Sometimes Obvious Churn Drivers are Not the Mobile Operator's Fault

Some customer experiences are almost-sure indicators of churn. When customers make repeated calls about service quality, churn danger exists. Opensignal, for example, says that customers who left a service provider spent more time unable to get a network signal than customers who did not leave.  

Departing customers also spent less time connected to 5G than “more-loyal” customers who did not leave. It is worth noting that “satisfied” or “happy” customers are not necessarily loyal. They simply have not left. Especially in consumer markets, even satisfied customers will churn for a better offer.  

Accounts with large numbers of trouble tickets are potential churn candidates. 

When usage of any service stops growing, or starts dropping, churn danger exists. Churn also happens early in a customer relationship when the solution is not a good fit  for the customer. 

When customers are changing geographic locations, churn danger exists. When customers reduce service plan levels, churn danger exists. Churn danger is always higher for new customer accounts than for those a firm has had for five or more years. 

Changes in management or client decision-maker behavior can signal there is higher churn risk. Low engagement can be a warning sign.  Lack of engagement by the customer also is a warning sign. 

So network experience shortfalls almost always are indicators of possible customer churn. Of course, sometimes service providers get blamed for issues caused by devices or user error. 

Those of you with Pixel 6 phones know what I mean. Someiimes the Pixel 6 issues relate to data connectivity. 

For me, the bigger problem is simply voice connections. Sometimes a phone has to act like a phone. And in this case, it is not a mobile operator problem. It is a phone problem. But some amount of service provider churn is going to happen until each user figures out it really is the device that causing the issues, not the service provider.