So-called voice-responsive services, otherwise known as voice-activated solutions, have been in vogue within the last nine months. Part of their allure is their potential for the creation of a channel delivering human-like, automated, and seamless interactions (through voice and audio) between potential or existing customers and businesses.
The inherent value proposition within these solutions is apparent based on a number of case studies published both through business journals and within the mainstream media. Further, such voice-responsive services are seemingly easy to build, thanks to the heavy lifting provided through tools developed by businesses such as Amazon, among others. Indeed, even before code-free solutions for creating Alexa skills were recently released by the Amazon Alexa team, I found it quite straightforward to build an Alexa skill that could provide side effects for any given medication found within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s database; this was possible within an evening of spare time and some caffeine.
Despite the advent of voice-responsive services, and their limitless potential, a number of challenges could stand in the way of widespread adoption and embrace of such services. Firstly, a certain class of customers may come to expect a certain type of experience which voice-responsive services may not be able to completely fulfill. For example, from a practical standpoint, when customers reach a business by phone, they resent being passed onto an interactive touch-tone- or voice-based menu system; customers prefer the human touch. Also, if customers reach out to a business via email, they very likely seek a human response. Certainly, autoresponder software is a nice touch to have for a business purportedly operating during non-business hours, however autoresponders in most cases do not provide a direct solution for an issue a customer could be facing. While these two challenges are critical for any business aiming to provide a semblance of support for their customers, other more striking challenges could dissuade consumers from using such services.
Customer psychographics are such that there are very likely consumers preferring to interact on a more visual level with the brand of their choice. Indeed, it is well known within the realm of education that there are those who are more visual thinkers versus those whom prefer to focus on auditory stimuli. Certainly, much of advertising and communication through online channels is relayed using visual information. Take, for example, the surfeit of information dashboards and business intelligence infographics flooding our days at work, along with the success of online video-on-demand. While general trends could be captured in a proverbial soundbite, a picture is still worth a thousand words. A certain class of consumers may continue using existing channels to relay and communicate with their brands of choice, while a different class of consumer might prefer the voice-responsive approach.
It remains to be seen to what extent voice-responsive services have an impact on the bottom line. Much FUD has been propagated throughout professional journalism insinuating that a significant number of jobs may be eliminated through global companies’ use of voice-responsive systems. However, history has much to reveal about the outcomes from using interactive systems to replace the human element within customer support channels. Nevertheless, there is quite considerable value to derive from voice-responsive services, particularly within specific applications where such solutions are appropriate. Perhaps only time will tell how much embrace such voice-responsive services will have from both consumers and brands in the existing marketplace.