zlacker

>>isp+(OP)
I never understand people who engage with chat bots as customer service.

I find them deeply upsetting, not one step above the phone robot on Vodafone support: "press 1 for internet problems" ... "press 2 to be transferred to a human representative". Only problem is going through like 7 steps until I can reach that human, then waiting some 30 minutes until the line is free.

But it's the only approach that gets anything done. Talking to a human.

Robots a a cruel joke on customers.

>>Michae+kd
I chatted with a chat bot this morning for getting reimbursed for a recalled product. It went fine. It was quick and easy. Chat bots type a lot faster than call center pay-grade humans.

>>bradfa+Dd
Did you need to chat with a bot for that? I've seen a worrying trend of companies creating what could be basic forms as "interactive" chat bots.

>>richbe+ce
Yes, it required me to chat with a bot to do the process. It could have been a form but some of the choices for which recalled products and how many of each recalled product would have likely made the form rather convoluted.

Chat bots like this, where basically they're executing a wizard type questionnaire seem totally reasonable to me. It's approachable to a wide audience, only asks you one question at a time in a clear way, and can easily be executed on a mobile device or normal computer.

>>bradfa+Xi
> It could have been a form but some of the choices for which recalled products and how many of each recalled product would have likely made the form rather convoluted.

I'm not sure I understand how a chat bot is better in this case. This sounds exactly what a form is for, and you can have multi-step forms or wizards.

Incidentally, a ubiquitous feature in with forms that I seldom see on chat bots is the ability to return to an earlier question and change your answer.