"Companies still need human representatives to handle the complexities of certain voice-interactions that cannot be satisfactorily synthesized and automated," said Chris Connolly, vice president of product marketing at Genesys.
Based on its findings, Clutch recommends that before implementing a phone menu, businesses should ensure that the technology will benefit the customer, not just the bottom line.
Tania Kefs, vice president of customer relations at Aircall, agrees. "If [a phone menu] is going to more quickly resolve a customer's issue and better route them to the right person they need to talk to, it's definitely beneficial," she says.
If the phone menu will only frustrate customers, though, then it shouldn't be used. Most people ranked listening to irrelevant options (69 percent) in their top three most frustrating issues with phone menus, followed by an inability to fully describe their issues (67 percent) and a lack of human interaction (43 percent).
Businesses might think that offering more options on phone menus makes them more personalized and effective. A long phone menu, however, often only frustrates customers, the research found.
That's why Ty Givens, founder and CEO of The WorkForce Pro, recommends keeping menus short. "I try to keep phone prompt options at or below three choices," he said.
Phone menus shouldn't replace human interaction, but instead make it easier and more effective.
In the end, a phone menu won't be able to answer every customer's needs, and, therefore businesses must always include the option to speak to a human. If callers cannot reach a human, they often take actions such as pressing zero (70 percent) or saying words like "agent" (65 percent), the research found
"You should always have an open-ended option [to speak to a human]. You can map out all the theoretical questions, but there's always going to be a percentage that you can't guess," Kefs said.