WTF?! Across the United States, consumers are confronting a new kind of obstacle when seeking help from companies and government agencies: a maze of automated systems, endless wait times, and bureaucratic hurdles that seem designed to wear people down. This phenomenon, known as "sludge," is quietly reshaping the customer service experience, often leaving individuals frustrated, exhausted, and, in many cases, defeated.
Sludge refers to the administrative barriers, such as convoluted phone trees, repetitive paperwork, and unclear procedures, that make it difficult for people to access services or resolve problems. The term was popularized by legal scholar Cass R. Sunstein and economist Richard H. Thaler, who argued that these frictions can discourage people from claiming benefits, contesting errors, or even participating in essential programs. Recent research indicates that the impact is widespread: a growing number of Americans report feeling anger and even a desire for revenge after experiencing poor customer service, according to the National Customer Rage Survey.
The roots of sludge can be traced to technological and organizational changes in how companies manage customer interactions. The introduction of the automatic call distributor in the mid-20th century revolutionized customer service by routing calls to available agents, making the process more efficient for businesses but often less satisfying for customers. Today, most people encounter interactive voice response (IVR) systems – automated menus that require callers to speak or press buttons to navigate options before reaching a human representative, if they ever do.
These technologies are designed to maximize efficiency and reduce costs for companies. Calls are handled according to strict metrics: agents are evaluated on how quickly they resolve issues, the number of calls they answer, and the frequency with which they escalate problems to supervisors.
As a result, agents are often given limited authority and information, making it difficult for them to address complex or unusual cases. Some companies even set up systems that intentionally increase friction, such as requiring customers to use specific language to access rebates or programming phone systems to disconnect after a certain period on hold.
The incentive structure behind sludge is subtle but powerful. Rather than explicitly instructing agents to deny help, companies set targets for reducing refunds, credits, or payouts. These targets are passed down through management, shaping the behavior of frontline employees without direct orders. The result is a system where helping customers can be at odds with meeting performance goals.
Sludge is not limited to the private sector. Government agencies also use complex procedures and legal jargon that can discourage people from applying for benefits or contesting decisions. Research by public policy experts Pamela Herd and Donald Moynihan has demonstrated that these administrative burdens can serve as policy tools, effectively limiting access to programs such as Medicaid or voter registration, particularly for marginalized communities.
The psychological effects of sludge are significant. Prolonged exposure to bureaucratic obstacles can erode trust in institutions and foster a sense of powerlessness. People may eventually give up on seeking help, pay erroneous bills, or accept unfavorable outcomes simply to avoid further hassle. For some, the experience is so draining that it becomes a source of lasting resentment and cynicism.
Despite the pervasiveness of sludge, there are efforts to push back. Regulatory initiatives, such as the Federal Trade Commission's "Click to Cancel" rule, aim to simplify the process for consumers to cancel subscriptions and memberships. International organizations are promoting "sludge audits" to identify and reduce unnecessary administrative barriers. Some researchers predict that the European Union will soon guarantee the right to speak with a human representative, recognizing the limits of automation in customer service.
As artificial intelligence becomes more integrated into customer service, experts warn that the challenges may intensify. Automated systems can process large volumes of requests, but they may lack the flexibility and empathy necessary to resolve unique or sensitive issues. Without careful oversight, the drive for efficiency could further erode the quality of service and deepen public frustration.
Image credit: sarah b
