I intentionally said "understanding the customer", rather than "being customer-facing".
I was kinda acknowledging a relatively uncontroversial point on which the article was predicated, before moving on responding to the parent comment with my interpretation of the more novel contribution of the article.
Agreed about a lot of things having value, diversity of viewpoints and skillsets also having value and being a reality, that not everyone wants to be customer-facing, and the importance of not emphasizing one bit of folk wisdom to the exclusion of other wisdom.
Okay, maybe I just don’t understand the flow of the conversation here. Too many referents, not enough clarity about which referents we’re talking about.
Comments
I intentionally said "understanding the customer", rather than "being customer-facing".
I was kinda acknowledging a relatively uncontroversial point on which the article was predicated, before moving on responding to the parent comment with my interpretation of the more novel contribution of the article.
Agreed about a lot of things having value, diversity of viewpoints and skillsets also having value and being a reality, that not everyone wants to be customer-facing, and the importance of not emphasizing one bit of folk wisdom to the exclusion of other wisdom.
Okay, maybe I just don’t understand the flow of the conversation here. Too many referents, not enough clarity about which referents we’re talking about.