Is Your Satisfaction Survey Creating

Dissatisfied Customers?
Editor’s note: Terry G. Vavrus book Improving Your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction: A Guide to Creating, Conducting,
Analyzing, and Reporting Customer Satisfaction Measurement Programs, published by ASQ Quality Press, provides rationale, iden-
tijies opportunities, and suggests programs for improving the measurement of customer satisfaction.

I
RONIC AS IT MAY SEEM, THE CUSTOMER
satisfaction measurement industry is
guilty of creating dissatisfaction among
the world’s customers. There are sever-
al reasons for this and they all have to
do with the process used to assess and remedy
Tips for customer satisfaction.
W. Edwards Deming’s mandate, “Find out
improving what customers want,” has sanctioned the
field of customer satisfaction measurement.
your survey For better or worse, customer satisfaction
measurement generally employs the survey
response rate techniques developed in marketing research.
while still Over the years, marketing research has estab-
lished reasonably strict survey guidelines bor-
pleasing your rowed from the disciplines of survey research
and public-opinion measurement. These pro-
customers tocols were not created from monitoring cus-
tomers’ opinions. A manufacturer’s customer
measurement (CSM) be executed with more
concern and follow-through than the typical
base as a survey population requires some dis- one-shot marketing research survey.
tinct considerations. While some may dis- Customer satisfaction work must draw on
agree, customer satisfaction research is much the strengths of marketing research practice
different from traditional marketing research while establishing its own set of practices.
or public-opinion measurement. Satisfaction measurement projects need to
by Perhaps the most critical difference add sensitivity to the management of cus-
Teny 6. Vavra between a survey research mentality and a tomer relationships, which may be missing in
customer satisfaction mentality is the research current marketing and survey research meth-
community’s insistence on respondent ods. Satisfaction survey respondents who
anonymity. Customers don’t necessarily want have taken the time to furnish information
to remain anonymous. are more than survey participants; they are
cherished customers of an organization.
The etiquette of caring for customers Their relationship with the organization
Regardless of the department or area should be strengthened as a result of the sur-
responsible for conducting a customer satis- vey, not taxed. Survey researchers routinely
faction survey, it must be understood that the deal with infinite populations. They exploit
survey is an important communication tool. It each member of the population who will talk
makes implied promises about the organiza- to them, hoping to collect the information
tion’s interest in and responsiveness to its cus- they’ve been hired to collect. While ethical
tomers. It is imperative that a customer service survey companies would never offend survey

Pualitv t’WrnSS/De%n-ber 1997 51

participants, they are likely to view respondents as a replen-
ishable commodity. Customers as survey participants, howev-
er, expect and deserve greater sensitivity to their value. In the
conduct of satisfaction interviewing, the customer’s feelings
should be tantamount to concerns for the quality of the infor-
mation.
Acknowledging customer participation
It is imperative to acknowledge the cooperation of respond-
ing customers. In the United States today, people are bombard-
ed with requests to tell suppliers how satisfied they are. While
many dutifully complete numerous such surveys, people are
becoming skeptical of the whole process. Not only do their
responses go unacknowledged, but to make matters worse, they
fail to see any improvement in the product or service they have
just critiqued. In these situations, it seems evident that the satis-
faction survey is more lip service than part of any well-thought-
out improvement process. Otherwise, their suggestions would
be acknowledged and perhaps an intended solution would be
relayed back to them.
All customers who return questionnaires must be sent an
acknowledgment of receipt and thanked for taking the time to
provide their feedback. This is also the perfect time to reinforce
the organization’s dedication to listening to its customers.
Responding to customers’ stated dissatisfaction
What should you do when a customer reports a malfunc-
tion or complete dissatisfaction with a product or service?
a
Traditional marketing research would forbid follow-up to
that individual, saying his or her anonymity was promised
and follow-up betrays this
promise. Yet what is the end
result when customer complaints
go unanswered? Customers may
become frustrated and assume the
organization doesn’t care.
Satisfaction measurement is not D today, people are bombarded with requests to
only a survey process, but an
invitation to correspond with
the sponsoring organization. 4
Correspondence establishes an
obligation of responding to participants. It may serve both
camps to conclude all satisfaction surveys with either a per-
mission question or a negative option statement, such as:
“Your answers will be reviewed by our customer-care staff.
This means you may be contacted about specific issues you
raise. If you do not wish your name disclosed with your ratings,
please check the box below.”
The difference between a sample and a census
It is also necessary to decide on the degree of a CSM pro-
gram’s coverage. Here again, marketing research and customer
satisfaction perspectives differ. There are two roles a CSM can
play: an informational role, collecting information to help an
organization improve its products or services and processes, and
a communicational role, demonstrating to customers the organi-
zation’s desire to serve them better and learn more of their
expectations and needs.
If a program is to be instituted for the informational compo-
nent only, a sample is adequate. The company need only draw a
52 O”illlly Pmpr(Mt/-r1997
random sample of customers for each survey period and field
the study.
The problem with conducting a satisfaction measurement
program as a sample is its minimal coverage of the total cus-
tomer base. CSM programs convey the message, “We care
about our customers’ opinions, suggestions, and levels of satis-
faction.” The communication role of CSM cannot be properly
satisfied by just a sample (unless major portions of the customer
base are sampled with enough frequency that all customers are
eventually contacted).
When is it appropriate to use a sample? The answer is partly
economics. CSM is expensive. The size of some customer bases
will make a census costly, especially for low-margin products
and services. But customer commitment to an organization is
what keeps the organization in business. Measuring all cus-
tomers’ satisfaction is probably a good investment in the future
of the business. It certainly improves the probability that cus-
tomers will remain loyal to the company. The decision is a
strategic one and must be considered with care.
Which customers should beintenriewed?
The question, “Which customers should be interviewed?’
may catch some off guard. There are numerous customer
groups to consider. Which of these groups to include in a cus-
tomer satisfaction survey is not as easily determined as it might
seem. The best answer to this question probably is, “It depends
upon the spccilic objectives identified for the customer satisfac-
tion survey.” Admittedly, there may be multiple objectives, but
try to focus on the primary objective. (If multiple customer
groups are to be included, the survey’s analytical plan will have
to address how the groups’ results are reported and possibly
It is imperative to acknowledge the cooperation
ofresponding customers. In the United States
tell suppliers how satisfied they are.
combined.) Groups that could be surveyed are current, past,
potential, and competitors’ customers.
Current customers. Certainly the feelings of current cus-
tomers will be a prevailing informational need. But sometimes
(in a situation of shrinking business volume or brand share) it
will be appropriate to include past customers and/or competi-
tors’ customers. Current customers should not be thought of as
a homogeneous group. It is generally advisable to have classih-
catory information about customers available for the sampling
and analytical stages. This is why it is so important to drive the
survey with information from the customer base.
Because all customers are not created equal, you must decide
which current customers to interview and how many of them to
include in the satisfaction measurement process. In fact, simply
identifying what is meant by a current customer may be more
of a challenge than you might imagine. You’ll have to create a
profile of the behaviors you associate with currency. Almost
always, you will want to identify your most important cus-
tomers. To read the responses of important customers with sta-
tistical confidence, there must be an adequate number of them
in the total sample.
This discussion is not meant to imply that all customers are
external. Many customer satisfaction surveys are conducted
among internal customers. These surveys audit how well one
department or unit serves other departments or units within the
same organization.
Past customers. Past customers represent a rich source of
information about product or transactional failures. When cus-
tomers contact your organization to terminate their relationship,
the organization should consider instituting an exit interview.
This interview, conducted when customers notify the organiza-
tion that they will no longer be purchasing its products or ser-
vices, attempts to determine exactly why they are terminating
their relationship. Obviously many manufacturers or service
providers, distanced from customers by a distribution network
or channel, cannot determine when a particular customer stops
buying their services or products. Without this knowledge, it is
impossible to conduct an exit interview. Without information
from exit interviews, past or lapsed customers become an
important subsample in a customer satisfaction process.
Naturally, a somewhat different survey introduction will need to
be used. But otherwise the questionnaire, in issues and ques-
tions, should remain as similar to the current customer survey as
possible.
Potential customers. Considering potential customers brings
with it the danger of catering to individuals who may never be
converted into actual customers. Beware of efforts to expand
categories. All too often these efforts are pipe dreams. Except in
new categories or industries or in the case of new, innovative
products, those for whom the product is relevant usually already
have self-selected product or category usage. New-to-the-cate-
gory users are expensive to develop, and their needs may be dif-
ferent from those of current customers and especially different
from those of high-value customers. Modifying the product
offering in the hope of attracting more users, tempting as it may
be, is generally impractical.
Consider an example from the pet food industry. How feasi-
ble is it to attract new customers to the dog food category? You
would first have to buy dogs for all of those consumers you
hoped to attract. While not as obvious in other product and ser-
vice categories, usage is generally self-selective. Winning new
customers is not that easy. The main lesson is to focus on cur-
rent customers-they drive the category.
Competitors’ customers. Why spend money and effort
interviewing competitors’ customers? Because they represent
one of the best sources of benchmarking data available,
although finding them and interviewing them poses special,
sometimes ethical, considerations. If available, however, their
responses can prove to be an invaluable aid in interpreting the
ratings of current customers. Competitors’ customers may be
dealt with as one group, disregarding their specific supplier, or
you may sample customers of each of your major competitors.
Your interest in competitors’ customers is in how they rate
the competitor. These ratings provide a benchmark with which
to interpret ratings that customers give to your product or ser-
vice. There have been suggestions, however, that competitors’
customers could be asked to rate the product and service quality
they expect they would receive from your company.’ This is
more perception than actual experience; generally satisfaction
surveys are oriented to measuring actual experience.
Measurement !wtuit%ments
Whether the satisfaction measurement program is to be field-
ed as a sample or census, a complete list of customers is neces-
sary. Unfortunately, this seemingly simple requirement may
prove to be one of the more difficult demands of the measure-
ment survey. If you encounter severe problems in identification,
try to determine if any bias will be introduced into your survey
by interviewing only those customers whose identities you cur-
rently have. For example, are all missing customers:
l From one region
l Purchasers of one specific product
l Serviced by a particular distribution channel
If you were to find such a systematic explanation for absence
from your customer list, it is possible that proceeding without
the unlisted customers would produce a biased picture of satis-
faction.
Existing databases
When a customer database already exists it is wise to scruti-
nize the list. You must satisfy yourself as to the completeness
and accuracy of the list before instituting it as the backbone of
your satisfaction assessment process.
In the purchase of all products and services, one or more
individuals will have made the purchasing decision, and they
deserve consideration for having their satisfaction measured.
The situation is most complex in the case of business-to-busi-
ness satisfaction measurement programs. Here, there may be an
extensive cohort of individuals, from the purchasing agent to
the decision maker, users, and maintenance parties. Not only
should these individuals be identified, but their relative impor-
tance in future acquisitions should also be ascertained. This
information may be used to combine ratings and possibly weigh
the ratings by relative influence.
With consumer products, the number of individuals involved
in the purchase will be fewer, but mapping the relative influence
will be no less difficult. The household bill payer will not neces-
sarily be the decision maker and primary user. Again, the billing
database is indifferent to these issues.
Creating a database
It is recommended that once a customer base of adequate
representation is identified, a separate satisfaction tracking data-
base be established. This will be a copy of the customer base
with special modifications. A separate database is desirable for
several reasons:
l It should be accessible to the satisfaction measurement team.
Piggy-backing the satisfaction database on an existing com-
panywide file may result in competition from other depan-
merits for access to the file.
l To properly sample and analyze the returned data, certain
customer information will be useful. This information may
have to be appended to the file, extending the size of the cur-
rent file.
l The satisfaction tracking file will require linking to other
relational databases to enable storing satisfaction scores from
years’ worth of surveys. This linking will generally not be
welcomed to an existing file.
Depending upon the size of the customer database, a micro-
or minicomputer should be appropriated on which to install the
database, and established software should be used. Rarely will a
OualiN P~IlVW/Decenber 1997 53

1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994
Year
Sources:
1985 and 1988: Your Opinion Counts research industry survey
1990 and 1992: Walker Research, Industry Image Survey
1995: Council for Marketing and Opinion Research
database warrant customized programming; in most applica-
tions, an off-the-shelf database program will suffice.
Prerectulting tor participation
Generally, response rates to survey research are declining.
The terrifyingly high refusal rates (58% in 1995) are shown in
Figure 1. While these data are not specific to satisfaction sur-
veys, it is unlikely that satisfaction survey refusal rates will be
substantially lower. A number of factors are responsible for the
rise in refusal rates:
l Previous participation has not been acknowledged. Sadly,
most customer satisfaction surveys are undertaken on limited
budgets with a research mentality. The simple courtesy of
acknowledging a customer’s participation may not be under-
stood. Since many satisfaction studies are conducted among
samples of the customer base, however, the likelihood of
contacting the same customer again in the near future is
small. Hence, the importance of reinforcing the customer’s
participation is downplayed.
l Limited budgets constrain the amount of communication
that may be undertaken in any one measurement wave.
Hence, the costs of a follow-up acknowledgment discourage
the activity.
l The presentation and packaging of most customer satis-
faction surveys is shoddy. There often is inadequate funding
to execute the survey in a stylish manner. Appearance can
influence response rates, and a cheap appearance can suggest
evidence of the organization’s low commitment to the CSM
process.
These perspectives must be overcome. The research men-
tality must be replaced with a customer-relationship mentality.
In such a perspective, reinforcing the customer’s participation
is essential. Relationship marketing stresses the value of com-
54 Oualitr Pmgf@SS/Dxeder 1997
municatmg with customers, so customer response must
be rewarded to be encouraged. Additionally, satisfaction
projects must be funded with sufficient resources to be
conducted in a style and manner befitting their value to
the organization.
To increase survey response rate, it is a good idea to
prerecruit customers before contacting them with a ques-
tionnaire. This can do two things. First, it legitimizes the
survey. Customers will not be alarmed that someone
knows they own a product and are being asked about its
performance. Second, prerecruiting can reveal the most
convenient time for customers to be contacted. When the
survey is administered during a convenient time, cus-
tomers will more likely participate.
To prerecruit, the survey sample is contacted, generally
by telephone (letter is also acceptable), and told they have
been selected to participate in a customer satisfaction sur-
vey. They may be alerted to watch for a questionnaire in
the mail or on the Internet or a telephone call or visit
li96 from a personal interviewer. They are always given the
opportunity to state the most convenient time for them to
be contacted, minimizing the intrusiveness of the survey
on their personal schedule.
The importance of incentives
Participating in a CSM (from the customer’s per-
spective) is time and labor intensive. It is appropriate
and reasonable to give respondents some incentive for
their efforts. Often in an industrial setting, the simple hope
of having the product better customized to one’s needs or
seeing an improvement in service or delivery will be a suffi-
cient incentive. Self-interest through high involvement is a
strong motivator. Leverage the direct benefits to your cus-
tomers through survey participation as much as possible.
This is the strongest motivation. In some industrial settings
any additional incentive, especially monetary, may be inap-
propriate or even against the customer’s organizational poli-
cy. (Government agencies will often forbid employees from
receiving monetary payment from a supplier’s organization.
Even though well meant, an incentive offered in this situa-
tion could lose a contract.)
When some additional incentive is either necessary (because
the product or category is not highly involving) or desirable (to
ensure a maximum response rate), there are two options: prein-
centives or postincentives.
Preincentives. Preincentives are rewards delivered prior to
the potential respondent having completed the satisfaction inter-
view.
Preincentives play on both the attention value of the incen-
tive delivered with the request for survey participation and the
guilt created by the potential respondent having received some-
thing of value. Merchandise or money included with a mail
questionnaire heightens the attention the mailing receives. It
also minimizes the likelihood of the mailing being immediately
discarded.
Having received something of value, it is hoped, creates guilt
stimulating the potential respondent to complete the interview.
Unfortunately not all customers receiving preincentives will
faithfully complete the interview, and a portion of preincentives
are therefore wasted.
Postincentives. Postincentives promise a reward to potential
respondents in return for completing the interview.
Postincentives generally must be greater than preincentives.
But, since some preincentives will be wasted, this is usually
quite feasible. The rationale here is to provide a nice incentive
for customers who actually complete the survey as opposed to
giving all customers something, regardless of whether they
complete the survey.
The way the incentive is positioned is important. Most cus-
tomers’ time and labor will be important and costly. An incen-
tive should never be presented as fair compensation for the
time, labor, or value of the information. Most satisfaction pro-
fessionals will present the incentive as a token of appreciation.
This way it is made clear that in no way is the incentive seen as
a fair compensation for the responding customer’s efforts. It is
simply a way of saying thank you.
Types of incentives
from
Informational. The most all-around effective and acceptable
incentive is an informational incentive offering survey partici-
the customers perspective, participating
in a CSM is time and labor intensive. It is
appropriate and reasonable to give respondents
some incentive for their efforts.
pants a summary of the data collected. Not only does this
intrigue potential respondents, but it is believed to add a level of
authentication to the survey. Of course, not all of the informa-
tion can (or should) be reported. But usually there are some
classificatory questions that may be interesting to potential
respondents. In offering an informational incentive, you should
make it clear that only some of the results will be reported to
prevent hard feelings when not all of the information is
received.
Monetary. Having touted the benefits of information as an
incentive, it must quickly be added that money speaks louder
than words. Money is certainly the most effective incentive
among consumers where there may be fewer prohibitions con-
straining your activities. One caveat: Don’t ever position or
imply that money is sufficient remuneration for the customer’s
time. Always offer money as a token of appreciation. Some cus-
tomers get offended when small amounts of money are offered
seemingly to offset the expense of their time or compensate
them for the value of their input or opinions.
Merchandise. Sometimes merchandise can be an effective
incentive. This is especially true when the survey sponsor pro-
vides an item that has a greater perceived value than its actual
cost. Cameras might be such an example. One might acquire a
large number of inexpensive 3.5millimeter cameras for $5 to
$15 that may have the perceived value of $25 to $50.
Affinity merchandise featuring the survey sponsor’s logo
should also be considered. Merchandise has the added advan-
tage of permanence, constantly reminding customers that their
opinion was sought and rewarded.
Additional products or services. Occasionally survey spon-
sors can offer additional units or amounts of the actual product
(or service) in exchange for survey participation. For complet-
ing a survey at a movie theater, for example, a movie-goer
might be offered a half-price or full-price ticket for future
admission.
When to intenriew
Interviewing at regular intervals. There are individuals
and industries that prefer conducting customer satisfaction
measurements at certain times of the year. There are two gen-
eral explanations for such periodic interviewing: convention
and events. Convention (or habit) finds some organizations
routinely surveying satisfaction annually (arguably the least
preferable method) or quarterly. In other cases, major events
(the spring industry conference, the end of the tourist season,
and so on) can trigger administration of a satisfaction survey.
Professionals who support periodic assessment will most like-
ly do so out of a belief that their information needs are rele-
vant to these events and, therefore, the collection should be as
contiguous to the event as possible. Sampling only certain
time periods is, of course, sub-
ject to bias from coincidental
contaminating events. For exam-
ple, if the periodic measurement
of satisfaction happens to coin-
tide with a low-fares promotion,
how representative will the mea-
sured satisfaction be of nonpro-
motional fare performance?
Interval sampling also gives
the sales force or other service
providers a calendar with which to allocate special treatment to
customers. If the periods for customer satisfaction measurement
are widely known, it can signal the time for enhanced service to
customers. Some organizations will ask their sales or marketing
personnel to distribute questionnaires to customers during these
periods. Such conduct is open to all sorts of bias, and this prac-
tice should be discouraged and avoided.
There is an efficiency to mass-distributing surveys at only
certain times of the year. The required infrastructure is much
less, and distribution can be more easily subcontracted.
Unfortunately, periodic satisfaction measurement also can lead
to a periodic focus on satisfaction. Without an ongoing program
and regular reports on satisfaction trends, satisfaction becomes
something that is only considered once a year-during the
appointed interval.
Interviewing continuously. Although a bigger undertak-
ing, more and more organizations are moving to a continuous
audit of satisfaction with their products and services.
Continuous measurement recognizes the ongoing importance
of customer satisfaction. In addition, continuous measure-
ments will not be influenced by momentary events (the so-
called contaminating events). With continuous measurement,
the satisfaction professional has a better chance of developing
commitment to quality from the organization’s entire work
force, since the measurement is contemporary and frequent.
Workers throughout the organization are likely to have their
customers’ satisfaction reported to them monthly or quarterly.
Continuous interviewing keeps an organization focused on
customer satisfaction, not allowing it to be forgotten between
survey waves.
Interviewing after moments of truth. “Moments of truth”
Oualitv hOlJ~SS/Deccsrker 1997 55
is the concept given to the service aualitv world bv Jan Carlzon.
past president-of Scandinavian Airlink System <SAS), in his
insightful book of the same name. Carlzon was able to identify
service encounters in which SAS employees either lived up to
or failed to meet customer expectations.’ Carlzon labeled these
moments of truth. The term has come to mean any interaction
in which an organization’s effectiveness is tested. Hence, claim
settlement in the insurance business is a moment of truth. Every
moment of truth can be followed up with a satisfaction survey
to determine how well the organization performed in this
important interaction.
Organizations, sometimes even industries, have begun exam-
ining their businesses from the customer’s viewpoint, looking
for moments of truth that surround their dealings with cus-
tomers. By identifying the most important moments of truth
surrounding your business, you will have a road map of critical
performance events. As these moments of truth are engaged by
your customers, you have an ideal time to assess customer satis-
faction with how well the organization conducted this important
interaction.
Follow-up affer response
It was suggested earlier that much of the decline in survey
response rates can be attributed to the fact that customers are
rarely acknowledged for their survey participation. Because
more and more organizations are understanding the value of
customer input, the number of surveys people are asked to com-
plete is increasing exponentially. Unfortunately, many of the
organizations just beginning to assess their customers’ satisfac-
tion may initiate the process without a proper understanding of
the responsibility of satisfaction measurement. A result, it is
feared, will be a rapid decrease in CSM response rates and a ris-
ing disenchantment with the satisfaction measurement process.
For satisfaction measurement to continue to flourish, a cer-
tain code of conduct for survey work must be established. An
essential component of such a code would be to acknowledge
each customer who completes or returns a questionnaire.
Such a code is in the best interests of both parties. The partic-
ipating customer feels appreciated and is given hope that his or
her comments will be used to improve the quality of the prod-
ucts or services. Additionally, the sponsoring organization is
given the opportunity to subsequently survey its customers,
bonding them even more closely to the brand.
The downside to this situation is the cost of the follow-up
and acknowledgment process-a cost many market researchers
and corporate financial officers will dismiss as too high. The
expense of follow-up is really an investment in the continued
satisfaction of the customer base that will pay handsome
rewards in the future. Study after study confiis that properly
attended customers will more than pay back any communica-
tion effort in their elongated lifetime and their expanded life-
time purchases3
The following are the essential post-survey activities to
which marketers should commit:
l Acknowledging each customer’s survey participation.
This can be as simple as a mass-mailed, impersonal postcard
acknowledging receipt of the questionnaire or telephone
interview. Ideally (and almost necessarily so for high-value
customers) the acknowledgment should be personalized and
should express sensitivity to the general tone of the CUS-
tomer’s comments.
56 Oualitr Progmss/~ecember 1997
Telling customers how their suggestions for improve-
ment will be acted upon or thanking for their words of
praise.
Thanking customers for their participation. This can be
in the form of some value-added product or activity; for
example, a general report of generic findings from your sur-
vey or a piece of your organization’s affinity merchandise (a
cap, letter opener, etc.).
Disseminating the findings of your CSM
Written reports. All too often, written reports become the
artifacts of customer satisfaction surveys rather than action
plans and reference tools for quality improvement. Make sure
the reports you write and disseminate do not simply adorn the
office shelves of company executives. Strive to make them valu-
able planning and reference tools.
Organization. Your written reports should probably include
at least the following sections:
l Executive summary/improvement plan. This section
should be the call to action. Any executive reading this sec-
tion should emerge with a clear understanding of exactly
what the organization needs to do to improve customers’ sat-
isfaction. Ideally, the plans should be allocated by operating
area or department.
l Key trends. There will be a certain number of measures that
management is keen on continuously reviewing. Make sure
these measures are clearly displayed as trends with an appro-
priate narrative, suggesting the ramifications of each depicted
trend.
l Detailed discussion of the findings. There will be some
readers of your report who will wish to examine how you
have arrived at your conclusions. For these readers, the
detailed discussion should provide a complete explanation.
l Description of the methodology. Do not fail to describe
exactly which customers you’re interviewing, how they are
selected, when you interview them, and how you collect
from them. The more open your process is, the more easily it
will elicit trust. The better understood the process, the more
likely you will be to receive suggestions for improving it.
l Appendix. The appendix is a good place to assemble things
that might be questioned at some time or another but would
only encumber your report with superfluous detail.
Contents. Generally, charts and graphs are the most action-
oriented way to communicate findings. Each organization will,
of course, have its own style sheet and preferences. Also, it’s a
good idea to encourage your quality improvement team to
review your proposed contents, keeping open to their specific
needs and suggestions.
Management presentations. Beyond the written report, it is
invaluable to schedule a presentation of your survey’s findings.
In a face-to-face discussion, it is far easier for executives to ask
questions and form a consensus of agreement with the results.
You should probably use such a personal meeting to elicit reac-
tions from management. This way you will know what each
executive thinks of the satisfaction process.
Frontline reports. Although policymakers’ support of a sat-
isfaction program is important, their decisions can often run
amok on the factory floor or frontline. Without buy-in and
understanding from the workers or service providers them-
selves, it may not be clear why processes or procedures need to
be changed. In the absence of such understanding, the tried and
true may be reverted to. 2. Jan Carlzon, Moments of Tncrh (Cambridge, MA: Balling Books,
Where successful satisfaction improvement programs have 1987).
been executed, in almost every case the work force will have 3. Terry G. Vavra, “Score Your Customers by Satisfaction, Loyalty,
been involved in the process. Without their meaningful Profitability, and Potential,” presented at National Center for Database
Marketing, 18th National Conference, Orlando, FL, December 1996.
involvement, the satisfaction program simply is reacted to as
Improving Your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction (item
management’s current fad or scheme. The pervasiveness of the H0922) is available through ASQ Quality Press for $34 (member
program and the organization’s commitment to it may be trans- price) or $38 (list price). To place an order, call ASQ’s Customer
parent unless the work force is meaningfully engaged in the Service Department, 800-248-1946 or (414) 272-8575.
process.
These are a few suggestions to help you rethink the structure Terry G. Vavra is president of Marketing Metrics in Paramus, NJ, and
and process of your current or future CSM program. It has been associate professor of marketing at Pace University in White Plains,
said that talking to customers overcomes one of the most seri- NY. He has a doctorate in marketing from the University of Illinois in
ous problems faced by corporations-that of talking to them- Urbana-Champaign. Vavra is a member of the American Society for
selves. But it is equally important to watch over exactly how Quality.
customer feedback is solicited. Abusing customers in the act of
trying to collect information from them obviously defeats the
entire process. The key to improving your measurement of cus-
tomer satisfaction is to never consider your process completed.
Rather, continually question your procedures and, through
benchmarking, look to others for ideas and suggestions for
improvement.
References
1. John R. Hauser, Duncan I. Simester, and Birger Wernerfelt,
“Customer Satisfaction Incentives,” Marketing Science, Vol. 13, No. 4,
pp. 327-350.

0 1997 American Society for Quality. Reprinted with permission.

Oualltr PWIBS/D-~ 1997 57