There is even a more general technique -- do the unexpected, to break the expected social protocol.
In situations like this, if there is an aggressor (say the customer in this case) they expect a certain outcome. They envision how the interaction will go. "I'll be demanding. Employee will get upset, maybe a bit snippy. I'll yell at them and show them who's boss. Maybe even complain to the manager." But in turn they see a smile, complements ("Oh, what a beautiful Porsche you have!") and willingness to help. They are angry inside but it is hard to manifest it without appearing completely crazy.
I've heard of other stuff like this:
* In a dangerous part of town and see a bunch of shady people eye you up -- act crazy, mutter to yourself and maybe flail your arms. Friend liked to do this in a bad part of Chicago.
* Someone wants to pick an argument and is just contrarian no matter what you say. At first argue a bit, then immediately switch sides and argue against your old position (basically on their side). Also to make it fun, be kind of aggressive and angry at your old position just like they were.
* An aggressive panhandler is verbally harassing you asking for money. "No thanks, I'm good. Talk to you on Wednesday". Say it, as matter of fact as possible. Their mind will stop for a bit trying to process that, and it gives you enough time to walk away far enough.
I don't really work in a dangerous part of town. But there's a group of shiftless young men who constantly pop up here and there. I refer to them as the Meth Head Bicycle Club (MHBC) as they tend to bike around and assemble in small groups at the local McDonald's or Rite-Aid (where AFAICT they take turns shoplifting petty items).
The other day I was walking to a nearby restaurant in the area that takes me along a somewhat marginal low-traffic area that borders an older industrial zone. As I'm walking down the road I see a member of what looks like the MHBC biking towards me. As he got closer, I noticed he was audibly muttering random swear words. I didn't feel threatened by it but was obviously on my guard. He biked past without incident and I just concluded he was crazy. But something didn't seem right about that conclusion. Why the bike (which was one of those urban lowrider types and seemed to be in pretty good shape)?
Your first bullet point now makes me wonder if this wasn't actually a quite uncrazy deliberate behavior. That would make more sense.
I wonder what would happen if someone tries to rob you and you put your finger against your inner earlobe, look down at an angle, and say to yourself "he's in position, MOVE MOVE MOVE"
Trying to outwit a panhandler is really stupid. Such a situation isn't hacker news, trying to look smarter than everyone else isn't going to win you any points.
They either will ask for money again, if you're lucky, or if you're not, get angry and then you're in a confrontation with somebody who has a lot less to lose in a fight than you.
I would recommend against anyone doing this. The best thing to do is keep your mouth shut and walk away.
In a "bad" part of town, maybe think of the people there as real people, and don't come across as obviously fearful. This has worked pretty well for me (although there are certainly other factors involved).
I'll probably get flamed for this, but this story reminds me of good ol' Proverbs 25:21,22!
If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat;
if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.
22
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head,
and the Lord will reward you.
I quoted the exact same verse in my response and was similarly concerned how it would be taken in this forum (having been the guy who generally rolled my eyes when people quoted the bible). Regardless of ones opinion of the bible, that verse is one that I started living by 20 years ago. Nothing is 100% reliable, and this bit of wisdom is no exception, but when applied properly the results have continually surprised me.
I wasn't a Christian when it was shared with me (I was somewhat hostile if I'm being honest with myself), but I credit the effectiveness of that one tiny bit of wisdom with my discovery that my view of Christians was unfairly colored by a vocal group of people who's real problem was unrelated to faith/religion, it just became an enabler for them to exert power and gain ego. You see it with every kind of group from Social Justice to Gluten Avoidance. There's always some collection of douche-bags that "become the label" with which everyone else is judged.
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. "Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
I'd rather just give him water & food while otherwise ignoring his attitude, simply because it is a logical way to defuse the situatuon. I see no need for heaping coals on his head or the promise of someone rewarding me.
Regardless of my misinterpretation, I enjoy the passage. :)
No need for flames. Even those of us who don't believe ought to be able to accept wise words and parables.
Along those lines, I'd like to offer a link to Walter Wink's Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way. There's something to glean here, even if you don't believe in Jesus.
"If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also." Why the right cheek? A blow by the right fist in that right-handed world would land on the left cheek of the opponent. An open-handed slap would also strike the left cheek. To hit the right cheek with a fist would require using the left hand, but in that society the left hand was used only for unclean tasks. Even to gesture with the left hand at Qumran carried the penalty of ten days' penance. The only way one could naturally strike the right cheek with the right hand would be with the back of the hand. We are dealing here with insult, not a fistfight. The intention is clearly not to injure but to humiliate, to put someone in his or her place. One normally did not strike a peer thus, and if one did the fine was exorbitant. The Mishnaic tractate Baba Qamma specifies the various fines for striking an equal: for slugging with a fist, 4 zuz (a zuz was a day's wage); for slapping, 200 zuz; but "if [he struck him] with the back of his hand he must pay him 400 zuz." But damages for indignity were not paid to slaves who are struck (8:1-7).
A backhand slap was the usual way of admonishing inferiors. Masters backhanded slaves; husbands, wives; parents, children; men, women; Romans, Jews. We have here a set of unequal relations, in each of which retaliation would be suicidal. The only normal response would be cowering submission.
Part of the confusion surrounding these sayings arises from the failure to ask who Jesus' audience was. In all three of the examples in Matt. 5:39b-41, Jesus' listeners are not those who strike, initiate lawsuits, or impose forced labor, but their victims ("If anyone strikes you...wants to sue you...forces you to go one mile..."). There are among his hearers people who were subjected to these very indignities, forced to stifle outrage at their dehumanizing treatment by the hierarchical system of caste and class, race and gender, age and status, and as a result of imperial occupation.
Why then does he counsel these already humiliated people to turn the other cheek? Because this action robs the oppressor of the power to humiliate. The person who turns the other cheek is saying, in effect, "Try again. Your first blow failed to achieve its intended effect. I deny you the power to humiliate me. I am a human being just like you. Your status does not alter that fact. You cannot demean me."
Such a response would create enormous difficulties for the striker. Purely logistically, how would he hit the other cheek now turned to him? He cannot backhand it with his right hand (one only need try this to see the problem). If he hits with a fist, he makes the other his equal, acknowledging him as a peer. But the point of the back of the hand is to reinforce institutionalized inequality. Even if the superior orders the person flogged for such "cheeky" behavior (this is certainly no way to avoid conflict!), the point has been irrevocably made. He has been given notice that this underling is in fact a human being. In that world of honor and shaming, he has been rendered impotent to instill shame in a subordinate. He has been stripped of his power to dehumanize the other. As Gandhi taught, "The first principle of nonviolent action is that of noncooperation with everything humiliating."
Have used this approach years ago when I worked retail and it works really well (as an aside working retail for at least a year will give you a sound grasp of customer service and introduce you to the 10/80/10 split, 10% are lovely to deal with, 80% are somewhere in between but fine and 10% are jerks).
I also learnt not to take it personally, some times people are having a really bad day for reasons you can't see and a little bit of empathy goes a long way.
I think this is a big one. When I am upset and calling Comcast (as an example that I think most people can relate to) it's always a frustrating customer experience. When I catch myself getting angry, I always try to tell the tech I'm talking to: "Listen, I'm sorry I'm snappy. It's obviously not you, it's your company's process that is making me angry" and try to make sure they understand that. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but as a customer, I try really hard to make that difference clear.
Yes, I do believe everyone growing up should work in retail for at least a year. It's a valuable experience (my experience was working for a year in a Toys R Us).
Worked retail to pay for my BsCpe. I would definitely suggest working retail to anyone who has the opportunity. You'll never whine about another job again.
There's a beautiful illustration of this principle from the NFL, of all places. When quarterback Andrew Luck gets sacked, he enthusiastically compliments his tackler for a great play. It completely messes up the opponent's psyche, at least according to this darkly funny Wall Street Journal story:
This is unfortunately rewarding poor behavior with extra attention- it's teaching people that they get better service when they are rude.
In a face-to-face position, this might be a good coping strategy where the confrontation is temporary and unavoidable.
On the web, it's best not to engage with rude users at all, since they will continue coming back and learn to expect attention from negative behavior. Try to only engage with polite and positive users.
Honestly, when somebody who isn't a subordinate, friend, or direct charge acts like a jerk, I don't think it's worth taking this kind of pedagogical role with regard to etiquette (probably not a good idea in the friends case a lot of time as well). If somebody wants to be a jerk, there are enough providers of goods and services that they'll find one that responds favorably to that. Not to mention that they'll probably rationalize turning them away as the provider being a jerk rather than learning something from it. As DarkTree points out, the provider's response to that behavior is more about managing the provider's quality of life than about shaping customers for the greater good.
Indeed, there should be a dichotomy between real life and the web when using this strategy, but again, I think this strategy is more about increasing your own happiness then it is to diminish theirs.
The principle I think you're hinting at here is one of reinforcing good behaviour and extinguishing bad behaviour, à la Skinner. However, this can only be done over time, with repeated interactions.
The mechanism described in the article doesn't seek to alter the behaviour of the customers, each of whom may never be seen again. Rather, it is a defence mechanism for the employee.
Sometimes it's not possible to just avoid people, even on the web - I worked online customer support for a while and we had to respond to every request. This tactic works well for those types of situations.
David Burns (in the book "Feeling Good") wrote about the "disarming technique" which is "find some truth in what the other person is saying, even if it seems totally unreasonable or unfair".
I worked at a fast food place back in high school, I often used this approach to a pretty effective degree. The only issue that can arise is when your increasing friendliness causes the person you're dealing with to get irrationally angry and do something rash, such as throw a cup of coffee at you.
It was pretty painful, but the laughter the situation induced was a nice distraction.
I'd imagine that increasing friendliness in such a situation could easily be interpreted as mocking or patronizing (no matter how sincere you are) and in that case the hostile reaction isn't to the friendliness it's to the mis-perception of it.
I will work customer support at a company sometimes just for fun. I work in completely unrelated field but I love the psychology of customer support, to me its a video game with very well created bots.
Over 1000+ online chats I have never been given a negative review and any customer can leave one through the live chat feedback. I have never had anyone complain about my service on phone either.
A couple things I find key, do not let anyone's words bother you, ever! You are immune to damage from words.
To me its like, do I get mad at a video game because the level is hard ? or do I enjoy it because its a challenge. That is probably the hardest part for most people. To me they are "crabby bots" that you want to defuse and brighten their day.
I never let someone's mood effect me, I consider that giving someone control over my emotions. They are forcing you to act a certain way by their actions and that to me is losing control, Which I find to be a weakness for many reasons. Once you are immune to them having any effect on your emotions you cannot be dragged down or taken off point, so you operate from a position of power.
Then, Empathy, Empathy, Empathy, and personalize your response almost as if you are friends. They are mad because their package is late ? "I am so sorry for that, I cannot stand when my packages are late."
They hate that their package is late ? well you realllly hate it when packages are late. They could not reach tech support, called and couldn't reach anyone so they are mad ? "I really have to apologize for that, it is unacceptable, I completely understand why you feel that way".
You adopt their sentiment that they are expressing and relate to it. It lets them know you are in their corner. They bash your companies customer service ? you reply with "I cannot stand poor customer service, so I will make sure we get this right because I know how frustrating it can be.
It's a game! You take no damage and get to play with someone's mind!! how fun is that!
Another subtle thing, Is don't just use copy paste responses that make you sound like a bot. I actually leave some typos and grammar errors in when I do customer support, and use smiles and lol sometimes (makes you human). Remember its your friend who you are talking to and they are trying to give you money, Help them do it.
I don't think the defence is really the happiness, it's the appearance of immunity to their behaviour. Which only helps if they're not actually in a position to puncture your defensive bubble. Are you supposed to keep acting happy when the jerk starts being physically violent or stealing your stuff?
Edit: Please imagine me smiling broadly despite the downvotes.
I have some technology related courses out and I sometimes get people who ask questions in extremely passive-aggressive ways or just have a terrible attitude.
I just bombard them with optimism and treat them in the best way I can. Most of the time they will do a full 180 and become very reasonable, sometimes even apologize.
Email is an interesting medium as it is one where if the recipient is in an emotional state then it is completely ineffective. No matter what you write you end up reinforcing the recipients emotional state. There does not seem to be anyway to get a person to calm down and assess the situation rationally via email. I feel the best way to handle a jerk by email is get on the phone and call them if you can.
This approach only works if the other person realizes they're being rude/obnoxious. If they're not self-aware enough to know that, they're just going to interpret your friendliness as a sign that you enjoy being around them...
This can be a good thing too. I worked at a gas station for a few years, and I had a share of regulars who seemed to have no regard for me as a person by the way they interacted with me. Some things that I would encounter from them included ignoring formalities, getting impatient over mild inconveniences, and generally acting haughty in conversation. I wasn't really in a position to act offended, so I would just follow my routine of acting friendly and saying hello and good-bye to them.
Almost every time, after enough repeated interactions like this, it's as though these regulars forgot that they didn't like me. They would see me and light up, or they would eventually thaw out and start putting more consideration into the way they interacted with me.
Whatever their inclinations for acting unpleasant may have been, I rarely, if ever, had anyone not come around and act more personable after enough friendly encounters with me.
I would have gone insane years ago if I didn't pick this up. If you remain happy & friendly while being able to explain the reason for any question you ask, no reasonable person can bring you down.
"A soft answer turneth away wrath." - not sure who said it, but I agree.
On the other side of the fence, I find that a sympathetic word to a cranky/grumpy cashier or salesperson can really help cheer them up. For example, "Wow, looks like you're having a super-busy day. How's it going?"
I try to do this every time they look harried. Because you know they're angry that the manager hasn't opened up more lines, or worried the people waiting are mad, or some sort of anxiety. So being friendly and acknowledging their predicament costs you nothing, but can make their day a bit easier.
Now a days I could see that being a nice service while I used my phone but what did people do while their car was being filled up back then? I'd rather be doing something rather than sitting in my car doing nothing...
I have a pet theory that people had longer attention spans back then and didn't need constant entertainment to distract them from the present moment. Also they listened to the radio and enjoyed not being out in the cold.
get out and chat with the attendant usually, at least that's what I used to do when I was living in Europe in a country where self-service was available only after hours.
It's not very common to do long trips requiring refueling at the end, so most of the time you go to the same gas station for years and as time goes on you end up making friends with the people there, also considering often gas stations are a lot smaller than here and either just have the owner pumping or max 1-2 rotating additional people.
If it's an unfamiliar gas station it really depends, in some cases the attendant will just put the pump in your car and click it so it keeps pumping and go to a different car to get paid in which case you stay inside, but if it's a slow time pre-cellphone days you just got out and chatted for the few minutes it took to refuel
[+] [-] rdtsc|10 years ago|reply
In situations like this, if there is an aggressor (say the customer in this case) they expect a certain outcome. They envision how the interaction will go. "I'll be demanding. Employee will get upset, maybe a bit snippy. I'll yell at them and show them who's boss. Maybe even complain to the manager." But in turn they see a smile, complements ("Oh, what a beautiful Porsche you have!") and willingness to help. They are angry inside but it is hard to manifest it without appearing completely crazy.
I've heard of other stuff like this:
* In a dangerous part of town and see a bunch of shady people eye you up -- act crazy, mutter to yourself and maybe flail your arms. Friend liked to do this in a bad part of Chicago.
* Someone wants to pick an argument and is just contrarian no matter what you say. At first argue a bit, then immediately switch sides and argue against your old position (basically on their side). Also to make it fun, be kind of aggressive and angry at your old position just like they were.
* An aggressive panhandler is verbally harassing you asking for money. "No thanks, I'm good. Talk to you on Wednesday". Say it, as matter of fact as possible. Their mind will stop for a bit trying to process that, and it gives you enough time to walk away far enough.
[+] [-] klenwell|10 years ago|reply
I don't really work in a dangerous part of town. But there's a group of shiftless young men who constantly pop up here and there. I refer to them as the Meth Head Bicycle Club (MHBC) as they tend to bike around and assemble in small groups at the local McDonald's or Rite-Aid (where AFAICT they take turns shoplifting petty items).
The other day I was walking to a nearby restaurant in the area that takes me along a somewhat marginal low-traffic area that borders an older industrial zone. As I'm walking down the road I see a member of what looks like the MHBC biking towards me. As he got closer, I noticed he was audibly muttering random swear words. I didn't feel threatened by it but was obviously on my guard. He biked past without incident and I just concluded he was crazy. But something didn't seem right about that conclusion. Why the bike (which was one of those urban lowrider types and seemed to be in pretty good shape)?
Your first bullet point now makes me wonder if this wasn't actually a quite uncrazy deliberate behavior. That would make more sense.
[+] [-] sdegutis|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] reddytowns|10 years ago|reply
They either will ask for money again, if you're lucky, or if you're not, get angry and then you're in a confrontation with somebody who has a lot less to lose in a fight than you.
I would recommend against anyone doing this. The best thing to do is keep your mouth shut and walk away.
[+] [-] cname|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pawn|10 years ago|reply
If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. 22 In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head, and the Lord will reward you.
[+] [-] mdip|10 years ago|reply
I wasn't a Christian when it was shared with me (I was somewhat hostile if I'm being honest with myself), but I credit the effectiveness of that one tiny bit of wisdom with my discovery that my view of Christians was unfairly colored by a vocal group of people who's real problem was unrelated to faith/religion, it just became an enabler for them to exert power and gain ego. You see it with every kind of group from Social Justice to Gluten Avoidance. There's always some collection of douche-bags that "become the label" with which everyone else is judged.
[+] [-] JustSomeNobody|10 years ago|reply
Matthew 5:10-12
"Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. "Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
[+] [-] bcook|10 years ago|reply
Regardless of my misinterpretation, I enjoy the passage. :)
[+] [-] CWuestefeld|10 years ago|reply
Along those lines, I'd like to offer a link to Walter Wink's Beyond Just War and Pacifism: Jesus' Nonviolent Way. There's something to glean here, even if you don't believe in Jesus.
Quoting from http://www.cres.org/star/_wink.htm (where there's a good bit more on this theme)
Turn the Other Cheek
"If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also." Why the right cheek? A blow by the right fist in that right-handed world would land on the left cheek of the opponent. An open-handed slap would also strike the left cheek. To hit the right cheek with a fist would require using the left hand, but in that society the left hand was used only for unclean tasks. Even to gesture with the left hand at Qumran carried the penalty of ten days' penance. The only way one could naturally strike the right cheek with the right hand would be with the back of the hand. We are dealing here with insult, not a fistfight. The intention is clearly not to injure but to humiliate, to put someone in his or her place. One normally did not strike a peer thus, and if one did the fine was exorbitant. The Mishnaic tractate Baba Qamma specifies the various fines for striking an equal: for slugging with a fist, 4 zuz (a zuz was a day's wage); for slapping, 200 zuz; but "if [he struck him] with the back of his hand he must pay him 400 zuz." But damages for indignity were not paid to slaves who are struck (8:1-7).
A backhand slap was the usual way of admonishing inferiors. Masters backhanded slaves; husbands, wives; parents, children; men, women; Romans, Jews. We have here a set of unequal relations, in each of which retaliation would be suicidal. The only normal response would be cowering submission.
Part of the confusion surrounding these sayings arises from the failure to ask who Jesus' audience was. In all three of the examples in Matt. 5:39b-41, Jesus' listeners are not those who strike, initiate lawsuits, or impose forced labor, but their victims ("If anyone strikes you...wants to sue you...forces you to go one mile..."). There are among his hearers people who were subjected to these very indignities, forced to stifle outrage at their dehumanizing treatment by the hierarchical system of caste and class, race and gender, age and status, and as a result of imperial occupation.
Why then does he counsel these already humiliated people to turn the other cheek? Because this action robs the oppressor of the power to humiliate. The person who turns the other cheek is saying, in effect, "Try again. Your first blow failed to achieve its intended effect. I deny you the power to humiliate me. I am a human being just like you. Your status does not alter that fact. You cannot demean me."
Such a response would create enormous difficulties for the striker. Purely logistically, how would he hit the other cheek now turned to him? He cannot backhand it with his right hand (one only need try this to see the problem). If he hits with a fist, he makes the other his equal, acknowledging him as a peer. But the point of the back of the hand is to reinforce institutionalized inequality. Even if the superior orders the person flogged for such "cheeky" behavior (this is certainly no way to avoid conflict!), the point has been irrevocably made. He has been given notice that this underling is in fact a human being. In that world of honor and shaming, he has been rendered impotent to instill shame in a subordinate. He has been stripped of his power to dehumanize the other. As Gandhi taught, "The first principle of nonviolent action is that of noncooperation with everything humiliating."
EDIT: formatting
[+] [-] jqm|10 years ago|reply
wff? if that's the endgame is I'm not giving anyone water ever again.
[+] [-] seivan|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] noir_lord|10 years ago|reply
I also learnt not to take it personally, some times people are having a really bad day for reasons you can't see and a little bit of empathy goes a long way.
[+] [-] CaptSpify|10 years ago|reply
I think this is a big one. When I am upset and calling Comcast (as an example that I think most people can relate to) it's always a frustrating customer experience. When I catch myself getting angry, I always try to tell the tech I'm talking to: "Listen, I'm sorry I'm snappy. It's obviously not you, it's your company's process that is making me angry" and try to make sure they understand that. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but as a customer, I try really hard to make that difference clear.
[+] [-] Magi604|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JustSomeNobody|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jsprogrammer|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LordKano|10 years ago|reply
Instead of trying to act happy or friendly, I remain as level as possible. Think "Mr. Spock with a smile".
I have found that even "huff and puff" types calm down after a minute or so of this.
[+] [-] seattle_spring|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] GCA10|10 years ago|reply
http://www.wsj.com/articles/andrew-luck-the-nfls-most-perple...
[+] [-] bobsgame|10 years ago|reply
In a face-to-face position, this might be a good coping strategy where the confrontation is temporary and unavoidable.
On the web, it's best not to engage with rude users at all, since they will continue coming back and learn to expect attention from negative behavior. Try to only engage with polite and positive users.
[+] [-] eseehausen|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DarkTree|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] edoloughlin|10 years ago|reply
The mechanism described in the article doesn't seek to alter the behaviour of the customers, each of whom may never be seen again. Rather, it is a defence mechanism for the employee.
[+] [-] ryukafalz|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] drivers99|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] LulzSect|10 years ago|reply
Shady character asking you for time, cigarette, etc.
"Nah bruh, shit I need one too, you got one? My bad fam."
This has gotten me out of questionable situations during the wrong hours out in Brooklyn/Manhattan inner city areas.
[+] [-] maket|10 years ago|reply
It was pretty painful, but the laughter the situation induced was a nice distraction.
[+] [-] markc|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Mendenhall|10 years ago|reply
Over 1000+ online chats I have never been given a negative review and any customer can leave one through the live chat feedback. I have never had anyone complain about my service on phone either.
A couple things I find key, do not let anyone's words bother you, ever! You are immune to damage from words.
To me its like, do I get mad at a video game because the level is hard ? or do I enjoy it because its a challenge. That is probably the hardest part for most people. To me they are "crabby bots" that you want to defuse and brighten their day.
I never let someone's mood effect me, I consider that giving someone control over my emotions. They are forcing you to act a certain way by their actions and that to me is losing control, Which I find to be a weakness for many reasons. Once you are immune to them having any effect on your emotions you cannot be dragged down or taken off point, so you operate from a position of power.
Then, Empathy, Empathy, Empathy, and personalize your response almost as if you are friends. They are mad because their package is late ? "I am so sorry for that, I cannot stand when my packages are late."
They hate that their package is late ? well you realllly hate it when packages are late. They could not reach tech support, called and couldn't reach anyone so they are mad ? "I really have to apologize for that, it is unacceptable, I completely understand why you feel that way".
You adopt their sentiment that they are expressing and relate to it. It lets them know you are in their corner. They bash your companies customer service ? you reply with "I cannot stand poor customer service, so I will make sure we get this right because I know how frustrating it can be.
It's a game! You take no damage and get to play with someone's mind!! how fun is that!
Another subtle thing, Is don't just use copy paste responses that make you sound like a bot. I actually leave some typos and grammar errors in when I do customer support, and use smiles and lol sometimes (makes you human). Remember its your friend who you are talking to and they are trying to give you money, Help them do it.
[+] [-] Joeboy|10 years ago|reply
Edit: Please imagine me smiling broadly despite the downvotes.
[+] [-] fastball|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nickjj|10 years ago|reply
I have some technology related courses out and I sometimes get people who ask questions in extremely passive-aggressive ways or just have a terrible attitude.
I just bombard them with optimism and treat them in the best way I can. Most of the time they will do a full 180 and become very reasonable, sometimes even apologize.
[+] [-] smarks|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danieltillett|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TranquilMarmot|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] feocco|10 years ago|reply
Just change/add some little quirks to make it seem like you're happy. Example, instead of Regards, - Say Thanks!
[+] [-] eseehausen|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] forrestbrazeal|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alewi481|10 years ago|reply
Almost every time, after enough repeated interactions like this, it's as though these regulars forgot that they didn't like me. They would see me and light up, or they would eventually thaw out and start putting more consideration into the way they interacted with me.
Whatever their inclinations for acting unpleasant may have been, I rarely, if ever, had anyone not come around and act more personable after enough friendly encounters with me.
[+] [-] feocco|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theseatoms|10 years ago|reply
As noir_lord mentions, just don't take it personally.
[+] [-] FiddlerClamp|10 years ago|reply
On the other side of the fence, I find that a sympathetic word to a cranky/grumpy cashier or salesperson can really help cheer them up. For example, "Wow, looks like you're having a super-busy day. How's it going?"
[+] [-] merpnderp|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mhurron|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mcguire|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kazinator|10 years ago|reply
You wouldn't last long in Japan if you sighed at customer requests. Hai, sumimasen, and wipe it again.
A jerk is what that customer is being today; it's not necessarily what he is.
[+] [-] joshstrange|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rthomas6|10 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tetraodonpuffer|10 years ago|reply
It's not very common to do long trips requiring refueling at the end, so most of the time you go to the same gas station for years and as time goes on you end up making friends with the people there, also considering often gas stations are a lot smaller than here and either just have the owner pumping or max 1-2 rotating additional people.
If it's an unfamiliar gas station it really depends, in some cases the attendant will just put the pump in your car and click it so it keeps pumping and go to a different car to get paid in which case you stay inside, but if it's a slow time pre-cellphone days you just got out and chatted for the few minutes it took to refuel