The Value of Chat

If you are listening to the voice of the customer, then you should be able to hear what it is saying. In service circles, that voice is speaking volumes about chat. Study after study shows that chat is a preferred channel among consumers. They find it more engaging, more immediate, and, when done well, more personalized. But, and this is critical, customers want live chat with engaged agents, not bots, not impersonal scripts, and not necessarily the instant pop-ups that appear within seconds of landing on a website.

This point is the subject of some debate. According to Gartner, chatbots will become the primary service channel for about 25% of all organizations by 2027. And corresponding data says nearly three-quarters of customers are okay with bots when seeking answers to easy questions. As we have written before, having mature DIY tools is part of an effective support strategy, but the issue here is not one of tools, it’s one of application. Self-service has a place, much like fast food has a place; neither is designed to be the end-all approach.

Speed vs. Quality

Chat’s appeal lies primarily in the immediacy and value that it provides. Unlike voice, there is no automated menu to navigate, nor is there a lag time in response usually associated with email. To the first point, an in-depth study of more than 56 million live chats found that, on average, it took 46 seconds for an agent to acknowledge and respond to a customer. Is that good or bad? And to the second, chat supports service personalization since agents have access to customer data, which provides some understanding of who consumers are and what they are likely to want.

As it turns out, the time it takes for an agent to respond is not nearly as important as what follows. Customers put a premium on the quality of an interaction. They do not mind if service takes a little longer so long as it is thorough and results in a first-contact resolution. In other words, it’s about the experience as a whole – did it reinforce the brand proposition? Did the agent ask probative questions to fully understand a consumer’s issue? While handle time is a standard metric in contact centers, it is not always a good indicator of high agent performance or user satisfaction.

Convenience and Conversion

The convenience factor also applies to agents. While live chat is an avenue for reactive responses, it is also ideal for proactive engagement. Consumers who use it are nearly three times more likely to convert into buyers than those who do not, and they spend more per purchase. Chat is even more valuable when used in tandem with artificial intelligence that looks for specific user behaviors and then alerts agents when those behaviors occur.

For instance, if someone is switching back and forth between two items or two pages, that signals a potential decision point. People will abandon their shopping carts if they are left to linger on a website for too long. To be fair, “too long” is a subjective metric, but engaging sooner rather than later is more effective, especially if a website visitor’s activity is visible. At that point, it becomes very much like the physical store employee who approaches a customer who has browsed for a few minutes and whose body language shows a propensity for purchasing.

The convenience factor is further buoyed by transcripts that can be made available to address misunderstandings or to serve as a record of the interaction and by innovations like our text analysis and customer sentiment tool. This technology parses interactions for the key moments delineating success and missed opportunity. It explores a user’s mindset during an interaction, and the findings are also a tremendous coaching tool for improving agent performance.

Putting It in Context

There will be those times when customers want a live conversation with an agent, not a digital exchange. Like anything else, there can be such a thing as over-reliance on chat, which is why we maintain a multi-channel environment. In this Washington Post piece earlier this year, the author noted that getting phone support from certain businesses is becoming increasingly difficult.

One reason for that is generational differences in communication preferences. When nearly three-quarters of Gen-X and Millennial customers prefer digital channels to voice, it’s easy to understand why companies are going digital. What should not happen is the either/or choice. Service can and should be provided across multiple channels, so long as you remember that each comes with trade-offs.

The industry standard with phone service is to answer 80% of calls within 20 seconds. That figure can and will vary greatly among industries and does not account for customers’ time on hold. That is an enormous source of frustration that typically does not exist with chat. In addition, phone agents are limited to one call at a time, while a seasoned chat agent can comfortably manage up to three concurrent conversations. That’s quite a productivity enhancement.

The Bottom Line

Higher sales conversions, improved retention, shortened sales cycle, better aftercare, and fewer abandoned shopping carts. Those are just some benefits of making live chat an integral customer service and support channel. Chat is also cost-efficient as agents can handle work with multiple customers simultaneously and often, in a shorter time than phone calls require. Faster issue resolution also helps with staffing levels, as agents can handle a higher workload.

One last number to keep in mind is that 63% of consumers say they are more likely to return to a website that offers chat. This connects to loyalty, which is priceless. Loyal customers are the ones who become brand advocates and key points of future customer referrals. People want real-time communication and live agents best provide that. Automation is not authenticity; bots struggle with personalization. The value behind this channel is self-evident. If you’re not already offering chat, we’ll help you get started.