Stop Obsessing About Organizational Alignment

I was recently asked a question that I hear a lot, how do we get alignment across our large, complex organization? This is an important question since the path to Experience Management (XM) often requires large-scale change.

I’m now just saying: Stop focusing so much on it. Instead of trying to gain full alignment before you begin, build it over time in an iterative manner that I’m calling Agile Alignment.

When people think about transformation, they often make a false assumption that alignment is required prior to change. They believe that it’s a prerequisite to get all of the key stakeholders on the same page. It isn’t.

If you have limited bandwidth (which is the case for just about everyone I’ve ever worked with), then you have to make trade-offs on where you spend your time and energy. At a simplistic level, you will be faced with deciding between trying to build alignment with people who are not pre-disposed to supporting your efforts, or focusing on driving some elements on your change agenda. My argument is that, on the margin, the latter can be much more productive than the former.

We often assume that alignment is a precursor to change. But let me introduce a new thought: Successful change is the precursor to true alignment. In other words, you may be able to get people passively on-board with your plans, but they aren’t truly on-board until they see something is working and on the path to success.

The ideal approach for driving transformation, therefore, is an iterative process that I’m calling Agile Alignment. It goes like this:

  1. Identify key stakeholders who are actively aligned
  2. Drive successful change initiatives with those aligned stakeholders
  3. Build alignment with a larger group of stakeholders
  4. Go back to step #2

This way, you keep expanding the scope of your efforts and the breadth of your alignment over time.

The bottom line: True alignment follows success.

 

 

Is NPS A Dubious Fad?

Okay, it’s that time again. Every few years someone ignites the debate about whether Net Promoter Score® (NPS®) is a great or terrible thing. A recent article in the WSJ (The Dubious Management Fad Sweeping Corporate America) has sparked the discussion this time.

Rather than write something entirely new, I decided to share something I wrote in 2015 that addresses the issue. Before I share that post, I also suggest you take a look at these:

Below is the 2015 post, Is Net Promoter Score A Savior Or A Demon?

**********

Every couple of years, I get a resurgence of questions about Net Promoter® Score (NPS®). These surges typically coincide with research that shows how NPS is either an excellent predictor or a terrible predictor of company performance. That data often ignites a religious battle between the NPS lovers and NPS haters.

Well, it’s one of those times.

Let me start by saying that I’m an atheist in this NPS battle. We’ve had the opportunity to study and work with hundreds of companies that use NPS. I’ve recommended to some companies that they adopt NPS, to others that they stop using NPS, and to others that they start with a totally different set of metrics (see our VoC/NPS resource page).

Let’s look at what we know for sure about NPS…

The reality is that the metric itself is much less important than how it is used. I’d rather use a sub-optimal metric in a way that drives positive improvements across an organization, than have a perfect metric that doesn’t result in as much impact.

Here are some quick answers to key questions:

  • Is NPS the best indicator of customer loyalty and business performance? In many cases, no.
  • Can other metrics be used to drive positive change? Yes.
  • Does NPS provide an easy to understand metric that can be widely adopted? Yes.
  • Can NPS be used to make an organization more customer centric? In many cases, yes.
  • Will a company improve if it increases promoters and decreases detractors? In many cases, yes.
  • Can NPS be used inappropriately? Yes.
  • Can any metric be used inappropriately? Yes.
  • Would I ever recommend NPS for every touch point? No.
  • Should companies consider their specific business when selecting metrics? Absolutely.
  • What’s more important, the metric or the improvement process? The improvement process.

The bottom line: NPS is neither a savior nor a demon.

P.S. In case you didn’t know, NPS® and Net Promoter® are registered trademarks of Fred Reichheld, Satmetrix, and Bain & Company.

 

Exciting News From The XM Institute

The time has finally come for me to tell people to stop purchasing Temkin Group research reports. Are we eliminating them? No. Are they irrelevant? No. We’ve just decided to give them away for free on the Qualtrics XM Institute site.

That’s right, you can now get access to almost our entire research library for free. One of the reasons we joined Qualtrics was to be able to help more people and organizations. This move shows you the commitment that Qualtrics is making to help the world understand and deliver on the promise of Experience Management (XM).

One of the things you’ll notice on the XM Institute page is a filter to select reports based on Six XM Competencies. Yes, we’ve created a new model. It’s based on the following six competencies:

  • Lead. Architect, align, and sustain successful XM efforts. Driving XM transformation requires a strong program and active support from senior leadership.
  • Realize. Track and ensure that XM efforts achieve business objectives. For XM efforts to have lasting, positive impact, they must align with the overall priorities of the organization.
  • Activate. Create the appropriate skills, support, and motivation. People generally gravitate towards the status quo. To help overcome that inertia, the organization must ensure that employees have all the appropriate XM-related training and support needed.
  • Enlighten. Provide actionable insights across an organization. At the center of XM is the constant flow of data being transformed into useful information and shared with those most capable of taking the appropriate action.
  • Respond. Prioritize and drive improvements based on insights. An organization must act on what it learns by making constant improvements as insights are uncovered.
  • Disrupt. Identify and create experiences that differentiate the organization. Truly successful XM efforts go beyond simply reacting to problems to proactively developing innovative experiences that give the organization a competitive advantage.

That’s just a quick summary. We will be publishing much, much more on this model in the future. It will be the primary lens for all of our content, which is why and we’ve created categories on this blog for the Six XM Competencies.

Enjoy all of the free content on the Qualtrics XM Institute site!

Six Categories Of X&O Data Insights

Last week I attended SAP’s SAPPHIRE and CX Live events in Orlando. It was great to see 35,000 or so of my new friends. As you might expect, Experience Management (“XM”) was a dominant theme. Just about every SAP or Qualtrics keynote speech discussed XM, and it was a topic at many of the concurrent sessions. I really enjoyed seeing the XM message come to life in so many different ways.

One of the cornerstones of XM is the combination of operational data (“O-data”) and experience data (“X-data”). While each type of data can provide valuable insights on its own, the combination can unlock new levels of intelligence across an enterprise. These more inclusive datasets will increase in value as organizations expand their use of predictive analytics, as the combined data is inherently more insightful.

To help you think about where you can find valuable opportunities to combine X- and O-data within your organization, we identified the following six categories of use cases:

  • X Why: Find something happening in O-data and look for an explanation in X-data
  • O Drivers: Find something happening in X-data and look for operational situations that are causing the situation
  • X&O Predict: Build projections based on an analysis of X- & O-data
  • X&O Personalize: Adjust how you treat people based on a combination of X- & O-data
  • X&O Alert: Send alerts and other proactive information based on a combination of X- & O-data
  • X Value: Measure the value of improving experiences by examining the impact that those changes have on business results

1905_CategoriesOfXODataInsights_v2

The graphic above provides some customer experience (“CX”) and employee experience (“EX”) examples, but it’s not meant to be an exhaustive list of use cases. Hopefully the table provides you with a good sense of the insights that can be unlocked with the combination of X- and O-data.

Now that you understand some of the ways for gaining insights from X- and O-data, think about how the combination can impact your organization. If you have some ideas or examples of how it’s worked for you, leave them in the comments section of this post.  I’ll try and highlight some of the most interesting items.

The bottom line: Combine your Xs & Os to unlock more insights.

 

Complexity Is An Experience Killer

I just spent two days in Miami with a great group of executives who are part of the SAP CX Client Advisory Board. One of their presentations described the company’s technology transformation, and included a stream of activity around “decomplexing.” I loved seeing that!

Complexity ends up oozing its way into all types of experiences. Complex products, prices, or processes lead to ill-prepared employees and confused customers. A complex set of benefits leads to ill-prepared HR representatives and confused employees. A complex brand positioning leads to erratic messages and a confused marketplace.

The problem even goes beyond confusion, as complexity causes people to make mistakes — or even to think they made mistakes when they hadn’t. It generates large numbers of unproductive interactions, as people try and sort through the complexity to figure out what they want to, or need to do.

People often try and mask complexity. And while that may be effective in some situations, it ends up failing almost all the time. Why? Because complexity oozes its way into everything. It’s extremely hard to contain. A complex pricing structure can be masked with a configurator, but customers end up being confused about why they have to buy something, the price associated with the purchase, or the information on their first bill.

Organizations have a natural tendency to create complexity. They add rules and processes on top of of other rules and processes. That’s why decomplexing is a great thing to work on. It requires an explicit focus and an ongoing discipline. Making things simple is often much harder than continuing to make them complex.

Decomplexing is worth the effort.

The bottom line: Simplification is a wonderful enabler of great experiences.

The Human Experience Cycle

As you think about your experience management (XM) efforts, it’s important to understand  how people flow through the experiences in their lives — as customers, employees, patients, fans, citizens, students, etc. To help deepen that understanding, I’ve created a simple model, the Human Experience Cycle (HxC). As you can see in the chart below, the HxC is made up of five elements:

  • Expectations: What a person anticipates will happen during an experience.
  • Experiences: What actually happens to a person during an interaction.
  • Perceptions: How a person views an experience based on their expectations.
  • Attitudes: How someone feels about the organization.
  • Behaviors: How a person choses to interact with an organization.

1903_HumanExperienceCycle2

Here are some implications of the HxC:

  • Experiences are in the eyes of the beholder. How someone feels about an experience (their perception) is based on their expectations along with the actual experience. So the exact same experience can lead to different perceptions for different people. That’s why you need to think about the expectations you’re setting prior to an experience, and consider delivering different experiences based on people’s expectations.
  • Experiences are judged by the emotions they create. Our memories aren’t like video cameras, they’re more like an Instagram account where we take pictures whenever we feel strong emotions, and then we judge that experience in the future based on reviewing those pictures. That’s why it’s critical to proactively think about which emotions an experience is likely to generate, since those are the elements which will most drive perceptions.
  • Attitudes are important... Many organizations measure attitudes (e.g., a relationship Net Promoter Score) as part of their overall metrics program. This is an important area to understand, because it represents an accumulation of multiple perceptions and can often be a leading indicator of behaviors. That’s why many successful XM programs prioritize their efforts around the experiences that most highly affect attitudes.
  • …But behaviors are the goal. The success or failure of an organization is driven by what people actually do, their behaviors. Over time, you need to make sure that the attitudes you’re measuring have an actual impact on the behaviors you really care about — is NPS really driving future purchases?, or is our employee engagement measurement predicting attrition? If not, look for different attitudinal measurements that are more predictive of those important behaviors.

The bottom line:  Align your efforts around the Human Experience Cycle.

The Evolving Role of CX (& XM) Leaders

Last week I spoke at a local CXPA meeting in Boston. We had a great turnout, thanks to the great work of the planning committee and the wonderful space provided by Education First.

image1

I led a discussion about the future of CX, which I believe was applicable to all experience management (XM) leaders. One of my key messages was that we need to think of our roles differently as we push our organizations to even higher levels of CX/XM maturity. Here’s how the role of CX/XM leaders need to change:

  • Early stages of maturity: WHAT WE DO. In the early stages of maturity, you need to build a strong team, a clear message, and a solid work plan. You need to enlist a few external supporters, but a large majority of the effort is driven by your team.
  • Middle stages of maturity: HOW WE INFLUENCE. Once you have some momentum and clarity around priorities, your team needs to shift focus from being doers to being facilitators. You need to build a much broader coalition of supporters and collaborators, and support them as they make changes within their organizations.
  • Advance stages of maturity: HOW CX/XM THRIVES. Once you’ve hit the larger stages of maturity, you need to make sure that good CX/XM practices are not only being deployed, but they’re being embraced. You should be helping leaders across the organization to embed the new practices within their core operations, and find ways to continuously improve on them. Deploying good CX/XM approaches isn’t good enough, as those activities must be nurtured so they don’t get stale over time.

I hope you are able to lead your organization to the advanced stages of maturity. If you do, you’ll likely need to change your approach many times along the way.

The bottom line: CX/XM leaders’ job description shifts from doing to nurturing.

The Engaging Power Of Employee Feedback

Does your organization listen to its employees? I mean, really listen and act on what they say. Based on what our research has uncovered, it’s likely that the true answer is “no.” Check out some data from our recent research:

  • In our Q3 2018 Consumer Benchmark Study, we found that 40% of full time U.S. employees strongly agrees with the statement, “My company asks for my feedback and acts upon what I say.”
  • In the report, Employee Engagement Competency & Maturity, 2018, we found that only 40% of executives within large organizations  put a high priority on taking action based on results from employee engagement studies.

Does it really matter? Yes! While there is enormous value from using employee feedback to improve your business, the true win might be in how it improves the engagement level of those employees.

To understand this phenomena, we examined the relationship between how employees think their company listens to and acts on their feedback, and the degree to which those employees are willing to do something good for their company even if it’s not expected of them. Eighty-two percent of employee who strongly agree that their company takes action on their feedback are likely to do something good for the company, compared with only 30% of those who do not agree.

We decided to dig deeper into the data and look at how this relationship differs across employee roles. As you can see in the chart below:

  • Executives (87%) are the most likely to do something good for the company if their feedback is acted upon.
  • Financial services sales or relationship management employees (19%) are the least likely to do something good for the company if their feedback is not acted upon.
  • The “do-good gap” is largest for B2B sales or relationship workers, where there’s a 65-point difference in employees’ likelihood to do something good for the company based on how the company deals with their feedback.

1902_EmployeeFeedbackValue3

The bottom line: Employee feedback is an under-appreciated gift.

The Inextricable Link Between CX & EX

CXEX_LinkedIn.pngIf you’ve followed our research, then you know that we’ve always viewed employee engagement as a fundamental component of customer experience.  One of our Six Laws of Customer Experience is that “Unengaged employees don’t create engaged customers.” It just makes sense. How can you possibly expect to consistently deliver great customer experience with apathetic or disengaged employees?!?!

Although the connection between customer experience (CX) and employee experience (EX) may seem obvious to many people, it’s important that we periodically test the linkage. So we took a look at the data from our survey that drove the report, State of CX Management, 2018.

We started by splitting the 194 respondents from companies that have 1,000 or more employees into three groups based on how they rated the customer experience that their organizations currently delivers compared with their competitors:

  • 51 companies that deliver considerably above average CX (“CX Leaders“)
  • 61 companies that deliver slightly above average CX (“CX Moderates“)
  • 82 companies that deliver average or below average CX (“CX Laggards“)

We compared their responses to Temkin Group’s 20-question CX Competency & Maturity Assessment. As you can see in the chart below:

  • The percentage of CX Leaders who earned “good” or “very good” employee engagement ratings is more than 5-times larger than the percentage of CX Laggards.
  • Most organizations have a long way to go on EX; less than 40% of CX Leaders are good at it–and they’re the best!
  • CX Leaders significantly outperformed CX Laggards across all five employee engagement behaviors in our assessment. Here are the gaps in the percentages of companies that either “always” or “almost always” demonstrate these behaviors:
    • My company celebrates and rewards the employees who exemplify its core values (32 %-point gap)
    • My company actively solicits and acts upon employee feedback (35 %-point gap)
    • Managers are evaluated based on the engagement level of their employees (38 %-point gap)
    • The human resources organization is actively involved in strategic initiatives (36 %-point gap)
    • My company provides employees with industry-leading training (31 %-point gap)

1812_CXandEX_v2

The bottom line: EX is a fundamental enabler of CX.

CX Myth #6: Compensation Drives Good CX Behaviors

CX Myths: Debunking Misleading Beliefs About Customer Experience

Many common beliefs about customer experience are misguided, based on oversimplifications or a lack of consideration for real-world constraints. In this series of posts, we debunk these myths.


CX Myth #6: Compensation Drives Good CX Behaviors

What’s Wrong: Many organizations try to drive behavior change by tying employees’ compensation to customer experience metrics. While some level of compensation tied to CX can be helpful, it is often overdone. When you overly compensate on a single metric, it can often lead to unintended and detrimental consequences. Symptoms of these counterproductive behaviors include pestering customers for scores; focusing on activities that may improve scores, but aren’t good for the business; and actively debating the accuracy of the metrics. Rather than engaging in these activities, we want employees focusing on ways to improve customer experience.

What’s Right: Don’t use compensation to drive behavior change; instead, use it to reward good behaviors. With that in mind, you need to find other mechanisms to drive change, such as appealing to employee’s four intrinsic needs; their sense of meaning, control, progress, and competence. As I’ve previously written, keep in mind these three underlying principles about compensation:

  1. If there is significant compensation tied to any metric (including customer feedback), then people will look for ways to manipulate the measurement.
  2. If people don’t understand a metric, then tying compensation to it will have little impact on their behavior and any downside in compensation may create negative behaviors.
  3. If people don’t understand how they personally can affect a metric, then tying compensation to it will have little impact on their behavior and any downside in compensation may create negative behaviors.

What You Should Do:

  • Treat CX as a team sport. Your customers’ experience is almost never the result of a single person, even if that person is the only one interacting with the customer. So focus on team-level metrics and compensation that encourages key groups of employees to work together towards a shared objective.
  • Use an organization-wide CX metric. Developing a core CX metric for the entire organization that is tied to some compensation (not too large), is a great way to show commitment to improving CX, and it will encourage a regular dialogue about your overall CX performance.
  • Bias rewards towards the upside. Consider starting with a compensation plan that is biased towards upside. In other words, you may want to introduce the plan where there is little negative impact on compensation if the group doesn’t hit a goal, but there is positive impact of they exceed it. This can help eliminate some of the negative perceptions early in a program.
  • Celebrate good CX behaviors. Compensation is not the only reward system in an organization. If you want employees to behave in a certain way, then provide them with positive role models. Find ways to highlight employees who are demonstrating the behaviors that you would like others to emulate. This can include monthly or quarterly awards, shout outs at company meetings, or highlights across your internal communications.
  • Make it unacceptable to game the scores. When an employee asks a customer to “give me a 10 on a survey or I’ll get fired,” can you really count on the accuracy of that customer’s rating? This may be an extreme example of “gaming feedback,” but many versions of this behavior occur all the time. To keep gaming feedback in check, it’s important to be explicit with employees about what the company considers to be unacceptable behaviors.  I’ve identified five rules that you should strictly enforce with employees, which includes not talking with customers about survey questions, scores, or consequences.

The bottom line: Use compensation to reinforce, not force, good CX behaviors.

CX Myth #5: Wow Customers During Every Interaction

CX Myths: Debunking Misleading Beliefs About Customer Experience

Many common beliefs about customer experience are misguided, based on oversimplifications or a lack of consideration for real-world constraints. In this series of posts, we debunk these myths.


CX Myth #5: Wow Customers During Every Interaction

What’s Wrong: While it may be appealing to think about creating an amazing experience every time you touch a customer, it’s just not appropriate or practical. All interactions should aim to meet your target customers’ success, effort, and emotional expectations, but in many cases they aren’t looking to be wowed. And if we put the same energy into all interactions, then we are underinvesting in the situations that matter the most to our customers.

What’s Right: Customer experience is not about wowing customers, it’s about delivering on your brand promises. Otherwise, companies that wanted to be great at customer experience would face an endless escalation of costs as they continue to layer on wow-inducing elements across their customers’ lifecycle. You need to understand how you want to be differentiated in your customers’ eyes (brand promises), and make investments in customer experience that bring those differences to life.

What You Should Do:

  • Elevate your brand promises. If you don’t know what makes you special, then you will never be able to effectively prioritize your resources. Start by making clear brand promises, then embrace those promises by helping all employees understand what those promises mean and what role they personally play in making the promises come to life. Finally, keep the promises by holding each other accountable to them on an ongoing basis and measuring yourself against them.
  • Master key moments. A handful of moments disproportionately impact your customers’ perceptions of your organization, and therefore disproportionately impact their loyalty. First identify these moments, and then invest in making those moments emotionally resonant experiences that reinforce your brand promises.
  • Focus on customer expectations. Delivering a great experience does not mean being better than your competitors. Their brand promises may be different than yours, or they may not be setting the right bar for key moments. Instead, measure yourself against your customers’ expectations. Are you exceeding your brand promises in the eyes of your key customers? If the answer is “an easy yes,” then you may want to consider even more aggressive brand promises.

The bottom line: Don’t try and wow customers, live up to your brand promises.

Employees Want To Make A Positive Impact

What motivates employees? This may seem like a difficult question to answer, but it’s not hard at all. There’s one overwhelming answer: Making a positive difference.

In our latest consumer benchmark study, we asked more than 5,000 full-time U.S. employees to select which of eight job characteristics they felt was the most important. Here’s what we found:

  • Making a positive impact: 42%
  • Earning a lot of money: 14%
  • Advancing your career: 13%
  • Building stronger skills: 12%
  • Using your judgment: 8%
  • Being seen as a top performer: 6%
  • Making friends at work: 3%
  • Impressing your family and friends: 2%

Making a positive impact is also the most important job characteristic across all age groups. As you can see below, it becomes increasingly more important as employees get older. For the youngest employees, being seen as a top performer comes in a close second place, but nothing is even close with older employees.

1811_JobImportanceByAge_v1

We also asked employees about the elements of their job that they enjoy. The chart below shows that once again, making a positive impact comes out on top across age groups and increases with age. For younger employees, building stronger skills is a very close second. As employees get older, using your judgement becomes an increasingly enjoyable element of their job.

1811_JobEnjoymentByAge_v1

The bottom line: Help employees feel like they’re making a positive impact.

What’s All This About X- And O-Data?

1811_XODataYou might have heard Qualtrics discussing X-data (experience data) and O-data (operational data), and wondered, should we care? The answer is yes, and here’s why.

Let’s start with a basic premise that no individual experience exists in a vacuum. People form their opinions about any experience based on a collection of different factors. The more we can understand those factors, the better we can extrapolate the insights about a single personal experience to form a deeper understanding about other people’s experiences.

Now to my discussion of Xs and Os, starting with customer experience (CX)…

Let’s say that your company has this data:

  • X-Data: NPS responses
  • O-Data: Customer product ownership and support history.

With X-data, you can calculate an NPS for the customers who responded. You can also dig into their feedback, and hopefully understand what’s causing promoters and what’s causing detractors.

That’s extremely valuable, but it only tells you what’s going on with the people who happened to respond to the survey.

By combining O-data with your X-data you can examine (especially through predictive analytics) what types of products and service interactions lead to promoters and detractors, and use this data to calculate the NPS for large portions of your customer base–—even for customers who never responded to a survey.

It could be that ownership of a certain version of a product tied together with a specific type of customer service problem is highly likely to create detractors. You can identify all the customers with that profile and take proactive measures to correct the issues — even though they may never have complained.

Result: More loyal customers and more targeted use of your resources.

This works across all areas, even with employee experience (EX). Let’s assume you have this data:

  • X-Data: Employee satisfaction study
  • O-Data: Employee tenure, promotion history, most recent performance rating

With X-data, you can determine how employees feel about their next steps at the company. You can also dig into their feedback, and hopefully understand what’s causing higher vs. lower levels of career satisfaction.

By combining O-data with your X-data you can examine what influence tenure, promotion history, and performance may have on satisfaction, and use this data to identify segments of employees to invite to participate in a high-potential development program.

Result: More high-performing workforce because you’re investing in the right employees.

Hopefully you can see how the combination of X- and O-data can increase your CX and EX insights. The same dynamic also holds true for brand experience (BX) and product experience (PX). By combining and analyzing the different types of data, you can use feedback from a few people to build an understanding of many, many more. This allows you to better prioritize investments, while making more targeted and impactful changes.

The bottom line: X- and O-data together provides an analytics goldmine.

CX Myth #4: Net Promoter Score Is The Best/Worst Metric

CX Myths: Debunking Misleading Beliefs About Customer Experience

Many common beliefs about customer experience are misguided, based on oversimplifications or a lack of consideration for real-world constraints. In this series of posts, we debunk these myths.


CX Myth #4: Net Promoter Score Is The Best/Worst Metric

What’s Wrong: People often argue that Net Promoter Score (NPS) is the greatest metric, while other people argue that it’s a terrible metric. Both of those points of view are off the mark.

What’s Right: 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 many cases, NPS is a reasonable choice, as our data shows that it often correlates to customer loyalty. The way you use a metric is often far more important than the metric that you chose.

What You Should Do:

  • Pick a simple metric. It’s important that you choose a metric that employees will understand, so they are motivated to help improve it. The metric can be based on customer attitudes (like NPS), behaviors (like repeat purchases), or even results (like first call resolution). Just pick a simple metric that aligns with your business goals.
  • Follow our five steps. To drive improvements using the metric, follow Temkin Group’s five steps. to a strong CX metrics program: 1) Determine a core CX metric, 2) set achievable goals, 3) identify key drivers, 4) establish key driver metrics, and 5) make the suite of metrics actionable.
  • Focus on all four action loops. People often discuss an action loop with CX metrics, but we’ve identified four customer insight-driven action loopsImmediate responsecorrective actioncontinuous improvement, and strategic change. Any CX metrics program should put in places processes to close all four loops.
  • Don’t compensate too much. When companies establish CX metrics, they often establish compensation based on them. While this can be a valuable approach to raise awareness and alignment, it can also be a problem if the level of compensation is too large (can encourage bad behaviors), it focuses on individual results (CX is a team sport), or the goals are too precise (some metrics are inherently jittery).
  • Have very clear sampling strategy. The approach for sampling often has a very significant impact on results. If you have multiple segments of customers and they each have a different profile (as many do), then your overall scores can change wildly based on the mix of those customers that are included in your calculations.

The bottom line: Obsess about your metrics program, not your metric.