Passenger vs Customer

[Flamingo]

My favourite is the Washington DC Metro - it calls the people who use it "Riders"! How cool is that?
http://www.wmata.com/about_metro/riders_advisory_council/

 

[PHILIPE]

My local council refers to people travelling on a bus as "travellers".
Imagine a scenario, two people sitting on a station platform and a non-stop train with people in it went through - "Look there's a train of customers". Sounds stupid doesn't it.

 

[AndyNLondon]

This is surely what announcement chimes are for. Or, prefixing it with "ladies and gentlemen" or "attention, please." No need for the "this is a customer announcement" tautology.

Having a few "pointless" words on the start of an announcement can be more helpful than chimes - both get people's attention, but if it's words then that gives listeners who might be less familiar with the speaker's accent a chance to tune in to the voice before the content that's actually needed starts.

 

[PeterC]

Having a few "pointless" words on the start of an announcement can be more helpful than chimes - both get people's attention, but if it's words then that gives listeners who might be less familiar with the speaker's accent a chance to tune in to the voice before the content that's actually needed starts.

The last company that I worked at had that as part of its telephone policy. There were even checks to ensure that we answered in the prescribed format.
"hello, xyz department PeterC speaking"
My first reaction was that it was total BS but as I thought about me I realised that when I just answered in the classic manner with just my name people would then ask to speak to me. That bit of "fluff" at the start of any announcement is essential.

 

[AM9]

My local council refers to people travelling on a bus as "travellers".
Imagine a scenario, two people sitting on a station platform and a non-stop train with people in it went through - "Look there's a train of customers". Sounds stupid doesn't it.

Describing the bus as containing 'travellers' might create an image of the bus turning through an unguarded gate leading to a field that they see as their new 'home'.

 

[341o2]

Describing the bus as containing 'travellers' might create an image of the bus turning through an unguarded gate leading to a field that they see as their new 'home'.

Mine too, in that the bus has no insurance or MOT and has a caravan in tow!

 

[Chester1]

They have to have a 'buffer' at the beginning of a message I believe to ensure people don't miss important information, I believe there's some optimum amount of time.

Isn't it to also differentiate between safety announcements which a customer will most likely ignore?

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

A year or so back, Northern Rail issued, to it's staff, a brief on new "tone of voice" guidelines, which, it is alleged, make us all "more approachable". Part of these guidelines was using 'customer' at all times because, apparently, a study has been done and this is deemed to be "more friendly" than using 'passenger'.

The last company that I worked at had that as part of its telephone policy. There were even checks to ensure that we answered in the prescribed format.
"hello, xyz department PeterC speaking"
My first reaction was that it was total BS but as I thought about me I realised that when I just answered in the classic manner with just my name people would then ask to speak to me. That bit of "fluff" at the start of any announcement is essential.

I agree with Peter. I did bank complaint jobs after finishing University to put something on my CV and had the same intial reaction. Tone is surprisingly important especially if people are angry, if you speak slower and softer they are much more likely to calm down. The need to delay messages with padding to give enough time to react or listen makes allot of sense. There are allot of things companies do that look like BS from the outside that actually work. A personal pet hate is Starbucks writing peoples names on coffee cups but I bet it helps to build a bond with regular customers.

 

[Via Bank]

I agree with Peter. I did bank complaint jobs after finishing University to put something on my CV and had the same intial reaction. Tone is surprisingly important especially if people are angry, if you speak slower and softer they are much more likely to calm down. The need to delay messages with padding to give enough time to react or listen makes allot of sense. There are allot of things companies do that look like BS from the outside that actually work. A personal pet hate is Starbucks writing peoples names on coffee cups but I bet it helps to build a bond with regular customers.

Hmm. I agree that a bit of buffer on the front is good. But I maintain that having too much buffer simply causes people to switch off again, and therefore occludes the message.

Saying "customer information" or "good morning, ladies and gentlemen" at the front of an announcement is good. Beginning an announcement with "your attention please, your attention please, this is a customer announcement, would customers please…" is probably not.

(Also consider that many pax might not speak English as their first language. They may also have trouble understanding the announcer's voice, particularly if, as many staff seem to do, they talk quickly. Fewer words, delivered more slowly and clearly, is almost certainly better.)

Of course, I haven't tested these hypotheses. But I see no reason why different announcement styles couldn't be A/B tested, and then their efficiency compared (maybe with "mystery shopper" surveys, or probably more accurately by monitoring the number of people who get on the wrong train, miss their stop, leave their things unattended, etc.)

 

[onlinespotting]

Although the Anne voice still refers to passengers when she commands you to join the train NOW as it is ready to leave. Although I think this is an earlier recording

 

[D1009]

Wasn't this also to do with the use of the word "passenger" some years ago as a derogatory term meaning someone who is part of a team, but not contributing to it, and this was thought to make the word non politically correct?

 

[TRAX]

I don't even get why this is a debate at all. Isn't a fare-paying passenger a customer, and isn't a railway customer a passenger ?

When in context, both mean exactly the same thing and the choice between "customer" and "passenger" should be anyone's decision. None of these two terms is better than the other, as in context they mean exactly the same thing.



A side note though, a fare evader is a passenger but, this time, not a customer.

 

[Via Bank]

A side note though, a fare evader is a passenger but, this time, not a customer.

So, at the risk of opening a potential can of worms…

A person who boards the train without a ticket with the intent of not paying is an (illicit) passenger but not a legitimate customer of the railway - that's fine, I doubt anyone can dispute that.

What about a person who has no ticket because they thought they could pay on the train? Someone who was confused and bought the wrong ticket from the machine, or was sold the wrong ticket by a clerk? Someone who forgot to collect their ToD tickets, or didn't realise that the confirmation email wasn't their ticket? Someone who didn't realise their reservation was on another coupon and left it in the machine, thus invalidating their Advance fare? Someone who didn't realise that a Senior Railcard wasn't the same thing as their OAP's bus pass? Someone who unknowingly bought a child ticket for their 16-year-old offspring? Someone who travelled to "London" Luton airport on their Oyster card, not realising that 'London Luton' is the world's most concise lie?

I propose that all the aforementioned people are "customers" (and in fact all customers who have been let down by the railway in various ways.) Therefore they should be treated as such. We need to be careful about saying who is and isn't a "customer," and preferably err on the side of someone being a legitimate customer (who deserves the respect, deference and good customer service that confers) if there is any doubt at all.

This, after all, is why BR started using the word "customer" in the first place.

(This is partly why I dislike the idea of "penalty" fares: if someone is a legitimate customer, should they ever have to pay a penalty?)

 

[TRAX]

You are raising good points. But I believe any passenger providing income to the TOC (and all the other companies involved in the service corresponding to the passenger's purchase) should be considered a customer. Someone who thought he could buy a ticket onboard when he couldn't, so didn't actually buy one, is not a customer as he is not buying anything.



But then comes subsidy and taxpayers' money - taking that into account, aren't we all railway customers ?



And another spark for debate - considering we convert some sections of Class 442 cars into ticket offices, are you a passenger as soon as you enter the ticket office as it is, or was, in essence, a train ?

 

[GatwickDepress]

Wasn't this also to do with the use of the word "passenger" some years ago as a derogatory term meaning someone who is part of a team, but not contributing to it, and this was thought to make the word non politically correct?

Nope. Absolute tosh.

 

[philthetube]

I don't even get why this is a debate at all. Isn't a fare-paying passenger a customer, and isn't a railway customer a passenger ?

When in context, both mean exactly the same thing and the choice between "customer" and "passenger" should be anyone's decision. None of these two terms is better than the other, as in context they mean exactly the same thing.



A side note though, a fare evader is a passenger but, this time, not a customer.

They are all punters, "sorted"

 

[MCSHF007]

Heard a Guard on an ECML train several years ago apologise for a delay at a station stop with the explanation that "this was due to a passenger who declined to become a customer".

 

[PHILIPE]

Elton John had a hit in 1984 titled "Passengers". Perhaps if it was to be released now, it would be called "Customers".

 

[TRAX]

Heard a Guard on an ECML train several years ago apologise for a delay at a station stop with the explanation that "this was due to a passenger who declined to become a customer".

That's my point.

Also, "passenger" relates more to the railway, whereas "customer" is used in any domain.

 

[keith1879]

The whole point of referring to "Customers" which was brought in by British Rail was to focus the minds of their staff on the fact that the people travelling on their trains
had paid for a service and needed to be treated with respect in the hope that they would come back with their friends. It was not the result of some idle exercise in political correctness - it was based on solid evidence that such an approach contributed to a successful commercial enterprise. I worked in the Electricity industry at the time and we were similarly encouraged to replace "consumer" with "customer" - it certainly changed staff attitudes and perceptions. You may feel that this is psycho-babble - but you will find that all modern profitable organisations disagree with you.

 

[Master29]

What difference does it make?

 

[90019]

They are all punters, "sorted"

Self loading freight.

 

[TRAX]

Self loading freight.

This is the best description I've known !