January 22, 2015
Temkin Group is accepting nominations for its 2015 Customer Experience Vendor Excellence Awards. Submission are due by March 5th (extended until March 10th).
Connecting Brands, Leaders, Employees, and Customers
March 6, 2015 Leave a comment
As I mentioned when we released the 2015 Temkin Experience Ratings, this is the fifth year of our large-scale customer experience (CX) benchmark. If you downloaded the free report (and why wouldn’t you?), then you would have seen some data and graphics on how the industry ratings have changed over those five years. Here’s one of the key graphics…
Computers is the only sector that has increased every year, while banks, credit cards, supermarkets have not had any declines. The results over the past year, however, showed a disappointing shift in direction; 10 of the 19 industries declined. It’s the first year that a majority of industries declined, with the largest previous number being four industries that dropped last year.
What’s going on here?
One explanation is that companies are getting worse at CX. Given the amount of effort that companies are putting into improving CX, this does not seem like a likely situation. I could buy an argument that they aren’t getting better, but there’s no reason to believe that they are getting worse.
A second explanation is that consumer expectations are rising at a pace that is faster than the speed at which companies are improving their CX. This makes sense to me. A few companies that are really, really good at CX establish a baseline of expectations for consumers across all of their interactions.
Keeping up with your mediocre peers may no longer be a viable strategy. As consumer discontent rises, there will be more opportunities for your competitors (or entirely new competition) to radically improve their CX and steal your customers.
The bottom line: CX isn’t keeping up with customer expectations.
March 1, 2015 Leave a comment
This week, I attended the annual MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference, Once again, I really enjoyed hearing players, owners, general managers, members of the press, and experts discuss two of my favorite topics: #sports and #analytics. Here are 11 highlights from the sessions that I attended:
1) The Van Gundy family is entertaining. My highlights from last year’s conference included several memorable quotes from Stan Van Gundy (Coach of the Detroit Pistons). While Stan didn’t speak at the conference this year, his brother Jeff Van Gundy (ESPN Analyst and Former NBA Coach) who said that his brother “Stan has steel balls” filled the void with his very outspoken approach. One of the funniest moments was Van Gundy’s rant about how to coach a 4th grade girls basketball team [in response to something that I heard Vivek Ranadivé (Majority Owner, Sacramento Kings) say last year]. He pretty much said that the trick is to get two of the lower performing girls not to show up so that you can have your two best girls play for most of the game.
2) Shane Battier was basketball analytics’ ground zero. Let me start by saying how impressed I was with Shane Battier (College Basketball Analyst, ESPN; Retired NBA Player). Not only was he styling some sharp green pants (see below), but he was incredibly smart and articulate. Daryl Morey (GM of the Houston Rockets), who traded for Battier, said the trade was the first one based on analytics and he got killed in the press for it. While Battier didn’t have great numbers, Morey could tell that his game was a strong complement to the Rockets’ key players, Yao Ming and Tracey McGrady. Michael Lewis, who wrote a great exposé on Battier in the New York Time called The No-Stats All-Star), described Battier as a “lab rat who understood the experiment.” Battier refined his game to focus on the places where the analytics said he added the most value to his team, defending opponents’ best player and shooting 3 point shots. Read more of this post
February 25, 2015 Leave a comment
We just published a Temkin Group report, What Happens After a Good or Bad Experience, 2015. This is our annual analysis of which companies deliver the most and least bad experiences, how consumers respond after those experience (in terms of sharing those experiences and changing their purchase behaviors), and the effect of service recovery (see last year’s report).
Here’s the executive summary:
To understand the effect of good and bad experiences, we asked 10,000 U.S. consumers about their recent interactions with 283 companies across 20 industries. Internet service providers and TV service providers deliver bad experiences more frequently than any other industries, as exemplified by Comcast and Charter Communications, each of which delivers a bad experience to about one in four customers, the most of any companies. Retailers, on the other hand, are least likely to deliver a negative experience. Out of all the industries, customers are most likely to stop spending completely after a bad experience with a computer and tablet maker, and they are most likely to reduce spending after a bad experience with a fast food chain. The economics of service recovery are compelling. Compared with companies that deliver a very poor response after a bad experience, companies that deliver a very good response have 41% fewer consumers cutting back on their spending and 31% more increasing their spending. Led by investment firms and major appliance makers, all industries improved or maintained their service recovery performance from last year. After a very bad or very good experience, consumers are more likely to give feedback back directly to the company than they are to post on Facebook, Twitter, or third party rating sites. These social sites, however, are still an important channel for consumers under the age of 45. When it comes to sharing bad experiences on social media, customers of Advantage Rent A Car and Alabama Power Company are the most likely to post about it on Facebook, while customers of Ameren Missouri Company and Fujitsu are the most likely to post about it on Twitter. The companies most likely to receive negatively biased feedback from their customers are Consolidated Edison of NY and Southern California Edison.
Here’s the first figure in the report:
Here are some highlights from the report:
The bottom line: Bad experiences are a real problem, especially if you don’t recover well.
February 23, 2015 2 Comments
We’re often asked to help people who have recently taken on new responsibilities in customer experience (which is commonly abbreviated as CX). Since it’s important for anyone in the field to understand the core principles of CX, I’ve put together this post and called it “CX for Smarties.” Anyone who cares enough about CX to read this post is not a dummy.
This graphic from the report “The ROI of Customer Experience, 2014” shows the connection between CX and loyalty.
This “Ultimate CX Infographic” also provides some of the compelling economics of CX:
Temkin Group’s research has shown that customer experience leaders demonstrate four CX core competencies: Purposeful Leadership, Compelling Brand Values, Employee Engagement, and Customer Connectedness. This video is a great way to learn about what it takes to deliver great CX:
Most companies have not mastered these competencies and remain in lower levels of CX maturity. This chart is from a post that discusses the shift from early levels of CX maturity (fluff) versus upper levels (tought).
February 17, 2015 1 Comment
We just published a Temkin Group report, Employee Engagement Benchmark Study, 2015, which is our annual analysis of U.S. employees. Here’s the executive summary:
We used the Temkin Employee Engagement Index to analyze the engagement levels of more than 5,000 U.S. employees. We found that although employee engagement overall has increased over the past year, engagement levels still vary by organization, industry, and individual. Companies with stronger financial performances and better customer experience have employees who are considerably more engaged than their peers. Our research also shows that out of all the industries, the construction sector has the highest percentage of engaged employees, while the transportation and warehousing sector has the lowest. We additionally found that large companies have a lower percentage of engaged employees than smaller companies do. On an individual level, our research shows that frontline employees, high-income earners, and males tend to be more highly engaged. Given the significant value of engaged employees, we recommend that companies improve engagement levels by mastering our Five I’s of Employee Engagement: Inform, Inspire, Instruct, Involve, and Incent.
Some of the other findings from the research include:
The bottom line: There are a lot of employees who can and should be more engaged.
February 11, 2015 1 Comment
Last year, I published a free eBook called People-Centric Experience Design (PCxD). Experiences are all about people, the customers who interact with your organization and the employees who shape those interactions. Most approaches to customer experience, from voice of the customer programs to customer journey mapping, deal with the logical, left-brain elements of customer experience. But they often fall short on the right-brain, emotional side. That’s where PCxD comes into play. It’s built on three principles:
To help people understand PCxD, we created this short video:
The bottom line: Tap into the power of purpose, empathy, and memories.