a “customer support” forum when the company in question isn’t participating. Customer support is between the vendor and its customers (obviously). If not officially sanctioned, any other kind of representation is just not that.
What GS is doing is all very misleading.
Robert
on 01 Apr 09In all honestly, how can you not read what was there and think there is nothing wrong with it? Either you weren’t paying attention to what was written or you don’t care about people using your business name, logo, etc without your consent, for their own gain. Then to top it off and say pay us or we keep using your (hopefully copyrighted and possibly trademarked) identity.
How many designers would be OK with having their work taken, for free, to push someone else’s business? People honestly think they’d say, “sure go for it” or “I never thought that that could be something bad to do…”
Eric Suesz
on 01 Apr 09Really appreciate all of the feedback we got today about Get Satisfaction, both here and on our site. I hope it ultimately adds up to something positive. We’re doing our best to respond, acknowledge the mistake, and correct it as quickly as possible. We also blogged about it on the Demand Satisfaction blog, if you’re interested: http://tinyurl.com/cj9czo
Always open to hearing your opinions. We’re going to keep working to realize our goal: a new way of bringing companies and customers together to solve real problems. As painful as it can be to hear the harshest words, it really informs how we develop the site. So, thanks again for caring enough to voice your opinion.
Gerry
on 01 Apr 09I find it fascinating to see people’s responses and which side they take on this issue. It says a lot about them.
GS’ staff seem friendly and helpful in this thread. But the fact remains, as other posters have pointed out, that some of their business tactics are definitely deceptive and underhanded.
I think Jason’s original post was entirely warranted. He’s telling it like it is, and some people don’t like that.
Thor Muller
on 01 Apr 09It’s clear that there is a lot of misunderstanding about what Get Satisfaction is. For those who care to understand our vision, and the full context for how this mistake happened, I’ve posted an open letter to Jason Fried here: http://blog.getsatisfaction.com/2009/03/31/open-letter-to-jason-fried/
Joel Hayhurst
on 01 Apr 09Get Satisfaction is a good idea. It’s a major Rails site. Jason, I think you were too hard on them here over a little bit of copy. Should I expect the same level of criticism on your blog?
Berserk
on 01 Apr 09Those that find it obvious that GS is a customer-to-customer “support” site, how do you find their expressed goal: “[A] new way of bringing companies and customers together to solve real problems” (my bold) just two posts up?
I agree with ben, the main problem is the un-authorized use of logos/trademarks and the phrase “customer support”. If that doesn’t imply business-to-customer communication I don’t know what does.
Also not impressed by the new language in the badge, it implies uninterest on behalf of the company.
I think this post was fair, it alerts people to these shady practices.
Shady994
on 01 Apr 09Please stop insulting our intelligence by calling it a ‘mistake’. The wording on that badge was clearly and intentionally written to pressure the company into paying for your ‘service’.
Eric Suesz
on 01 Apr 09Shady994: This is no attempt at insulting your intelligence. The actual point of the wording, flawed though it was, was to try and encourage people to foster and support a two-way conversation between companies and customers—the idea behind the Company-Customer Pact. The idea behind that is to leave anonymous rants at the door and meet each other halfway so productive outcomes might be realized between companies and customers. The “mistake” was the wording in one particular use case: when companies aren’t participating on our site. We’ve corrected that and we’ll do our best to reinforce it so companies who don’t want to participate on our site (customers we understand we’ll never get, mind you) feel comfortable with that language. Our intention is to satisfy companies who aren’t our customers and don’t ever intend to be, in addition to pleasing our current customers who are looking to foster this kind of meet-in-the-middle conversation on our site that’s inherent in the Company-Customer Pact. Or, to put it more bluntly (and I hope you take this in the positive spirit I intend it): Our intention is to treat you like a customer even if you aren’t.
Pedro Custódio
on 01 Apr 09Hi Jason,
although I guess that most of the points you raised on this post are reasonable, I seriously doubt about your intents on writing them here! ;)
When I read something like
Steve Turner
on 01 Apr 09I’m really surprised that people don’t seem to get the tactics here. Half of you say 37S was too public and angry in their response, and the other half say they should just be filing lawsuits.
This posts gets the results of the latter, by using a dose of the former. This situation has already been resolved, at no cost and with little conflict, by a smart strongly-worded blog post on a major forum. No harm, no mess, little trouble.
Another smart move from 37S.
Andy Davies
on 01 Apr 09Since when do (or should) companies own the places where customers talk about them?
It’s pretty obvious that GS isn’t an official support forum for many companies, anyone visiting gets shown enough information to enable them to make a distinction as to whether a company officially supports on GS or not.
As for GS creating entries for companies, it’s pretty easy for any customer to go and start one for any company they’ve had dealings with.
How many people on here complaining have actually used GS in anger?
Jano
on 01 Apr 09“Jason, by posting this here, as opposed to at Get Satisfaction’s Get Satisfaction page, you’ve undermined your argument.”
Sending unsolicited email is wrong. It MUST be opt-in, not opt-out. I shouldn’t have to email back 200+ messages to opt-out. What’s so hard to understand? no matter if it’s email or ripping a support company page it shouldn’t happen, and I’m glad they get exposed for the shake of those 14,000 companies that didn’t opt-out.
Alex
on 01 Apr 09“Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence.”
I wouldn’t go so far as to say Get Satisfaction do this for underhand reasons, but it shows breathtaking naivety.
One of the most valuable things you have is your reputation and people are right to jealously protect theirs. If a single 37signals customer misunderstood what the GS forum was, posted then came away with a negative opinion of 37S’ customer service then Jason etc have every right to be furious.
I don’t use GS (to provide service or seek support) because I don’t like the site design, but disputes like this could easily be prevented:
Companies should be able to “claim” a forum (as on Technorati) Only claimed forums should display a logo Unofficial forums should have a very prominent message that the forum is not operated or endorsed by the company in question, and that official support requests should be directed to the company on their own website.Problem solved.
ben
on 01 Apr 09While not putting up a distinct notice that the page isw not official was bad, that’s fixed. As far as creating a forum for people to discuss another company’s products… That’s hardly unconscionable. If I buy a product, it’s my right to talk about it anywhere I want, no company has a monopoly on my time, and if I want to talk about it on a GS forum, who the hell are you or anyone else to tell me I can’t, or that I have to go to the company’s official page? GS should never have to have permission to open up a dialog about someone else’s product. Not in a free country, anyway.
Greg
on 01 Apr 09One presumes 37Signals are about to release a competing product…
...and thought they’d undermine the credibility of the competition first.
(Whilst getting some link-bait publicity at the same time).
They are indeed smart.
Alex Hardy
on 01 Apr 09@ben Agreed, people have the right to talk about a company or product anywhere they want, without the involvement (interference?) of the company in question.
... but you’d want them to understand that the company is not at the party.
I’ve seen GS pages for the likes of Campaign Monitor etc and maybe I didn’t look closely enough, but I always assumed that they were manned by the company in question.
If I’d have posted and not “got satisfaction” I’d have come to a negative conclusion about their customer service.
Without meaning to, by thoughtless design and copywriting, GS would have damaged that company’s image.
“GS should never have to have permission to open up a dialog about someone else’s product. Not in a free country, anyway.”
Playing the Freedom of Speech card. OK…
If they’re in it to profit from dialogue about someone else’s product they could show some respect to those product owners though.
I don’t think a tiny little text change is sufficient. Supported / unsupported forums should look distinctly different.
read before commenting
on 01 Apr 09nothing you write in the box below will be useful if you haven’t read every damn comment like I have.
read before commenting
on 01 Apr 09trust me the words you so badly want to type have already been said. but you know this already, because rather than run into the room shouting you’ve taken a seat, listened to the most mentally retarded opinions and demands even as the most constructive arguments and updates on actual fixes have been expressed.
read before commenting
on 01 Apr 09I for one am now a non beliver in open conversation. of the hundreds of comments in this thread, only about eight actually present original ideas or comment on new developments. I defy anyone to prove me wrong.
Alex
on 01 Apr 09Thank you “read before commenting”, but some of us have read this thread and the admirable open letter from GS.
If someone wants to second a point that’s their right. You picked a funny post to suggest that people should hold their tongue :)
Lakshman
on 01 Apr 09Since Getsatisfaction changed only the title on 37 signals page to “Unofficial Customer Support for 37Signals” and others still display “Customer Support for Apple” I think they did it by putting a condition in their templating system
{% if name = ‘37signals’%} Unofficial {% endif %}
David
on 01 Apr 09The fact that there are some people defending Get Satisfaction just confirms my theory that you can go onto any forum on the Internet and start a thread titled “Murder, good or bad” and you will find some morons who will argue in favor of murder.
Get Satisfaction’s tactics are utterly transparent and they are SLIME.
David
on 01 Apr 09p.s. I probably should have said “motives” not tactics.
bochgoch
on 01 Apr 09Oh dear! There’s a real stench of link & PR baiting going on here – wonder how much traffic 37S have just generated for GS? ...
A Real Attorney
on 01 Apr 09I have no respect for getsatisfaction. Their business tactics are somewhat akin to extortion. Obviously their use of logos and trademarks is not “fair use” as they are a for-profit company. It’s one thing to make a web form and set up categories for public discussion about products and services. However, that’s not what they did nor what they are trying to do. Their verbiage and layout still violates federal and state law – even international law. Jason, you should sue them and it should be a class action suit which includes all companies “listed” on their site. In addition, you should seek an immediate injunction to take their site down in the meantime. Their patronizing remarks above and their mickey-mouse changes to their verbiage and layout are too little too late.There is a legal claim called interference with business relationships and they have crossed that line to. There are plenty of forums online and one huge forum for anything under the sun means that nothing is really accomplished and no public good is really served. The brain-trust behind getsatisfaction are lazy and their business model is illegal, obnoxious, and doomed to dismal failure.
chanux
on 01 Apr 09In customer point of view: I need to sign up in getsatisfaction in order get support a given company (AFAIK). And that sucks big time.
Todd Zaki Warfel
on 01 Apr 09Let me get this straight: you don’t like GS business model and how they have a “our way or the highway” mentality. That the company was created because the founders had a problem and designed a solution that fits their needs and may or may not work for others.
Hey Kettle, you’re black.
You guys have made no bones about the fact that you design your products for yourselves and if we don’t like the way they work, then bugger off. GS is doing the same.
GS has helped 10s of thousands of people get issues fixed when the companies who make the products fail their customers. They’re helping 10s of thousands of customers who have been failed by companies who don’t have the AMAZING customer support you guys do.
Looks Official? It doesn’t look anything like a 37s site to me. I can’t imagine anyone who uses your products thinking they’re actually at a 37s site. And the ones who do, well, you probably don’t want them as customers anyway.
We use your products, but have never really been fond of your take it or leave it mentality. This is another case of you being unprofessional, Jason. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
A more professional approach would be to contact GS directly, state your beef with them, and give them a chance to fix it. Instead, you use your public forum to get satisfaction from GS. Ironic how that works, isn’t it? I’d be more empathetic towards you if you’d contacted them directly, stated your issue, they refused to change anything, and then you took the tactic you have here. But alas, I guess that’s not your game.
Hey kettle, you’re black.
Did you even look at the content on your Basecamp page? There’s nothing harmful to 37s there. If anything, it’s a gold mine for possible product ideas.
I’m with you on the badge comment, which would have been better served contacting them directly. But the other arguments, you don’t have a leg to stand on.
Rama Vadakattu
on 01 Apr 09GS should not have done that. Pretty bad.
Richard
on 01 Apr 09Out of curiosity Jason, why didn’t you take your problems to Get Satisfaction directly?
From your article and Sarahs comments you have obviously had a few customers mistake their forums for your official customer service and your frustration has been brewing. Did you not think a straightforward approach would get the desired result.
Your post questions their integrity. It could be argued that in attacking them in the manner you have, you have done so knowing it will be a good blogpost and attract more attention to you and your products. If you have made that choice rather than initially contacting them direct then I think that it questions your own integrity.
I like 37s and SVN and I understand your annoyance with GS and their copy, (it’s wrong) but I think you come off as being a bit of a dick going straight to angry blog post. This is a serious issue effecting your customers and you should have dealt with it more professionally in my opinion.
I love yours and David’s irreverence but I hope with hindsight you learn to be just a little less cocky.
Rich
on 01 Apr 09They need to change the way they are doing it or somebody will sue them, end of story. I would at least ask nicely if I was 37s, then I’d call my lawyer for a more convincing document.
Rich
on 01 Apr 09sorry, I just took a quick look this little bit o text made me rofl
“where companies are encouraged to [bold]get real[/bold] with their customers.”
Rob
on 01 Apr 09For all the continued ranting I see about “if you search Google, you’ll find the Get Satisfaction page”, search any of the following and GS doesn’t show up (in the first page of results):
- basecamp support [link]
- highrise support [link]
- 37 signals support [link]
If you have customers dragging off to GS based on these search terms (which 37s doesn’t), then maybe test whether users can find support/help links in your product and in searches. This isn’t to say that users won’t get confused or won’t find the GS page, but as an alternate explanation: maybe those confused users already use GS for other companies/services.
And for those people confused why Apple’s GS page doesn’t say “Unofficial”, notice that Apple has registered employees that use the service: http://getsatisfaction.com/apple/people (how actively, I don’t know…).
Kris Walker
on 01 Apr 09I’m part of a founding group of people that is building an open, member managed company around great user experience design. The majority of that effort will be related to our customer support and service principles.
I cannot even express how angry I would be if we someday find ourselves hijacked by Get Satisfaction, or someone like them. I believe in their ideas about service, but why do they need to give it a bad name like this?
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.
Eric the .5b
on 01 Apr 09It’s because the only thing those people read is what percolates up at Digg or Reddit or whatever.
zen
on 01 Apr 09The VCs backing GS should look more closely at what they are doing:
Is Your Business Infringing on the Intellectual Property in Other Companies’ Logos?
Philip John
on 01 Apr 09I posted a comment yesterday, but it’s been deleted. Any one care to explain why?
ste
on 01 Apr 09@Rob: try googling for “37signals customer support”. GetSatisfaction shows up at the 7th place (or 5th if you do count subpages). With “Ikea customer support” GS shows up 3rd.
Jack Dawson
on 01 Apr 09@daniel tenner:
I think you are missing the point. I’ll try to illustrate it for you with an example:
I’m thinking of starting a site called “Daniel Tenner Support”
I’ll make it open to anyone. I’ll copy the picture of you from your blog and display it prominently on my site.
I’ll work to get my site highly ranked in Google. Who knows, people who search for your name may click on the result that points to my site.
I’ll have words to the effect that you haven’t been open to conversation yet at the top of the page.
I’ll display ads that are in direct support of whatever political party you disagree with.
I’ll stop all of that if you pay me a monthly fee.
Berserk
on 01 Apr 09@Eric Suesz:
“Our intention is to treat you like a customer even if you aren’t.“
Well, I thought that kind of was Jason’s point..
George Huger
on 01 Apr 09This could be especially problematic for companies who have good SEOs, as contact and support pages are frequently nofollowed, and would be especially easy to outrank.
Its a great business model, with bad execution in this area. I am impressed by how quickly GS responded here though, and it looks like they are committed to making a great product.
Gary
on 01 Apr 09GetSatisfaction has a CEO – Her name is Wendy S. Lea.
Where is her voice in all of this? To read her Twitter stream, she’s having such a nice day! http://twitter.com/WendySLea
Shouldn’t a CEO be out in front leading the discussion when something like this happens? How come she’s silent?
Lukas
on 01 Apr 09It seems clear to me that if GS is truly a forum for free speech and discussion, then no one would have to pay to post there, including 37 signals. There is a contradiction between the claim that GS is a “free speech” forum and the fact that GS seeks fees from businesses for using the site.
Is there something I’m missing here, GS folks?
Jon Crawford
on 01 Apr 09This post made me afraid as a small business owner on the web. When is the 37 Gestapo going to come looking for me?
As others have said, you might have a point about some of their language, but there are far better villains out there than customer service advocates. Sheesh.
Lukas
on 01 Apr 09Also, if GS truly aims to help, rather than prejudice users against non-subscribing businesses, why not provide the direct link to company support sites right at the top of the page?
Lukas
on 01 Apr 09Jon: It’ll be too late, the GS Brownshirts will already have beat you senseless, it seems to me. All while blaming you for the beating you are receiving.
Eric Suesz
on 01 Apr 09Lukas: There is absolutely no charge to participate on Get Satisfaction. We offer premium tools to help with moderation, analytics, etc. It is the freemium model. No one need pay to join in.
We absolutely want companies to point people to their “official” site. We encourage it. Also, we would love to provide links to official support sites if companies don’t want to participate. Great idea. It can be hard to determine where that support site is located, but I love the idea. We also love it when companies want to include that kind of information.
We’re really not out to deceive anyone. I have to be honest: All of these charges of extortion are distressing for someone who has worked so hard to try and encourage open and honest communication between companies and customers. I know that the pile-on effect is in effect here, but to hear it told in these comments, we’re evil people who are trying to exploit people in the worst way. We’ve always been simply trying to help improve the way companies do their customer service and make it more human. We apparently need to be better at explaining the way it works, I suppose.
And now, I’ll step aside and dodge the bottle I see sailing through the air in my direction.
Scott Anderson
on 01 Apr 09Sadly to say, 37signals just lost quite a few Respect Points in my book. This post seems a strong attempt at a lynching to me.
The GS guys have gone above and beyond in responding to this post, only to receive a trite remark in return.
Daniel Guermeur
on 01 Apr 09Try Mojo Helpdesk as great alternative for customer support.
Anton Crocei
on 01 Apr 09Sheesh. The GS folks seem polite and fawning enough. But they they sure sound like bumblers to me. ‘We wrote some bad copy. Lotta people misunderstand what we mean. We want companies to pay, but we’re sorry nobody gets what we’re doing. We want to encourage people to go to the original support sites, but we don’t know where they are.” If you need a 17-inch open letter to describe what you do, exactly, and for whom, you don’t have a business. You have a scam.
Happy
on 01 Apr 09@Anton: I agree with you re: the open letter. If I were GS, I would have silently made some changes in hopes of making this thread moot and then moved on, avoiding the distraction all together. I would not have posted here nor written an open letter. Both responding here and with the open letter validates JF’s method of complaining, raises GS’s blood pressure, and burns time. None of which helps GS nor JF.
Ivan Road
on 01 Apr 09“GetSatisfaction has a CEO – Her name is Wendy S. Lea.
Where is her voice in all of this? To read her Twitter stream, she’s having such a nice day! http://twitter.com/WendySLea”
I’m hoping this is a silly joke. An April Fool’s thing. Sort of like an airhead ditz parody. A clueless satire. Nobody can be this, well, this goofy.
I hope.
RTAddison
on 01 Apr 09Not a parody, I think. From her personal web site:
“As CEO of Get Satisfaction, Wendy is using her expertise to drive the convergence of social media and customer service through the deployment of Web 2.0 technologies that bring brands closer than ever to their customers.”
Except she’s not in at the moment.
Okay, enough sniping at GS.
Ducker
on 01 Apr 09“To a hammer everything is a nail.”
...Ducks Thor’s flying hammer.
Andre in LA
on 01 Apr 09I think this conversation got a little stuck on taking sides and when you take sides you have to pick a favorite. To me, this is not 37s vs GS.
Finally, someone with a loud enough voice is sharing their honest discontent with the business practices of a company.
I find GS’ business practice lacking moral and even legal grounding. Using my business logo without my permission? Telling my customers that I am not committed to customer support, unless I agree to pay a fee?
And, this has been maintained as a profitable approach for a long time, in the face of many complaints.
It is just now, that someone with a voice loud enough exposes GS’ practices that they are looking into making a change.
This doesn’t change the fact that they have been doing something very close to extortion, fully knowing what they are doing, for as long as they could get away with it. A slap on the wrist doesn’t change the intentions of the players, just the current situation.
GS’ site shows mastery of language and communication. Their saying that the badge language was an accident does not ring true.
What’s going to happen next, Yelp asking for money from businessess to make bad reviews disappear?
John
on 01 Apr 09It’s hard to read this blog, because there is no margin, or border space, on the left side and the text goes right up to the side of the window.
Using Safari on the Mac.
Jay
on 02 Apr 09Jason – With respect, you are in a position of power. People hang on your every word. You can do good smart things and inspire people. Or you can unleash a torrent of bile and chanting calls for lawsuits.
With power comes responsibility to manage that power, whether you like it or not.
I once knew of a inspiring group of guys called 37Signals. I wish you were still here.
Btw, your note below mentions inflammatory comments. There are a few of those here. What will you do about them?
Thank you for your time.
Other Ian
on 02 Apr 09I’ve been a longtime user of 37s products, was a paying customer for a couple of years, and still like the products.
Granted, it’s not okay that GetSatisfaction’s 37s landing page looked like it was claiming to provide your support experience—-and also appeared to be portraying 37s as uninterested in conversation.
But:
It’s a bit cheeky wrapping yourself in the “but we’ve got awesome support; look at our testimonials!” flag. Maybe things have gotten better since Sarah came along, but 37s used to come across as a company with great products and little support. I watched forum posts and e-mailed support requests fall into a black hole.
Lukas
on 02 Apr 09Eric:
You “have” to be honest? That one should raise flags every time, as it suggests you have not been honest all along. ;)
Lukas
on 02 Apr 09PS -
That anyone thinks this is “37s v GS” rather than “Is GS unscrupulous?” is a testament to the efficacy of GS’ self-aggrandizing style.
Travis Roberts
on 02 Apr 09While I agree with your post for the most part, and think it’s a little shady how GetSatisfaction is running their support pages, I think it’s a huge deal that they so quickly reacted to try and make things right on their end.
adam jones
on 02 Apr 09In this ever changing online landscape we as companies all push right to the boundaries as we try to capture market share, and every day these boundaries change. Given this fact its only natural that sometimes companies will push a little too far, step over these boundaries and hopefully remedy and learn from their mistakes – Sometimes its the very act of stepping over these boundaries that reminds the rest of us where they actually are.
Im a fan of what you guys have done here at 37 signals within the web community – mostly because you’ve been catalysts in allowing us all to check ourselves and the way we’ve been doing things up until now. But theres a huge distinction in allowing someone to check themselves and doing it for them.
We’re all in this game trying to make money and capture market share – Lets face it, 37 signals is a money making venture. Whilst i agree that Get Satisfaction have overstepped the mark, their ability to jump in and remedy it without question speaks massive volumes towards their intent.
I think you’ve totally abused your position as publishers by making this post. If you have an issue with a company take it up with them, Dont bitch about it on your blog.
V
on 02 Apr 09I read both threads on GS and 37S. Frankly, I put myself in the shoes of a company forcefully “opted-in” and felt close to 37S. What if someone opened OFFLINE a shop with an Apple logo to store complaints about Apple products? Who would feel cheated? Surely Apple and their customers.
The key flaw in GS’s value proposition is that they OPT-IN companies without asking them permission. This is illegal for mailing lists with information about individuals. I’d be surprised it is not for legal entities like companies and organizations.
Frankly, hiding behind the “openness mantra” of the Internet is becoming tiring. Though I feel sorry for GS that “it compromises years of work by our small but committed team”, maybe they should feel sorry for themselves for letting your enthusiasm clutter your (not-so-)common sense and preventing them from getting sound legal legitimacy before spending those years building a good product wrongly marketed.
Steve
on 02 Apr 09GS is a brilliant, useful idea. Stand it up next to anything 37signals has ever produced and maybe you see the roots of this blathering screed.
All the ethical language here is ridiculous. You know, United has me over a barrel when I want to fly certain places – they’re the only game in town sometimes. My iPod won’t work with other download services! Craigslist dropped a nuclear weapon on the newspaper industry but doesn’t everyone think that Craig Newmark is all warm and cuddly? Intuitive fairness is a mess in person-to-person interactions – when you’re talking about corporations it’s completely irrelevant.
If you don’t want to participate, then don’t. The only reason you or anyone cares about this is because GS is quality – if they weren’t doing something people value, you wouldn’t be so defensive and rattled.
My Thoughts
on 02 Apr 09Wow! Huge web S**tstorm over this… I think it’s important to realize that very few people in the real world read SVN, or know what a get satisfaction is…
But to those of us still in the 2.0 bubble, it is important to realize that GS & 37S are both right and wrong.
Disclaimer: I don’t like 37S products (used Basecamp for 6 months that I absolutely hated) but I do get SVN in my reader and read every post. I think GS is a design nightmare, but have seen it around and think it’s trying to do something positive.
GS Pros & Cons
1. Think that they are well intentioned to be a place for customers to find support from either the company or other random GS users on that page.
2. Agree that they somewhat hold companies over a barrel to subscribe to their service. To say that they made an honest mistake is a fib I believe. They have raised investor money and I am quite certain that investors want to know how they are going to make money, not how they are going to improve the world with fluffiness and butterflies.
3. Someone called out the new GS CEOhh, and I’d bet Jason’s salary that she was put in place by said investors to convert the previously free Web2.0 service into a money earning entity, and I’m quite sure this tactic came up when groveling for money.
4. GS is primarily a gripe site, even if they don’t want to be known as such. Just the name “Get Satisfaction” and their blog “Demand Satisfaction” shouts unhappiness and a way for the little guy to vent, be heard and Get Satisfaction by airing grievances publicly.
5. Their Web2.0 hippie, “open conversation” is not for every company, or even most companies. Demanding that they subscribe to some Pact is uncomfortable.
6. A previous commenter likened them to the BBB and I agree. A smaller percentage are BBB members out of altruism, but most for appearance and marketing purposes.
37S Pros and Cons:
1. Take it or leave it tone is growing tiresome and one of the reasons I don’t like their products.
2. Throwing a company under the bus in the middle of a crowded intersection in not cool, but it’s part of their style.
3. Alerting the web to GS tactics publicly, definitely had more impact than a private email.
4. It is interesting how GS responded to some of their own medicine… They want grievances for OTHER companies to be public, yet for their own to be handled privately.
5. SVN has a point, they weren’t complaining about twitter or other random postings on the web, just those that were official looking and had disparaging remarks about them.
In all, I think the winner is GS. Even though their service was bashed and piled on by the readers, I think that their concept of open and transparent communication has been proved out here. Sometimes it’s better to call people out and debate in a public forum to enact the change you were looking for. Then again, I guess SVN got what they wanted too.
I don’t know if it’s a WIN-WIN, seems like more of a LOSE-LOSE to me.
Rapolas
on 02 Apr 09Why Jason? Why why why did you wrote this post? You just gave them what they wanted – a post about Get Satisfaction on 37signals blog. Everything else doesnt matter. You advertised them AND for free…
Jeff
on 02 Apr 09@My Thoughts, a couple of points:
- I don’t think anyone from GS said they wanted this handled privately. Some of their defenders have said 37signals was showing bad form in not trying to handle this privately before taking it public.
- GS isn’t a gripe site. There are plenty of those, none satisfying. The whole idea of GS is that you can actually get results, not just air your grievances on the internet.
- What GS can’t say is that they are in a precarious niche. They make their money from the businesses, but their chief role is to be mildly adversarial to the companies in question. After all, if these companies actually provided decent customer support, GS wouldn’t be necessary. The name “Get Satisfaction” hints pretty strongly at that relationship.
Lost somewhere in this mess is the fact that GS exists because most companies absolutely suck at customer service. We’ve all run into that same brick wall, often with hundreds or thousands of dollars on the line. A middleman with a little bullying power is a godsend in those situations, and I’m grateful that GS exists.
A good company like 37s can get caught in the crossfire, and it’s up to GS to make that right. But I’m okay with that crossfire if it means that I have an advocate against these companies when I need it, sorry.
Damien
on 02 Apr 09@ adam jones:
Really? You think of yourself as a company inhabiting an “online landscape” and “capturing marketshare,” rather than as a human being? That’s seriously messed up. Are you a script, or are you a person?
I could ask the same about Wendy S Lea… how is that a real person? She seems like a manufactured persona. Why does her twitter stream mention nothing about what is actually going on in her company, instead of fluffy nonsense?
brutal honesty
on 02 Apr 09GS is a stupid and lame attempt to make money from other people’s work. Their idea that they will be a support forum for other companies is just trash. They have no expertise and users don’t need to congregate at their sh*thole to get support on anything. I was so angry to hear about GS, what an obnoxious outfit they are. And, I think their comments show that they are just looking to profit off others, while doing nothing themselves and while adding absolutely fking NOTHING to the web. “GS” should simply be call BS because that’s what it is.
I will never go to GS and I wait for the day that they are taken down by legal action, if not their own guilty conscience.
Sorry for rant SVN readers, but this GS is the lowest of the low mud sucking slime-coated bottom trolling so-called web-businesses online. They have a “CEO”? She sounds like a dipsh and a moron without the guts to face 70-80k SVN readers like a real leader.
Wendy S. Lea
on 02 Apr 09Thanks for your comments. We are evaluating things here at GetSatisfaction.com. Please use our service in the meantime.
Arnold Tagul
on 02 Apr 09I don’t see a single trademark. Did you register your logo? Are you suggesting that others not be allowed to speak about your product. I’d have to say that 37signals posturing here is very ANTI-Web2.0 and very anti-free speech in general (yes commercial speech is free speech too, look at the supreme court rulings).
So in essence DHH maybe you should recognize that you have competition and you just gave the competition a huge boost.
BJ Cook
on 02 Apr 09“Wow” is all I could think as I read through this post. Both from a perspective of we are customers of 37Signals products and from the perspective as the former CMO of SuggestionBox. If you’re actually in the customer feedback on the provider side there are many challenges and I know from personal experience. One of interesting tactics is allowing people to setup these “online feedback pages” for brands and companies they interact with. What happens when you enable people? Well …
1. It’s an SEO tactic. When someone searches, even if long tail around that brand or company name + some type of modifier keyword like “support”, “suggestion box”, “feedback”, “customer service”; you get in front of someone.
2. Some of us at SuggestionBox had the same feelings, but were thwarted … it’s brand hijacking. I heard the same thing when I was doing business development with vendors and agencies.
3. You create a false sense of that brand’s existence with this support landing page. Which I often heard, people didn’t appreciate what it did to their brand equity. They felt robbed in a way because they didn’t know it was even setup.
On the other side, being in the space and a customer of 37 Signals products … this only helped Get Satisfaction in the end. If you have any sense of PR or Marketing; this is driving some buzz for them. I’m sure this link gets popped into all sort of social media channels where the conversation continues to grow. I’m all for open conversations and that’s what we promoted at SuggestionBox. There’s also the marketing tactics, which end up being a replacement for the actual act of business development where you REALLY make money in that space. These guys are a startup selling software and one of their sales channels happens to be people-powered pages.
At the end of the day, props to Get Satisfaction for reacting quickly. Knowing the style of 37 Signals guys, props to them for being open about something that was truly incorrect and standing up for their own brand and support culture.
Also there are a lot of great feedback tools out there if you don’t have the resources inhouse and I would recommend checking out the Uservoice guys.
dwillett
on 02 Apr 09Imagine walking into a non-internet business location that offered GS’s services, but did it in an honest and open manner.
Down one hallway you head to official customer support desks to ask a question, report a problem, etc. to a person who is provably an employee and representative of that company’s support team, and that company is paying for and directing users to the services of this support company.
Down the other hallway you head toward discussions regarding companies that have given no consent and prefer to bear no affiliation with the support services offered. Given the distinction between the official and unofficial support outlets, you know what you’re in for (and probably won’t be shocked to discover a complaint forum, which is the only real reason people would gather at an unofficial support outlet: to vent their issues or ask other customers about their issue).
GS doesn’t give you this clear and honest division. With the addition of “Unofficial” to a title, they only mildly improve their user’s awareness. With the rewording of their badge, they still give users the impression that the company in quesiton doesn’t care as much as the other official companies.
If you claim to be an “open and honest business”, lose the misleading wording, make a completely obvious division between official customer support pages and unofficial customer discussion groups, and accept what your business boils down to when you aren’t trying to slyly deceive your users and cornering companies into creating accounts.
Lars Bæk
on 02 Apr 09@Eric Suesz I’m sure the criticism hurts, that your intentions were good, and that you’re a good guy. I have no reason to doubt that. That conclusion must then be that you were extremely unfortunate with your choices concerning design and text?
I’ll address just one of the things you, in my opinion, failed to do right – the pact badge text, including the revised version: “No one from [COMPANY NAME] has sponsored, endorsed, or joined the conversation yet.” This wording is, in my opinion as a professional copywriter, only slightly better than what you had. It’s still ripe with negative connotations and innuendos concerning [COMPANY NAME]. You’re negating [COMPANY NAME]’s desire and dedication to “sponsor” and “endorse” (words loaded with positive connotations). It’s obvious that you haven’t used a copywriter on this project – I highly recommend you hire one.
@Ben got it right, it should be something like this: “[COMPANY NAME] has not been contacted about using get satisfaction. Get in contact with them to suggest they use us for their support. In the meantime you can post a message here for users to contribute an answer, or use [COMPANY NAME]’s existing support system.”
I wish you good luck with your future work.
Dave
on 02 Apr 09I’m hesitant to write this, because until now I’ve believed in the infallibility of 37s. Total fanboy, and will still be one after the dust clears, but this whole situation is just unfortunate. Your problem is a “mafioso” style tactic by GS, yet that is exactly what this blog post did to them. Judging by their timely response and the way they have handled the situation, I think GS wins the moral battle here. It was clearly an unfortunate mistake on their part, something they didn’t quite think through completely before launching their design. As much as 37s is committed to open discussion on design and copy, I would have expected to see a little more realistic stance than some whining. We developers know how quickly one bad decision can get out of hand and cause unforeseen consequences. That is clearly what happened here, and yet there is no apology from Jason or 37s.
The commenters here are even worse, calling GS immoral, slime, etc. If anything, this has made me look closer at using GS for an upcoming project! The way they responded was out of respect and humility, rather than the arrogant, brash blog post that started the whole thing. This could have easily been solved by a quick email to the GS team, and then a blog post about how good companies are willing to look at design in a different light, instead of a post bashing another small business.
37S loses points here, GS gained a ton in my book.
JF
on 02 Apr 09FYI, I posted a follow-up this morning.
Ryan Zegler
on 02 Apr 09Jason, Did you try contacting GS and requesting them to make a change before publicly lambasting them. It just shows how arrogant the 37Signals team has become with their success.
Also, please re-read your post. It is filled with arrogance. There is a fine line between arrogance and being opinionated.
Ryan.
Anonymous Coward
on 02 Apr 09Ryan: If Jason is arrogant because he didn’t contact GS first, then that would make GS a few thousand times more arrogant for creating/hosting/promoting thousands of misleading customer service pages without asking thousands’ of company’s permission before they did it.
Remember who did what first here. GS did all this first. They created misleading PUBLIC customer support pages for companies without their permission. They used their trademarks illegally to profit from these brands as well.
Let’s be honest about who’s arrogant here.
Lanny Heidbreder
on 03 Apr 09It’s an accepted truth that big corporations are impermeable fortresses of douchebaggery; they see people only as consumers, they do shortsighted, evil things just for a little money, and there is no way one person’s polite correspondence will make a dent in the company’s bureaucratic practices. Indeed, the only proven way you can possibly get a megacorp’s attention is to foment an angry mob on the internet.
However, not all companies that do douchebaggy things are megacorps, which means that not all instances of douchebaggery require the same tactics that you would use with Verizon or Microsoft.
Get Satisfaction’s faux pas here really was egregious, and I admit that I really, really enjoyed reading this post. But bringing out the big guns against Get Satisfaction has inspired more sympathy for GS than they deserve.
Who knows — they’re small enough that a simple e-mail might have gotten things put straight. At least if it didn’t, you could still post the blog entry, and then the sympathizers wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.
Anonymous Coward
on 03 Apr 09So, if I go to eat at a restaurant for lunch, hate my dish but like the place and what my friend got, and post a review describing this on Yelp.com, that somehow makes Yelp evil? Yelp should give the restaurant the ability to censor my post about it?
Because that’s all I see happening at Get Satisfaction. Some internet user used some 37Signals products, started a page at GetSatisfaction to tell other people about it, and others joined in. 37Signals doesn’t like the conversation happening there and wants to censor it, and they are pissed that GetSatisfaction doesn’t censor it.
@Anonymous Coward
on 03 Apr 09Yelp is not that restaurant. Misleading people into thinking otherwise is the difference. Got it now?
fred
on 03 Apr 09Get SatisFaction is nothing more than a Yelp for businesses. To call itself a Customer support site is a joke. In fact, even it’s so-called big customers like Zappos does not have much traffic of any kind on their site.
GetSatisfaction looks like so many of these web 2.0 companies that have better marketing than value
Anonymous Coward
on 04 Apr 09No, I still ain’t got it. I don’t see any proof that GS is trying to mislead people into thinking they are on an official 37Signals page. I see some design elements that might confuse people into that, and some design elements (“unofficial…”) that are meant to clearly signal it’s a third party service. I don’t disagree with Jason’s design criticisms, but poor design choices don’t automatically equal evil to me (they seem more ignorant to me than malicious).
If GS fixes the wording and layout issues that Jason has pointed out, does that solve the problem? I think it does. What’s the objective, here? To help correct a problem, or foment populist rage at one more example of how companies no longer have control over their brands?
This discussion is closed.