A quick, anecdotal, survey among overseas residents and visitors to Singapore on the quality of service they have received here delivered some unexpected results.< /p>

Rewarding to learn that most people said the service had been courteous, smiling and friendly. There were a few too many blank faces but, generally, a willingness to present a helpful image and an air of welcome. People do like to be welcomed.

Less comforting were the views about product and price knowledge, speed of delivery and general service standards, suggesting considerable room for improvement in training and monitoring performance. Opinions on these points ranged from ‘not up to standard’ to ‘very poor’. Comparisons were often made with the United States, that bastion of cheerful, informed and willing service.

The most startling summary I got was “clueless”, and I have to say that I have found this a good description of some of the attention I have received recently. The word is not widely used in Singapore but its meaning is frighteningly obvious.

Little knowledge of products – especially true in computer and high-tech shops – and a lack of awareness of prices and offers, even in restaurants, led to frustration and a feeling that perhaps the customer was being cheated. On two occasions recently I have found loyalty card credits to restaurant bills being ‘miscalculated’. Not a good way to end a family meal.

How important is good service?

We don’t eat somewhere just because the service is good but we may avoid a restaurant if the service is bad. We prefer to shop where the assistants know their stock, smile, treat you politely and seem genuinely interested in your needs.

Good service is needed for the survival of any business; it becomes critical when massive new hospitality enterprises such as the Integrated Resorts are being launched. So what is first class service?

It is knowledge and care based. We can test the knowledge – but do we? Not often, I think. The seller’s answer to this is that product specifications are frequently changed and it would be impossible for every assistant to know every product.

Maybe, but surely we could have product range specialists? It is very off-putting when you ask an assistant about a refrigerator only to learn that the information on the price tag is the extent of his knowledge about it.

Too much service is “reference-based”. For example, when you speak to your Relationship Manager at the bank it seems that even the simplest question you ask has to be referred back to the supervisor, indicating that training is being carried out on your time and at your expense.

And “your call is important to us” is the ultimate service insult.

Knowledge is one thing; care is altogether different. We cannot always get perfect service nor can our knowledge of what we are selling always be bang up to date. We won’t always have the stock a customer wants. But we can present a helpful, ‘can-do’ attitude in contrast to the “don’t have”, semi-resentful response we sometimes get.

Caring is an attitude to the customer. It can be explained; it cannot be trained. The standards needed for good care are personal, not corporate. The culture of a company may encourage or discourage care but it’s up to the individual to exhibit the passion to get it right. Are we still teaching individual passion? Are we providing the morale needed to trigger it?

Service cannot be subjected to the type of measure achieved by check-list questionnaire. You know it when you see it, and, my goodness, you sure know it when you don’t.