while this whole thread sort of feels like that, I don't think this was Meg's intention.
You're right, Mike. This was not my intention. I had no way of knowing where this thread would lead. I certainly didn't have any inclination it would turn in to a pre-vac debate.
So what was Meg's real intent here in this thread? I think she's using our comments to leverage John into slowing down a bit and providing more value. I am willing to bet she hears complaints of how fast the crews went for the amount of money spent quite frequently.
Since I had no idea what the comments were going to be, there was no intent along these lines. I have found when I've posted this type of scenario in the past it has lead to great conversation and insight. This thread is proving just that. It' up to 8 pages.
The original post had nothing to do with John or that he did anything wrong in the field that would have caused this. I was not looking for anyone to take sides or trying to prove anyone, especially John, wrong. If anything, it's my responsibility since I'm the one that booked the appointment knowing the client wasn't going to be there for John to do his detailed walk through and have the client sign off on it. And my responsibility for telling him he could mail us a check instead of insisting on payment in full. This experience has helped us tweak our procedures and taught us a valuable lesson. We also understand there will be times when a homeowner can't be there. So no we get to plan for how to deal with that to minimize these types of things. We can either pass on the job, extend our hours to be there in evenings or weekends, or have a new procedure in place for confirmation so the client responds in writing and it's not a verbal authorization. We talked about it and said in this instance we will now require the tech to send a text to the client with the total and any pertinent information and we don't start the work until we receive a text back with the go ahead. This way we avoid, the "he did tell me, but I was busy or not feeling well and it just didn't register so I said yes but I shouldn't have".
As I titled the post...."It's been a while"...., so no, I don't hear quite frequently how fast the crews are and I'm wanting or needing John to slow down. If we heard this once a week, then absolutely. And I know John would take that into consideration and make changes. I don't need other people to get leverage for him to make changes if that is the kind of feedback we are getting from clients more than once or twice a year.
It must be embarrassing for her to admit that her crews do not prevacuum when she's hob-nobbing at these weekly
SFS and
Jon Don events that she goes to, what seems like each month.
I'm not embarrassed to admit this. I have admitted it multiple times here and in classes. I will tell anyone. There is nothing to be embarrassed about. I think it should be part of our process, but I'm not the one on the truck living it each day. John has his reasons for not pre-vacing. While we don't do this, there are still so many other things that we DO do that create positive moments of truth for our customers. We do exceed their expectations. We do a lot of other extras that "the other guy never did". So we have repeat and referral customers that are willing to pay our prices and feel they are getting a great value. They don't know what they don't know. And what we do give them, even if it doesn't include vac does set us apart from others and creates the feeling of us being 'premium'. And that is a subjective interpretation. You're idea of premium and mine could be very different.
I had a friend that I took on a GNO and we stayed in a hotel in the city. It was an Embassy Suites or Double Tree. Not a fancy or what I consider a premium hotel by any means. She could not stop talking about the hotel and how nice it was. But, this is a person that typically stays in a Motel 8 or Red Roof Inn. To her, it was a premium hotel. I can only imagine what she would her reaction would be if she ended up in a hotel like the Waldorf Astoria or the Ritz-Carlton.
The point is, while we may not do all the "premium" things others would, it is our reputation and that is how we are viewed in our community. And I'm not embarrassed about that in any way.
If she came on here with this to get the husband's attention while bringing embarrassment to them...then it's just messed up and they have something else to figure out.
See my response above, Zee. Not at all why I initiated this post.
Mike is right. I do have a plan on how to handle this situation and I did have intent when I posted, just not the intent Mike thinks. I find value in sharing these things with others, starting conversations, seeing differing viewpoints. If it can prevent someone else from having this experience because they put a system in place to eliminate it before it happens because of my post, then I'm thrilled. It's invigorating to have a thread that so many people chime in on....especially ones that don't normally post. It think it's a great thing for the board. I hope Mike and others appreciate it and what it brings to this community. So, yes there are some motives behind my post. But not to get John's attention, bring embarrassment to him or us or leverage him in to doing things they way I think they should be done.
Maybe he will take Mike's advice and try the pre-vac. I'd be thrilled if he did. What a great, unintentional/unforeseen benefit from this thread. Maybe he'll keep on doing it the way he'd doing it. So be it if that's the case.