Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Taoofss wrote:

All far as a retail perspective, that manager did nothing wrong.

Because leaving a repeat customer feeling disgruntled is clearly the right way to approach business. No doubt for his amazing examples, he'll shortly be heading up the US division of GW.

And once again:
New manager who had never dealt with the customer before, outside of the customer coming in with no receipt and wanting an exchange for a product they'd had for months.

Not saying it's 100% the most sensible thing, but the guy was likely doing what he felt was best.

So what you're saying is he's a bad manager? And therefore really shouldn't have the job?

No, I'm saying that you need to go back and reread the thread, because you got a pretty key fact wrong.

Saying "leaving a repeat customer feeling disgruntled" assumes that the manager actually knows the OP is a repeat customer.

He doesn't know that, what with him being a new manager.

What's him not knowing its a repeat customer got to do with the price of cheese?

He went against company policy on exchanges, which means he either didn't know it or didn't want to follow it(making him a bad manager). And he left a customer feeling disgruntled. Which, as pointed out, is so clearly the objective of a good manager, right?

See, most stores have these hi-tech apparatus these days called telly-phones. And what a good manager would do, upon hearing this chap had spoken to customer service, is if he's feeling doubtful, put through something called a telephone conversation to Customer Service, to clarify exactly what the policy entails, and whether it should be applicable in this case. Instead of leaving the customer feeling disgruntled.

Ergo, he is a bad manager.

I'm sorry, you were there to know that he didn't call Customer Service after the guy left? Or that maybe he felt the guy was being slightly jerky to him?

Seriously. I figured you would have realized by now that taking these kinds of stories at face value is more gullible than believing there were WMDs in Iraq.

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Taoofss wrote:

All far as a retail perspective, that manager did nothing wrong.

Because leaving a repeat customer feeling disgruntled is clearly the right way to approach business. No doubt for his amazing examples, he'll shortly be heading up the US division of GW.

And once again:
New manager who had never dealt with the customer before, outside of the customer coming in with no receipt and wanting an exchange for a product they'd had for months.

Not saying it's 100% the most sensible thing, but the guy was likely doing what he felt was best.

So what you're saying is he's a bad manager? And therefore really shouldn't have the job?

No, I'm saying that you need to go back and reread the thread, because you got a pretty key fact wrong.

Saying "leaving a repeat customer feeling disgruntled" assumes that the manager actually knows the OP is a repeat customer.

He doesn't know that, what with him being a new manager.

What's him not knowing its a repeat customer got to do with the price of cheese?

He went against company policy on exchanges, which means he either didn't know it or didn't want to follow it(making him a bad manager). And he left a customer feeling disgruntled. Which, as pointed out, is so clearly the objective of a good manager, right?

See, most stores have these hi-tech apparatus these days called telly-phones. And what a good manager would do, upon hearing this chap had spoken to customer service, is if he's feeling doubtful, put through something called a telephone conversation to Customer Service, to clarify exactly what the policy entails, and whether it should be applicable in this case. Instead of leaving the customer feeling disgruntled.

Ergo, he is a bad manager.

I'm sorry, you were there to know that he didn't call Customer Service after the guy left? Or that maybe he felt the guy was being slightly jerky to him?

Seriously. I figured you would have realized by now that taking these kinds of stories at face value is more gullible than believing there were WMDs in Iraq.

See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

That's a pitiful defence Kan. Saying that I should mistrust what did and didn't occur is irrelevant, because neither you or me were there. You have to assume at face value here that you've heard is true. Otherwise, there'd be no point in posting anything on this message board at all. Every time someone posted a picture of their army, you'd have people wailing, 'How do we know you painted it! You probably mugged a golden demon winner and stole that model!'

Ketara wrote:
See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

That's a pitiful defence Kan. Saying that I should mistrust what did and didn't occur is irrelevant, because neither you or me were there. You have to assume at face value here that you've heard is true. Otherwise, there'd be no point in posting anything on this message board at all. Every time someone posted a picture of their army, you'd have people wailing, 'How do we know you painted it! You probably mugged a golden demon winner and stole that model!'

No, I'm saying that you should take it with a grain of salt. Just like anything you hear on the Internet, really.

How many of these threads do we have come up where someone complains about their local store, and then gets called out by another local for skewing the facts? Or where they keep changing facts as time goes on?

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

No. It's the definition of an "unexperienced manager".

They're not necessarily bad managers, but they can become them.

Or they can become that fabled beast, the "fantastic manager who everyone loves".

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:
See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Therefore making him....a bad manager?

Kanluwen wrote:

That's a pitiful defence Kan. Saying that I should mistrust what did and didn't occur is irrelevant, because neither you or me were there. You have to assume at face value here that you've heard is true. Otherwise, there'd be no point in posting anything on this message board at all. Every time someone posted a picture of their army, you'd have people wailing, 'How do we know you painted it! You probably mugged a golden demon winner and stole that model!'

No, I'm saying that you should take it with a grain of salt. Just like anything you hear on the Internet, really.

How many of these threads do we have come up where someone complains about their local store, and then gets called out by another local for skewing the facts? Or where they keep changing facts as time goes on?

Take what with a grain of salt? Presuming the manager acted in the aforementioned way, in my judgment, he is a bad manager. If the situation never occurred, than my judgement would hypothetical, but not wrong. It would still apply to the given scenario.
The pinch of salt is unnecessary, because I'm not currently in a position where it is required. Whether right or wrong, accurate or inaccurate, the story has no bearing on my life beyond the initial post. There's no incentive on my part to doubt him with no prior evidence. So why should I bother? I have better things to do with my time than go around mistrusting and questioning every anecdotal story I read on the internet. As long as the scenario is plausible, and the poster has no bad track record, I'm perfectly happy to take their described situation at face value, because there is no benefit for me not doing so. As I said, you have to assume people are generally telling the truth, or I'd have to start wildly hypothesizing about you being Tom Kirby or something.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

No. It's the definition of an "unexperienced manager".

They're not necessarily bad managers, but they can become them.

Or they can become that fabled beast, the "fantastic manager who everyone loves".

An unexperienced manager is poorly trained manager, and thus a bad manager.

He cannot do his job well. He does it badly.

Therefore he is a bad manager.

Kanluwen wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

No. It's the definition of an "unexperienced manager".

They're not necessarily bad managers, but they can become them.

Or they can become that fabled beast, the "fantastic manager who everyone loves".

Managers have to, yano, manage people and general store stuff. If they're inexperienced they really shouldn't have been picked for the job. Having a clue about the job tends to be a priority when you're MANAGING people and merchandise, because if anything does go wrong, who do you think is the first to blame and who's head is on the chopping block first?

In the same vein you wouldnt send a Football coach to a soccer team. God forbid he tells them to toss the ball with his hands if he doesnt have any idea what he's doing.

so this a 6-month gamer turned manager, who refuses to trade a product- breaking the trading rules- and telling all nearby stores to do the same...and he isn't a bad manager?

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:
See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Therefore making him....a bad manager?

Because I'm sure you were an expert, amazing employee with your first job even after training.

Kanluwen wrote:

That's a pitiful defence Kan. Saying that I should mistrust what did and didn't occur is irrelevant, because neither you or me were there. You have to assume at face value here that you've heard is true. Otherwise, there'd be no point in posting anything on this message board at all. Every time someone posted a picture of their army, you'd have people wailing, 'How do we know you painted it! You probably mugged a golden demon winner and stole that model!'

No, I'm saying that you should take it with a grain of salt. Just like anything you hear on the Internet, really.

How many of these threads do we have come up where someone complains about their local store, and then gets called out by another local for skewing the facts? Or where they keep changing facts as time goes on?

Take what with a grain of salt? Presuming the manager acted in the aforementioned way, in my judgment, he is a bad manager. If the situation never occurred, than my judgement would hypothetical, but not wrong. It would still apply to the given scenario.
The pinch of salt is unnecessary, because I'm not currently in a position where it is required. Whether right or wrong, accurate or inaccurate, the story has no bearing on my life beyond the initial post. There's no incentive on my part to doubt him with no prior evidence. So why should I bother? I have better things to do with my time than go around mistrusting and questioning every anecdotal story I read on the internet. As long as the scenario is plausible, and the poster has no bad track record, I'm perfectly happy to take their described situation at face value, because there is no benefit for me not doing so. As I said, you have to assume people are generally telling the truth, or I'd have to start wildly hypothesizing about you being Tom Kirby or something.

Pft, if I were Tom Kirby I wouldn't be on Dakka. I'd be on Warseer, basking in the loving glow of the people.

Kanluwen wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

No. It's the definition of an "unexperienced manager".

They're not necessarily bad managers, but they can become them.

Or they can become that fabled beast, the "fantastic manager who everyone loves".

An unexperienced manager is poorly trained manager, and thus a bad manager.

He cannot do his job well. He does it badly.

Therefore he is a bad manager.

Again:
Training means nothing. You can be trained in all kinds of different ways, but they're poor substitutes for actual experience and customer feedback.

And despite what you might be thinking...
Customer feedback? It's not given on Internet Forums that have absolutely nothing to do with the shop in question.

From everything that's been said here, the manager apparently did one of two things:

1.) he honestly didnt know about company policy and didnt bother to check, meaning he's rather neglegent and undertrained, or the sudden rush of "power" got to his head.

2.) He got really worked up on this one customer and forgot policy (anger does cloud the mind), however it makes it really ridiculous that he got worked up over one box of bloodletters.

Kanluwen wrote:No, I'm saying that you should take it with a grain of salt. Just like anything you hear on the Internet, really.

How many of these threads do we have come up where someone complains about their local store, and then gets called out by another local for skewing the facts? Or where they keep changing facts as time goes on?

Some Cars are lemons.
My vehicle is a care.
Therefore my vehicle is a lemon.

Wait.

There's no real reason to doubt the OP's credibilty. I mean, I'm not saying we boycott the store in question, but I see no reason not to be aware that the manager of that store might be more prickly about things than most.

Aside from the thread title, the OP never really engaged in any hyperbolic depictions. Nothing seems unbelievable. And nobody is really calling for the guys head, but for some reason you seem to think that there is some sort of problem with this thread.

Kanluwen wrote:Internet Forums...have absolutely nothing to do with the shop in question.

and thus we aren't biased towards either party.

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Isnt that basically the definition of a Bad Manager?

No. It's the definition of an "unexperienced manager".

They're not necessarily bad managers, but they can become them.

Or they can become that fabled beast, the "fantastic manager who everyone loves".

Managers have to, yano, manage people and general store stuff. If they're inexperienced they really shouldn't have been picked for the job. Having a clue about the job tends to be a priority when you're MANAGING people and merchandise, because if anything does go wrong, who do you think is the first to blame and who's head is on the chopping block first?

You do realize the majority of GW operations here in the US(and from what I understand--parts of the UK/Europe) are one employee, right?
They're de facto managers, but are essentially registerjockeys.

shrike wrote:so this a 6-month gamer turned manager, who refuses to trade a product- breaking the trading rules- and telling all nearby stores to do the same...and he isn't a bad manager?

One of the things the OP made a point of mentioning is that the guy had no experience with GW games prior to being hired. It's not a case of "he was a gamer turned manager". He's a 6 month manager.

And again:
"bad manager" is subjective. He's unexperienced. I'm sure if we took a look at your employment history, your early employers thought you were a "bad employee" at some point.

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:
See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Therefore making him....a bad manager?

Because I'm sure you were an expert, amazing employee with your first job even after training.

Believe it or not, I have a part time job with a massive emphasis on customer relations. The company is terrible, and I was put out with virtually no training. But ya know what?

As long as you're polite and reasonable, and do everything you can to help the customer, its quite easy to be an 'expert amazing employee' in customer relations.

Pft, if I were Tom Kirby I wouldn't be on Dakka. I'd be on Warseer, basking in the loving glow of the people.

Ah! But that could be a trick! You're really Jervis Johnson, aren't you?

See, that's what happens when you doubt everything people say online.

Again:
Training means nothing. You can be trained in all kinds of different ways, but they're poor substitutes for actual experience and customer feedback.

And despite what you might be thinking...
Customer feedback? It's not given on Internet Forums that have absolutely nothing to do with the shop in question.

Actual experience? He had to pick up a phone. And be polite.

If he can't think of these two things on his own, he's terrible at managing a store, and is thus a bad manager.

Kan is always arguing about stuff like this with a string of nonsensical fallicies. I really should stop giving a damn.

In anycase, bar one or two people, it seems that the majority thinks this manager did something wrong. While the customer might have been in the wrong for asking for an exchange on an item a good few months old, getting a green light from upper management at Customer service was the right thing to do. The manager had equal opportunity to do the same in a polite manner, but evidently didnt (as Ketara pointed out, calling CS after the customer has left would have been pointless).

EDIT:

Ketara wrote:
Ah! But that could be a trick! You're really Jervis Johnson, aren't you?

See, that's what happens when you doubt everything people say online.

Now that has me paranoid XD

I think the term "bad manager" is being misused. I think I would say that the manager in question handled a few situations in a ham fisted manner that are not what an experience retail manger would do.

If nothing else, an experienced manager would know how to tell people that decisions that go against the customer are mandated from above him, and attempt to build rapport. Even if you say something like "I'm sorry, according ot the district manager I'm not allowed to do returns without a reciept or computer record. this is a new policy, and if you want to give me your name and number I'll try to get it waived. I'm pretty new so I need to keep my nose clean, but I might be able to get an approval from above. I'll give you a call when I find out."

In my experience, simply acknowledging the problem and making some attempt to resolve it keeps a customer happy most of the time.

Kanluwen wrote:

shrike wrote:so this a 6-month gamer turned manager, who refuses to trade a product- breaking the trading rules- and telling all nearby stores to do the same...and he isn't a bad manager?

One of the things the OP made a point of mentioning is that the guy had no experience with GW games prior to being hired. It's not a case of "he was a gamer turned manager". He's a 6 month manager.

And again:
"bad manager" is subjective. He's unexperienced. I'm sure if we took a look at your employment history, your early employers thought you were a "bad employee" at some point.

So...he's a bad manager. It's rare for a guy to work in GW in thier first year of gaming, let alone becoming a MANAGER in your first few DAYS.
He knows barely anything about it and thus is a bad manager. If 90% of 11-year-olds has more knowledge in tactics and the rules than the store manager, that means he's a bad manager, doesn't it?

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Ketara wrote:
See, a good manager would have done the call on the spot in front of them. Y'know, assures the customer you're doing something? Not only that, why would he call afterwards if he's already decided he's not going to do the exchange? If there was any doubt in his mind on this one, why would he call them afterwards? The customer wouldn't be in the shop to swap the goods with!

Sure, a good manager who'd been working in customer service for years beforehand and isn't the only employee at that shop would have done that.

But the guy likely is working for his first bloody time in retail and has no clue what the hell he's doing.

Therefore making him....a bad manager?

Because I'm sure you were an expert, amazing employee with your first job even after training.

Believe it or not, I have a part time job with a massive emphasis on customer relations. The company is terrible, and I was put out with virtually no training. But ya know what?

As long as you're polite and reasonable, and do everything you can to help the customer, its quite easy to be an 'expert amazing employee' in customer relations.

And who says he wasn't "polite and reasonable" in his first encounter with this customer?

It's the second encounter that forms the crux of this whole issue for me. The guy either felt too uncomfortable calling GW CS and asking if yes, they had indeed told this customer to bring his item in for a refund/exchange(in which case, yeah. He might just be a bad employee and should be relegated to stocking shelves for the rest of his life.) or he felt the OP was trying to scam him.

Pft, if I were Tom Kirby I wouldn't be on Dakka. I'd be on Warseer, basking in the loving glow of the people.

Ah! But that could be a trick! You're really Jervis Johnson, aren't you?

See, that's what happens when you doubt everything people say online.

Haha! Wrong again! I'm truly Andy Chambers in disguise!

Again:
Training means nothing. You can be trained in all kinds of different ways, but they're poor substitutes for actual experience and customer feedback.

And despite what you might be thinking...
Customer feedback? It's not given on Internet Forums that have absolutely nothing to do with the shop in question.

Actual experience? He had to pick up a phone. And be polite.

If he can't think of these two things on his own, he's terrible at managing a store, and is thus a bad manager.

shrike wrote:So...he's a bad manager. It's rare for a guy to work in GW in thier first year of gaming, let alone becoming a MANAGER in your first few DAYS.
He knows barely anything about it and thus is a bad manager. If 90% of 11-year-olds has more knowledge in tactics and the rules than the store manager, that means he's a bad manager, doesn't it?

That doesn't make him a bad manager. Hell, even if everything the OP says is true, that doesn't make him bad at his job. There's a reason most workers only have annual reviews: nobody wants to be judged based on their worst week.

If I were a betting man, it's just a young man that has a little taste of authority and is taking the job overly seriously and hasn't learned the fine art of handling people. He very well might end up bad, and get flushed out. Or he might learn and improve.

Or just not a people person or felt his newfound power was being impinged upon or any number of things.

You don't need to automatically jump to "bad manager" to explain these things.

See, I would class someone who allowed either of those two things to stop him from effectively managing a store as a bad manager.

Seriously, what would he have to do to not be one in your eyes? Chase the customer out with a shotgun?

Kanluwen wrote:
One of the things the OP made a point of mentioning is that the guy had no experience with GW games prior to being hired. It's not a case of "he was a gamer turned manager". He's a 6 month manager.

And again:
"bad manager" is subjective. He's unexperienced. I'm sure if we took a look at your employment history, your early employers thought you were a "bad employee" at some point.

Contradictory post here again. If he did indeed have 6 months worth of management experience he's hardly "unexperienced" (btw the proper word is "inexperienced"). Even a newbie manager would know to pick up the phone and actually call customer service. Hell I've actually had a manager do that for me when I was bitz-ordering (back when you could still order bitz off the GW website). 5 minutes worth, not that much. And if they are Register Jockeys, then they really shouldn't be questioning Customer Service. Again, one phone call, not that hard. The OP could have done it, but even if he took it outside and came back with phone in hand, no matter how discreet, he's going to be labeled as the guy who "called the boss on him".

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:Kan is always arguing about stuff like this with a string of nonsensical fallicies. I really should stop giving a damn.

In anycase, bar one or two people, it seems that the majority thinks this manager did something wrong. While the customer might have been in the wrong for asking for an exchange on an item a good few months old, getting a green light from upper management at Customer service was the right thing to do. The manager had equal opportunity to do the same in a polite manner, but evidently didnt (as Ketara pointed out, calling CS after the customer has left would have been pointless).

Sorry, but of course the majority of people on a site that's well-known for whining about the employees in GW shops feel the manager did something wrong.

If you asked this same question to a group that has no previous experience with GW shops but had worked in retail, we'd likely be seeing different results.

Nothing about what I'm saying is nonsensical or a fallacy. I'm not using strawmen arguments. I'm just saying that "hurr bad manager!" and "YOU'RE WRONG BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE FEELS DIFFERENTLY!" isn't an answer. It's an assumption that's quite easily predictable from the atmosphere of "hiss! GW baaad!" that we have here on Dakka.

Ketara wrote:
Ah! But that could be a trick! You're really Jervis Johnson, aren't you?

See, that's what happens when you doubt everything people say online.

Now that has me paranoid XD

If only you knew the truth...

Kanluwen wrote:Or just not a people person or felt his newfound power was being impinged upon or any number of things.

You don't need to automatically jump to "bad manager" to explain these things.

Yeah, i'm not saying he's a bad manger, but if you've got somebody with weak social skills and a power trip running a store, things can end up going poorly. You can quibble over the semantics, but this guy didn't act like a good mananger.

Okay, I feel I need to throw my 2 cents in.

I know the manager that the OP talking about, I go to that store from time to time. In fact, I knew the manager he was talking about within the first 2 paragraphs his first post, without the OP even giving any identifying info. I knew it was the same guy, because everything he's said is absolutely true about him.

On that note, I get along really well with him, and he's given me great service there. My only real complaint is that he does not know what he's talking about sometimes when giving advice.

BUT - what the OP said about his attitude/demeanor is absolutely true.

Also, to finally put to rest all the questions on whether he's a bad manager...he has told me himself he has a dozen or so years of managing experience. That's why he was hired in the first place, given that he does not know much, if anything, about the hobby itself. His selling point to GW when they hired him was that he in fact HAS years of experience as a manager. So given all that, is it alright to dismiss this as inexperience and a learning process in the realm of customer service?

I think even Kan would agree that chasing them out with a shotgun might possibly be a teeny bit on the harsh side...maybe...
he is bad at managing the store, thus he is a BAD MANAGER.
Are we agreed that he didn't handle things well?
Are we agreed that because of him, the OP will no longer be going to that store?

Erudog wrote:Okay, I feel I need to throw my 2 cents in.

I know the manager that the OP talking about, I go to that store from time to time. In fact, I knew the manager he was talking about within the first 2 paragraphs his first post, without the OP even giving any identifying info. I knew it was the same guy, because everything he's said is absolutely true about him.

On that note, I get along really well with him, and he's given me great service there. My only real complaint is that he does not know what he's talking about sometimes when giving advice.

BUT - what the OP said about his attitude/demeanor is absolutely true.

Also, to finally put to rest all the questions on whether he's a bad manager...he has told me himself he has a dozen or so years of managing experience. That's why he was hired in the first place, given that he does not know much, if anything, about the hobby itself. His selling point to GW when they hired him was that he in fact HAS years of experience as a manager. So given all that, is it alright to dismiss this as inexperience and a learning process in the realm of customer service?

See, now with this right here?

This puts him into the category of "meh" manager. He's business oriented, and has bad people skills.

If he had experience then it doesnt put him in a good light imo. It just means that he did know about policy but didnt give a damn about it.

Kanluwen wrote:Sorry, but of course the majority of people on a site that's well-known for whining about the employees in GW shops feel the manager did something wrong.

If you asked this same question to a group that has no previous experience with GW shops but had worked in retail, we'd likely be seeing different results.

That's a poorly chosen second sample. People that have worked in retail would know that actions like that happen all the time. They might also not know the expectancy most people have of making exchanges at the GW stores, or how they are generally run.

And your first point is actually pretty silly, given that people aren't comparing these actions to an FLGS or some hypothetical ideal: they are comparing them to the GW staff they interact with all the time!

I posted earlier that this discussion is grounded in the understanding most of us have that GW has excellent customer service (if a little overzealous to sell). Framing this discussion as the result of inherent anti-GW bias seems inappropriate.

shrike wrote:I think even Kan would agree that chasing them out with a shotgun might possibly be a teeny bit on the harsh side...maybe...
he is bad at managing the store, thus he is a BAD MANAGER.
Are we agreed that he didn't handle things well?
Are we agreed that because of him, the OP will no longer be going to that store?

Yeah, no.

He's bad at handling customers. That doesn't make him a bad manager. What with the fact that he's managing a business like...y'know, a business.

He's got a crummy attitude, if what Erudog says is true and someone needs to bring that up to him so he can work on it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Polonius wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Sorry, but of course the majority of people on a site that's well-known for whining about the employees in GW shops feel the manager did something wrong.

If you asked this same question to a group that has no previous experience with GW shops but had worked in retail, we'd likely be seeing different results.

That's a poorly chosen second sample. People that have worked in retail would know that actions like that happen all the time. They might also not know the expectancy most people have of making exchanges at the GW stores, or how they are generally run.

And your first point is actually pretty silly, given that people aren't comparing these actions to an FLGS or some hypothetical ideal: they are comparing them to the GW staff they interact with all the time!

Considering most of the people here complain that GW staff are pushy and jerky...yeah, I find it a good example.

I posted earlier that this discussion is grounded in the understanding most of us have that GW has excellent customer service (if a little overzealous to sell). Framing this discussion as the result of inherent anti-GW bias seems inappropriate.

That's not true. Most people feel that GW has excellent customer service--when they're replacing products. Not in actually dealing with the customers.

Erudog wrote:Also, to finally put to rest all the questions on whether he's a bad manager...he has told me himself he has a dozen or so years of managing experience. That's why he was hired in the first place, given that he does not know much, if anything, about the hobby itself. His selling point to GW when they hired him was that he in fact HAS years of experience as a manager. So given all that, is it alright to dismiss this as inexperience and a learning process in the realm of customer service?

Well, if you have a dozen years experience and your managing a GW... you're career is not on an upward arc. No offense, as I dont' know what they make, but probably less than most good managers do after a few years.

Now, he is learning a new industry, and selling the GW hobby is different from other goods. There is a learning curve involved there.