The Customer Service Survey

Do You Want Positive Feedback or Honest Feedback?

by Peter Leppik on Fri, 2016-04-08 17:16

Which would you rather have: Positive customer feedback, or honest customer feedback?

Most people would probably say "both," but it's not always possible to have both. If the honest customer feedback isn't positive, then you can only get one or the other.

So when forced to choose, I would generally prefer honest feedback over positive feedback. As long as the person giving me feedback isn't being cruel or demeaning, I would rather hear about ways I can improve than get my ego stroked. At least that's what I say, and what the rational part of my mind thinks. In reality, hearing negative feedback can be hard, even though it's also much more valuable.

I think most business leaders would probably agree with me: it's better to get honest feedback from customers than positive feedback.

But the real-world incentives at most companies don't support this. Incentives based on customer feedback are always designed to encourage positive feedback, not honest feedback. That's because it's easy to measure how positive the customer feedback is, but almost impossible to measure how honest it is.

Where companies base bonuses and compensation on customer surveys, this leads to a perverse incentive to get customers to give higher scores no matter the customer's actual opinion. Is it any wonder that survey manipulation is so common?

The problem is that when customers don't give you the straight story, the feedback has no value. You might as well not do the survey at all if you can't get honest feedback.

So what's the solution?

The first step has to be to stop undermining yourself. If you give employees incentives to only deliver positive feedback, stop that.

That probably means you shouldn't be using survey scores for employee bonuses at all, since it's difficult-to-impossible to create an incentive system that encourages honest feedback.

The next steps are much harder. The goal is to create a culture where customer feedback is seen as constructive criticism and an opportunity to improve. That will require significant effort coaching employees in how to listen to customers without becoming defensive or negative.

But if your customer surveys are biased towards giving you positive, rather than honest, feedback, then you're not getting any value anyway.

Join the CXPA

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-04-06 14:50

I don't often plug other organizations in this blog, but I'm going to make an exception for the Customer Experience Professional's Association (CXPA). We have an amazing local chapter here in Minneapolis that holds meetings every other month, and the CXPA's annual conference is coming up in early May in Atlanta.

What makes CXPA different from other groups and events in this space is that CXPA is a non-profit professional association run by and for CX practitioners. That means that it stays focused on helping CX leaders connect with each other to share ideas and best practices. Since Customer Experience is much more an art than a science, finding out what's worked for others in the field can have tremendous value.

Any time someone asks me the best way to learn more about Customer Experience, I always tell them to join the CXPA and become active in their local and online communities. And now I'm telling you.

Vocalabs Newsletter: NCSS Results for Communications

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-03-30 16:55

We just published issue #96 of Vocalabs' Newsletter, Quality Times. This month we focus on our recent NCSS results for the Communications industry, showing that T-Mobile has continued its improvements since 2012, while Comcast still brings up the rear. The compete Executive Summary is available for download.

As usual, I hope you find our newsletter interesting and enjoyable. If you like it, please feel free to subscribe via email. Subscribers are the first to get new issues when they are published.

Incentives

by Peter Leppik on Fri, 2016-03-18 16:31

A few weeks ago the Harvard Business Review published an article with the provocative title, Stop Paying Executives for Performance. The main thesis was, as you might expect, that companies should stop paying executives for performance. The authors give a number of reasons:

  • Performance-based pay only really improves performance for routine tasks, not activities which require creativity and out-of-the-box thinking.
  • The best performance tends to come when creative professionals focus on improving their skills rather than focusing on outcomes.
  • Intrinsic motivation is more powerful than extrinsic motivation, and performance-based pay tends to only drive extrinsic motivation.
  • Performance-based pay encourages people to cheat to hit bonus thresholds.
  • No performance measurement is perfect.

You can argue about whether the authors' conclusion is right (and in the comment section of the article several people argue that they are wrong), but there's no question they make a strong case for an interesting and counterintuitive idea.

To me as a Customer Experience professional, what's most interesting about this is that the same arguments can be made about performance-based pay for many customer-facing employees, since delivering a great customer experience often requires employees to go beyond the rote skills and find creative solutions to the customers' problems.

A great example of this is the declining use of Average Handle Time (AHT) in many call centers. Over the past ten years I've spoken with a lot of call center managers who have stopped evaluating (and compensating) their customer service reps based on how long they spend on the average call. Every single one has described significant improvements in the customer experience. Several also said that their AHT didn't even go up as a result.

Removing AHT from the employee's compensation meant that reps were freed from having to worry about the mechanical part of their job--how quickly they could get someone off the phone--and instead think about the best ways to solve the customer's problem. The other problems with performance-based pay also show up in customer service, since focusing on AHT can lead employees to cheat (for example, by occasionally "accidentally" hanging up on a customer at the beginning of a call). AHT turns out to not be as tightly tied to operational cost as most managers expect, because customers will often call multiple times if they don't get the service they need the first time.

Moving away from performance-based pay would be an enormous cultural change in today's business environment where the implicit assumption is that money is the best, or even only, way to motivate employees. But there's decades of research in behavioral economics showing that money is only a mediocre way to drive performance in many circumstances.

If you're using performance-based pay to try to improve your customer experience, it's worth thinking about whether you're really driving the behavior you want.

NCSS Results: T-Mobile Keeps Getting Better, Comcast Still Trails

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-03-09 15:19

We just published the 2015 results for the National Customer Service Survey (NCSS) of Communications companies. This ongoing survey tracks customer service quality at AT&T, CenturyLink, Comcast, DirecTV, Dish Network, Sprint, T-Mobile, Time Warner, and Verizon.

In this year's data we find that T-Mobile has extended its record of improving customer service going back to 2012, making substantial gains in many of our survey metrics and the company is now leading the pack in eight of the nine scores we track.

Back in 2012, T-Mobile was performing poorly on our survey. T-Mobile had just come out of a failed attempt to merge with AT&T (abandoned in December 2011) and its scores had been sinking. Since then, however, T-Mobile has rebranded itself as the "un-carrier" and made deliberate efforts to be more consumer-friendly. This has been successful, as shown by the fact that T-Mobile's moves to abandon such hated industry practices as two-year contracts and overage charges have now become the norm in the mobile phone industry.

Our data shows that T-Mobile's efforts have extended to improving its customer service more generally, with sustained multi-year improvements across the board in our customer-service metrics. While we don't have any insight into T-Mobile's internal operations, from our data it appears that the company has been making a significant and sustained effort to improve its customer service operations.

Comcast, meanwhile, has posted some small gains over the past two years (CenturyLink, Comcast, DirecTV, Dish, and Time Warner were added to our survey in 2013), but not enough to pull it out of last place in our survey rankings. In 2015 Comcast held the bottom slot in six of our nine metrics: better than 2013 when Comcast was last place in eight of nine metrics, but still not a stellar performance.

The complete survey data is available to NCSS subscribers, and the Executive Summary can be emailed to you through our website:

Download NCSS Communications 2015 Executive Summary

You're Not Managing If You Only Measure

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-03-02 14:46

"You can't manage what you don't measure" is the old business saw.

But measurement is only the first step. Once you have the data you need to put it into action.

A lot of customer feedback programs fail to go from measurement to management. They collect data and metrics but don't follow through with the actions needed to improve the customer experience.

The problem is that it's too easy to think that survey metrics are telling the whole story, and that improving them is the goal.

But neither of those statements are true. Survey metrics do not tell the whole story, they give a statistical aggregation of hundreds or thousands of unique customers each with their own experiences and problems. And improving survey scores should never be the goal, but rather an expected side-effect of the true goal of making thousands (or millions) of individual customers have better opinions about the company.

Using survey data creates a dilemma: on the one hand it's necessary to boil down the data into a handful of numbers in order to make sense of the thousands of individual customers' opinions and get a high level view of how you're performing. On the other hand, those statistical measurements also hide the individual customers' experiences and opinions, making it hard to understand what the numbers actually mean.

The solution is to being individual customers back into the management part of the equation. Survey scores are always going to be necessary to track progress, but when it comes to actually making changes you should focus on individual customers.

That means using feedback from individual customers (especially the open-ended parts of the survey) for coaching and training, spending time reading (or listening to) survey comments when looking at process changes or improvements, and making individual customers' stories (not statistics) the core of survey reporting.

So while it's true that you can't manage what you don't measure, you also have to be careful not to let the measurement get in the way of the management.

Vocalabs Newsletter #95

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-02-24 13:34

We just sent out the latest issue of Quality Times, our mostly-monthly newsletter about customer feedback and the customer experience. Featured in this month's newsletter are the National Customer Service Survey (NCSS) results for the banking industry in 2015. Next month we plan to publish the results for Communications, so stay tuned for those.

As always, I hope you find the newsletter useful and informative. You can subscribe to receive future issues via email.

NCSS Results: Chase on top, Bank of America Improves

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-02-10 11:16

We just published the results for the National Customer Service Survey (NCSS) on Banking for 2015. This is our ongoing syndicated research program comparing the customer service at four major consumer banks: Bank of America, Chase, Citi, and Wells Fargo.

For the NCSS we interview customers within a few minutes of a customer service call to one of the companies we track. This is very different from other published research, where participants are asked to recall a customer service experience which may have happened months ago. As a result, we are able to get very reliable, detailed survey data about what's actually happening when a customer picks up the phone.

In 2015 we saw Bank of America make significant improvements in our survey. In one year, BofA's score for Call Resolution went up 13 points, its score for Ease of Reaching and Agent went up 11 points, and overall satisfaction with the customer service call was up 13 points over the past two years.

Chase took the honors for best scores overall, even though it didn't have as dramatic an improvement as Bank of America. Chase had the highest scores in seven of the nine key metrics we track in our report, and generally continued the upward trajectory it has been on since we started our survey in 2011.

Meanwhile Citi took a beating, losing 13 points in overall satisfaction with the company, 12 points in satisfaction with the customer service call, and claiming the bottom slot in eight of the nine metrics.

The 2015 results represent a reversal for both Bank of America and Citi. When we started the survey in 2011, Chase and Citi were posting lower survey scores than Wells Fargo and Bank of America. But Chase and Citi made several years of improvement, while Bank of America's scores were generally flat. This year, though, Bank of America is back in the middle of the pack with its gains, and Citi's scores are behind its competitors.

It's hard to speculate on what might be driving these major changes this year. Improving the customer experience is a process, not a project, and it's possible that Citi has been distracted with other priorities.

You can get a copy of the Executive Summary sent to you through our website:

National Customer Service Survey on Banking, 2015 Executive Summary

Sharing Feedback, Constructively

by Peter Leppik on Tue, 2016-02-02 11:32

Back when I was is college I took a creative writing class, and part of this class was to critique each other's work: read what the other students wrote, and offer constructive criticism and feedback. It turned out that was one of the hardest things to do effectively, because most people instinctively get defensive about any negative feedback. They're just too emotionally invested in their work to accept even mild criticism dispassionately.

The same thing can happen when you share negative customer feedback. Often, an employee's intense and emotional reaction is that someone is trying to tell them that they're bad at their job, and they react defensively. At the company level, most people take a lot of pride in the organization they work for (even when it's not justified) and have a hard time hearing that something might be broken. Breaking through this takes a lot of finesse and you have to be careful about how you present and frame the feedback.

I did eventually get pretty good at giving and receiving constructive criticism, and that's turned out to be really helpful professionally. Here's my suggestions for making negative feedback a positive experience:

  1. Most important, always have the attitude of constructive criticism. This is about problem solving, not assigning blame. A customer had a bad experience, that does not mean the company is bad at CX (even if you think they actually are, don't let that be part of the message). Everyone makes mistakes, and the goal is to identify the mistakes so they are less likely in the future.
  2. Present positive feedback along with negative, and lead with the positive. This helps set the tone of, "We're generally doing a good job and we'd like to find ways to do even better."
  3. Focus on the customer's perceptions. For example, if a customer complains about a late shipment, this should be framed as "A customer felt his delivery expectations were not met. Let's try to figure out why the customer felt this way," rather than, "We're really dropping the ball on deliveries!" There can be a lot of reasons for a negative perception, not all of them related to what actually happened.
  4. Select the feedback you choose to present carefully. Not all negative feedback is credible, but you should reinforce the customer feedback with other data that supports that this is a problem worth paying attention to (for example, "We're seeing more complaints about late deliveries this quarter. This customer's experience is similar to a lot of other complaints"). Share feedback that's articulate, believable, and relatable. Don't share the crazies, as entertaining as they may be.

Sharing customer feedback, both with individual employees and the organization as a whole, is a powerful way to motivate action but needs to be done carefully to inspire the right action and avoid negativity.

Newsletter #94 Is Published

by Peter Leppik on Wed, 2016-01-27 15:12

We've published issue #94 of Quality Times, our newsletter about customer experience and customer feedback programs. 

This month, rather than doing the usual thing of writing about the industry trends for the new year, I wrote about the Non-Trends. These are the basic truths of Customer Experience work which were true last year, will be true this year, and will still be true in 2017. Most of these are much more important than the hot trends for 2016.

This newsletter is one of the ways we get to know prospective clients. So if you find this useful and informative, please help us out by forwarding this to other people who might also enjoy it, and encourage them to subscribe. You can subscribe to this newsletter on our website.

How Can We Help You?

Let us put our expertise in customer feedback to work for you.

Please tell us about how we can help you improve your customer feedback process.