Report: Tech Vendor NPS Benchmark, 2017 (B2B)

We just published a Temkin Group report, Tech Vendor NPS Benchmark, 2017. The research examines Net Promoter Scores® (NPS®) and the link to loyalty for 58 tech vendors based on feedback from 800 IT decision makers in large North American organizations. We also compared overall results to our benchmarks from the previous five years. Here’s the executive summary:

For the sixth year in a row, we looked at the correlation between NPS and loyalty for technology vendors. To examine this link, we surveyed 800 IT decision-makers from large North American firms, asking about their relationships with their technology providers. Through this research, we found that:

  • Across the 58 tech vendors we examined, NPS ranged from +43 to -22.
  • Microsoft, SAS, Google, and VMware earned the highest NPS, while Accenture consulting, ACS, Autodesk, and Fujitsu received the lowest.
  • Overall, the average NPS for the tech vendor industry decreased by more than eight points from last year, down from 29.9 to 21.4 – the lowest level of any year we’ve studied.
  • Our analysis shows that NPS is correlated to customers’ willingness to spend more with tech vendors, try their new products and services, forgive them after a bad experience, and act as a reference for them with prospective clients.
  • When it comes to loyalty, IT decision-makers are most likely to purchase more from Microsoft and HP, try new offerings from Microsoft and Google, forgive SAS and Microsoft if they make a mistake, and act as a reference for Apple and IBM SPSS.

The report includes graphics with data for NPS, likelihood to repurchase, Temkin Forgiveness Ratings, and Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient (likely to try new offerings).. The excel spreadsheet includes this data (in more detail) for the 58 companies as well as summary data for other tech vendors with less than 40 pieces of feedback. It also includes the summary NPS scores from 2016.

Download report for $695
Purchase includes Excel spreadsheet with data.
Download sample spreadsheet to see details. 
BuyDownload3

As you can see in the chart below, the NPS ranges from a high of 43 for Microsoft servers down to  a low of -22 for Fujitsu.

The industry average NPS decreased from 29.9 last year to 21.4 this year this year.

Report details: The report includes graphics with data for NPS, likelihood to repurchase, Temkin Forgiveness Ratings, and Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient (likely to try new offerings).. The excel spreadsheet includes this data (in more detail) for the 58 companies as well as summary data for other tech vendors with less than 40 pieces of feedback. It also includes the summary NPS scores from 2016.

Download report for $695
Purchase includes Excel spreadsheet with data.
Download sample spreadsheet to see details. 
BuyDownload3

Note: See our 2016 NPS benchmark2015 NPS benchmark2014 NPS benchmark2013 NPS benchmark and 2012 NPS benchmark for tech vendors as well as our page full of NPS resources.

P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Dataset: UK Net Promoter Score Benchmark, 2017

In our Q1 2017 UK consumer benchmark study, we asked 5,000 UK consumers to provide Net Promoter® Score (NPS®) ratings for the companies that they had interacted with during the previous 90 days. We used that data to create an NPS benchmark of 157 companies across 16 industries.

You can purchase and download the dataset, which includes companies that had at least 85 respondents. The excel spreadsheet includes detailed NPS for all 157 companies and 16 industries, along with data on industry-level NPS by the age group of the respondents.

Download dataset for $295+
(see sample spreadsheet)
BuyDownload3

Some of the highlights of the study include (see figures below):

  • Company NPS ranges from a high of 45 (Nationwide) down to a low of -39 (Bank of Scotland).
  • Industry averages for NPS range from a high of 20 (supermarkets) to a low of -12 (rental cars & transport).
  • The NPS by age groups ranges from a high of 34 (NPS of auto dealers by consumers who are at least 65-years-old) to a low of -34 (NPS of health insurers by 25- to 34-year-olds).
  • When we compare NPS to the 2017 Temkin Experience Ratings, UK, we find a very high level of correlation. That shouldn’t be a surprise, because improving customer experience is the path to better NPS.

Read More …

Report: Economics of Net Promoter Score, 2017

We just published a Temkin Group report, Economics of Net Promoter Score, 2017. Here’s the executive summary:

Net Promoter® Score (NPS®) is a popular metric that companies use to analyze their customer experience efforts. But how does this metric actually relate to loyalty? To uncover the relationship between NPS and loyalty, we asked 10,000 U.S. consumers to give an NPS to 331 companies across 20 industries, and we then looked at how this score correlated with four key loyalty behaviors. Here are some highlights from this research:

  • Compared to detractors, promoters are over four times more likely to repurchase from a company, over five times more likely to forgive a company if it makes a mistake, over seven times more likely to try new offerings from a company, and almost five times more likely to trust a company.
  • We performed a detailed analysis of the loyalty data for promoters, passives, and detractors across 20 different industries: airlines, auto dealers, banks, computer and tablet makers, credit card issuers, fast food chains, health plans, hotels and rooms, insurance carriers, investment firms, parcel delivery services, rental car and transport agencies, retailers, software firms, streaming media services, supermarkets, TV and Internet service providers, TVs and appliance makers, utilities, and wireless carriers.
  • Ultimately, if a company wants to benefit from using NPS as a key metric, it must focus on improving customer experience, not obsessing over the metric itself.

Download report for $295+
BuyDownload3

Note: To see NPS for individual companies and industries, download the report, Net Promoter Benchmark Study, 2016.

These two graphics from the report show the average connection between NPS and loyalty across all 20 industries, while the report also contains data for each of the 20 industries:

Download report for $295+BuyDownload3

While this report provides clear evidence that promoters are more valuable than detractors, it is not an endorsement of NPS as a metric. The data shows that companies should be able to increase their customer loyalty if they create promoters and cut down on detractors. As you will see on our VoC/NPS Program Resources, the processes for improving is more important than the specific metric being used.

La Quinta “Gaming” Highlights Flaws in NPS

I’m in Las Vegas to watch some NBA Summer League games (Go Celtics!), and am staying overnight at a La Quinta near the airport. I found this note on the table next to the bed.

While there’s no problem with a nice thank you note, one section caught my eye…

*********
You may be receiving a guest satisfaction survey from La Quinta in the near future and we hope you feel confident that you may answer the question “Would you recommend us to your family and friends” with a 10.

If you should be surveyed, La Quinta uses a 1-10 scale (10 being the best). Although the scale ranking is from 1 to 10, scores of 8 or below results in a negative impact on the overall rating for this hotel.
*********

First of all, this is what I would call “gaming” the system. Anytime you ask for a specific score or range of scores, it’s gaming. Instead of getting a true response from the customer about his/her experience, the customer is forced to balance her honest feedback with a request for a specific score. Some customers are likely to be intimidated, since they may think that the hotel has visibility into their specific response. This would lower response rates and alter true feedback.

The second problem this highlights is the Net Promoter Score (NPS) calculation (since this is clearly an NPS question). As you probably know, NPS segments responses into three categories: Detractors (6 or less), Passives, (7 or 8) and Promoters (9 or 10). Is there really that much difference between an “8” or “9” on this scale? I think people giving either of these ratings would think that they are saying that the experience was good, but not the best that they’ve ever had. The choice of an “8” or “9” may be more driven by an internal rating gauge (that is different in each person), then it is being caused by a distinctive difference in the actual experience.

[Side note: La Quinta’s NPS is 9 points below the hotel industry average in Temkin Group’s latest NPS benchmark study]

The final, more substantial problem is how the metric is being used. My guess is that La Quinta is using NPS to substantially impact the compensation of some hotel employees. This pushes people to focus on “the number” as opposed to what’s really important, the ability to continuously improve.

To be honest, the issues I discuss above are not NPS-specific. I’ve seen them with a variety of metrics, and we work with many companies that are successfully using NPS. So let me share some advice for improving your use of CX metrics….

I wrote a post a few years ago that listed these five rules to stop employees from gaming your feedback system:

  1. Don’t mention or refer to a score
  2. Don’t mention specific survey questions
  3. Don’t mention any consequences
  4. Don’t say or imply that you will see their responses
  5. Don’t intimidate customers in any way

Check out my most about nine recommendations for NPS programs:

  1. The choice of metric is not as important as people think
  2. Driving improvements is what’s critical
  3. Promoters & detractors need their individual attention
  4. Sampling patterns really, really matter
  5. NPS is for relationships, not transactions
  6. NPS is for teams, not individuals
  7. Compensation can be a real problem
  8. Target ranges make more sense than single numbers
  9. There are four loops to close

The bottom line: CX metrics need to focus on improvements, not numbers

Report: Tech Vendors: Product and Relationship Satisfaction, 2017

1701_ds_techproductsandrelationships_coverWe just published a Temkin Group data snapshot, Tech Vendors: Product and Relationship Satisfaction of IT Clients, 2017.

During Q3 of 2016, we surveyed 800 IT decision-makers from companies with at least $250 million in annual revenues, asking them to rate both the products of and their relationships with 62 different tech vendors. HPE outsourcing, Google, and IBM SPSS earned the top overall scores, while Trend Micro, Infosys, and SunGard received the lowest overall scores. To determine their product rating, we evaluated tech vendors across four product/service criteria: features, quality, flexibility, and ease of use. And we calculated their relationship rating using four different criteria: technical support, support of the account team, cost of ownership, and innovation of company. We also looked at how the average product and relationship scores of tech vendors have changed over the previous three years.

This research has a report (.pdf) and a dataset (excel). The dataset has the details of Product/Service and Relationship satisfaction for the 62 tech vendors as well as for several tech vendors with sample sizes too small to be included in the published report.

Download report for $495
(includes Excel spreadsheet with data)
BuyDownload3

Here’s a link to last year’s study.

The research examines eight areas of satisfaction; four that deal with products & services and four that examine relationships. Tech vendors earned the highest average satisfaction level for product features (64%) and the lowest for total cost of ownership (57%).

As you can see in the chart below, the overall product/service & relationship satisfaction ranges from a high of 76% for HPE outsourcing down to a low of 42% for Trend Micro.

1701_techproductrelationshipoverallresults

Read More …

Report: The State of CX Metrics, 2016

1612_stateofcxmetrics2016_coverWe published a Temkin Group report, The State of CX Metrics, 2016. This is the sixth year of this study that examines the CX metrics efforts within large companies. Here’s the executive summary:

Temkin Group surveyed 183 companies to learn about how they use customer experience (CX) metrics and then compared their answers with similar studies we’ve conducted every year since 2011. We found that the most commonly used metrics continue to be likelihood-to-recommend and satisfaction, while the most successful metric is transactional interaction satisfaction. Only 10% of companies regularly consider the effect of CX metrics when they make day-to-day decisions. The top two problems companies face are limited visibility of CX metrics and the lack of taking action on metrics. Companies are best at measuring customer service and phone-based experiences and are worst at measuring the experiences of prospects and customers who defect. We also had companies complete Temkin Group’s CX Metrics Program Assessment, which examines four characteristics of a metrics program: consistent (does the company use common CX metrics across the organization?), impactful (do the CX metrics inform important decisions?), integrated (are trade-offs made between CX and financial metrics?), and continuous (do leaders regularly examine the CX metrics?). Only 11% of respondents received at least a “good” overall rating in this assessment, and companies earned the lowest average rating in integrated. Companies with stronger CX metrics programs deliver better customer experience and use more effort and likelihood-to-repurchase metrics.

See the State of CX Metrics studies from 2011, 201220132014, and 2015.

Download report for $195
BuyDownload3

Here are the results form our CX Metrics Competency & Maturity Assessment (one of 22 graphics in the report):

1612_cxmetricsmaturity

Download report for $195
BuyDownload3

Report: ROI of Customer Experience, 2016

1610_roiofcx_coverWe published a Temkin Group report, ROI of Customer Experience, 2016. This research shows that CX is highly correlated to loyalty across 20 industries. Here’s the executive summary:

To understand the connection between customer experience (CX) and loyalty, we examined feedback from 10,000 U.S. consumers that describes both their experiences with and their loyalty to different companies. To examine the CX component, we used the 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings (TxR), which evaluated 294 companies. Our analysis shows that there’s a very large correlation between companies’ TxR and the willingness of customers to purchase more from them. This connection holds true for other areas of customer loyalty as well. We used this data to calculate the revenue impact of CX across 20 industries. We found that a moderate increase in CX generates an average revenue increase of $823 million over three years for a company with $1 billion in annual revenues. Rental car agencies have the most to gain from improving CX ($967 million), while utilities have the least to gain ($645 million). While all three components of customer experience¬—success, effort, and emotion—have a strong effect on loyalty, our research shows that emotion is the most important element. When compared with companies with very poor CX, companies with very good CX have a 16.7 percentage-point advantage in customers who are willing to purchase more from them, 16.7 percentage-point advantage in customers who trust them, 10.3 percentage-point advantage in customers willing to forgive them if they make a mistake, and 7.1 percentage-point advantage in customers who are willing to try their new products. Additionally, companies with very good CX ratings have an average Net Promoter Score that is 22 points higher than the scores of companies with poor CX. We recommend that you build your own CX ROI models, using our five-step approach for guidance.

Download report for $295
BuyDownload3

This is one of the figures in the report, and it shows the high correlation between Temkin Experience Ratings (customer experience) and purchase intentions for 294 companies across 20 industries:
1610_purchasemorecorrelationgraphHere’s an excerpt from the graphic showing the three year impact on revenues for a $1 billion company in 20 different industries:

1610_roirevsbyindustry

Download report for $295
BuyDownload3

To see the customer experience levels of all 294 companies, download to the free 2016 Temkin Experience Ratings report.

P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Report: Net Promoter Score Benchmark Study, 2016

1610_npsbenchmarkstudy_coverWe published a Temkin Group report, Net Promoter Score Benchmark Study, 2016. This is the fifth year of this study that includes Net Promoter® Scores (NPS®) on 315 companies across 20 industries based on a study of 10,000 U.S. consumers. Here’s the executive summary:

As many large companies use Net Promoter® Score (NPS) to evaluate their customer loyalty, Temkin Group measured the NPS of 315 companies across 20 industries. With an NPS of 68, USAA’s insurance business earned the highest score in the study for the fourth year in a row. Four other companies also earned an NPS of 60 or higher: Cadillac, USAA’s banking business, Apple, and USAA’s credit card business. In addition to earning some of the top scores, USAA’s banking, credit card, and insurance businesses also all outpaced their respective industries’ averages by more than any other company. Comcast, meanwhile, earned the lowest NPS for the second year in a row, coming in just below Time Warner Cable, Cox Communications, and McDonalds. And while all 20 industries increased their average NPS from last year, utilities enjoyed the biggest improvement in its score. Out of all the companies, US Airways’s and Advantage Rent-A-Car’s scores improved the most, whereas TriCare’s and Lexus’s scores declined the most. On average across the industries, the youngest consumers gave companies the lowest NPS, while 35- to 44-year-olds gave them the highest NPS.

See the NPS Benchmark Studies from 2012, 20132014, and 2015.

Here’s a list of companies included in this study (.pdf).

Download report for $495
(includes report (in .pdf) plus dataset in Excel)
BuyDownload3

Here are the NPS scores across 20 industries:
1610_rangeofindustrynps

Here are some other highlights of the research:

  • Five industries toped the list with an average NPS of 40 or more: auto dealers, software, investments, computers & tablets, and appliances.
  • The bottom scoring industries are TV service providers, Internet service providers, and health plans.
  • USAA’s insurance, banking, and credit card businesses earned NPS levels that are 30 or more points above their industry averages. Five other firms are 20 or more points above their peers: com, credit unions, Chick-fil-A, Apple, and Trader Joe’s.
  • Five companies fell 25 or more points below their industry averages: RadioShack, Motel 6, eMachines, McDonalds, and Days Inn.
  • US Airway’s NPS increased by 31 points between 2015 and 2016, the largest increase of any company. Eight other companies improved by 25 or more points: Fifth Third, 21st Century, Fujitsu, DHL, MetLife, HSBC, Commonwealth Edison, PSE&G, and Hannaford.
  • TriCare, Lexus, Mercedes-Benz, Baskin Robins, and Nordstrom had double-digit declines in NPS between 2015 and 2016.

Download report for $495
(includes report (in .pdf) plus dataset in Excel)
BuyDownload3

If you want to know what data is included in this report and dataset, download this sample Excel dataset file.Screen Shot 2014-10-17 at 4.05.17 PM

P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Report: Tech Vendor NPS Benchmark, 2016 (B2B)

1609_technpsbenchmark_coverWe just published a Temkin Group report, Tech Vendor NPS Benchmark, 2016, The research examines Net Promoter Scores and the link to loyalty for 62 tech vendors based on feedback from 800 IT decision makers in large North American organizations. We also compared overall results to our benchmarks from the previous four years. Here’s the executive summary:

For the fifth year in a row, we examined the link between Net Promoter Scores® (NPS®) and loyalty for technology vendors. We surveyed 800 IT decision-makers from large North American firms to learn about their relationships with their technology providers. Of the 62 tech vendors we evaluated, IBM, HPE outsourcing, IBM SPSS, and VMware earned the highest NPS, while Cognizant, Capgemini, and Infosys received the lowest. Overall, the average NPS for the tech vendor industry decreased by almost 2 percentage points from last year. Our analysis shows that promoters are much more likely than detractors to increase their spending with tech vendors, try new products and services when they are announced, and forgive tech vendors after a bad experience. We also found that Software AG and HPE outsourcing are the top companies for purchase momentum, while IBM SPSS, IBM software, and IBM outsourcing have the highest Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient, and HPE outsourcing and IBM SPSS are at the top of the Temkin Forgiveness Ratings.

The report includes graphics with data for NPS, purchase intentions, likelihood to forgive, and likelihood to try a new offering. The excel spreadsheet includes this data (in more detail) for the 62 companies as well as for other tech vendors with less than 40 pieces of feedback. It also includes the summary NPS scores from 2015.

Download report for $695
(includes Excel spreadsheet with data)
BuyDownload3

As you can see in the chart below, the NPS ranges from a high of 61 for IBM software down to  a low of -10 for Cognizant IT services.

1609_techvendornpsclear

The industry average NPS decreased to 29.9 this year. The research also includes data for Purchase Momentum (how much customers are planning to buy), Temkin Forgiveness Ratings (likelihood of customers to forgive after a bad experience), and Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient (likelihood of customer to try a new offering). We not only list the results for each company, but we also show that NPS is highly correlated to each of these items (as you can see below for Purchase Momentum).

1609_techvendornpstrendandcorrelatoin

Report details: When you purchase this research, you will receive a written report and an excel spreadsheet with more data. The report includes graphics with data for NPS, purchase momentum, Temkin Forgiveness Ratings, and Temkin Innovation Equity Quotient for the 62 tech vendors that had at least 40 pieces of feedback. The excel spreadsheet includes this data (in more detail) for the 62 companies as well as for other tech vendors with less than 40 pieces of feedback. It also includes the summary NPS scores from 2015. If you want to know more about the data file, download this SAMPLE SPREADSHEET without the data (.xls).

Download report for $695
(includes Excel spreadsheet with data)
BuyDownload3

Note: See our 2015 NPS benchmark2014 NPS benchmark2013 NPS benchmark and 2012 NPS benchmark for tech vendors as well as our page full of NPS resources.

P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

My Latest 9 Recommendations For NPS

We study 100’s of companies that use Net Promoter® Score (NPS®) and work with dozens of others that are in different stages of NPS deployment. We also publish one of the most comprehensive annual NPS benchmark studies. This gives us a unique view on how organizations use this popular customer experience metric.

Every year or so, after being asked a series of similar questions about NPS, I write a blog post with a collection of my thoughts. Before I get to my current thinking (which has remained relatively consistent over the years), here are some previous posts you might be interested in reading:

As you probably know, there are people who love NPS and people who hate it. I am neither. I’ve seen NPS used as an effective metric to drive change, and I’ve seen it used in ways that are harming organizations. I could also say that about almost every metric that I’ve seen being used.

Having established all of that, here are nine of my current recommendations:

  1. The choice of metric is not as important as people think. We rarely see a company succeed or fail based on the specific metric that it choses. That doesn’t mean that you can chose a ridiculous metric, but most reasonable metrics provide the same potential for success (and failure). In general, NPS is a reasonable metric to chose, as our data shows that it often correlates to customer loyalty. As organizations mature, we try to get them to use metrics that are more closely aligned to their brand promises.
  2. Driving improvements is what’s critical. Instead of obsessing about the specific metric being used, companies need to obsess about the system they put in place to make changes based on what they learn from using the metric. Successful NPS programs systematically take action on insights they uncover. If the program is working well, then the company isn’t debating scores. Instead, they’re continuously making changes to create more promoters and eliminate detractors.
  3. Promoters & detractors need their individual attention. The most important thing you can do with NPS is to understanding what is driving NPS. It turns out that the things that create promoters are not just the opposite side of the issues that create detractors. So you need to separately identify changes to create promoters and decrease detractors. All too often, companies focus just on detractors. This helps to fix problems, but it does not identify opportunities to propel your organization. By focusing on what causes promoters, you will get the opportunity to engage the organization in uplifting discussions—instead of just beating the drum about what’s broken.
  4. Sampling patterns really, really matter. The approach for sampling often has a very significant impact on NPS results (and results from other metrics as well). If you have multiple segments of customers and they each have a different NPS profile (as many do), then your overall NPS can change wildly based on the mix of those customers that are included in the NPS calculation. In B2B, this may come from combining results from enterprise accounts with smaller clients, or mixing responses from executive decision makers and end users of your products. In B2C, the variance may come form mixing data between new customers and repeat customers.
  5. NPS is for relationships, not transactions. Asking people if they would recommend a company isn’t a good question to use after an interaction. If a customer is a detractor on an NPS survey deployed right after a call into the contact center, for instance, then it doesn’t necessarily mean that there was a problem with that interaction. The contact center might have done a great job on the call, but the customer may still dislike something else about the company. If the contact center interaction had been problematic, then the customer’s NPS score might be temporarily lowered and not reflective of the customer’s longer-term view of the company.
  6. NPS is for teams, not individuals. Since NPS asks about the likelihood to recommend a company, it actually reflects the actions of more than one person. So if you want to look for someone to hold responsible for NPS results, think about making it a shared metric across a large group, not an individual KPI. Many companies that fall in love with NPS, start applying it to every part of their business, trying to give everyone their own NPS. While it’s worthwhile to look for improvements across the business based on NPS, you run into problems when you try to create to many levels of NPS.
  7. Compensation can be a real problem. When an organization shares a common metric (like NPS) and its people collectively have some compensation tied to it, then it can help align everyone’s focus on customer experience. But if the compensation gets too significant, then people start focusing too much on the number—questioning its validity and strong-arming customers—instead of looking for ways to make improvements. Remember, the majority of your discussions should be about making improvements, not data.
  8. Target ranges make more sense than single numbers. NPS is an inherently jittery metric; there’s only a porous line keeping passives from becoming promoters or detractors. And the situation is magnified by the sampling issues described above. That’s why we see many customer insights group wasting a lot of time running around trying to explain small movements in their companies’ NPS, as executives overreact to small movements. Instead of setting NPS goals as a specific number, consider defining a range (similar to a process control chart). As a start, think about adopting a 3- to 5-point range. That way you only react to results outside of the range or multiple periods of increases or declines.
  9. There are four loops to close. When people talk about closed loop and NPS, they often mean contacting customers after they answer the NPS question. But that immediate response is just one what we call the four customer insight-driven action loops: Immediate response, corrective action, continuous improvement, and strategic change. Any NPS program should put in places processes to close all four loops.

The bottom line: NPS success comes from the process, not the metric.

Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Use Customer Insights To Close Four Loops

Companies that have voice of the customer (VoC) programs (including NPS) often put in place a closed-loop process. Those efforts often focus on closing a single loop, immediately responding to a customer after they respond to a survey. But this represents only one of four loops that companies need to close.

In the report, Make Your VoC Action-Oriented, we introduced the concept of four closed loops.

1608_FourActionLoopsHere’s an example of the four loops for a restaurant chain:

  • Immediate Response. Reach out to a restaurant customer who responded on a survey that the bathroom was dirty and help take care of her ongoing concerns.
  • Corrective Action. Get the manager or employee to clean the bathroom in that restaurant.
  • Continuous Improvement. Create new process for restaurants to check and clean bathrooms on a regular basis.
  • Strategic Change. As part of new restaurant formats, design bathrooms so that they don’t require as much time from employees to keep them clean.

The bottom line: Make sure to build out four closed loops.

Report: Economics of Net Promoter Score, 2016

1606_EconomicsofNetPromoter_COVERWe just published a Temkin Group report, Economics of Net Promoter, 2016. Here’s the executive summary:

Net Promoter® Score (NPS®) is a popular metric that companies use to analyze their customer experience efforts, but how does it actually relate to loyalty? We asked thousands of consumers to give an NPS to 294 companies across 20 industries, and then we examined the connection between NPS and four key areas of loyalty. We found that compared to detractors, promoters are more than five times as likely to repurchase from companies, more than seven times as likely to forgive companies if they make a mistake, and almost nine times as likely to try new offerings from companies. Our research also shows that promoters recommend a company to an average of 3.5 people. The following analysis provides detailed loyalty data of promoters, passives, and detractors across 20 industries: airlines, auto dealers, banks, computer and tablet makers, credit card issuers, fast food chains, health plans, hotel chains, insurance carriers, Internet service providers, investment firms, major appliance makers, parcel delivery services, rental car agencies, retailers, software firms, supermarkets, TV service providers, utilities, and wireless carriers. Ultimately, if a company wants to benefit from using NPS as a key metric, it must focus on improving customer experience, not obsessing over the metric itself.

Download report for $295
BuyDownload3

Here’s one of the 12 graphics in the report, which shows the average loyalty differences for promoters, passives, and detractors across all industries:NPSEconomicsOverview

The report provides this loyalty data for promoters, passives, and detractors for 20 industries: airlines, auto dealers, banks, computer and tablet makers, credit card issuers, fast food chains, health plans, hotel chains, insurance carriers, Internet service providers, investment firms, major appliance makers, parcel delivery services, rental car agencies, retailers, software firms, supermarket chains, TV service providers, utilities, and wireless carriers.

Download report for $295
BuyDownload3

See our VoC/NPS resource page, which includes great resources for creating a successful NPS program. You mat also want to see our latest NPS Benchmark Report with NPS data on 291 companies.

The bottom line: Promoters are much more valuable than detractors.

Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Report: Tech Vendors: Product and Relationship Satisfaction, 2016

1601_DS_TechProductsAndRelationships_COVERWe just published a Temkin Group data snapshot, Tech Vendors: Product and Relationship Satisfaction of IT Clients, 2016.

During Q3, 2015, 800 IT professionals from companies with at least $250 million in annual revenues rated both the products of and their relationships with 62 tech vendors. The research examines satisfaction with eight areas: product/service features, product/service quality, product/service flexibility, product/service ease of use, technical support, support of the account team, cost of ownership, and innovation of company. Some of the findings include that Intel, Google, and HP outsourcing earned the highest overall satisfaction ratings, while Unisys, Sage, and Cognizant IT services earned the lowest. When it comes to product satisfaction, Intel leads in product features, Apple and IBM IT services lead in product quality, Google leads in product flexibility, and NetApp leads in product ease of use. When it comes to relationship satisfaction, HP outsourcing leads in tech support and in cost of ownership, Intel leads in account team support, and Google leads in innovation.

This product has a report (.pdf) and a dataset (excel). The dataset has the details of Product/Service and Relationship satisfaction for the 62 tech vendors as well as for several tech vendors with sample sizes too small to be included in the published report.

Download report for $495
(includes Excel spreadsheet with data)
BuyDownload3

As you can see in the chart below, the overall product/service & relationship satisfaction ranges from a high of 74% for Intel down to a low of 46% for Unisys.

1601_ProductRelationshipSatisfaction_Ratings

The chart below shows the average scores across all satisfaction criteria. Tech vendors scored the highest in innovation (64%) and the lowest in cost of ownership (56%).1601_ProductRelationshipSatisfaction_Elements

Report details: When you purchase this research, you will receive a written data snapshot and an excel spreadsheet with more data.The dataset has the details of Product/Service and Relationship satisfaction for the 62 tech vendors as well as for several tech vendors with sample sizes too small to be included in the published report. If you want to know more about the data file, download this SAMPLE SPREADSHEET without the data (.xls).

Download report for $495
(includes Excel spreadsheet with data)
BuyDownload3

Report: The State of CX Metrics, 2015

1512_StateOfCXMetrics2015_COVERWe published a Temkin Group report, The State of CX Metrics, 2015. This is the fifth year of this study that examines the CX metrics efforts within large companies. Here’s the executive summary:

Temkin Group surveyed nearly 200 large companies to learn about how they use customer experience (CX) metrics, and we then compared their answers with similar studies we’ve conducted every year since 2011. The most commonly used metrics continue to be likelihood-to-recommend and satisfaction, while the most successful metric is interaction satisfaction. And although the percentage of companies where senior leaders regularly refer to CX metrics has increased significantly from last year, fewer companies are making explicit trade-offs between CX metrics and financial metrics. Companies are best at measuring customer service and phone-based experiences and are worst at measuring the experiences of prospects and customers who defect. In addition to answering survey questions, we also had companies complete Temkin Group’s CX Metrics Competency and Maturity Assessment, which examines four areas of a metrics program: consistent (does the company use common CX metrics across the organization?), impactful (do the CX metrics inform important decisions?), integrated (are trade-offs made between CX and financial metrics?), and continuous (do leaders regularly examine the CX metrics?). Only 14% of respondents received at least a “good” overall rating, and companies earned the lowest rating in integrated. Ultimately, companies with stronger CX metrics programs deliver better customer experience, have stronger business results, more frequently measure ease of doing business, and compensate more employees based on CX metrics.

See the State of CX Metrics studies from 2011, 20122013, and 2014.

Download report for $195
BuyDownload3

Here are the results form our CX Metrics Competency & Maturity Assessment:

1512_CXMetricsAssessmentResults

Here are some other highlights of the research:

  • Forty-nine percent of companies with stronger CX metrics programs have well above average customer experience compared to 17% of those with weaker CX metrics programs. The stronger CX metrics programs are also 50% more likely to have significantly better business performance then their competitors.
  • While 64% of respondents rate their company as good or very good at collecting and sharing CX metrics, only 22% gave themselves those high marks when it came to making trade-offs between CX metrics and financial metrics.
  • Likelihood to recommend and satisfaction remain the most popular CX metrics, while companies are most successful in using satisfaction as a measure of specific customer interactions.
  • Seven out of 10 companies have compensation tied to CX metrics for some of their employees. Net Promoter® Score is the most common metric used and customer service is the most common group to have its compensation tied to CX metrics.
  • Companies are most effective at measuring customer service and phone interactions and least effective at measuring the experiences of prospects and customers who have defected.

Download report for $195
BuyDownload3

P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.

Report: 2015 Temkin Loyalty Index

1511_TemkinLoyaltyIndex_COVERWe published a Temkin Group report, 2015 Temkin Loyalty Index. This report ranks the loyalty of consumers to 293 companies across 20 industries. Here’s the executive summary:

The 2015 Temkin Loyalty Index evaluates the loyalty of 10,000 U.S. consumers to 293 companies across 20 industries. The Index is based on evaluating consumers’ likelihood to do five things: repurchase from the company, recommend the company to others, forgive the company if it makes a mistake, trust the company, and try the company’s new offerings. Our research shows that USAA, H-E-B, Publix, and Trader Joe’s are at the top of the list when it comes to consumer loyalty, while Con Edison of NY, Coventry Health Care, Comcast, and Time Warner Cable are at the bottom. At an industry level, supermarkets, fast food chains, and retailers inspire the highest loyalty levels. At the other end of the spectrum, TV service providers and Internet service providers have the lowest levels of loyalty. USAA, JetBlue Airways, TriCare, credit unions, ACE Rent A Car, Apple, and Georgia Power have loyalty levels that most outperform their industry averages. Conversely, Con Edison of NY, RadioShack, Blackboard, Coventry Health Care, Citibank, Jeep, Bi-Lo, and McDonalds fall farthest behind their peers.

Download report for $395
(includes report plus dataset in Excel)
BuyDownload3

Here are the leaders and laggards as well as the industry scores:

1511_TLi_TopBottom

1511_TLi_IndustryRanges

Here are some other highlights of the research:

  • The Temkin Loyalty Index is an average rating across consumers’ likelihood to do five things:
    • Repurchase from the company
    • Recommend the company to others
    • Forgive the company if it makes a mistake
    • Trust the company
    • Try the company’s new offerings
  • At an industry level, supermarkets, fast food chains, and retailers have the highest loyalty levels. At the other end of the spectrum, TV service providers and Internet service providers have the lowest.
  • USAA (for credit cards, banking, and insurance), JetBlue Airways, TriCare, credit unions, ACE Rent A Car, Apple, and Georgia Power have loyalty levels that most outperform their industry averages.
  • Con Edison of NY, RadioShack, Blackboard, Coventry Health Care, Citibank, Jeep, Bi-Lo, and McDonalds fall farthest behind their peers.
  • The average likelihood to purchase across all industries is the highest (67%) while the average likelihood to try new offerings is the lowest (42%).
  • H-E-B and USAA lead, and Con Edison of NY lags in repurchase.
  • Aldi and Hy-Vee lead, and Coventry Health Care lags in recommendations.
  • USAA and ACE Rent A Car lead, and Con Edison of NY lags in forgiveness.
  • ACE Rent A Car leads, and Citibank and Citizens lag in new product loyalty.
  • Credit unions and H-E-B lead, and Comcast lags in trust.

Download report for $395
(includes report plus dataset in Excel)
BuyDownload3

If you want to know what data is included in this report and dataset, download this sample Excel dataset file.