Maybe they think they are being helpful, but companies who only supply a webform to send feedback really wind me up. What is wrong with providing an address to send proper e-mails to?
I tried to report a damaged cabinet to our local cable firm and thought an email would be the most efficient way, but you have to go to a web page, fill in loads of boxes and then can only include a text-based message.
As confirmation I had an automated reply, which cannot be replied to, followed up by a proper email from a real person asking questions which could also not be replied to. The only way to reply was to go back to the web page and fill in the boxes again, but I wanted to attach a photo of the damaged box instead of having to describe it in words. Not possible.
I eventually managed by uploading the photo to a web server and including the URL in the text message. It might sounds like a lot of trouble, but I'm sure its better than having to endure a call centre's on-hold music.
Paypal are the same, but with the added attraction that the web form expires so that if you type anything too long it cannot be sent. To send a message of more than a few lines, youwill need to write it elsewhere and then paste it in.
Isn't technology supposed to make life easier?
I’m 90% with you on this (especially in the example you’ve given). But today I was glad for a webform. I was receiving no email – my email wasn’t working. Luckily the company I needed to contact had a web-form for mailing them, otherwise I’d have been stuck (and the answer popped into my account page I have with them).
Don’t get me started on this one. Some companies make you search for hours before you can even find their contact details. Apple Mac is a fine example. Some insist that you will find an answer to your query in their FAQ, provided you keep looking. Apple, again a good example.
The BBC lets you preview a message before telling you it’s too long. No word count or anything of course. You either have to split your message in two, or edit in MS Word and keep checking the word count.
Lots of them provide comments boxes that only let you see a portion of what you’ve written. Many don’t let you preview, and edit your message before submitting it.
Then we have those which quite deliberately provide no method of contact other than telephone. Natwest, for example. So they let you bank on line, using passwords etc., but not write to them? Archaic.
I’m an offender! There are some + points, though mainly for small operations: you can focus the mind of the user so that the amount of text can be reduced (given that free text is often hard to decipher); having the same subject line helps organisation; OS/browser info can be generated automatically; there’s also a reduced chance of attacks from bots, and abuse from irritants.
Obviously those things aren’t appropriate when you offer professional support, but then the only time I’ve had success with email support recently is, say, with hosting companies where I’m one customer out of 10. Would go straight to the phone for a bank, and straight to blood sacrifice for BT.
Like any other communication facility, a webform in itself is not bad – its how its used.
The trick is to balance the plus points you mention (which are all to the benefit of the supplier) with a few plus points for the customer or user. Or at the very least, not introduce minus points.
For example, with Telewest you have to put in a customer account number, which prevents a passing member of the public using the Internet to report something like a damaged manhole – which could put equipment at risk or lead to injury and lawsuits.
Having put in a customer number you then have to fill in e-mail, address and phone number. Why? As a customer, they will have my address for their bills and as a telephone company they will have the phone number.