Here's another slant on this:- it's all very well expecting service engineers (who are sometimes under a fair amount of pressure, anyway) to be "star quality", suited and booted, and all the rest - but surely what really matters is can they (did they) service (and/or repair) the kit in an efficient manner?
Just a thought.
In my experience, if there's any poor communication or rudeness (how about complete indifference?) going on, it's more likely to come from the side of the user(s) (and even the patients) than from the service engineer. It was not unusual to have enough of a problem just to find someone to sign your service report!
The "personal characteristics" being mentioned should be a normal part of any service engineer's approach, I would have thought. It has certainly been the case in most I have ever met, or worked with. To be honest, some techs don't shape up very well in that regard, and usually prefer to be back in the workshop away from any "customer facing" involvement. Horses for courses.
Not everyone is PC. But there again, not everyone is a technical genius, either.
Lastly, explaining what you're doing when you're not really sure yet yourself can be a tough call (and yes, I speak from experience on that one); unless of course, you want folk to "wing it" (waffle, "smoke and mirrors"
etc.). There have always been those who try to bluff their way through. But how does the customer, with the "satisfaction list" (tick-box) in hand, distinguish the BS from the gems?
