Customer Satisfaction Surveys

Another great podcast by Church of the Customer - April 26, 2005. As usual it got me thinking. This time about how companies, specifically individuals within companies use their customer satisfaction survey data.

How often do departments create and/or modify questions that are geared towards getting the highest possible score? Is this done maliciously, or is it done in part by a desire to celebrate the things that are working? What is influencing the operational improvements - the questions or the findings?

I also wonder if the bombardment of the customer satisfaction advertisements (i.e. "JD Power & Associates say we do this better than anyone else...") we hear and see impact our thinking about what we want to hear from our customers? Are companies seeking endorsements or valuable intelligence? Or more dangerously, are they trying influence survey results for their marketing efforts?

One thing for sure is that most customer satisfaction surveys don't always connect in meaning to the customer (i.e. Does ACME company treat you with respect?). If you can't relate to the word respect in this question as a customer, the question becomes meaningless. Now imagine the effort and energy applied to improving and/or changing the variables in the company around meaningless findings...

Jackie and Ben mocked an survey interview playing roles with a company they currently do business with. Below is the question/answer response in summary:

How satisfied are you with ACME? / I don't understand the question
How likely are you to continue to repurchase from ACME? / likely
How likely are you recommend ACME? / depends, depends on the need of the person
Would you say ACME is a name you can trust? / I think so
Do you think ACME always delivers on what they promise / I think so
ACME always treats me fairly / I don't understand the question - compared to what? - if they didn't treat me fairly I wouldn't be a customer
If a probably arises, I can always count on ACME to reach a fair & satisfactory resolution / I think so
I feel proud to be an ACME customer / not really
ACME always treats me with respect / I am not sure what that means - what does it mean to me?
ACME is the perfect company like me / I am not sure what that means - I don't know other people like me that fit into this category
I cannot imagine a world without ACME / Yes, I can - other options are available

While I am not a survey expert by any means, I do see abuse often with satisfaction programs, and more often than not confusion about what to do with the findings. Probably because of the confusing findings based upon questions that are meaningless to customers - do you see how cyclical this is? I strongly encourage you to try this with a company you purchase goods or services from on a regular basis.

The Gallup CE11 questionnaire they referenced appears flawed because the definitions are too broad. So, what is the best way to measure these emotional intentions? Ben's suggestion is to use recommendation as the key indicator (yes, no, maybe), and then drill down from there.

Broken link

In my last post, I had a broken link for the great blog Improving Customer Experience (ICE). Sorry Eric!

I have also added it to my blog list for your quick reference. However, I encourage you to add this one in your Bloglines feeds. If you don't have one setup - do it now!

So, here it is - now, go read it...

Improving Customer Experience

Is your label broken?

A great post at ICE about the simple aspects of customer experience.

Before and After Brand Experience

Does this change your opinion about those little customer complaints?

Intermediaries

Customer Experience Crossroads has an interesting post on the role that intermediaries play in our lives. This role is a key part of today's buying psychology.

Consumers often wonder who they can trust given the world in which marketers lie - as Seth Godin points out (with an elongated nose)! Consumers universally are seeking to save time, effort, and money. So, if time and trust are the primary movers, then why are we seeing a shift in intermediaries in some industries?

Using the real estate industry as an example, realtors are famous for their 7% commissions. While I have always used a professional realtor, there are more and more consumers opting to use a FSBO (For Sale By Owner) program such as Home Avenue. A couple reasons I think this trend is increasing:

1. Home owners are starting to see less value added by realtors because of the broader availability of FSBO programs - the tipping point phenomenon
2. Home owners have lost trust in the real estate agents
3. Real estate agents have bombarded home owners with marketing campaigns - too much noise and clutter is impacting the amount of permission consumers give realtors
3. High home value equity gains have created enough value for the home owner to sell the home themselves, because it is worth their time and effort (and they make more money).

Given these elements, I believe that a broad erosion of trust is occurring in this industry. Perhaps even with traditional intermediaries in other industries. It is also clear that the economy plays a role in the amount of services individuals purchase from intermediaries. Moreover, this will likely lead to a shift in the gate keepers of the current intermediaries within each industry.

This appears to be further confirmation of an experience shift. The old ways of providing services are not holding up to the changing demands of consumers today. People simply want an experience that makes them better on the other side of the transaction, and where they feel good going through the process.

More to come on this subject. Thanks to Susan Abbott for igniting the talking point!

Experience = process + training

As technology continues to provide us with ways to improve the experience for our customers, we must remain diligent in studying the impact once deployed.

Retail has seen an explosion of credit card swiping machines. Have you ever noticed that none of the follow the same process? Some don't even work. They are just sitting there waiting to be used. And others are just broken. Destroyed by real pens, broken displays, and a cadre of other ailments. Some are just mounted too close to the cash register or other counter elements for you to even effectively swipe your card.

So, you have to ask yourself; why is everyone rushing to deploy these machines? I am sure it is in the hopes that it might improve the customers experience by:

1. Making it faster
2. Making it easier
3. Putting them in more control

To the best of my knowledge, there is only one company doing exceptionally well. Let me describe Target Corporation process in the hopes that others follow:

1. After depositing your items on the counter, you can immediately insert your card
2. Machines only take the card in one direction (face up!).
3. If not authorized, the cashier automatically enters something (I don't know, or care what it is, but they enter it automatically) - can you say training?
4. The machine requests your signature
5. The machine returns your card
6. The cashier completes the transaction by telling you the amount, and handing you a receipt.
7. Done...

Physical space note: The scanner is approximately 20" above the counter with a small ledge to the right of it for holding down purses or wallets

I think that training and a logical process design contributes to this ease of use experience. Simple yes, but effective? Tremendously!

So, Target has effectively taught us a lesson we should pay attention to. Stop just deploying technology, and start thinking customer experience in terms of process and training.

Leaving experience to chance

Ok. Have you ever been at a fast food place, when the server hands you a tray with your food and a empty cup so that you can fill up your own soda? I know we like to have control of our destiny, but do we really need this much control? Besides the fact that we are reduced to filling up our own soda, we also must perform a circus act to do so.

Yesterday I had a lunch meeting atPotbelly Sandwich Works - a great establishment, which I really do enjoy. After going through the line, I received my food and empty drink cup. So, I proceed ceremoniously to the big soda machine along with the other patrons. When it came my turn I discovered that this particular soda dispenser had the "PUSH" button on the front of the tap - oh no, here we go...

So, balancing the tray on one hand, I grab the cup at the top with four fingers (keeping my pointer free), I load up with ice, and then slide my cup beneath my soda selection, and then press the button. Of course, the weight and the thin cup instantly create a collapsing effect to the cup. So, I stop early and fill my cup only part way while soda is spilled on my hand.

I know that this may be nit picking, but here is the issue:

1. A vendor's dispenser is impacting my experience with Potbelly's experience
2. A separate product's weakness unintentional combines with the vendors product to also impact my experience
3. Potbelly has little control over this situation, but is sure to more than just one patron

So, while not Potbelly's fault, it is imported into their eating experience. How many things do we as business owners allow to creep into our experience. Whether it's a vendors machine, another part, or any other external influencers we need to pay attention to them as part of the overall experience we are providing to our customers. While a single frustration such as this will not push a customer out the door, enough combined will do just that - whether or not the business had direct control over them. The reality is that the experience just becomes too frustrating or confusing for a customer to engage for anymore than one time.

Again, we tell our clients that you cannot leave experience to chance. So, this serves as a good example of chance experiential elements.

A tip for hotels

I just returned from a trip through outstate Minnesota where I stayed at a Country Inn & Suites . By all accounts a very dependable value-based chain for business travelers.

After a long day of work and restless sleep, I woke to get ready for a new day. When I reached for the shampoo on the counter top, I saw a unfamiliar package admist the usual suspects (shampoo, lotion, body soap, face soap, and...). Makeup remover towel - what?

My first thought (as a male) was what a waste! Then I thought a bit more about this and realized that Country Inn & Suites must have some marketing data that indicates a large population of female guests. So, someone in the marketing team thought it would be nice to provide a female hygiene component to the bathroom supplies. Interesting idea, but not very well thought out - especially as a male realizing that I have been left out of the equation - do I mean more or less?

As all these existential thoughts race through my head, I was reminded how complicated we make things in our businesses. Here's an idea for a more simpler solution for the Country Inn & Suites:

1. Know if your customer is female or male.
2. Provide them with a care-bag of supplies that is provided to them at the time of their check in.
3. If they don't want to carry it to their room, offer to do so before they will need it.
4. Gear the package to a male or female - providing the basics, plus a surprise or two. Like maybe a chocolate truffle for the women, and a styptic pencil (nick & cut relief).
5. Stock the room with the basic hand soap, but include a scented body wash geared towards the sex of the occupant. Everyone should wash their hands - right?
6. Know the needs of regular customers. Anticipate what I will need, and remind me at check in that its my "usual kit".

Just think of how that could improve the experience, and how much money they would save.