Went to some Hypermarket near my PJ home, in Kelana Jaya (does it ring a bell? Note that there aren't any other Hypermarkets OTHER than THAT one next to the LDP. Anyway, I'll call it XXXXX here, and HINT: It's HUGE) with my family during the afternoon.
I wasn't actually in the mood to go shopping during that time (thanks to the morning badminton session and the packed Sunday schedule), but well, ya know, parents are always in the authority to force their family to do something 'fun'. So well, I was actually sulking (call me kiddo - but I was just too tired at that time) all the way until we reached the Hypermarket entrance, where all the fun begins.
My younger sis happened to be wearing a denim jacket, and the moment she stepped over the automatic gates, Mr. DumbGuard (his face was so 'yong sui' - disgusting till that I even remembered his name - starts with an A and ends with a H) halted her from entering. When asked why, he says that it was his superior's orders to (in Malay) 'deny entry to anyone wearing jackets'.
Oh yeah, WTF. And of course, all of us were pissed with this sudden change of events. Mr. DumbGuard furthur explains that this is to 'curb the problem of shoplifters' (oh yeah WTF, like that's not going to backfire by ruining their business). Dad persuaded that this is unreasonable, but Mr. DumbGuard decides to stick with the 'orders'. Fine. XXXXX Hypermarket is going to lose a business transaction thanks to their 'effective' security.
Before we retreat, I uttered 'Gila betul' while passing by Mr. DumbGuard, but Mr. DumbGuard replies with 'Betulllll'. 'Betulllll' my foot.
Though Dad threatened that we shall all go home immediately, but well, I know my Dad - he's not going to let this matter to get away from him. Seconds later we found ourselves in front of the Customer Service nearby, and after listening to Dad's complaint, one of the receptionists say that my sis' attire was OK, but the security guards were a bit too paranoid about this issue.
Good thing that she decides to help us out, and we were back to the entrance in no time to reason it out with Mr. DumbGuard. He was a bit surprised to see who we've called upon, but he insists that he was 'doing his job'. The receptionist then asked for one of the foremen in the Security division to show up to the scene, and couple of minutes later the issue was resolved, and finally we get to do our shopping.
I have no idea if their management knows about this, but well, if they still let their Security Division to run their hypermarket show like this, I've got a picture here, though not an accurate one :-
Let's assume that 1 out of 100 people wear jackets to XXXXX.
And the security guard chases every single one of them out of the gates.
Point is, not all of them come alone - there are those who came with their families. And from 'Lilo & Stitch' (I can't believe I actually watched that, *&^%$#@!), family means 'no one should be left behind'.
And an average visiting family going out to shop consists of, say, 4 people.
So that's more or less 4 out of 100 -> 1 out of 25 people being denied access into the hypermarket.
If the hypermarket can make a business transaction out of everyone who visited, that means they are gonna lose about 4% of their overall sales.
And that's not all - the customers who are being denied for entry may not return. For maybe, well, a long, long time.
That's gonna hurt a lot.
Well, like I said the above scenario wasn't accurate, but it's really happening in a much smaller scale (maybe), and it's undeniable that this is causing indirect losses to said hypermarket.
Let's just hope that their management realizes the 'good' deed their Security Division has come up with - and fix it ASAP.
goodbye and hello, in 2 weeks time
11 years ago
1 comment:
@Ping: I prefer to keep the store's name anonymous. Who knows what kind of cyberlaw might touch on me?
@lobak: Very sad indeed =(
Anyway, here's what a friend of mine told me (well, I hope he didn't mind me posting it on here :P)
"Well I find this whole scenario very interesting.
One of the problems of our country is that we seem to like to judge and react too harshly on the actions of the extreme minority.
In this case, the Security Division wishes to reduce shoplifting cases - which probably is barely 1% of their customer statistic.
So in their reasoning, they'll rather punish or cause inconvenience to the other 99% of their legal customer than lose the some money to the troublemaking 1%.
But guess what the real irony is..
The consumer base themselves would judge a whole multi-national hypermarket based on ONE individual guard's over-reaction.
Blogger's father was right to approach this matter to the customer service rather than judge the whole system to be flawed.
The wrong actions of the few does not dictate that there is a problem with the world.
This goes for large organizations as well as individuals."
Well, come to think of it, we too have to reflect upon ourselves too. Hehe. :P
Post a Comment