약 2,000달러를 주문한 전기자전거가 배송 사고로 사라진 한 소비자가, 오직 AI 챗봇만 연결해주는 기업들의 고객센터 시스템으로 인해 수개월간 고통받은 사례를 다룹니다. 이는 기업들이 비용 절감을 위해 도입한 AI 고객센터가 소비자의 문제 해결을 오히려 방해하는 '슬럿지(Sludge)' 전략으로 변질되었음을 보여줍니다.
번역된 본문
몇 달 전, 약혼녀와 저는 과감하게 전기자전거 두 대에 돈을 썼습니다. 우리는 특히 언덕이 많은 도시인 애틀랜타의 가장 경사가 심한 지역에 살고 있었고, 마침 두 사람 모두 직장에서 보너스를 받은 터라 자전거 한 대당 거의 2,000달러에 달하는 가격이 잠시나마 합리적으로 느껴졌습니다. 우리는 온라인으로 주문했고 며칠 뒤, 약혼녀의 멋지고 다양한 기능이 탑재된 자전거가 우리 집 문 앞에 도착했습니다. 하지만 다른 소매업체에서 별도로 구매한 제 자전거는 배송이 지연되고, 또 지연되고, 다시 지연되었습니다. 드디어 어느 수요일 저녁, FedEx로부터 제 자전거가 저희 주소로 배송되어 서명이 완료되었다는 확인 문자를 받았습니다. 하지만 이는 말이 안 되는 일이었습니다. 그 문자를 받았을 때 저는 부엌에 서서 자전거도 없이 에어프라이어로 닭허벅지살을 굽고 있었거든요. 아파트 밖을 확인해 보았지만 소포는 없었습니다. 그래서 주문 확인 내역을 살펴봤고, 자전거가 정체불명의 이니셜 'M.M.'이라는 사람에 의해 서명되었다는 것을 알게 되었습니다. 그건 저도, 약혼녀도, 우리 건물에 사는 누구의 이니셜도 아니었습니다. 물건이 도난당했든, 잘못 놓였든, 아니면 잘못된 주소로 배송되었든 간에, 그 원인을 따지는 것보다 해결책을 찾는 것이 더 중요했습니다. 저는 다음 날 FedEx 고객센터에 전화를 걸어 도움을 요청하며 이 문제를 해결하려고 나섰습니다. 하지만 그 이후 겪은 일은 수개월 동안 지속된 끔찍한 고객센터 지옥의 심연으로의 추락이었습니다. FedEx, 자전거 회사, 은행, 신용카드 회사, 심지어 지역 경찰서까지 수많은 가상의 챗봇 대기실에서 수시간을 허비했습니다. 그저 저의 2,000달러짜리 문제를 해결해 줄 수 있는 살아있는 진짜 사람과 이야기하고 싶었을 뿐인데도 말입니다. 새로운 형태의 '슬럿지(Sludge)' 제 상황에서 가장 이상한 점은 이런 일이 이제 너무나도 흔해졌다는 것입니다. 최근 몇 년간 기업들은 고객센터 부서에 AI를 매우 적극적으로 도입해 왔으며, 이 과정에서 종종 인간 직원의 일자리를 희생시키기도 했습니다. 4월에 발표된 고객센터 리더들을 대상으로 한 설문조사에 따르면, 응답자의 31%가 이미 AI 도입으로 인해 직원 수를 줄였거나 줄일 계획이라고 답했습니다. 조사에 참여한 리더들의 다수는 직원들을 단순히 해고하는 대신 새로운 역할로 전환하거나 업무를 추가하고 있다고 말했습니다. 하지만 일부 리더들은 더 대담했습니다. 버라이존(Verizon)의 CEO 댄 슐만(Dan Schulman)은 최근 블룸버그와의 인터뷰에서 AI가 회사의 고객 서비스 업무 중 '상당 부분'을 대체할 가능성이 높으며, 이 분야가 해당 기술로 인한 변화에 가장 많이 노출된 비즈니스 부문 중 하나라고 언급했습니다. 저와 같은 소비자들에게 이는 수십 년간 형편없는 고객센터의 특징이었던 환멸을 느끼게 하는 대기 시간, 통화 대기 음악, 그리고 아무런 대답도 아닌 대답들을 인간의 따뜻함은 빼고 훨씬 날카롭고 극대화된 버전으로 느끼게 만듭니다. 게다가 이러한 시스템은 때때로 문제 해결을 추구하는 고객들을 좌절시키려는 의도, 즉 업계에서 '슬럿지(Sludge)'라고 부르는 전술을 통해 고의로 사용되기도 합니다. 에모리 대학교의 마케팅 교수이자 소비자 심리학 연구자인 라이언 해밀턴(Ryan Hamilton)이 지적하듯이, AI는 단순히 이러한 슬럿지에 새로운 형태의 얼굴을 부여했을 뿐입니다. 해밀턴은 "슬럿지는 AI 이전부터도 존재했다"며, "하지만 다른 모든 것들과 마찬가지로 AI는 그 디스토피아적인 성격을 한층 더 끌어올렸을 뿐"이라고 말합니다. 자연스럽게 발생하는 나쁜 경험이든, 고의적인 슬럿지든, 아니면 둘의 결합이든 간에, 소비자들이 주도하는 AI 고객 서비스의 현 상태에 만족하지 않는다는 것은 명백합니다. 미국, 영국, 캐나다 소비자들을 대상으로 5월에 발표된 보고서에 따르면, 59%가 AI 고객 서비스 상담원에 좌절감을 느낀다고 답했습니다. 동시에 85%는 실제 사람과 대화하는 것을 선호한다고 말했습니다. 저만의 개인적인 챗봇 지옥 저의 전기자전거가 사라졌을 때, 거의 모든 전화가 저를 챗봇으로 연결시켰으며, FedEx의 AI 상담봇은 제가 사람 상담원과 연결해 달라는 요청을 반복적으로 무시했습니다. 심지어 저희 지역 경찰서조차 이 딜레마를 더 비인간적으로 만들었습니다. 분실물 신고를 하려고 전화했을 때, 경찰은 저에게 챗봇에 개인정보를 남기고 경찰관이 나중에 연락할 때까지 기다리라고 안내했습니다. 결국 저는 두 가지 신고를 시도했습니다.
Comment Loader Save Story Save this story Comment Loader Save Story Save this story A few months ago, my fiancée and I splurged on a pair of ebikes . We live in an especially hilly area of Atlanta, which is an especially hilly city, and we’d both just gotten bonuses at work, making the nearly $2,000 per bike feel, for a moment, digestible. We placed our orders online, and days later, my fiancée’s beautiful, feature-rich bike arrived at our door. Mine, bought separately from a different retailer, was delayed, then delayed again, and again. Finally, one Wednesday evening, I got a text from FedEx confirming that my bike had been delivered to our address and signed for. This seemed impossible, considering that when the text arrived, I was standing in my kitchen, bicycle-less, air-frying a batch of chicken thighs. I checked outside our apartment; my package wasn’t there. So, I checked my order confirmation, only to learn the bike had been signed for by someone with the mysterious initials “M.M.,” which don’t match those of myself, my fiancée, or anyone in our building. Whether it was stolen, misplaced, or delivered to the wrong address didn’t matter as much as finding a solution. I set out to do that the following day by calling FedEx's customer service line for help. What followed was a monthslong descent into the bowels of customer service hell, during which I spent hours in virtual, chatbot -governed waiting rooms—with FedEx, the bicycle company, my bank, my credit card company, and even my local police department—desperately trying to find a real, living person who would speak to me, let alone solve my $2,000 problem. The New “Sludge” Perhaps the strangest thing about my situation is how incredibly normal it has become. In recent years, corporations have employed artificial intelligence with a particular verve in their customer service arms, often at the cost of human employees. In a survey of customer service leaders published in April, 31 percent said they have already reduced or are planning to reduce headcount due to AI adoption. A majority of the surveyed leaders say they are shifting their human agents into new roles or adding new tasks to their workload rather than simply laying them off. Some leaders have been more brazen, though. Verizon CEO Dan Schulman recently told Bloomberg that AI will likely replace a “large percentage” of the company’s customer service work, noting that it’s one of the business sectors most exposed to changes brought on by the technology. For consumers like myself, this has led to a less human, more acute version of the demoralizing wait times, on-hold music, and non-answers that have characterized bad customer service for decades. What’s more, these systems are sometimes employed intentionally, via an industry tactic known as “ sludge ,” in an attempt to discourage customers seeking resolution. As Ryan Hamilton, a marketing professor and consumer psychology researcher at Emory University, points out, AI has simply given sludge a new face. “Sludge existed before AI,” Hamilton says. “But AI, like with everything else, has just sort of ramped up the dystopian nature of it.” Whether it’s due to organically bad experiences, intentional sludge, or some combination of both, it’s clear that shoppers are not happy with the state of AI-led customer service. In a report published in May and featuring consumers from the US, UK, and Canada, 59 percent said they were frustrated with AI customer service agents . Meanwhile, 85 percent said they’d prefer to speak with a real person. My Personal Chatbot Hell When my ebike went missing, nearly every phone call led me to a chatbot, with FedEx’s AI agents often ignoring my requests to speak with a human representative. Even my local police department made the dilemma more inhuman. When I called them to file a missing property report, I was prompted to leave my information with a chatbot and wait for an officer to contact me back. Ultimately, I tried to file two police reports: one over the phone and one via the department’s website. The first time, I never heard back. The second time, I got a call back, but it came during a work meeting, so I missed it. There was no voicemail, and when I tried to return the call, I found myself, again, in the same chatbot-run waiting room. So I went the corporate route again. I wrangled FedEx into opening a claim for my missing bike, although the company resolved it over email with an automated message to say that my bike was, in fact, missing—but that I’d have to contact the shipper for any restitution. When I called the bike company, I was able to bypass its online chatbot and get a real person on the phone. In the end, though, the best they could do was convince FedEx to compensate me for the shipping, which was a measly one-tenth of the total amount I spent. Then, I tried appealing the purchase via my bank and my card company, but both led me through long, chatbot-filled rabbit holes that ended with one human, finally, telling me they couldn’t help me, since the package was technically lost on FedEx’s watch. Sunk Cost Though it’s afforded gobs of hype, agentic AI is still in its infancy; Meta’s Toolformer , a model that was considered groundbreaking for its ability to call upon external tools when in doubt, is just three years old. In my situation, a better chatbot may have directed my calls to the right person, or, given the amount of shipping data FedEx has at its disposal, it might have even tracked down my bike. What remains to be seen, though, is whether corporations can employ more advanced tools to the benefit of the consumer. Hamilton says that some companies adopt technologies like agentic AI customer service bots without a full appreciation of how much they’ll negatively affect the customer experience. “Sometimes they’re aware,” he says. “They’re willing to accept that trade-off.” While companies in some industries can afford to get away with poor customer service, Hamilton says, others cannot. And in a world where AI-led consumer interaction is increasingly the norm, executives will have to find other ways to differentiate themselves, potentially through better service. There’s a risk these changes are “smoothing out the service dimension,” he says, “where everyone is going to have the same AI call center, no matter what industry you’re in.” Ravi Dhar, a professor at Yale and the director of the school’s Center for Customer Insights, told me he sees a kind of sunk-cost fallacy driving AI implementation across several business sectors, not just customer service. Global spending on AI tools is expected to ramp up sharply this year , potentially leaving many leaders pot-committed to their implementation, even if things aren’t going as planned. “If you’re a CEO,” Dhar says, “you’re getting questions from all of the investors, from Wall Street, like, ‘Hey, what is your AI strategy, first of all, and is it showing any return on investment? You’re spending all this money.’” Hamilton believes many companies are making decisions based on “optimism,” assuming an all-in approach to AI chatbots will eventually pay off. In the meantime, though, they could be inadvertently damaging their reputations with bad service. “They kind of assume that AI will catch up, or it won’t be that bad,” he said. “And it can, in some circumstances, be quite bad.” During my ebike saga, I was immensely annoyed by the chatbots themselves. More so, I was annoyed by the fact that no one seemed to care that I was stuck with them. This idea, that a corporation could hide, intentionally or unintentionally, behind a wall of under-equipped AI tools, was a tough pill to swallow. Nearly three months later, my bike and I are still trapped in chatbot hell. FedEx never found my package, I was never reimbursed beyond the shipping fees, and I’m still out around $1,700. When reached for comment, the Atlanta Police Department told me they had in fact dispatched an officer to my place