Only 26% of U.S. Employees are Highly Engaged. How Engaged are Your Employees?

In our latest Employee Engagement Benchmark, we found that only 26% of U.S. employees are highly engaged.

1609ee_fewemployeesarehighlyengagedHow do we measure employee engagement?

Several years ago, we examined the attitudes that drive engagement levels of employees. Our goal was to identify a small group of key drivers and create a simple measurement for employee engagement. That led to the creation of the Temkin Employee Engagement Index (TEEI).

1609ee_teeiThe TEEI is based on the degree to which employees agree with these three statements:

  1. I understand the overall mission of my company
  2. My company asks for my feedback and acts upon my input
  3. My company provides me with the training and the tools that I need to be successful

Our research shows that engaged employees are an enormous asset. Compared with disengaged employees, highly engaged employees are more than four times as likely to recommend the company’s products and services and do something good for the company that is not expected of them, 2.5 times as likely to stay at work late if something needs to be done after the normal workday ends, and seven times as likely to recommend that a friend or relative apply for a job at their company.

If you’re looking for a simple, actionable metric around employee engagement, feel free to use the TEEI. We also have other great content on our Employee Engagement Resources Page.

The bottom line: Are you focusing enough on employee engagement?

Tech Vendor Client Success Ratings, 2016

Are tech vendors helpful in making their IT clients successful? To answer that question, we surveyed 800 IT decision makers from North American companies with at least $250 million in annual revenues.

We asked the following question:

How helpful are these IT vendors in making sure that your organization successfully achieves its desired value from the products and services that you have purchased from them?

Responses are on a scale from 1 (not at all helpful) to 7 (extremely helpful).1611_clientsuccessratingsTemkin Group created the Client Success Ratings (CSR), which is the percentage of respondents who answered 6 or 7.  As you can see below, the average CSR is 63%, which is an increase from 61% last year.

1612_techvendorsuccessoverall2yrs

Which tech vendors are the best and the worst? We examined client responses for 62 tech vendors and found that IBM software, Google, IBM SPSS, VMware, and HPE outsourcing have the highest CSR. At the other end of the spectrum, Trend Micro, Accenture outsourcing, Sun Microsystems, and Satyam have the lowest CSR.

1612_techvendorsuccessblocked

You can purchase and download the dataset for $295.BuyDownloadThe dataset includes the detailed client success ratings for the 62 tech vendors listed in the graphic above, along with the results from 2015.

Amazon Makes Smart Move to Positive Employee Feedback

Last year the New York Times published an article describing Amazon as having a “bruising workplace,” a performance-based environment that often brings employees to tears. It seems that Amazon is changing its ways a bit. It recently announced that it was adjusting the way it evaluates employees. A spokesperson for Amazon described the change as follows:

We’re launching a new annual review process next year that is radically simplified and focuses on our employees’ strengths, not the absence of weaknesses. We will continue to iterate and build on the program based on what we learn from our employees.

My take: Great move. There’s a growing body of research showing that people perform better when they receive positive feedback. 1611_positivitymattersIn my post Positive Psychology Meets Customer Experience, I mention an approach called “appreciative inquiry,” which is a technique for motivating employees that focuses on their strengths.

To highlight the impact of this phenomena, I analyzed our data on more than 5,000 U.S. employees. As you can see below, when bosses give more positive feedback, employees are more likely to recommend the company’s products and services, to do something good for the company that is unexpected, and make improvement recommendations.

1611_employeerespondtopositivefeedback

The bottom line: Positivity is a strong human motivator.

The Demographics of Happiness

1611_demographicsofhappinessTomorrow I will join millions of Americans in celebrating Thanksgiving. Many of us will spend the day with our families devouring turkey, stuffing, and other savory dishes while watching football games. It’s also a great time to actually give thanks.

I have a lot to appreciate; a wonderful family, a great group of friends, a thriving business, an amazing Temkin Group team, and the world’s best clients. As we know from the positive psychology movement, the act of appreciation creates happiness—and all of that makes me very happy.

Given the holiday, I decided to dig into Temkin Group’s Q3 2016 Consumer Benchmark Study and see who’s happy. I analyzed which of the 10,000 U.S. consumers in our study agree with the statement “I am typically happy.”

This first chart shows data from the 27 states where we had at least 100 respondents. As you can see, happiness ranges from a high of 83% in Oregon down to a low of 67% in Wisconsin and Indiana.
1611_hapinessbystate

The next set of charts show the level of happiness across different demographic segments:

  • Genderations: The happiest females are 75 and older, while 65- to 74-year-old males are the happiest (85% say that they are typically happy). 18- to 24-year-olds are the least happy, followed closely by 45- to 54-year-olds. Between the ages of 18 and 44, males are happier than females. Females are happier between 45- and 74-years-old.
  • Education: As the level of education increases, so does happiness. Eighty-five percent of those with an advanced degree are happy, compared with only 60% of those who did not graduate high school.
  • Ethnicity: There’s little variation in happiness across ethnic groups. Caucasians are the happiest (73%), but only three points above African Americans (73%).
  • Income: Only 60% of consumers making less than $25,000 per year are happy. Happiness rises with income until consumers’ household income hits about $100,000, after which happiness plateaus around 86%.
  • Family: Married people are happier. Eighty-four percent of those who are married with young children are happy, followed by married people with older children and with no children at all. The least happy people are those who are not married and do not have kids; only 66% are happy.

Read more of this post

Business-to-Business-to-Customer (B2B2C) CX Best Practices

We often get asked by companies that don’t directly serve consumers if they can learn from customer experience content that seems to be more focused on business-to-consumer (B2C) models. The answer: Absolutely yes!

Our research does include some items that are B2C-oriented, but most of our core ideas apply quite well in other models, including business-to-business (B2B), government and non-profits.  We’ve had no problem using our insights to help a wide range of organizations.

In our report The Secret to B2B2C Customer Experience Success, we discuss a more complex B2B model, business-to-business-to-customer (B2B2C). The goal of CX in B2B2C is to:

Enhance end customer experience in a way that satisfies the needs of channel partners

B2B2C CX is all about four relationships:

  1. Company to Channel Partners. To deliver great CX to customers, a company also needs to nurture its relationships with its channel partners to help them be successful.
  2. Channel Partners to End Customer. In this relationship, a company can only influence how channel partners think about and deliver CX in the partner’s interactions with the end customer.
  3. Company to End Customer. These interactions provide the company with the best CX opportunities to deliver great CX to the end customer because such interactions are wholly under a company’s control.
  4. Company and Channel Partner to End Customer. These are times when a company and a channel partner engage the end customer as one unit. In these instances, both partners need to share a common vision of how the CX should be delivered.

1611_b2b2cfundamentalsIn the chart below, you can see how to infuse these four CX core competencies across the relationships:

  1. Purposeful Leadership: Operate consistently with a clear set of values.
  2. Employee Engagement: Align employees with the goals of the organization.
  3. Compelling Brand Values: Deliver on your brand promises to customers.
  4. Customer Connectedness: Infuse customer insight across the organization.

1611_b2b2c4cxcompetencies

The bottom line: Good CX practices transcend business models.

People Aren’t Perfect, Design Around Their Biases

Every day, people are faced with innumerable choices, and methodically weighing the pros and cons of each one is not only unnecessary, it is also mentally draining. In order to ease this cognitive burden, people have evolved two modes of thinking—intuitive thinking and rational thinking—to help us make decisions more efficiently. 1611_2typesofthinking2Intuitive thinking—also known as System 1 thinking—is fast, effortless, automatic, and takes place in our unconscious, while rational thinking—also known as System 2 thinking—is slow, effortful, logical, and takes place consciously. Intuitive thinking actually helps us reach successful conclusions more quickly and economically than rational thinking.

Intuitive thinking relies heavily on existing mental shortcuts—known as heuristics—and on cognitive biases. Heuristics are simple rules of thumb that our brains have evolved to help us reach satisfactory—though not always optimal—decisions swiftly and efficiently. Sometimes, however, heuristics fail and lead to cognitive biases, which are systematic errors in the way we think. For instance, people:

  • Are more affected by losses than by gains. One of the most important underlying principles of human decision-making is called Prospect Theory, which holds that humans do not make decisions based on a rational evaluation of the final outcome, but rather on an unconscious evaluation of the potential gains and losses of each choice.
  • Prefer simplicity over complexity. Biases and heuristics are all about lightening the cognitive load, so it is no surprise that people tend to choose options that are easier to mentally process, even when a more complicated option is actually better.
  • Are affected by current emotional and visceral states. Like cognitive processes, visceral states and emotions play an essential role in helping people make successful choices, but sometimes they can lead to biases. For example, people are more impulsive when they are hungry, thirsty, sexually aroused, or in other heightened states of emotion.
  • Are heavily influenced by those around them. People are naturally social creatures who automatically imitate the actions and mimic the emotions of those around them.
  • Make decisions based on context. Decisions are not made in a vacuum; rather, they are extremely dependent on context. Context can include the physical environment in which a person makes a decision, the unconscious priming effects a person encounters, how a decision is framed, and what other choices are available for comparison.
  • Misjudge their past and future experiences. Our memory is not like a videotape; it does not record every moment of an experience, placing equal emphasis on each second. Instead, it is like a camera, taking snapshots at certain crucial moments and then retroactively judging the experience based on those snapshots.

For more information on how to incorporate these biases into your efforts, see the report Behavioral Guide to Customer Experience Design.

The bottom line: Embrace human biases, don’t ignore them.

Announcing Temkin Group CX Excellence Award Winners

1611_temkingroup_cxewinnerbadge2Congratulations to winners of the 2016 Temkin Group CX Excellence AwardsBusiness Development Bank of Canada (BDC), Century Support Services, Crowe Horwath, Oxford Properties, and VCA.

Report: Temkin Loyalty Index, 2016

1611_temkinloyaltyindex_coverWe published a Temkin Group report, Temkin Loyalty Index, 2016. This is the second year of this study that examines the loyalty of U.S. consumers to 294 companies across 20 industries. Here’s the executive summary:

The 2016 Temkin Loyalty Index (TLi) evaluates how loyal 10,000 U.S. consumers feel towards 294 companies across 20 industries. To determine companies’ TLi, we asked respondents to rate how likely they are to exhibit five loyalty-related behaviors: repurchasing from the company, recommending the company to others, forgiving the company if it makes a mistake, trusting the company, and trying the company’s new offerings. Our research shows that, of all the companies we looked at, customers feel the most loyal towards Publix, USAA, and H-E-B, and feel the least loyal towards Comcast, Motel 6, and Anthem. At the industry level, we found that supermarkets, hotels, and retailers inspire the highest levels of loyalty, while TV service providers and Internet service providers trigger the lowest levels. Meanwhile, USAA, Mercedes-Benz, and Alabama Power Company enjoy the highest levels of customer loyalty compared with their industry peers, whereas Motel 6, Citibank, and Compaq fall the furthest behind their industry peers. We also compared the results of this year’s Index with those from last year and found that the average TLi declined across all 20 industries. TV service providers declined the most, while banks declined the least. And when we narrowed in on each of the five loyalty behaviors, we found that the Trust component scores dropped most significantly. And while the vast majority of individual companies’ TLi decreased over the past year, both Con Edison of NY and Morgan Stanley Smith Barney saw their scores improve by more than nine points.

Here’s the 2015 Temkin Loyalty Index.

Download report for $295
(Includes report plus dataset in Excel. See sample spreadsheet (.xls))
BuyDownload3

Temkin Group’s TLi is based on evaluating consumers’ likelihood to do these five things (data for these items are included in the dataset):

  • Repurchase from the company
  • Recommend the company to others
  • Forgive the company if it makes a mistake
  • Trust the company
  • Try new offerings from the company

Here are the top and bottom rated companies:

1611_tli_topbottomcompanies

Read more of this post

5 Market Research Lessons From Election Polling Miscues

161111_tornmarketresearchIn the NY Times article Pollsters Face Hurdles in Changing Landscape and Aaron Zitner discuss a number of reasons for recent high-profile polling failures, the Brexit vote and the U.S. presidential election.

Why should customer experience (CX) professionals care? Here’s what they say in the article:

The outcome also raises questions about the research businesses rely on to test new products and measure customer behaviors, since many of the same survey methods are used for market research.

The article brings up some good reasons for the poor predictions:

  • People are less likely to answer surveys, so it’s harder to get representative samples.
  • It’s more difficult and expensive to reach people via cell phones than it was by landline.
  • Decision factors are changing. For instance, education level was a more important decision driver in this election than it was in 2012.
  • The people who choose to respond to polls don’t fully represent the population.

My take: I’ve been talking about the need to shake-up market research for many years. As a matter of fact, my 2011 post Market Research Needs An Overhaul remains relevant today. All of the issues with recent polling projections are similar to what many companies face when trying to understand their customers. Here are five thoughts on how to prepare your market research efforts for the new realities:

  1. Embrace outliers. The traditional approach for dealing with data points that don’t fit a model is to ignore them or discount them as being “outliers.” But these counter-trend pieces of data can be much more than that. They may be a window into an emerging trend or a small signal about a set of customers that your current research is missing. When you see an outlying datapoint, don’t ignore it anymore. Think about what it might be telling you, and what insights you may missing.
  2. Always ask “who are we missing?” All research processes, including surveys, are biased in many different ways (see my Latest 9 Recommendations for NPS). You can minimize and address some of the biases, but there’s always the risk that you just don’t see some of them. One of the things you can do is to proactively look for the biases. Always seek to define the populations of people that you are missing or under-representing in your research, whether it’s caused by a demographic or attitudinal blind spot. If you can’t find them, then you haven’t looked hard enough.
  3. Listen, don’t just calculate. A lot of my insights about the election came from listening to what people were saying, not from crunching datasets. As the environment around your company changes, you need to spend a lot more time with qualitative, unstructured content. Why? Because structured data collection reflects historical assumptions, and may very well be missing the key variables required to fully understand changing customer attitudes and behaviors.
  4. Over-emphasize recency. If you’re building a predictive model, make sure that it is very sensitive to recent data. If you’re mapping out a long-term trend or trying to fit the data to a historical model, it may take a while for you to identify a substantive change in the environment. Even if you don’t change your core model, look at what it says if you significantly over-weight recent data points.
  5. Modernize your leadership. The way that organizations can and should use data is one of the shifts that is making traditional management techniques obsolete. That’s why you should adopt what I call Modernize Leadership: Shifting 8 Outdated Management Practices. This requires making a shift to Engage & Empower, Learn & Adjust, Detect & Disseminate, Observe & Improve, Purpose & Values, Strengths & Appreciation, Culture & Behaviors, and Experience & Emotions.

The bottom line: It’s hard to project from the past when the future is changing.

Off Topic: 10 Things I Learned From The Election

electionsLet me start by being totally transparent; I voted for Hillary Clinton. I wasn’t gung-ho for Clinton, but liked her more and more as time went on. Mostly, I didn’t think that Donald Trump had the knowledge, temperament, values, and innate desire to serve others that’s required to be a good president. Having said that, I hope that Trump is a good president who leads in a more inclusive and compassionate way than what we saw during the campaign.

As I look back at the entire election season, here are some of the things that I learned:

  1. Trump is a world-class framer. When Trump labelled Clinton “Crooked Hillary,” he took advantage of a human bias called the framing effect. By establishing that “nickname,” Trump was able to shift how people reacted to information about and from Clinton. Any news on her emails reinforced the “crookedness” and any of her arguments against Trump would be discounted. Trump did the same thing with “biased media” which helped to dissipate bad press, and “locker room talk” to change how people felt about vulgar language.
  2. You need to stand for something positive. Clinton never established a compelling, positive vision for her candidacy. Her message seemed to be a combination of her legacy of service, strong experience, liberal principles, and pointing out Trump’s flaws. She never gave non-committed voters a reason to choose her. Trump on the other hand, was able to communicate a positive vision of the country being great again through a masterful approach of painting a very dire picture of the current situation (framing again). I actually think Clinton’s final set of negative ads hurt her, as they didn’t introduce anything new or provide a positive reason for people to select her, and played into Trump’s framing (again) of the “establishment” rigging the system. Clinton needed to be more aspirational, even at the expense of being less factual.
  3. Clinton suffered from an image problem. I can understand how people may not like Clinton or her political views, but there were a lot of people I know (and others across the country) who said they hated her. Every explanation that I’ve heard from those people has been based on a superficial understanding of her. Their pre-conceived dis-like was reinforced by an amplification of Clinton’s “issues.” As you recall, there’s the tragedy at Benghazi (many Republican-lead investigations couldn’t find evidence of fault), her email situation (which, at worst, was a mistake driven by her desire to do her job more effectively), and the Clinton Foundation (where there is no evidence of wrong doing, but lots of evidence that the foundation does great work). Even the collective weight of these “issues” don’t seem strong enough to create such powerful negative feelings towards Clinton. As I mentioned, my respect for Clinton increased as I learned more about her during the election. She’s dedicated her entire adult life to social causes, which is driven by her deep Methodist faith. Add to this her strong experience as a senator of NY and Secretary of State (even Trump praised her in the past), and it’s hard to truly dislike her. But many do. Unfortunately, Clinton’s public persona was so stiff that her issues “stuck” and many people didn’t really get to know her underlying passion as a committed public servant.
  4. This was not an easy election to predict. If you’re looking for me to provide insights on what went wrong in all of the polling projections, sorry. I don’t have specific answers. This was a particularly hard year to predict the outcome, given the changing pattern of voters, and the fact that Trump was a very, very unconventional candidate. It’s almost impossible to build an accurate model when you can’t test it or fine-tune it with data from a similar historical environment. We actually collected a large dataset of presidential preferences (10K consumers), but I resisted my urge to forecast the results. I would most certainly have been wrong as well.
  5. Truthfulness is not the same as honesty. By any objective measure, Trump has told many more mis-truths during the campaign than did Clinton. Yet polls regularly found that Trump earned higher ratings than Clinton for being honest and trustworthy. This confused me until I heard a number of interviews with Trump supporters. People weren’t gauging the truthfulness of the candidates, they were reacting to their apparent authenticity. Even if Trump said something that was not true, he appeared to be answering it authentically, which helped him appear to be more honest than Clinton. The content from the candidates was often secondary to how they were delivering the message.
  6. We’re a divided nation, but it isn’t about wealth. Our country has a growing divide between the rich and the poor, as the country’s wealth becomes more concentrated with the “top 1%.” When our country prospers, the wealthy get wealthier and everyone else stagnates. It turns out, however, that wealth was not the key divide of this election. The larger factor was the difference between urban and rural Americans. These groups tend to have quite different views on a wide range of topics, including immigration, global trade, gun control, and the opportunity of their families to achieve the American dream. Rural citizens are more likely to believe that they have been neglected by a system that is not addressing their needs and desires, and it’s not providing good opportunities for their children. This is where Trump’s message of change (“Drain the Swamp”) really resonated.
  7. I appreciate the electoral college. Some people are upset that Trump was elected, even though Clinton received more of the popular vote. It’s because of the electoral college, and I like the system. Rather than allowing a candidate to become president by dominating a very narrow part of our county, the electoral college forces candidates to have a broader appeal. It puts more of the states “into play” during the election, which makes more of our citizens part of the process.
  8. Michelle Obama is a national treasure. Over the last several years, I have enjoyed hearing Michelle Obama’s speeches. At the 2012 Democratic National Convention, I was truly moved when FLOTUS said this about POTUS “And he believes that when you’ve worked hard, and done well, and walked through that doorway of opportunity…you do not slam it shut behind you…you reach back, and you give other folks the same chances that helped you succeed.” During this year’s DNC, she inspired us with “when they go low, we go high” and then she had one of the most powerful speeches of the year in New Hampshire when she responded to Trump’s horrible comments about women. She’s a totally class act, and I hope she continues to be a public figure.
  9. I want Kellyanne Conway on my team. Every time Trump found himself in a negative situation, his campaign manager Kellyanne Conway would show up on TV with a clear and focused explanation. She was coherent, convincing, and maintained a very approachable style. She seemed very reasonable, even when I (often) totally disagreed with her. She was a critical asset for this campaign. If I were to ever run for office, she’d be one of the first people I’d look to recruit.
  10. Positivity really, really matters. Like many other Americans, I was very disappointed with the results of the election. Rather than lamenting on what could/should have happened or obsessing abut the damage that Trump may cause, I’m choosing to be positive. I appreciate the strength of our democracy and the resilience of our people. I marvel at the statesmanship of president Obama as he transitions leadership of this great nation to a person who he does not seem to like. My opinion of Trump hasn’t changed, but I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt moving forward. I’m hopeful that our collection of public officials will work together to close the divide amongst us, and not just continue to spread us apart.

The bottom line: I hope to be more inspired in 2020.

 

The Rise of Mobile CX (Infographic)

I’m sure you’re not surprised to hear that mobile customer experience is on the rise, but this infographic provides some more insights on what that shift looks like. It pulls from a variety of Temkin Group research, including: Data Snapshot: Channel Preferences Benchmark, 2016, Five C’s of Mobile VoC Disruption, Data Snapshot: Media Use Benchmark, 2016, and The State of CX Metrics, 2015.

You can download this infographic in different forms below, including in poster form.
the-rise-of-mobile-cx

You can download (and print) this infographic in different forms:

The bottom line: Make sure you have plans to be mobile first.

Design Lesson From… MA Department of Transportation

As you read the title of this post, you were likely thinking that there’s been a typo. Departments of Transportation (DoT) around the country have been called a lot of names, but good designers isn’t a common label. In this one case, though, I want to give a shout out for a part of the MA DoT’s roll out of MA’s new toll-less EZPass system.

1611_tollboothsbyeIn the past, if you did not have an E-ZPass transponder, you could go to a separate lane on the Mass Pike and pay a toll operator. The new system will completely eliminate the need for toll operators. If a car doesn’t have a transponder, then the system will take a picture of the license plate and charge the car owner with the toll fee plus a penalty for not using a transponder. So over time, the goal is for everyone to use a transponder.

Here’s where the design part comes in. The MA DoT is having a grace period of six months during which people who get a penalty for not using a transponder can get those fees eliminated if they get a transponder. Here’s why I think that it’s good design:

  • No matter how much the DoT tries to communicate the upcoming changes, a very large number of people won’t really understand (or care about) what’s going on.
  • The point at which many, many people will understand (and care about) the changes is when it truly affects them… when they receive their first bill with penalties for not using a transponder.
  • By providing a way to eliminate the penalties, the DoT will motivate a large number of people to get transponders — instead of just being upset with the DoT.

The key lesson here is that you need to design interactions based on how people really behave, not on how you’d like them to behave. While it would be great for everyone to understand and care about the E-ZPass changes prior to them going into effect, that would not be realistic. Most people do not pay attention to situations until they are directly affected by them. In this case, that moment is likely on the arrival of their first bill. So it is critical to design an experience around that moment which drives the behavior that the MA DoT is looking for — getting an E-ZPass Transponder.

In order for this part of the program to really work well, it is critical that those initial bills be designed to clearly communicate the option to eliminate the fees, and provide a simple path to do so. If not, then forget everything that I’ve said about good design; it will be a poor experience.

The difference between success and failure at this point comes down to what I’ve called the Design of Little Things (DoLT). All too often, people get the big things right, but fail to obsess about the DoLT that will make or break the experience.

I will be going through some toll booths without a transponder so that I can see what the experience looks like. If I find something interesting, then you might see a follow-up post.

The bottom line: Design for how people really behave, and obsess about little things.

HR Execs: Wake Up To Employee Engagement!

Let me start by saying that HR execs are missing a big opportunity.

In the report Benchmarking HR’s Support of CX and Employee Engagement, we examine what human resources (HR) professionals are doing to support customer experience and employee engagement efforts. How? We surveyed 300 HR professionals from large companies and compared the results to a similar study we conducted in 2012.

As you can see in the graphic below, HR professionals are increasingly seeing employee engagement as an important area of focus. We also found that the percentage of HR organizations that are significantly helping their organizations become more customer-centric has more than doubled from 15% in 2012 to 31% in 2016. That’s good news, but it’s not enough.

1609ee_hrismoreinvolvedOur research shows that engaged employees are an enormous asset. Compared with disengaged employees, highly engaged employees are more than four times as likely to recommend the company’s products and services and do something good for the company that is not expected of them, 2.5 times as likely to stay at work late if something needs to be done after the normal workday ends, and seven times as likely to recommend that a friend or relative apply for a job at their company.

With all that potential value, HR professionals should be much more focused on employee engagement. It’s not only that this is a critical area, but it’s an opportunity for HR teams to become even more strategic partners within their organizations. Instead of just hiring, placing, training, compensating, and firing employees, make your workforce incredibly more valuable. What am I suggesting?

HR Orgs Should Make Employee Engagement A Top Priority

If you’re an HR professionals and wondering where to start, take a look at our employee engagement resources.

The bottom line: It’s time for HR to take the lead in employee engagement.

Report: 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings of Tech Vendors

1610_temkinexperienceratingstechvendors_coverWe just published a Temkin Group report 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings of Tech Vendors that rates the customer experience of 62 large tech vendors based on a survey of 800 IT decision makers from large North American firms. This is the fifth year of the ratings, here are links to the 2012, 20132014, and 2015 ratings.

Here is the executive summary of the report:

The 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings of Tech Vendors evaluates the customer experience of 62 large technology vendors. We surveyed 800 IT decision-makers from large companies regarding three components – success, effort, and emotion – of their experiences with these IT providers. Out of all the vendors we looked at, HPE outsourcing, IBM SPSS, and Google earned the highest ratings, while Capgemini, Infosys, and Accenture received the lowest ratings. The average score for the Ratings dropped by one percentage-point over the past year, down from 59% in 2015 to 58% this year. Furthermore, our research shows that the Temkin Experience Ratings are strongly correlated with multiple elements of loyalty behavior, including likelihood of repurchasing from the company, likelihood of recommending the company, likelihood of trying new products, and likelihood of forgiving the company if it makes a mistake.

This product has a report (.pdf) and a dataset (excel). The dataset has the details of the 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings, including all three components, for the 62 tech vendors as well as data on customers’ likelihood to repurchase from the vendors, their 2016 Temkin Forgiveness Ratings, and their 2016 Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient. It also includes a summary of the 2015 Temkin Experience Ratings, likelihood to repurchase, and Temkin Forgiveness Ratings.

Download for $695, includes report (.pdf) and data file (.xls)
BuyDownload3

The Temkin Experience Ratings of Tech Vendors evaluates three areas of customer experience: success (can customers achieve what they want to do), effort (how easy is it for customers to do what they want to do), and emotion (how do customers feel about their interaction). Here are the overall results:

1610_techvendortxr_companies

Read more of this post

The Changing Pattern of Consumer Communications

For the past several years, we’ve been examining how U.S. consumers prefer to communicate with each other, analyzing their answers to the question, Which method would you most likely use to communicate with your friends?

As you can see in the figure below:

  • Text messages are on the rise (+8 points between 2012 and 2016), while home phones (-6 points) and email (-5 points) are on the decline.
  • Cell phones (increases with age) and text messages (decreases with age) are the most variable choice based on age group.
  • Text messages are the preferred channel for all ages below 45 years old.
  • Cell hones are the preferred channel for 45- to 74-year-olds.
  • Home phones are the preferred channel for people who are older than 74.
  • Online chat via Facebook has increased in preference (+4 points since 2012), and is most popular with 25- to 34-year-olds.

1609_preferredcommunications

The bottom line: More proof of a generational communications gap.

%d bloggers like this: