Customers say we never told them about a delay
Compare planned dispatch date changes with outgoing customer messages. Use what you find to change the way this work is handled this week.
This is one cause behind related problems such as Debit notes arrive without warning. Bad news is held back until the customer calls. The checks below concentrate on this cause rather than repeating the full symptom diagnosis. The quality or customer-service coordinator usually hears about this through a phone call or a last-minute request. Bad news is held back until the customer calls. A usable fix starts with evidence and one person accountable for the next decision.
What it looks like
- The quality or customer-service coordinator has to search the complaint register and customer file before answering a routine question.
- Bad news is held back until the customer calls.
- Staff cannot locate the complaint reference, batch record and customer acknowledgement for the latest case.
- People spot the gap after a disputed condition is remembered differently by the customer and factory.
- The open case has no documented owner, due date or proof of closure.
Why it happens
The specific failure is left unchecked. Bad news is held back until the customer calls. If there is no recorded owner for that condition, the effect travels to the next team.
The work and its evidence move separately. Teams respond to the immediate customer demand but may not preserve the defect, affected batch and agreement in one case file.
A later hand-off exposes the gap. Sales, quality and dispatch can each close their own task while the customer issue remains unresolved.
The less obvious cause: A control may exist on paper but still fail in practice. Test whether someone actually performs this check: find jobs where production knew the delay before sales did.
Find the first failed hand-off before changing staff targets. A completed register alone cannot prove that physical work happened.
What to check first
- Compare planned dispatch date changes with outgoing customer messages. Compare dates, quantities and references. Mark an unconfirmed difference as unverified. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.
- Find jobs where production knew the delay before sales did. Record the affected item or party and the person who can verify the detail. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.
- Check whether the new date was internally confirmed before promising it. Mark each exception open, waiting for evidence or resolved, with a named next owner. Finish the first pass in under 30 minutes and name the missing source if needed.
How to fix it
- Start with one live case. Compare planned dispatch date changes with outgoing customer messages. Keep the source reference before changing the record.
- Make the control explicit. Notify the customer when a committed date becomes at risk. Put the rule in the register or sheet that staff already use.
- Set a second guardrail. Record the revised date, reason and acknowledgement in the order file. Keep customer containment separate from permanent corrective action. The customer needs an immediate response even when the cause is still being investigated.
- Assign the next decision. The quality or customer-service coordinator records the action and its due date. A separately authorised person signs off changes affecting money, safety or customer terms.
- Review the open list. Start with items affecting today or tomorrow. Keep third-party commitments separate from completed actions.
- Check whether the rule holds. For four weeks, count cases reopened or unresolved past their agreed response date. Reopen repeat cases and identify where the control failed.
Copy this complaint and corrective-action register into a register or sheet:
| Reference / item | What went wrong | Evidence checked | Action owner | Promised date | Status / decision |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P015 (example) | delay not communicated | Compare planned dispatch date changes with outgoing customer mess | Quality or customer-service coordinator | Set at review | Open |
Retain the source reference and limit access to authorised staff.
A worked example
Illustrative example only. A shipment slips by four days but the buyer learns only after the truck fails to arrive. Start by locating the source that would verify these amounts or quantities. The quality or customer-service coordinator records the exact exception, gives it an owner and checks the next relevant event. This example shows how to structure the decision. It does not claim that a business achieved a saving or avoided a loss.
How you know it is fixed
- Completeness: Count cases reopened or unresolved past their agreed response date at the same time every week. Record the count and the oldest item, rather than just saying things are better.
- Timeliness: Check whether the assigned person took the next action before the agreed cut-off. Keep missed dates visible instead of replacing them silently.
- Proof of closure: Sample three closed cases and locate the complaint reference, batch record and customer acknowledgement. A tick without supporting evidence is still an open control gap.
When it is more serious
Contractual notices or export commitments are missed. Hold irreversible decisions until the material facts are verified. For contracts, tax, wages or legal rights, retain source documents and consult a qualified adviser. Repeated exceptions after four reviews may require changing the control.
This works if someone does it every day. In most businesses, that someone is you.
Questions people ask
What should we check before taking action?
Compare planned dispatch date changes with outgoing customer messages. Keep its date and reference. Then compare it with the complaint reference, batch record and customer acknowledgement; if they disagree, record the difference before changing either one.
Who should own the next action?
The quality or customer-service coordinator should own the open item. The person authorised to change money, a technical standard or a customer commitment must still approve that decision.
Can we run this control without new software?
No. Start with a shared sheet or register containing the reference, owner, promised date, status and evidence. Once those fields are reliable, decide whether a system connection is worth setting up.
When is the issue serious enough to escalate?
Contractual notices or export commitments are missed. Keep supporting records and get specialist help where relevant.