Serving customers’ needs should be a top priority for power companies, irrespective of the regulatory construct and business model. Transformation doesn’t change this basic fact, but how do we...
How to avoid a Texas-style backlash.
why many utilities are struggling to come up with a sensible strategy for engaging customers; we’re playing catch up and learning to view end users as customers instead of captive ratepayers.
But the problem isn’t just about utility strategy. It’s also about customer expectations. Most ratepayers view electric and gas utility service as public infrastructure, like roads and sewer systems. The only time they think about it is when it’s not working right. So most customers probably will resist greater engagement with utilities, and the harder we try, the more annoyed they’re likely to become.
In Texas, that situation has changed somewhat, with a small army of retail competitors fighting over customers, and providing services delivered via the networks of Oncor, Centerpoint and several other wires companies. Texans today are shopping for their energy suppliers in a way that resembles the wireless phone market, comparing the features and prices of various service offerings. This is changing the way customers view utility services, and leading to some creative approaches to services and pricing—with companies offering menus of services, delivered under fixed, indexed and variable rate plans.
Nevertheless, despite this competition, the franchised utility compact is alive and well in Texas, vis-à-vis the exclusive franchises of Oncor and the other wires companies. And Oncor has learned the hard way that as the delivery company, it takes the brunt of consumers’ anger over almost everything bad that happens with the delivered service—no matter who’s actually providing the energy, or how many advanced features Oncor’s new meters can accommodate.
The class action lawsuit against Oncor might be a classic example of shooting the messenger for bad news, but the controversy has executives spooked—and not just in Texas. Utility leaders across the country know bad news is coming for their customers, and the smart-grid infrastructure that’s now being installed might get a bad rap, especially if promised benefits don’t materialize in an obvious and meaningful way.
In this environment, customer engagement might be as much about damage control as it is about helping customers understand and manage their options.
Ignorance is Bliss
Between green mandates and long-delayed cap-ex investments, utility bills likely will be going up for many utility customers during the next several years. Smart meters and energy management systems are widely viewed as primary tools for putting customers in charge of managing their own consumption. Accordingly, many utilities are ramping up efforts to educate customers about the new technologies and options; Oncor itself is in the middle of a customer-engagement roadshow, going from community to community with a mobile smart-home demonstration, complete with smart appliances, a model home-area network and tour guides to explain it all.
But despite such sophisticated outreach efforts, the whole concept of engagement might be missing a key point: customers don’t want changes that make life more complicated. Any changes should make things better— i.e., improved service with lower costs. New technologies and options shouldn’t require anything of customers who just want to maintain the status quo—and they must provide clear and compelling benefits to those who choose to become