As an American living in China for the better part of 8 years, I have experienced the spectrum of customer service experiences, but my experience earlier this week (July 1) at the Westgate ACS office highlighted that within your own office.

On (May 14, 2009) my wife I went to the Westgate office to arrange for the Marriage affidavit.  We completed the form, paid 40USD, swore the oath and were given the document; a document which requires little information (name, date of birth, passport number, name of previous spouse, etc), but whose data accuracy is critical (as we would find out 2 weeks later at the Marriage Registration Office).

We proceeded to the Marriage Registration Office on a day that my wife to be had chose for its auspicious nature, where we were turned away for having ‘an incomplete affidavit”.

The document that the consulate provided (a document with the seal of the State Department) did not contain my middle name.  Furthermore, it did not specify that the name is required “as it appears on my passport”.  None of the consular staff or officers brought this to our attention.

This was not a new problem.

In order to solve this problem, we returned to the consulate two weeks later; the earliest appointment available under the new system.

Following a brief conversation with the local Chinese staff member at the window, and explaining that the error had occurred, she returned 5 minutes later saying that they were sorry but we would have to pay again as it was not their responsibility to fact check the document. That I should read the paragraph at the bottom where it says

“I … , the individual named above appeared before me, and being duly sworn, made the statement set forth in this instrument.  I assume no responsibility for the truth or the falsity of the representations that appear in this document”

At this point I was fairly astounded that someone - anyone in the ’service’ business - would dodge responsibility and stick the ‘client’ with an additional $40 charge for what was a simple clerical error

I was not holding them responsible for the veracity the document, but the fact that their document and officers failed to properly ensure the document was properly filled out in the first place. That, even though the consulate staff and officer both reviewed the document against my passport, neither alerted me that I needed to provided my name as it appears on my passport.

Following that, I  made another appeal as they (the original staff member was the person who assisted us 2 weeks before) and mentioned the above, which they summarily rejected.  A second woman then joined the conversation, and when I asked her why I as an American not only paid taxes and paid money for this product should still have to pay for their mistake. I was laughed at and she walked away.  When she came back she told me that I was not paying for them to check the piece of paper, or fact check it, but for the act of notarizing the affidavit. My reply to her was that I was paying for a product, the complete affidavit itself.  She again walked away,

Again, the argumentative nature of the conversation was extremely off-putting, especially as I was facing a loss of $40 and no one on the other side of the glass displayed one ounce of concern for this.  A simple ‘I’m sorry’ would have probably solved the problem.  Instead, she walked away.

Couldn’t they simply have waived the $40?

Then the first staffer told me that I needed to pay, and as I began to move from the first window to the second, I saw the visa officer poke his head around the partition with a big grin on his face.  Apparently, my little seen has become office joke, and it only took him 2 minutes to call us to the window.

While at the window, I again tried to make my case and this time was given a blank dismissive look, and while explaining to him that we had made the trip to Xujiahui and been turned around he continued to look away. My final act with him was a suggestion that he and the staffers look out for this in the future and alert citizens to the problem should it be made.  Again, dismissive look and he walked away.

All in all, a horrible experience.  One that I do not believe I deserved, and as I have come to find out over the last 18 hours, I am not the only one who has experienced the same level of service.

However, rather than simply rant about what I went through, I will suggest actions/ changes that I believe could not only avoid a similar experience, but could make the overall ’service’ much more efficient and customer-friendly:

1) Consulate staff should at all times act in a manner fitting of their position. Regardless of whether or not the official or staff member feels the claim is legitimate, the claim should not be dismissed, and at no time should the person bringing the claim or airing the grievance be treated with disdain.

2) Ensure the American Consulate website is updated on a regular basis to reflect the dynamics on the ground. Two months ago, after the new scheduling process had been in place for several months, a number of the pages had still not been updated, and as of today U.S. Citizen Visa Hour page is down.

At a minimum, the following information should be made available, be up to date, and staff should be trained up:

• Who should / should not apply for an appointment
• Electronic versions of documents that are in a consistent format, use consistent terminology, and have instructions/ examples on how they should be filled in  (I suggest looking at HSBC’s Document Library for Best in Class examples)
• Ensure that all documents, and their explanations conform to current relevant Chinese requirements (for example, instead of asking for “name” on applications, specify “Name as it appears on passport”)
• Create an internal process within each section to maintain the site on a monthly/ quarterly basis

3) If services are to be paid for, then the consulate staff must accept responsibility for the quality of their product.

In the case of a notarized document, the stamp is not the product.  The completed document is the product, and the stamp and signatures are only part of that product.

And even if one is not responsible for it, it never hurts to take a moment of extra time to ensure things are done correctly.

4) If, in the case there is a mistake found after the fact, citizens should be provided the opportunity to expedite their appointments. In the recent case, it took 2 weeks to schedule an appointment (inconvenient), however in other cases (adoption) the document need is time sensitive.

5) An improved customer service platform needs to be implemented

• Staff should wear name tags to allow for easy identification
• Comment boxes (physical and/or electronic) should be made available
• Expatriate staff should be made available when problems arise
• Complaints should not be summarily dismissed, ignored or laughed at.

The people who go to Westgate are couples planning weddings, families planning adoptions, business men and women planning trips, and there is no reason for citizens who are paying taxes and 30 USD a stamp to be treated poorly.

A basic measure of customer service needs to exist, the products need to be produced to quality, and when there are problems or complaints a channel needs to exist.

As I said above, I recognize that as 1 of 10,000+ Americans in Shanghai I cannot expect red carpet service, and am I asking for it. I am asking that the process put in place to manage the 10,000+ Americans living in Shanghai is effective, and offers a satisfactory level of customer service at our own embassy.

Those of us in the private sector learned long ago that small, proactive steps taken to improve customer service pay huge dividends  not only through the positive word-of-mouth that it generates among the community, but in heading off problems before they arise.  As a long-term resident of Shanghai, I submit that the biggest impact you could make during your tour in Shanghai would be to improve the view in the community of this service dept in the consulate.

I thank you for your time and look forward to any feedback you might have for me in the future.

Sincerely.

Richard Brubaker

Continue reading »

In China, there are few mistakes more difficult to recover from than misjudging value.

It is a lesson that I learned early on while working for a valuation firm and assisting firms purchase state-owned assets, invest in joint ventures, pick up non performing loan portfolios on the cheap, or funds develop their residential real estate portfolios, and an issue that I regularly must consider as I develop partnerships, sell product, and work with clients to develop their China plays.

At a fundamental level, everything (tangible and intangible) can be valued, but what was interesting to witness early on was just how far apart the same product, asset, or concept could have such widely different “values” depending on the perspective.  More interesting, and more important to this post, is the fact that many fims failed to anticipate or understand where the other side was coming from.

A situation that killed many deals prematurely, or worse, resulted in nasty breakups later on.

Asset valuation aside (download my previous article  ), where the concept of value ( real vs. perceived) is most important for many entering the China market is that many have simply failed to accurately understand the various ways that value can be influenced, or what their own value was.

From a consumer market perspective there are of course over a billion people that must drink water, and firms like Evian and Watson are banking on getting x% of that market, but there is a reason why more people select Wahaha vs. Evian in China. Wahaha’s value proposition of providing a 1 kuai square bottle of water is more attractive than a well designed Evian bottle containing Swiss alp spring water.

Continuing with Wahaha, and looking at the role of value within a partnership, Mr Zong obviously saw more value in working outside the JV than within it, or perhaps from Mr. Zong’s perspective Dannon believe that his product idea did not offer value to the JV lead him to explore opportunities.

Of course both examples can be debated, as all arts can be, but the greater point still stands.  That many entering and operating in China fail to understand the value that they themselves possess, their firms offer the market, that a partnership will bring, or that an asset possess.

It occurs in the profit and non-profit arenas alike, within foreign firms run by foreigners and Chinese, and results can vary wildely on a regional basis.  Some questions you may ask include (in the context of your own self, firm, or product):

• What is your value (self, firm, or product) to a situation, to a market, to a partner, etc?
• How is this value defined?
• What are the drivers or value?
• What are the forces that define those drivers?
• How sensitive to time duration is that value
• What adjustments need to occur during short term or over the long term?
• What can be done to enhance value, or destroy it?
• What is the cost of misjudging value?

In answering these questions myself, or with clients, what I often find is that it is often more important to think about these questions as if you were sitting on the other side of the table.  Working out not jsut what you percieve your value to be, but to also take the time to understand what will ultimately be the real value to others, and then moving forward to develop business models, advertising campaigns, etc.

Certainly a process the new owner of Hummer would have benefitted from.

Taking a 2 week break after nearly 2 years of posting I must admit was therapeutic, but more than that, it gave me a chance to take a bit of stock on just how much content had been published… and before I get back to writing, I wanted to see first how I have been doing.

Sometimes I break the story, as in I have a breaking story, while at other times I break the stroy, as in I really break it with poor grammar and spelling.

To ensure that I continue do accomplish that (let’s assume I historically have for a moment), I need some feedback on the following questions:

1. Why do you come to All Roads?
2. Where are the areas that you feel All Roads can be improved?
3. Is there an issue of focus that you would like to see more / less content on?
4. Would you prefer a more analytical writing style or more personal?
5. Which of the following would you like to see:

• Executive interviews
• Regulatory announcements & analysis
• Event/ conference Announcement or writeups
• Reader Polls

Any and all comments or emails will be greatly appreciated.

Well folks, I am happy to report that the trip to Koh Samui was a success and I am now a married man.

I honestly did very little work while I was gone, so it is going to take me a few days to get back in the saddle and get the posts flowing, but I am already working on a few.

In the meantime, I have put up a new page called Recommended Vendors of firms that I am putting forward.  It was a list I have been meaning to put up for some time, and I have a few other firms to add, and I hope you will find the list of use as you are looking for assistance in China.

More later