Should in-store associates help online browsers?
Source: saksfifthavenue.com

Should in-store associates help online browsers?

What’s the best way to deliver the same level of in-store service to online customers? Saks has turned to in-store associates.

Saks has placed a box in the lower-left corner its home page that encourages online browsers to “Start A Conversation” and “Connect With A Sales Associate.” Clicking through enables shoppers to search for nearby associates who are identified by first-name. The shopper can also browse through headshots and partial last names (i.e, “Hillary H.”) to find an associate they may know.

Clicking “about me” reveals the associate’s specialties (i.e: Handbags, Men, Shoes, etc.) with some highlighting of their retail experience and talents.

Once a customer makes a choice, they have a number of ways to reach an associate. They can use “live chat” if the associate is available at that time or request an appointment via online chat, phone call or in-store visit at a future time.

Customers can start the assistance process online by providing details on what they’re looking for and their budget. The associate may send back a customized “lookbook” collection or share a product page from Saks’s e-commerce site along with their personalized notes using e-mail or social media tools built into a mobile app. Shoppers can also e-mail the associate with any question.

Rolled out earlier this year after a long test, the tool was recently profiled by The Wall Street Journal.

Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus are among other retailers that have ways for in-store associates to connect with online shoppers but it appears no other retailer offers the access Saks does.

Saks limits its online access, however. Saks associates appear to be rarely available for live chat and are told to assist any in-store customers first. Joe Milano, SVP of Saks.com, told the Journal, “Priority is always to the customer in front of you.”

BrainTrust

"Sounds great but unless they add staffing, something has to give either in-store or online."

Ken Lonyai

Consultant, Strategist, Tech Innovator, UX Evangelist


"If a retailer already trains and teaches its sales associates best practices, this is simply an evolution of the process. "

Carlos Arambula

VP of Marketing, FluidLogic


"Leveraging in-store associates to assist online shoppers is an atypical practice today."

Ken Morris

Managing Partner Cambridge Retail Advisors


Discussion Questions

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: How common will it become among customer service oriented retailers for in-store associates to assist online shoppers? How might the practice affect in-store service levels?

Poll

25 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jasmine Glasheen
Member
7 years ago

Talk about creating a seamless omnichannel experience. As long as the in-store customer comes first, I see the “Start a Conversation” feature bringing online customers into stores.

One of the deterrents to brick-and-mortar shopping is the difficulty in navigating stores and finding an associate (department stores are increasingly under-staffed). This program enables the customer to plot their course prior to their arrival.

Sterling Hawkins
Reply to  Jasmine Glasheen
7 years ago

It’s all in the execution of a program like this and it looks like Saks has the right building blocks. Bringing the names and faces of customer service people into the online environment that match those in-store is poised to build stronger shopper connections with the brand resulting in better experiences across the board. The emphasis is now even more on store personnel to be personable, properly trained and engaged. Technology is just the enabler.

Max Goldberg
7 years ago

On paper the effort sounds interesting, but in practice it will be difficult to achieve success. Online shoppers don’t want to wait when they have questions. The thought of offering chat but not having someone available to chat at that moment is counterproductive. I see this an interesting gimmick that will irritate far more consumers than it will satisfy.

Tom Dougherty
Tom Dougherty
Member
7 years ago

This is a no-brainer. As in-store online shopping and browsing grows, having in-store personnel available to help shoppers is simply good customer service.

Retail had better stop seeing the experiences as different the more it moves into this century. It’s not HOW they shop. The question of the day is, DO THEY SHOP?

Chris Petersen, PhD.
Member
7 years ago

Joe Milano, SVP of Saks.com has it right when he states: “Priority is always to the customer in front of you.”

Using store staff to engage in live chat seems to be aligned with the concept of “seamless” service, but there are major challenges with implementation! When does a store have enough surplus staff to enable some to engage in chat? Most probably at times when customers are least likely to shop. The article specifically states that: “Saks limits its online access … Saks associates appear to be rarely available for live chat.” So how likely is the customer to try live chat if associates are rarely available?

Live chat can be very powerful as an engagement tool on websites. But it takes a different level of talent to serve multiple customers at a time in chat sessions. Store staff were recruited, trained and paid for different levels of face-to-face engagement. Let them do what they do best … and staff separately for live chat if that is needed.

Ben Ball
Member
Reply to  Chris Petersen, PhD.
7 years ago

I generally agree with Chris. But my first thought was that this would be a way to regain the personal experience of “my guy/gal” at stores with high touch products like clothing or sporting gear. I think I would be much more likely to stay engaged with a single retailer if my in-store and online experiences could be linked through a single trusted representative.

We stayed with Verizon for years longer than financially justified simply because “Jeff” at our local store also gave his cell/email to “his” customers. It’s hard to break customer service bonds that include a face and name.

Mark Ryski
Noble Member
7 years ago

This sounds like a case of stealing from Peter to pay Paul. While using in-store personnel to assist online shoppers may seem like a reasonable idea, it’s problematic for a number of reasons. First, many stores are operating very lean staff schedules which makes it a challenge to adequately serve the shoppers who are already in the store. Further distracting in-store associates by having them support online customers will make the situation worse. Second, engaging with online shoppers effectively requires a level of communication skill the in-store associate may or may not have. So even if the associate is willing to do it, there’s no guarantee that the interaction with the online shopper will be a quality experience. If you want to support your online shoppers then hire dedicated “online associates” who have the skills and focus to do the job.

Bob Amster
Trusted Member
7 years ago

As already mentioned, most stores do not enjoy a wealth of associates with time to spare. Therefore this tack will work well for those online customers who had planned to come into a specific store to begin with — maybe just to pick up — and are now looking for additional assistance to justify the trip to the store and consummate a transaction.

Ken Lonyai
Member
7 years ago

Sounds great but unless they add staffing, something has to give either in-store or online. Customer support is not so wonderful now, so unless Saks invests in more employees/hours, stretching thin resources only thinner is going to either hurt the brick-and-mortar experience or fail online.

Adrian Weidmann
Member
7 years ago

Mr. Milano has the correct foundational statement for using in-store associates to assist online browsers: “Priority is always to the customer in front of you.” As long as the shopper standing in front of you takes priority then leverage your staff wherever you can. They can be incented to help through sales commissions. One of my shopping pet peeves is having to wait for an associate who is on the phone while I’m standing in the store waiting for assistance. The shopper in your physical store is, and should always be, your absolute priority — no exceptions. If your in-store associate has the time then by all means they should be helping shoppers through all available channels. Access to specific individuals may become a very challenging policy to adopt. Why not go old school and give your sales associates business cards — analog and electronic — to hand to clients? It would be interesting to learn how effective this program has been for Saks. They apparently tested it for quite some time before expanding its use.

Steve Montgomery
Steve Montgomery
Member
7 years ago

My quick research indicates that Saks uses a commission based compensation model. Nothing I read indicates that they receive a commission if the online chat results in a sale. This is a disconnect that Saks and other retailers have to determine how they want to address.

Carlos Arambula
Carlos Arambula
Member
7 years ago

Very few things are more valuable to a loyal consumer than a sales associate that not only knows the merchandise it offers but also the consumer’s preferences. The shopping process becomes very personal and expedites sales. It’s also a great tool for a good sales associate to increase his or her sales by seamlessly utilizing the tools and communication vehicles already being used by consumers.

If a retailer already trains and teaches its sales associates best practices, this is simply an evolution of the process. It’s an add-on to what already exists. It’s definitively not an initial step to improve customer service.

Ralph Jacobson
Member
7 years ago

As we all face the challenge of delivering a seamless shopping experience, the more an enterprise blurs the lines between online and offline shopping, the more seamless it will become for the shopper. This is a great example of a successful tactic to achieve this goal. I see this being adopted by more retailers and I only see in-store shopping being enhanced due to more involved staff with local store inventory. Really great effort!

Richard J. George, Ph.D.
Active Member
7 years ago

This is a terrific concept to insure the success of an omnichannel perspective. Remember, omnichannel is about customers not channels, with the goal to make the shopping experience seamless, convenient, efficient and effective.

As noted in the article, the key will be the execution of the concept, namely assisting online shoppers while not neglecting in-store customers. Some of this can be solved by additional resourcing of these positions in the the store, which brings inherent new costs.

Lee Kent
Lee Kent
Member
7 years ago

The concept is a good one however it would put a strain on an already busy associate. Perhaps it should be limited to personal shoppers and if the lift is big enough would warrant hiring more associates.

I have a friend who was developing an app for the DIY industry to let folks request a chat with an expert but they would have to pay a little something for it. The experts were not employees of a store but well-vetted. People were willing to pay unless the service didn’t bring value. Interesting. It’s an Uber world we live in.

For my 2 cents.

Herb Sorensen
7 years ago

I realize that my promotion of the converging of online, mobile and brick-and-mortar store for the past several YEARS has totally missed the notice of most people stuck in the past. Saks’ convergence is the first true convergence I have read about, but not yet seen. Amazon’s planned convenience stores with tablets deployed across the store is an even more serious convergence.

And then in the discussions there is this treatment of the subject “retailing” with scarcely a notice that, besides channels, there is a stark contrast between service and self-service retailing. Admittedly, pretty much all self-service retailers do provide some SERVICE, but that is mostly in their service departments like bakery, deli, etc.

I’m sure there are careful thinkers who make these ESSENTIAL distinctions, but now that convergence is not just a “five year in the future” phenomenon, I would expect the discussions to move a little closer the reality of “retail.” Convergence is a totally new phenomenon, and as long as you think because Walmart is squandering billions on an online service LAYERED onto their brick-and-mortar operations as convergence, we are really not having a discussion but talking about two starkly different things.

And I wouldn’t be so insistent about this if the whole phenomenon of click-and-collect hadn’t been mostly a large disappointment. And all such efforts are doomed to minimal effect. I was disappointed in Amazon’s Seattle brick-and-mortar bookstore because I thought surely Amazon would do online right in a brick-and-mortar store, but no, they obviously were more stuck on the Apple model: high-margin tech equipment.

Eventually, as the converged store becomes common, people will be sayin, wow, Wow, WOW! Who woulda thunk it?! Living in the future is always a little stressful.

Ed Rosenbaum
Ed Rosenbaum
Member
7 years ago

Like many of the prior comments, I agree this is going to be a staffing issue. I like the idea and think it will show excellent customer service results. But only if it is staffed properly and at all hours, day and night. Online shoppers have no “open or closed” clock. They shop when they want. This means continual staffing will be required. It is customer service around the clock.

Mel Kleiman
Member
7 years ago

A customer is a customer, either online, in the store or on the phone. They are looking to spend money on something you have to sell. The key is to help and sell to the customer any way they want to be helped and served.

Craig Sundstrom
Craig Sundstrom
Noble Member
7 years ago

This doesn’t seem much different than what already occurs when an associate gives his/her business card out and says — implicitly or explicitly — “contact me if you need anything.” “Live chat” is somewhat innovative, but I would think there are coordination issues, with online requests (often) interrupting store interactions … either that or frequently “busy” signals.

Ken Morris
Trusted Member
7 years ago

Leveraging in-store associates to assist online shoppers is an atypical practice today. While there are a few luxury retailers experimenting with this unique service, it remains to be seen how pervasively it will be adopted by other retailers.

The biggest challenge is how it will impact in-store service levels. The last thing we want to see as a shopper in the store is a sales associate that is preoccupied on their phone and can’t help us. The flip side of that is if an online shopper wants to chat with a specific associate and they are not working that day or are not available because they are helping another shopper in the store.

Some type of hybrid approach might be the best scenario. For online customers that want immediate service, they could choose from a list of associates that are currently available to chat in real-time (leveraging employees across time zones is a good option as it is not always peak everywhere). These associates may not be in-store employees and could be part of the corporate service team or call center group that are dedicated to providing personalized services.

For those customers that would rather wait for a specific in-store sales associate that they have a previous relationship with, they could request an appointment via online chat, phone call or in-store visit at a future time.

These enhanced customer services are becoming a consumer expectation, as they want to shop and buy whenever, wherever and however they want and in real-time. The bar continues to be elevated and retailers need to jump over it or limbo beneath it!

Vahe Katros
Vahe Katros
7 years ago

Industrial strength solutions (read: scalable and safe(r)) are now available from real companies with real implementation partners to help retailers digitally connect a person to another person via text or phone, that includes streaming rich media. To once again quote William Gibson: The future is already here — it’s just not very evenly distributed.

So the good news is you can inexpensively launch a pilot with technology that is usage based. The bad news is you can inexpensively launch a pilot. It’s bad news because doing anything that involves store personal or other people is complex and could even be an idea that is dead on arrival unless you “intellectualize” the impact first (a term I heard Barnes & Noble’s founder Len Riggio use during a meeting relating to a previous generation’s technological opportunity to screw up the store experience.)

So, let’s intellectualize. What type of test might you design? Are all customers the same? How does the experience change based on the customer type (first time/returning/premier?) Based on the point in the journey? Based on merchandise category? Will associates hand off to other experts? Will all experts be store associates, or vendors, or third parties? How can I turn what I do into a brand attribute to compete with others in my category? How much of the work can be done with handoffs to how-to videos and if so, what’s the lowest cost way to make them? What about bot’s? How do I integrate with my HR systems? How do I recognize or incentivize folks, what are the KPIs, ok, ok, enough — let’s do some hypotheticals….

  • “I’m looking at something online the photo makes the finish look shiny, can you go look at it?”
  • “I want to figure out what home automation system I should buy…”
  • “I want to buy this, but it doesn’t say where it was made, or if it was tested on animals.”
  • “The plant I bought last week is dead and the leaves have a funny brown color.”

Well that was fun! Now that we’ve discussed the easy stuff, what about the more difficult strategic thinking as in business model design and service model design? Hmmm. If I were starting a retail business today, I’d build it around a business/service model that is based on nailing this question. I guess that’s what Ron Johnson is trying to do with Enjoy.com. In fact, that might be his business, specifically: to have an enterprise solution for retailers whose journeys will flow from online to offline, from home to store, from contractor to vendor, all done transparently.

I am sorry I retired from retailing — it’s getting interesting again! Are you hiring?

Shep Hyken
Active Member
7 years ago

Customers have a choice — online or onsite. The concept of bringing an onsite/in-store associate into the online conversation shows the focus is on the customer. Multiple channels, yet one brand. While a good onsite sales person could answer a lot of questions, the retailer may want to consider dedicated sales people to focus on the online customer.

William Hogben
7 years ago

This is going to be an essential load balancing tool for customer service oriented companies. When it’s slow in-store, why not take advantage of the extra capacity offered by associates?

Adam Silverman
7 years ago

For customers who have a relationship with the associate, extending that relationship in any touchpoint is a great idea. However, targeting browsers doesn’t have a financial model that will make sense. As it stands, conversion rate is relatively poor online for browsers. Let’s assume these browsers at Saks are more likely to buy and have a high conversion rate of 5%. So for every 100 chat sessions, 5 people will buy … that’s one in every 20 chat sessions. Now let’s assume that associates spend 5 minutes chatting with each browser. Total chat time is 1 hr 40 minutes (20ppl x 5min) for a single sale. The math doesn’t work out … even if conversion was 10%

Better — use the solution just to target your most loyal customers.

Don’t be fooled by shiny objects. Build the financial model and poke holes in it. And by the way, do customers even want this? Why not try out the model with a company like Needle that uses advocates to drive sales online?

My 2 cents.

CASEY GOLDEN
CASEY GOLDEN
7 years ago

Great article for discussion. I have been crafting an ideal solution to execute this very issue while still retaining the brands DNA. The Art of Retailing has yet to be beautifully translated online. I love that we are talking about this!

I have been on the floor, managed the store, trained the associates and managed the entire brand. The connection the consumer has with the brand and product is the only action that generates a sale. The person in charge of that is not an entry level position.

Jasmine brings up a good point. Stores are not only understaffed by count but the talent is below the standard of excellence once considered the backbone of the luxury retail experience. Relationship selling has taken a back seat in today’s retail environment. providing an in-store agent is a great idea online — in concept. However, to Sterling’s point, executing a premium experience for both online and in-store customers becomes compromised when the technology tools, process and talent are not capable of delivering such an experience.

Often I do “tests” shopping online with chat. I have experienced long wait times, unavailable messages and even been told “I am a customer, give me your email?” I waited 45 minutes on HugoBoss.com for someone to tell me “I am not allowed to make suggestions.” Receiving two images, two days later with wonky images and no reason to engage. I have been given a link to 432 boots even though I was asking about brown flat riding boots.

As a founder of a technology solution attempting to solve this crucial element missing when shopping online, I love hearing Tom say “it’s a no brainer.” What is the value of bringing back the level of service with technology tools capable of delivering a personal, consistent and seamless online shopping experience that builds brand value?

To Chris’s point and Joe Milano, SVP of Saks.com statement: “Priority is always to the customer in front of you.” Surplus staff is not paid premium dollar, so is that the talent we want to scale? It takes a different type of talent with a different career objective and an unmatched passion for helping customers with product with proven experience engaging long-term customers. I agree with Mark, you can’t rob Peter to pay Paul and neither want to be paid in loose change.

Steve mentioned the golden lining to all of this working. If you work on a luxury retail floor you are paid a monthly draw vs. net commission. If you don’t exceed your draw you go into areas. It is detrimental to work the floor and your book to keep food on the table. Who cab rightfully hold in-store associates accountable when their online sales when the compensation is not aligned?

The entire foundation and relationship between brick’s and click’s needs to be completely re-architected to serve the entire industry an executable solution the is seamless for customers that provides a meaningful engagement. I think I am on to something, but it will take us all to hold ourselves to higher standards. Conversations like this are beautiful and will be how we get there … together!

We have all had negative and positive experience online, in chat chat and in-store. Don’t stop, keep trying to engage as a consumer, as an experienced industry consumer because not so long down the road a solution will come to market and you’ll have to click the button to experience it.