A definition of failure demand
Failure demand is a really powerful idea for those of us working in and around the public sector. But I couldn’t find a definition that seemed quite right applied to digital services, so I decided to write this one.
‘Avoidable contact’ and ‘channel shift’
Most of the time, it’s cheaper to provide a service online than it is over the phone or by post. And no-one wants to waste public money.
But that doesn’t mean reducing overall customer contact rates (or ‘channel shift’) is a good measure of how well your digital service is doing.
It’s important to distinguish between contact that’s the result of ‘value demand’ and contact that’s the result of ‘failure demand’.
Value demand
Value demand is contact between user and service provider that’s about doing the thing the service is intended to do. Contact that helps to solve a problem for the user.
This includes contact from:
- people who can’t use the digital service
- people who prefer not to use the digital service
- people who need advice that’s highly specific to their circumstances
- people whose problem represents a complex edge case, meaning that it doesn’t make sense — for them or us — to try to meet their needs through the digital service
Note that the last point isn’t a reason not to meet accessibility requirements, or to provide anyone with a poor user experience overall. It’s ok to treat problems as edge cases, but not people.
Failure demand
Failure demand is contact that results from a problem with the service. For example:
- the digital service isn’t working
- I don’t understand how to use the digital service
- I can’t tell whether the digital service is intended to meet my situation
- the digital service doesn’t fit my situation, and that wasn’t made clear
- I can’t tell whether the service has done the thing I wanted it to do
- I can’t find the thing I was looking for (assuming it’s not an edge case problem we’ve deliberately decided not to address)
- where’s the thing you were supposed to send me?
Why this is important
Distinguishing failure demand from value demand means you can find cost savings without forcing everyone to deal with you online, whether or not that’s the best way to solve their problem.
And freeing up your operational staff from dealing with the consequences of failure demand means they can focus on the people who can really benefit from their expertise.
I think credit goes to occupational psychologist and author John Seddon for coming up with the idea of failure demand.
It’s powerful because it exposes the false dichotomy between ‘good services’ and ‘efficiency’, and allows us to attach a value to the design of services. A good service is an efficient service, because it minimises failure demand.
Image by Boston City Archives. Used under a creative commons licence.
