#wordnerdwednesday
Why haven’t we made more progress in #CX when we have all the tools we theoretically need? When my friend and former colleague Sam Stern lamented this issue in a post last week, I pointed out that most business people still don’t really understand what CX is.
“CX definition” is still one of the most searched CX terms on Google after 15+ years. It’s not surprising colleagues haven’t been engaged if they don’t know what we want them to engage with.
And truth be told, I think we in the CX community bear some responsibility for the confusion.
We’ve quibbled too much over making sure a definition is complete and technically accurate with not enough thought about how audiences might USE the definition we write.
I don’t want to pick on anyone so I’ll paraphrase the most common definition of CX I hear:
“CX is how people think and feel about the sum total of their interactions with a company.”
Readers/listeners may understand that in concept, but few remember or share it. Even fewer use it because they’re not sure how.
A few years ago I started using simpler but more memorable definition:
“Customer Experience is:
1) what happens to someone when they do business with a company, and
2) how they feel about what happens.”
Audiences remember these two points. And when I ask what it means to “manage CX” in light of this definition, the answer is straightforward. To mange CX is to influence what happens when customers do business with you (events) and managing – or trying to manage – how the people feel about said events.
One definition isn’t a cure-all for the rampant confusion surrounding CX, but the more we prioritize clarity over perfection in CX, the easier everyone’s job will become.
(Find original post that prompted this discussion here: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/samsternjones_customerexperiences-cx-ugcPost-7176401713585631233-Pcd0)
