Customers increasingly view the mobile app as their primary point of contact with their bank, yet satisfaction with digital service remains low—particularly when it comes to the now-ubiquitous chatbot. Too often, these bots fail to answer specific questions and offer little clarity when customers need to reach a real person. For younger customers especially, the mobile app is a focal point of their banking relationship, and banks underestimate its importance at their own peril.
A report from Javelin Strategy & Research, Growing Adoption, Low Satisfaction Raise Risks for Mobile Customer Service, examines the best practices banks are employing in their mobile services. The bottom line: treat the chatbot as a gateway, not an end in itself.
The New Call Routing
The rise of the mobile app has raised the stakes for banks in customer service. When mobile banking first appeared, it was little more than a way for users to check transactions. Today, for a growing share of customers, the mobile app is the primary interaction point with their bank. For that reason alone, banks need to elevate their approach to mobile customer service.
Chatbots and live chat have become the two main ways banks direct customers to service. Live chat is now common enough that most banks offering a bot back it up with human agents. The problem is that many customers must first fail with the bot before they are even told that live chat is available.
“Chatbots have become call routing for a live human,” said Emmett Higdon, Director of Digital Banking at Javelin. “The bank will still let a customer talk to a human, but the chatbot is going to ask five questions before they can connect to somebody. Depending on whether you need more help with than the chatbot can provide, it’s going to send you one of 10 different places. It makes sense logically, but not necessarily to consumers who just want to talk to a person.”
Making Connections
In many ways, chatbots resemble the phone trees of the past, which forced frustrated callers to keep pressing zero or saying “Agent, agent!” A customer chatting with a bot can ask to connect with a person, but they are often routed through additional prompts before that happens.
For example, if a customer asks about a duplicate payment, the chatbot may not immediately connect them to a live agent. Instead, it might display their last dozen transactions and ask which one is in question. The bot will gather the necessary details and promise to have someone review the issue, but it may still stop short of transferring the customer to an agent.
For simple questions, chatbots generally suffice. Many banking customers go online simply to check their balance or resolve other straightforward issues. In those cases, chatbots can improve efficiency.
“If you say I need to speak to someone, the bot might say, ‘Happy to connect you to an agent, what do you need help with?” said Higdon. “I’ll type in my question and it will say ‘That’s right here in the app,’ and they’ll bring up other links. That’s probably a best practice. You want folks to use your digital services first before they use your human resources. Sometimes folks just don’t know it’s available.”
One side effect of the growing reliance on chatbots is the quiet return of the FAQ. Years ago, banks invested heavily in writing clear and accessible FAQ guides. Ironically, many chatbots today can’t answer half the questions already addressed in those documents. Few banks follow the example of US Bank; when a customer asks a question that aligns with an FAQ, the bank’s bot responds with several relevant FAQ links that may help resolve the issue.
Options for the Customers
Many banks’ customer service menus still lack a direct option that allows customers to chat with an agent immediately. The biggest reason is cost: it’s cheaper to start with a chatbot before engaging a human representative. But a handful of institutions, such as Navy Federal, are starting to offer alternative service options from the outset.
“Right away at the top of every Navy Federal chatbot screen now is a thin little prompt that says something like chat with an agent. We don’t want to tick you off, so if you want to go straight to an agent, go here,” said Higdon
Going Straight to Mobile
Mobile app adoption has already surpassed online banking visits, and usage continues to rise. For younger consumers, the mobile app is the only way they ever interact with their bank.
To attract and retain these customers, banks must deliver their best level of service through the mobile channel. Still, too many institutions still act as though letting customers check their balance or transfer money through Zelle is sufficient.
The risk for banks is that poorly designed chatbot experiences can drive customers away rather than draw them in. If a chatbot is frustrating or unhelpful, it can become the kind of annoyance that pushes customers to switch accounts.
“It can be like talking to your teenager,” said Higdon. “You’re getting one-word responses back. Nobody wants to play a game of 20 questions just to get with your bot. If you don’t have decent and clear escalation, I’m never coming back to that chatbot again.”
Customers are far more forgiving when an interaction begins with a chatbot but quickly escalates when the bot can’t resolve the issue. As long as the transition to a live agent is seamless—and the customers receives individualized help—the experience is likely to be viewed positively. In fact, customers are often willing to start with the bot again the next time they need assistance.
“But if there’s no escalation and the bot just keeps saying, ‘Can you phrase that another way? I’m still learning. I can’t help with that right now…’ Well, what good are you?” Higdon said.
The post What Banking Customers Want—and Don’t Want—From Chatbots appeared first on PaymentsJournal.
