The problem with uservoice/getsatisfaction etc. is businesses approach them as a replacement for normal support systems and then don't provide user support through them and rarely (if ever) bother with the ideas/suggestions users have, they think they're an easy get out clause for providing support (which is costly) and it ends up sucking.
When done right the systems rock, the way that Mint.com uses getsatisfaction is wonderful but the way most companies use uservoice/getsatisfaction isn't.
Perfect example of this model of support/feedback being done so wrong: Seesmic (http://feedback.seesmic.com/) just spend 5 minutes looking around, they have thousands of votes on thousands of suggestions and they've accepted only a few (back when the system is new) and now it goes completely ignored...
You should spend a second on http://www.uservoice.com/helpdesk. We've never said that UserVoice was a replacement for a support system, and we've actually very clearly stated that we think customer-powered support doesn't work as a standalone solution for 99% of companies (blog.uservoice.com/entries/customer-powered-support-doesnt-work).
UserVoice Feedback is a tool for getting prioritized feedback from your customers, not providing customer support. And how actively you respond to feedback is not something controlled by the tool, it's controlled by the company. We encourage our customers to actively respond to feedback, but we can't force them.
oh no, your product is wonderful and the problem is most definitely not with your company, it's with the way people approach it. The way that Mint.com use it (they use getsatisfaction, but it's the same model so we can treat them as the same) is the perfect example of the model working so very well, it's not a complaint / criticism of you, it's a criticism of companies that think they can just half-ass some modernisation of customer support. Just like companies that think making a facebook page and then leaving it is "social media".
Thanks for the clarification. We totally agree that any tool can be used incorrectly, which is why we're always working to educate our customers (and businesses in general) about best practices for customer service and customer feedback. One blog post at a time, we'll get people there. :)
Only problem I've had with UserVoice is that it turns into something like that stereotypical open source project bug reporter that no one monitors. You find a suggestion with 100 votes and either there's no response or something from the company that says "thanks, we'll take that under advisement" and it's not very satisfactory or anything.
That's definitely a concern here at UserVoice. We're firm believers in saying "no" (and explaining why) rather than letting ideas sit open or in "under review" or "planned" piles. We do and will continue to preach that to our customers, and we're looking at ways to actually encourage them to respond via the UX.
Good deal. I'm guessing it is in response to zendesk's change to $20/yr donated to charity deal that they started a couple weeks back. Too bad I just paid for a year of that otherwise I'd give this a run.
When done right the systems rock, the way that Mint.com uses getsatisfaction is wonderful but the way most companies use uservoice/getsatisfaction isn't.
Perfect example of this model of support/feedback being done so wrong: Seesmic (http://feedback.seesmic.com/) just spend 5 minutes looking around, they have thousands of votes on thousands of suggestions and they've accepted only a few (back when the system is new) and now it goes completely ignored...