Let's give customer service a chance to bear fruit
Published April 29, 2014
by Randy Turner, former DOT scientist, published in News and Observer, April 28, 2014.
N.C. DENR Secretary John Skvarla has been chastised for daring to demand that his environmental regulatory programs implement a customer service model as they fulfill their mission to the public. Some critics are incredulous that regulators can serve as partners to those being regulated under the law.
This divergence from a long-standing model of interaction is obviously unsettling to those who think environmental resources can be protected only through adversarial relationships with the applicants.
I spent two decades working for regulated entities: the N.C. Department of Transportation and private-sector companies in the Raleigh area. At NCDOT, I determined how proposed transportation improvement projects would affect natural resources. We coordinated with project designers to minimize the effects to these important resources. We also were responsible for applying for the necessary permits and certificates of authorization for each project from all relevant state and federal agencies.
The scientists, engineers and technical staff of the state and federal agencies responsible for ensuring compliance with the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Coastal Area Management Act and the Sedimentation Control Act are dedicated and committed civil servants. However, I can attest that many regulators historically have treated the regulated population with a fair amount of disrespect and discourtesy. A failure to return phone calls or respond to emails was not rare and not the worst of their failings.
With no goal of good customer service from regulators, applicants often were treated as inferior. The irony is that many scientists employed by regulated entities are as passionate and respectful of the environment as the regulators.
In addition, the rules were often different from one regulatory person to another, and many regulators projected an air of condescension and superiority. It often seemed they viewed the world as being populated by the virtuous (those who protect and preserve natural resources) and the transgressors (those who affect the same resources). That’s not necessarily terrible, but when they failed to see an applicant and his proposal as a credible expression of an individual or a company’s blood, sweat and tears, they often crossed a line that led to blatant disrespect and verbal conflict.
It is not true that people who regulate effectively must also be belligerent. I know plenty who aren’t.
In spite of this indictment of the attitudes and deportment of some regulatory staff members, some earned my respect. I treasure some friendships I made among state and federal regulators. However, there is no question there was a systemic malady within the regulatory community.
John Skvarla may be on the right track. Let’s give customer service a chance to bear fruit.
M. Randall Turner of Reidsville is a scientist who formerly worked in NCDOT assessing the environmental effects of road projects.
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/04/28/3818747/in-defense-of-skvarla-denr-and.html?sp=/99/108/#storylink=cpy
April 30, 2014 at 11:05 am
Norm Kellly says:
Can anyone define the difference between a private company and a government agency? Any government agency? It does not have to be one of the regulatory agencies that deal with the big boys like Duke or PSNC. It could be the DMV for your registration, the property tax payment office, you name it, any government agency.
The most important difference is the one that defines the difference between customer service and contempt. When I visit any private business and need to take advantage of customer service, even if it's over the phone or web, there is one expectation and only one expectation: whether they resolve my issue the way I want it resolved or not is secondary to getting good customer service. If I call my tv service provider (typically called cable company, but i don't want to imply singling out any company!) with a complaint, but it turns out my interpretation of the situation is wrong, I don't expect them to conform to my erroneous assumption just because I'm the customer and 'always right'. Cuz the customer isn't always right! I expect that customer service is going to treat me like an adult, understand my point, and explain why I'm wrong OR correct the situation. If I am right, but the service rep simply insists that they will continue to do it their way, then I have the choice to leave that business and do business with SOME OTHER company. This actually did happen with my previous unnamed tv service provider. I had a signed contract for a set price for 12 months. After the first bill was received, for a different amount, the service rep informed me that I didn't qualify for the special pricing and my bill would be different than my contract price. I pointed out that not only did I have a contract signed by one of their reps, but it was also signed by me. They were free to charge me whatever they wanted, but I would pay the contract price and they could do whatever they wanted with the leftover. Having a contract in my hand meant something to me and I expected it to mean something to them. I will not stand for a bait-and-switch. Eventually, before I dropped them as a service provider, the rep understood that they would stand by the contract. But throughout the situation I had the opportunity to stop doing business with this provider and start doing business with another provider. And the rep fully knew this.
Now, let's talk about government agencies. What are your alternatives? You HAVE NONE!!! You WILL do business with that specific agency OR YOU WON'T GET your situation taken care of AT ALL. And every one of the government agency employees knows this. Way too many of them, maybe even a majority, display this attitude regularly. Why is ANYONE concerned that DENR has decided they will be good service providers rather than adversaries? What's wrong with government agencies providing good customer service? Does it mean that the regulators are ignoring the rules & regulations just because they have a good attitude while dealing with their customers? Fact check time! DENR ignored the coal ash ponds for decades! Wow! You mean even when the Demon party controlled Raleigh, the regulators were ignoring the rules? That can't be! It's those darn, pesky Republicans and Koch brothers telling lies again. Has to be. There's no other reason that anyone would believe DENR regulators wouldn't do their job. But the truth is DENR did fail to do their job, reasons do not matter, at the same time that they were (apparently) being adversarial with their customers. So this is proof that an adversarial relationship, a holier-than-though attitude, doesn't ADD to the effectiveness of the job. So what's wrong with trying to actually provide good customer service at the same time as ACTUALLY DOING THE JOB one is getting paid to do. Did the coal ash pond problem start when the Republicans thankfully took over the Legislature? Did the coal ash pond problem start when a Republican was thankfully finally elected to the Govs mansion? No? Really? Certainly no one who relies on the lame-stream media would know this!
When I deal with a government agency and they have a rotten, terrible, adversarial attitude toward me, I HAVE NO CHOICE but to deal with them anyway. I am not SUPPOSED to expect good customer relations when I deal with a government agency. When I deal with a government employee who interprets a specific regulation different from the way the regulation is worded, I have very little choice but to accept that regulators interpretation cuz they can make the rest of my business life a living hell. So I MUST conform to the idiotic/wrong interpretation to make my future life with regulators/agencies run more smoothly. Hopefully. And I could ask for a second opinion as to why my interpretation is wrong, but chances are almost 100% that the government employees are going to stick together unless the 1st interpretation is so outrageous. So, I must go along to try to get along. With someone who has an adversarial attitude?
But this is not the attitude we see in response to a suggestion that DENR try to be less adversarial. The response is that there is no way DENR should change their attitude and even try to get along with their customers. They ARE SUPPOSED to be adversarial. Cuz it's worked so well in the past? Cuz they are government employees and that's the way all government employees are supposed to be?
Can anyone who supports maintaining this adversarial relationship please explain? The old attitude didn't foster following the rules, why wouldn't a new attitude help? We've tried doing it the adversarial & ignore the rules way, why not try both good customer relations AND following the rules?
