Because the NPS system is antiquated and relies on pop-psychology. If a customer has to call a customer service helpline, then defacto they are not too happy with some aspect of a product or service.Now if they leave that interaction feeling that although the situation was negative, but the adviser they spoke with had at least put in an effort to improve the situation or find a resolution. They may be tempted to put a middling score. This will result in low NPS for the adviser.A place I used to work at, actually "promoted" and "educated" customers to the surveys we sent and even in situations actively asked for 9-10 scores. I disagreed heavily with this, because you're not getting an organic/genuine answer from the customer.The closest I came to promotion or education, was advising the customer that the survey they would receive was based on my performance, not the companies. This I still felt was disingenuous, but we were given targets to meet or risk being fired.
I'd think the fact that many people know that low scores are used to punish staff (cut bonuses, threats of firing) would also taint the data they customers provide.You may have had an 8/10 experience, but you feel obliged to rate it 10/10 out of guilt about the risk of penalizing your CSR. As more people are aware of this, I'd expect to see scores drift higher without any actual improvements in service.
I currently work in retail sales with two different surveys on customer satisfaction on both the only real passing score for me is the top score, honestly I really do get an earful if a customer gives me a 9 out of 10 on either survey even if the problem was not reflective of my service, but of the product I sell.They do this for the reason listed below, to cut bonus, as a gateway to fire people, and a control mechanism to make customers feel like they are getting better service than they might actually be getting.Just last week I recieved a 9 out of 10, I'm the districts top producer with the highest average NPS of a 9.3, however on this particular survey it was stated that I was great, but the product I sells actual service I sell billing department made some mistakes and they had to call to have them corrected. I was scolded by my employer and had to write an e-mail to my higher ups explaining how I would provide better customer service, and educate them better on the survey.
Customer surveys aren't just about getting feedback to improve service. They are about convincing the customer they got better service than they did.How does that work?Most people don't want to complain about little things. It is confrontational, impolite, and often it just isn't worth the effort. The hotel gives you two shampoos instead of a shampoo and a conditioner, the inconvenience of going without is less than the inconvenience of trying to get them to fix it for you.These surveys almost always ask whether you complained. If you didn't complain, it must not of been so bad, so you'd be a jerk to give them a low score for something you didn't give them a chance to fix. They take your desire to be nice and use it against you to try to make you agree you had a better experience than you did.
If you are pretty mediocre or kind of just a passive sales rep, you will not earn the 10's, but maybe a few 10's and a few 9's. In that case your overall CSI score for that customer may drop down to 92% (for example). Anything below 90% is pretty much considered bad in car sales.I do get bonuses for each perfect 10 survey I get, so the perfect survey is always in my head throughout the whole sale process. To make it harder, I am the only one who gets scored based on the survey, so if the customer thinks the dealership looks messy, or if the finance manager filing paperwork was rude, and gives a 5/10 for each of those areas while giving me a 10/10, well then my score drops down to something like 7/10 which is considered horrible and could even take my bonuses for the next 3 months away.
I hate hate hate the survey system. I oversee surveys are a car dealership. They are so stringent on both the sales and service side it isn't even funny. 97 for sales and 92 for service. They're also worded really poorly, with an 8 being "excellent" but in reality that 8 cost your poor advisor or salesperson a lot of money. I along with the sales management team, service team, and parts team get hefty bonuses quarterly if numbers are hit. For the love of God, if nothing went catastrophically wrong give us 10s or ignore the survey.
Seriously. If you have a problem, dont be a part of the most ridiculous survey system ever created. Take it up with management and work with them. Get resolution and when that happens still mark all 10s for the poor sod behind the counter. So much is not his/her fault and is still blamed for it all.I have to average 8.9 or better and if I'm below that I get fired, just like a fully capable friend of mine that did his job well. Next time you fill out a survey with a 2 because your oil change took 30 minutes longer think about the fact that there is a person behind that and you need to relax. If you demand satisfaction, take it up with management, don't get someone fired.
My company's survey has 6 questions each on a scale of one to five (five being the best). The company considers a score of 92% or higher to be "passing". So even if for example someone gives us a survey with all 4s, that would be an 80 and thus a failing grade. The company claims that we need to give the customer exceptional service, and only a 5 truly represents that.
When I bought my Firehawk at a Pontiac dealer, they didn't just ask me to give them 10's. They told me to bring them the blank survey in exchange for a free oil change. I did. But I got 3 oil changes, a set of new wiper blades, a Pontiac license plate frame, a Pontiac windbreaker, and a Pontiac hat. I asked for a second set of floor mats, too. That's when they politely told me to fuck off about the survey. They got their 10's and I got some swag, but since Pontiac literally lost my car for 3 months (it was special ordered and lost), I figured they still owed me even though they waived my first two payments for the mistake.
I work for a call center that will not be named, but one of the good ones. I will say if a survey comes back as a 0 we do have a supervisor call the customer back asking what that can do to fix it. Unfortunately most of the time the rep is doing everything correctly, according to policy, and bad surveys can be the difference of 100's of dollars off a bonus check. But outside the supervisor level these are not looked at. So if the rep you talked to was bad rate a 0, if you are having an issue with the company just talk to a supervisor. The rep you are speaking to may not agree with policy but can't do anything about it but still has bills to pay.
Having worked in assurance, I can tell you, very simply, it's a mechanic used to penalize and fire people. Any time a manager needs to cut workers, lay people off, reduce compensations, etc. they can just quote "bad performance" as the reason to get rid of any personal liability. The numbers don't matter, and no one cares at all (at most places). It's just so that management can do more or less what they want and have an out if anyone asks questions.
As a manager of a very large retail store that uses this method, I have a few comments on this. Overall, I do not believe it paints a true picture of service levels. However, it is a useful system.
- After reading the comments the customer provide, I feel that customers who rank us a 9/10 feel like they are still giving us a good rating even though this screws us because the metric is a percentage of people who rated us perfectly.
- Customers who are upset are much more likely to provide feedback. This is a good thing because sometimes I can reach out to them to find a solution to their problem or situation. (If they provide their information)
- At least the system we use provides excellent data on time and areas the customer shopped. I can break the results down by day or department and identify trends to resolve repetitive issues.
From my experience the data is viewed in aggregate for the overall team but not for individuals because you may not have enough data to make a reasonable conclusion. So only those on the extreme and especially those who write comments are viewed because again on the individual level anything else isn't easily actionable by management or you.
No comments:
Post a Comment