How Appropriate Levels of Value Helps LinkedIn Scale CS

What was the catalyst for making that switch from delight-focused strategy to prioritizing appropriate levels of value?

Part of it was the rapid growth that we were seeing in our clients, both in terms of net new logos, but also in terms of current customers expanding.We sell recruiter licenses, and when we released Enterprise Agreements, we saw a 10x increase in interest in that product set, which meant that we really needed to think differently about how we scaled. That’s when we took a step back to better understand the customer journey, and also to test and pilot other areas where we could leverage technology, product solutions, etc. to deliver the same level of success for those clients but in a far more scalable and repeatable fashion. 

What are some practical steps companies can take to change direction on that scale?

The first thing I would say is that AX (appropriate experience) and customer delight are not mutually exclusive. I think you can have both - it’s just that you really need to focus on what that appropriate value looks like. If one client is spending 10K, and another is spending 1.5 million, their expectations are going to be vastly different. 

There’s three things you need to do in these cases:

First, understand all of your different customer personas and journeys. Every journey will vary depending on the size of the client and the complexity of the product suite. 

Second, you have to understand what value looks like for each of these businesses. You should be working directly with Product & Acquisition or your Finance partners to determine some of the internal cost-to-serve constraints, but also from a service tiering perspective. Are there logical ways to bucket based on spend or complexity, where we feel that we’re able to service those customers and deliver the appropriate level of value for their investment? 

Third, you need to test and pilot your changes. We’ve been fortunate enough to be able to do that at LinkedIn - not many companies allow for that testing phase, and instead just roll changes out immediately. You have to have a mindset of continuous improvement. Identify those areas where you feel that you’re going to get the biggest bang for your buck; where you’ve got the biggest, most challenging hypothesis, and then test it as best you can. 

I have a good example that illustrates what I’m talking about. 

When I first started at LinkedIn, every customer had their own assigned CSM. When the client had a product or a feature query, they would phone their CSM and try to get an answer. The query would normally be answered within 24 hours. As we continued to grow and expand, the number of users kind of just exploded by ten, maybe a hundred times. The reality quickly set in, where that level of service was no longer sustainable. 

So we implemented a live chat via our support center. And now, the current average response time is less than three minutes. 

Does it really matter to the client that they speak to their named CSM? Or does that end user just want that product feature question answered in the shortest amount of time? Now, you can have your questions answered within a three-minute window from anywhere in the world in real-time. 

What practical benefits of making that change have you seen?

We’ve seen product engagement increase at all levels - small business, mid market, and our largest clients. We’ve been able to shift and focus our internal resources, which are finite and fixed, to far more meaningful interactions with our largest clients. Those are the ones that have the greatest risks, greatest growth, or the highest degree of complexity. 

What are the challenges you had to overcome in order to get your CS team to where it is now?

One big challenge was helping shift the mindset away from “every customer is equally important” and “every dollar counts equally.”

There are different ways to service different clients based on either their service tiers or their level of complexity. That’s something we had to very tread lightly around because everything is in-house. One of the ways we got around that was by providing sales and CS professionals the ability to flag or prioritize any accounts. 

Regardless of that account’s size and our perceived understanding of what value would look like for them, if the sales rep wanted to flag this account for either significant growth or as a churn risk, we have a mechanism in place. Flagged accounts get four times as much outreach and support as those that aren’t flagged. It’s kind of like a “breaker” in the support system. 

Do you have any final thoughts you want to share?

I just want to reiterate that I definitely don’t think it’s a choice between delight or appropriate levels of value. I think it’s both.

It’s understanding what value looks like; what “good” and “great” look like for your customer. It’s about knowing your clients’ different personas and helping them understand all the ways you’re going to be supporting them. 

We need to make sure they understand the value of the self-service options, the webinars, and the online learning, etc. Not just relying on a human being to be there at every point. That’s why I focus on getting to that mutual level of understanding and that up-front social contract in terms of how we’re going to partner.