Given the circumstances, 1-800-Flowers can't be happy to see their name in the New York Times over an epic miscommunication.
The flower arrangement for Grandma's funeral was supposed to read, "Farewell Grammy, you had a good run."
What it actually said, as transcribed by the phone agent who, according to the customer, "spoke English as a second language," was "FAR WELL GRANDMY YOU HAD A GOOD RUNS".
When the customer sent an e-mail complaint he heard no response--probably because he sent it to a "do not reply" address, which is where his order confirmation came from.
Someday I'll write an article about why using "do not reply to this email" email addresses are a dumb idea from a customer experience perspective. But this is not that article.
Instead, I'd like to pose the question of why 1-800-Flowers--a company whose entire existence is based on people's desire to be sensitive, communicate, and do what's culturally expected--can't hire employees with the sensitivity, communication skills, and cultural background to understand that while "you had a good run" is an appropriate (if cheeky) message for a funeral while, "you had good runs" is not.
Of course we all know the reason: it costs more money to hire good employees than bad ones.
But, as the Times columnist notes, 1-800-Flowers has attracted hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of complaints about botched orders.
Apparently the company has decided (for now at least) the negative publicity and bad word-of-mouth is a reasonable price to pay. I'll be curious to see how long that lasts.