As I mentioned, I recently put Primus to the test in moving to their TalkBroadband product and (finally) away from my ILEC. I gleaned a number of things from the early exchanges before signing on for the service, which I’m very happy with. Yes, I’m probably a difficult customer in that I looked to test them early and have drawn some significant conclusions from a minor exchange… but I think the inferences I draw are supportable. So what’s the fly in the Primus ointment? They could stand to learn the power of community, and put some employee effort towad it.
I indicated in my earlier post about my switch to Primus that one of the support technicians had provided a link to some non-official documentation. The documents were apparently created by a TalkBroadband forum moderator, and I recommend that the link in question be promptly bookmarked and not lost by anyone who uses or is interested in this product from Primus. Three observations, which I’ll phrase as questions:
- Why is the link at DSL Reports and not on the Primus website?
- Why was it composed by someone outside the company?
- Why is it more comprehensive than what Primus themselves provide?
Let’s take these in turn.
Firstly, while the forums are part of the TalkBroadband portal site to which any customer has access, there is evidently no place to compile a Forum-FAQ that is organized any differently than a message-board thread. There is only the corporate website, which I suspect has an entirely different process to get something published on. It may be best not to speculate why the document has to live elsewhere, but Primus should be hosting this themselves even if that’s all they do. The information would then become more readily available to the people who want it, as it could be made accessible from within the portal.
Secondly, you can always tell when documentation — say, a FAQ — is compiled by someone who knows, uses, and loves the product… and especially someone who knows it really well and has encountered many items to troubleshoot over time. You can also tell when the “FAQ” is compiled by the marketing department. The latter is worthless to actual users, while the former is invaluable. The only thing that the marketing department really cares about are the questions that it hopes a prospective customer will ask… take a look at the Primus TalkbroadBand FAQ and see what you think. It’s my contention that the marketing use of a FAQ exhibits nothing more or less than a failure on the part of the marketing department to get the information into an easily accessible format in proper context elsewhere, but that’s another rant entirely. In this case, the unofficial FAQ that a very helpful support person directed me to is technical and is based on questions that are actually asked concerning situations that actually arise and provides answers that actually help. The reason is simple: goal of the FAQ is to help, not to sell.
Thirdly, it is frankly unclear why the third-party FAQ would be more comprehensive than what Primus provides, except perhaps to observe that it was compiled outside of company time by someone not paid to do it. The support person who pointed it out was, as I said, very helpful and even went the extra step of emailing me after the question had already been suitably answered to provide a bit more information that was relevant. This particular support technical evidently cared enough to try to help when something outside the norm was requested, and I suspect perhaps he’s connected to the forum community in some fashion.
What I will suggest to Primus, should the board of directors suddenly call me out of the blue to ask, is that they should put more value in the community, and direct someone in their employ (a technical person, ideally) to spend some time in there not monitoring, moderating, or filtering, but simply participating. Whatever the community needs, help them find it or get it. Take the compiled information they have and host it for them. Index it, make it searchable, and incorporate it into the site, as written. Heck, make it a wiki. All this I say without even knowing how much of a community their forums are… all I know is that there is at least one person (and probably more) in there that care enough about the product to spend a lot of effort helping others sort out how to get the best use of it.
Well, “call from the board of directors” is a little bit pushing it… What about the product manager?
Actually both our Tech Support people and myself are frequenting the TBB internal forums answering the customers questions.
As far as the collaborative FAQ are concerned, we really love what our customers have done. DSL Report-based FAQ has been created by the few of them with the contribution from other members of the TalkBroadband community (many thanks to all of them!!!). At that point, being the first to introduce this service in Canada, we have not had much of the FAQ ourselves — vendor’s documentation does not always addresses real life questions and situations. This FAQ has evolved so well, so there is not much that we can do better ourselves. We like the collaborative and third-party nature of this FAQ that is just answering frequent questions, without trying to sell something (leaving selling to Primus). On another hand, exactly because of the same nature (even wikipedia has sometimes wrong info), we cannot host this FAQ ourselves because of the liability issues.
Will be happy to chat…
Dmytro,
The BOD comment was tongue-in-cheek of course, but a comment from the product manager — that’s a class act. I haven’t spent much time in the forums (not yet, anyway), but the third-party FAQ tells me what kind of users you have… which reflects well on the company.
I had put the FAQ-hosting down to a decision from the legal department, so I’m not surprised… but I think sometimes accountants and lawyers need to be told to make a decision work rather than let them change it. Let them write the disclaimer, their version of something like “This information is contributed by users and not verified for accuracy — if you find something that needs updating, post a message in the forum, where be sure to find further assistance.” I think what I’m seeing is a case of something that speaks really well of the brand, but fear from the legal team is holding it back. Determine what you want brand to become and make them back it up instead of letting them shape it, which would be a counter-Cluetrain approach.
Of course, I could be wrong. ;^)
As for the “official” FAQ, take a look at it again — it reminds me of a pet peeve I’ve had for some time… offering information that either is elsewhere on the site or should be. It’s a marketing FAQ designed to sell, and as such the information should be in the pitch instead. A carefully crafted pitch shouldn’t leave the prospect with 25 “frequently” unanswered questions. IMHO, a FAQ should exist for technical support. If marketing questions frequently arise, most of that information should be crafted into the pitch or linked from it as a “more info” opportunity. The absolute worst reason for a website to have a FAQ section is the one that I see countless designers and developers fall back on “Because websites have FAQs.” I’m in danger of starting a rant on that, so I’ll stop there ;^)
Thanks for dropping by to comment, Dmytro. It’s only been a week so far, but I’m a happy customer… next I’ll see about switching over the LD on my cell phones. While I’ve got you though, maybe I could put in a plug for a cross-platform soft-phone that would work on my Linux laptop when I travel? Get one of the Open Source ones running, and just write a plug-in or patch for it if you really need some proprietary bits in there (the reason I was given for not being able to supply my own gateway or soft phone). Most of the grunt work is already done for you…