[HN Gopher] Klarna changes its AI tune and again recruits humans...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Klarna changes its AI tune and again recruits humans for customer
       service
        
       Author : elsewhen
       Score  : 159 points
       Date   : 2025-05-11 17:35 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.customerexperiencedive.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.customerexperiencedive.com)
        
       | GreenGames wrote:
       | I don't understand what Klarna is doing here lol
        
         | firtoz wrote:
         | They went too hard too early
        
       | gregdoesit wrote:
       | Either Klarna is really good at pulling strings to get media
       | coverage, or mainstream media does not fact checking themselves.
       | About a year ago, the company was everywhere in the media when
       | its CEO announced that it created an AI bot that is doing the
       | equivalent of 700 fulltime customer service folks.
       | 
       | I did what seemingly no other publication reporting on it did:
       | signed up for Klarna, bought one item and used this bot.
       | 
       | I was... not impressed?
       | 
       | Klarna's "AI bot" felt like the "L1 support flow" that every
       | other company already has in-place: without AI! Think like when
       | you have a problem with your UberEats order and 80% of cases are
       | resolved without a human interaction (e.g. when an item is
       | missing for your item.)
       | 
       | I walked through the bot's capabilities [1] and my conclusion was
       | that pretty much every other company did this before (automating
       | the obvious support cases.) The real question should have been:
       | why did Klarna not do it before? And when it did, why did it
       | build a wonky AI bot, instead of more intuitive workflows than
       | other companies did?
       | 
       | My sense is that Klarna really wants to be seen as an "AI-first
       | tech company" when it goes public, and not a "buy now pay later
       | loan company" because AI companies have higher valuations even
       | with the same revenue. But at its core, Klarna is a finance or
       | ecommerce-related company: an not much to do with AI (even if it
       | uses AI tools to make its business more efficient - regardless of
       | whether it could use non-AI tools to get the same thing done)
       | 
       | [1] https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/klarnas-ai-chatbot/
        
         | vrosas wrote:
         | To be fair, admitting their amateur foray into chatbots was an
         | abject failure and rolling it back really does put them at the
         | forefront of the AI movement.
        
         | iforgetti wrote:
         | Glen Okun of NYU business school has written about BNPL loan
         | portfolio weakness.
         | 
         | The AI marketing is just an attempt to reframe the value
         | narrative of the company before IPO. They would rather be seen
         | as an AI company than an unsecured lender of last resort.
         | 
         | The narrative on Klarna's core business is not good in any
         | case, either an extractive lender benefiting from people buying
         | what they may not afford and charging exorbitant interest or a
         | lender of last resort who has not properly underwritten the
         | risk in their portfolio. Neither is preferential to them
         | compared to a value narrative framing them as an AI company.
         | Likely the market is too skeptical in this environment to take
         | the bait however.
        
           | blibble wrote:
           | > a lender of last resort who has not properly underwritten
           | the risk in their portfolio.
           | 
           | I thought they more or less instantly offloaded the risk as
           | asset backed securities to clueless people who didn't know
           | the actual risk profile what they were buying
           | 
           | sound familiar?
        
           | spaceman_2020 wrote:
           | I can't believe it takes b-school professors to figure out
           | that people financing their DoorDash might not be the best
           | people to lend money to.
        
             | rchaud wrote:
             | This is the primary positioning tactic used across the
             | startup industry . Uber isn't a taxi app, it's actually the
             | "future front end for millions to access autonomous
             | transport". Doordash isn't a delivery app, it's an "on-
             | demand logistics" platform.
             | 
             | Similarly, Klarna isn't a shady payday loan company, it's
             | an "AI-first consumer finance play".
        
               | Avicebron wrote:
               | > "AI-first consumer finance play"
               | 
               | In a more civilized time, saying this was your plan would
               | get you chucked feet-first into a wood chipper.
        
               | runlaszlorun wrote:
               | oh I think we're heading back that way slowly...
        
           | Freak_NL wrote:
           | They are scum, and currently are suffering from increased
           | scrutiny from governments for pushing their buy-now-pay-later
           | exploitative business everywhere. In the Netherlands they are
           | even attempting to gain access to brick-and-mortar stores by
           | partnering with Adyen1 which provides the payment solutions,
           | but the government is being vocal about that being unwanted.
           | This is in addition to the unabating coverage in the media
           | about how Klarna is about as harmless as vaping -- that is,
           | they are enticing young people into buying stuff they don't
           | need2 before they can afford it.
           | 
           | Shopkeepers don't want it, but fear they must if big chains
           | start offering it, just as online shops feel like offering it
           | is unavoidable due to the popularity in certain demographics.
           | The financial watchdog doesn't like Klarna, and is increasing
           | scrutiny3.
           | 
           | If Klarna has trouble marketing their value, then that at
           | least is good news, but not unsurprising given the spate of
           | attention it received over the last two years.
           | 
           | 1: So much for the ethical side of Adyen (e.g.,
           | https://www.adyen.com/impact sounds hollow when you partner
           | with loan sharks).
           | 
           | 2: Some people are quick to defend Klarna for offering people
           | a chance to buy their necessities with what amounts to a
           | payday loan, but that is bullshit. Klarna predominantly is
           | not used for daily necessities.
           | 
           | 3: Klarna now has to state that they are offering a loan in
           | the Netherlands where they are available as payment option,
           | with the mandatory "borrowing money costs money" tag-line.
        
             | nikanj wrote:
             | Shopkeepers do want it, because it expands their market
             | from those with funds to also those without. Klarna carries
             | the lending risks, for the shopkeeps it's a risk-free
             | customer base
        
               | returnInfinity wrote:
               | that's the short term, if everyone starts to default,
               | something is going to break and come back to the shop
               | keeper.
        
               | Freak_NL wrote:
               | In the Netherlands no less than twenty trade associations
               | sent letters to the government on behalf of their
               | shopkeeper members urging legal action to prevent Klarna
               | from coming. Part of it is that Klarna is fairly
               | expensive compared to the common payment methods (i.e.,
               | cash and debit cards). Klarna charges a whopping 4% of
               | the purchase price, whereas using a debit card (perhaps
               | 95% of payments in physical shops) costs a fixed 17 euro
               | cents, and cash costs just the costs of keeping it around
               | safely and getting it to the bank.
               | 
               | But there is also the realisation that a customer who
               | uses BNPL today, won't be coming back next month when
               | they are paying off their loan.
               | 
               | Dutch shopkeepers do not want Klarna, but if major chains
               | like Primark etc. do it, they fear customers will start
               | expecting it.
        
               | ericmay wrote:
               | > But there is also the realisation that a customer who
               | uses BNPL today, won't be coming back next month when
               | they are paying off their loan.
               | 
               | I don't think that's a good argument. For shops and
               | customers that utilize BNPL you are not typically making
               | routine purchases at the shop anyway because the minimums
               | are $50 or more (merchants can negotiate those terms with
               | the provider) but the base tends to be around $50.
               | 
               | If you buy a bicycle using BNPL you're not like coming
               | back to the shop the next month and buying a new bike
               | again.
               | 
               | BNPL increases sales and merchants really like using it
               | which is why they are signing up for it more and more.
               | Basically the increase in cost is worth it to increase
               | sales.
               | 
               | There may be some bad social dynamics, taking out loans,
               | etc. but generally both merchants and customers like
               | using those products which is why they use them.
        
               | gmd63 wrote:
               | They might say they want it, but like a wise parent
               | guiding the BNPL spending habits of a teenager,
               | government is right to step in and stop shopkeepers from
               | seeking to cheese their way through business (only in the
               | short term) by relying on a fickle and unsustainable base
               | of new creditors.
               | 
               | Putting a new group of people into predatory debt is a
               | nice way to juice your numbers before you dump your
               | shares, but it's not a good way to sustain an economy
               | focused on producing real value.
        
               | skeeter2020 wrote:
               | that depends on the deal. Restaurants don't wnat meal
               | delivery services because of the terrible economics but
               | really have no choice if the delivery company captures
               | the customer base.
        
           | subtlesoftware wrote:
           | If you default on your Klarna loan, you could pay them back
           | in support hours:
           | 
           | > The pilot has started small, with two of the new breed of
           | customer-service agents live now, but the ambition is to tap
           | into candidates such as students or rural populations. "We
           | also know there are tons of Klarna users that are very
           | passionate about our company and would enjoy working for us,"
           | he added.
           | 
           | [from the bloomberg article:
           | https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-08/klarna-
           | tu...]
        
         | Avicebron wrote:
         | The problem with "AI-first" companies is that they really are
         | just shells for people who want to be "AI-First" engineers, and
         | not "guy who solved my problem affordably and was nice"
         | engineers. The average person doesn't care how you ended up
         | fixing the weird charge on their account, it's how fast and how
         | proficiently did you fix it
        
         | cosmicgadget wrote:
         | I liked your comment but don't think the shot at media was
         | necessary. A company replacing workers is news enough and the
         | fact checking need only be to validate that information. The
         | "as good as 700 workers" I assume was presented as a claim, not
         | a fact.
         | 
         | Evaluating the effectiveness of the AI bot is another matter
         | and firmly in the investigative journalism sphere.
         | Coincidentally that is an awesome application of a blog.
        
           | AznHisoka wrote:
           | Sorry, but its attitudes like yours that make it easy for
           | media to keep spouting out ridiculous claims/lies, and get
           | away with it.
           | 
           | Shots are absolutely necessary when its warranted. Full.
           | Stop.
        
             | cosmicgadget wrote:
             | Am I allowed to respond once you've used "full. stop."?
        
         | darth_avocado wrote:
         | I think this is in the broader context of Klarna CEO claiming
         | he had stopped hiring for almost a year because of AI. It was a
         | big talking point for a lot of CEOs and LinkedIn influencers.
         | Big enough that incompetent management across the industry was
         | following Klarna's steps and reducing staffing (Not because AI,
         | but because they could short staff teams with AI as an excuse).
         | That is why when there is a clear evidence that Klarna was
         | completely wrong, it needs to be talked about.
         | 
         | Previous discussion:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42432494
        
       | kgeist wrote:
       | >While Klarna pioneered the use of AI in customer service
       | 
       | Local firms here have had bots in customer service for many years
       | now, even well before the transformers era. Is Klarna living in a
       | bubble?
        
         | cosmicgadget wrote:
         | They are pioneering too hard to pay attention to the rest of
         | the industry.
        
           | bookofjoe wrote:
           | Quote of the day.
        
       | baobabKoodaa wrote:
       | A few days ago Klarna's AI bot lied to me that it was human, lied
       | about speaking Finnish as its native tongue, and wrote me a Haiku
       | about Klarna's cashback.
        
         | bornfreddy wrote:
         | That's actually a great captcha - if the presumed human can
         | write a haiku about something very quickly, they are probably a
         | bot.
        
           | dakiol wrote:
           | Umm, I think any respectable human would simply deny writing
           | a haiku. So, a bot can simply mimick that behaviour.
        
             | dmd wrote:
             | Can, but won't!
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | Because system prompts cannot be changed?
        
               | baobabKoodaa wrote:
               | Because it's hard to draw the line on which requests
               | should be refused and which should not be refused,
               | because it's hard for an AI to pretend to be human, and
               | because they have other objectives to work toward rather
               | than just passing the Turing test.
        
             | baobabKoodaa wrote:
             | Sure, it could. In theory.
        
               | geysersam wrote:
               | Bots love haiku. They're hopeless romantics.
        
       | abhisek wrote:
       | > AI gives us speed. Talent gives us empathy
       | 
       | Not sure if this is the primary reason. It just seems to me their
       | AI adoption was unable to meet the baseline effectiveness of
       | their human agents.
        
         | AIPedant wrote:
         | "Empathy is when you use common-sense reasoning to solve
         | problems that weren't explicitly covered during training."
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | What does empathy even mean in the context of payday-loans-as-
         | a-service? They'll lure people debt traps and then bleed them
         | dry, but pretend to feel bad about doing it?
        
       | aerhardt wrote:
       | I whole-heartedly believe in free markets, but at the same time,
       | fuck everything about the circus clown show that is modern
       | techno-capitalism.
        
         | treyd wrote:
         | This is where incrementally making markets more and more "free"
         | gets us.
        
         | mystraline wrote:
         | Go hack and read Marx and Engels, and also study Ned Ludd and
         | Luddism/luddites.
         | 
         | There is NOTHING special about current technology in
         | application of capitalism. Its always been exploitive, and
         | grinds people into used and nearly dead objects.
         | 
         | The answer isn't reforming capitalism, either. FDR tried, and
         | we're back to the Black Friday set of events... But in this
         | case, we're even worse off with alienation of basically every
         | country as some sort of oneupmanship.
        
           | lukan wrote:
           | So .. your answer is to try socialism again?
           | 
           | Were there any major updates to the agenda, since it was
           | tried the last time?
           | 
           | If not, why expect a different outcome next time?
        
             | mystraline wrote:
             | Go actually study what's going on in China, rather than
             | eating up all the US propaganda.
             | 
             | What they're doing in tech innovation is astonishing. And
             | you can look at even just something like high speed rail,
             | and its amazing. They're also connecting western Europe as
             | well to the rail system. Look up Belt and Road initiative.
             | 
             | They're also on the forefront in green/clean tech. And
             | thorium reactors. Oh, and fusion.
             | 
             | I'd say their 'try' is doing damned well. Its certainly
             | blowing the USA out of the water. Well, unless you count
             | number of homeless. We're beating them handedly there.
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | Oh, you count china as socialism?
               | 
               | I rather meant the more traditional approaches, like the
               | one I was born into that fell apart. China as of now is
               | rather state capitalism to me.
               | 
               | And yes, they are quite effective in some areas.
               | Totalitarism can be. Doesn't mean I would like to copy
               | them.
        
         | fullshark wrote:
         | Maybe you should reconsider where your heart lies, and ask if
         | "free markets" that have worked so well for modern society have
         | always been heavily regulated in order ensure they serve
         | citizens beyond capital owners.
        
         | okanat wrote:
         | Our system isn't a free market. With 95 years of corporate
         | copyright you'll have no free market. Neither with 20 years of
         | patents. China probably has freer markets than West now,
         | because since 1950s the West is constantly siding with
         | mono/oligopolies that are against free market. The origins of
         | capitalism is against free market. Neither Britain nor the
         | Netherlands got their capitalism head-start because they let
         | their companies to fairly fight. They created monopolies to
         | terrorize, genocide, and impoverish people.
         | 
         | Startup ecosystem is against free market. YC is against free
         | market. They want the startups to grow at the cost of
         | everything else and buy out all their competition. There is no
         | fair competition nor free market there.
        
       | g9yuayon wrote:
       | I'm more curious about how much cost of customer service can
       | Klarna cut by using AI , and how much marginal improvement to
       | their customer service can Klarna achieve. Customer service
       | should be an amazing application to AI: AI solves X% of the
       | problems, and for the remaining 1 - X% of the problems, customers
       | will tell the system deterministically, which means the company
       | can continuously improve their systems with customer feedbacks.
        
       | osigurdson wrote:
       | I think it is generally in the best interest of companies to
       | overstate what they are able to do with AI. Investors aren't
       | interesting in hearing "we tried vibe coding but got tired of
       | reviewing and fixing the trash code it produced". No, they want
       | to hear "we've reduced our headcount by 40% while increasing
       | customer satisfaction by 60%". Overstating AI adoption and
       | success amplifies P/E ratios.
        
         | candiddevmike wrote:
         | I wonder if investors see AI usage as some kind of reassurance
         | that their other investments are going to make money. Basically
         | everyone is lying through their teeth to infantilize investors
         | that they made A Good Choice investing in nebulous AI
         | companies. The folks that don't play the game don't get
         | funding.
        
       | feverzsj wrote:
       | Sounds like a trick to hire human with lower salary.
        
       | iamsanteri wrote:
       | Even here people don't seem to realize, or even consider the
       | likely fact that Klarna CEO has been bullsh**ing all along. I
       | read a hugely viral post of them replacing their entire CRM with
       | AI. It's ridiculous to me people took that seriously!
        
         | rwmj wrote:
         | It's Ryanair all over again. Remember the stories about how
         | Ryanair were going to make passengers pay to use the toilets,
         | or the "all standing" plane (which would obviously be highly
         | illegal, but credulous journalists printed it anyway). All a
         | very cheap, very successful marketing campaign.
        
         | AznHisoka wrote:
         | Absolutely, people need to assume everything they read in media
         | is wrong, then find evidence to prove otherwise. Klarna
         | replaced their CRM with AI? Good. Its absolutely false until I
         | find enough evidence going forward that its true
        
       | kace91 wrote:
       | I went through klarna's interview process some time ago.
       | 
       | I had to go through both reasonable and weird steps, including IQ
       | tests for some reason. I passed them all, and then I was ghosted,
       | and upon reaching out I was met with months of excuses asking me
       | to wait (the recruiter is on vacation, we're waiting for the new
       | budget to be approved, "I personally forgot to reply", and a few
       | others). I eventually stopped reaching out and never heard back.
       | 
       | If the whole company is as dysfunctional as those interactions
       | implied, I wouldn't really look up to them as trendsetters.
        
         | DanielHB wrote:
         | Yes they are, a few years ago once got a scuffle with the
         | Swedish tax agency because they were abusing some tax
         | loopholes. The tax agency came in with the bill and they just
         | immediately "layoff" 90% of the contractors working there (a
         | good chunk of the workforce). All so their quarterly statements
         | wouldn't look bad for the stock market.
         | 
         | Klarna is the prime example of toxic public companies
        
       | DebtDeflation wrote:
       | I've worked in the field of Contact Center AI for almost 10 years
       | now. Rough order of magnitude you can expect to deflect around
       | 30% of inbound contacts with an AI chatbot. You can also expect
       | to reduce agent Average Handle Time by 15-20% using AI enabled
       | semantic search and workflow automation. This is ballpark, if
       | your contacts are simpler you can do a little better, if they're
       | complex you'll do a little worse.
       | 
       | The problem is that vendors are telling companies they can
       | eliminate 80-90% (maybe even 100% if they can keep a straight
       | face) of their customer service agent jobs with AI, and that is
       | nonsense.
        
       | firefoxd wrote:
       | I spoke about this before [0]. As engineer number one in a
       | startup that specialized in customer service automation, I can
       | see how they were fooled by an upward trend. The problem is the
       | arrow plateaus at ~40%.
       | 
       | Even humans cannot handle all requests because some don't make
       | sense or are unrealistic. But at least a human can make that
       | judgement and be held accountable for their decisions. I'm
       | baffled when companies makes such drastic decisions, I'm pretty
       | sure if they had asked (they probably did and ignored them) their
       | AI team, they would have advised against firing their agents.
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43880490
        
       | lm28469 wrote:
       | Anyone with half a brain saw it coming but somehow these elite
       | executives lack basic common sense. I wonder who they are
       | surrounded with to come up with such deranged business decisions
        
       | Frummy wrote:
       | Maybe because they're learning from other swedish finance
       | companies, Swedbank lost customers due to bad customer service
       | and hired more people to answer the phone, you know so they're
       | probably watching what works for others in the same sphere
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-11 23:00 UTC)