August 16, 2016
September 27, 2016 Leave a comment
We just published a Temkin Group data snapshot, Channel Preferences and Cross-Channel Activity Benchmark, 2016. The research examines consumer preferences for using different channels for completing common tasks as well as the frequency of several cross-channel interactions.
Here’s the executive summary:
In Q3 2016, we surveyed 10,000 U.S. consumers about their channel preferences for performing 11 different activities—such as selecting a life insurance policy or applying for a new credit card—and compared them to the results of a similar study conducted in 2015. This data snapshot examines how channel preferences vary across age groups, how these preferences have changed over the past year, and how channel preferences differ across multiple activities. (See last year’s data snapshot).
A key component of the research examines how consumers would like to complete 11 different interactions with companies: Apply for a new credit card, change the beneficiary on a life insurance account, check the balance on a savings or checking account, check the delivery status of a purchase you made, investigate a mistake in your monthly cell phone bill, open a new investment account, purchase a new auto insurance policy, resolve a technical problem with your computer, select a life insurance policy, and update your address on an account after you move.
The report has 13 data-filled charts, covering the 11 activities with details of preferences by age. Here’s one of the graphics (without the numbers) showing that consumers most prefer using their computers…
September 21, 2016 2 Comments
In case you missed this in the news, Wells Fargo is under investigation for opening fraudulent accounts for its customers. During a period between 2011 and 2015, it is estimated that there were as many as 1.5 million deposit accounts and more than half a million credit card accounts opened inappropriately on behalf of customers.
As part of a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren grills Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf and makes a few very important points. Stumpf heavily, heavily pushed his organization to cross-sell products, setting a long-term goal of 8 products per household, while the industry average was around three. He regularly touted the increase in products per household (over 6.1) to investment analysts and pushed his organization for the growth to continue.
My Take: Stumpf should resign (or be fired). That sounds abrupt, but let me explain…
In this blog, I often discuss the power of culture. It’s one of the most critical drivers of the behaviors of employees across large organizations. As a matter of fact, Peter Drucker has been credited as saying, “Culture eats strategy for lunch.”
Whenever there is a consistent set of widespread actions (good or bad), then the first place you should look to explain them is the culture. One of our Six Laws of Customer Experience is that employees do what is measured, incented, and celebrated. Clearly at Wells Fargo, cross-selling new accounts to customers was measured, incented, and celebrated.
So Wells Fargo employees acted in ways that were consistent with their environment. They acted in accordance with the company’s culture. Does that mean that the individuals who did the wrong things should be absolved of their errors? Absolutely not. They were wrong and should face the consequences for their actions. But the acts of individuals are symptoms, while the culture that encouraged those behaviors is the systemic issue.
That gets me back to Stumpf. He created (or at least nurtured) the culture across Wells Fargo, and should therefore be held accountable for the consequences. Let me put it this way, should Victor Frankenstein be held accountable for the damage caused by the monster he created? Of course!
Stumpf was rewarded handsomely for the cross-sell results of the culture he created. It’s now time for him to pay the price for the problems caused by that culture.
The bottom line: Leaders must be more mindful of the culture they create.
September 14, 2016 4 Comments
We 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.
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.
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).
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).
P.S. Net Promoter Score, Net Promoter, and NPS are registered trademarks of Bain & Company, Satmetrix Systems, and Fred Reichheld.
September 12, 2016 Leave a comment
If you’re looking for data to benchmark your organization, competitors’ performance, or the CX of any group of companies in specific industries, then check out Temkin Group’s Industry-Specific CX Research (IndustryCX.com). We have a lot of data covering the 20 industries shown in the sidebar.
We also have a lot of data on B2B technology vendors, examining the market from the perspective of IT decision-makers.
If you’re looking to get some CX insights on industries, then you should join us for these recorded and upcoming industry-specific webinars:
- Retail: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight
- Banking/Credit Cards: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (September 20)
- Health Plans: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (September 22)
- Airlines: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (September 29)
- Insurance: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (October 13)
- TV/Internet Service Providers: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (October 17)
- Utilities: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (October 21)
- Auto Dealers: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (November 3)
- Wireless Carriers: 2016 Industry CX Spotlight (November 7)
The bottom line: Check out our industry data.
September 11, 2016 Leave a comment
Today is the first Sunday of the 2016 NFL season. (Go Pats!)
So I tapped into our Q1 2016 benchmark of U.S, consumers to look at the make-up of NFL fans, examining the consumers who say they like watching the NFL (and other pro sports) on TV. As you can see in the chart below:
- NFL is the king of U.S. pro sports. The appeal for football is more than 20-points higher than baseball and basketball.
- Older males love the NFL. Males of every age like to watch football more than their female peers, and the level of interest increases with every increase of age. For females, 45 to 54 is the prime time for NFL interest.
- Gender gap jumps at 35. For consumers who are 35 and older, the gap between male and female NFL fans is more than 20 points.
- More income means more NFL. Consumers who earn $100K or more are considerably more active fans of the NFL on TV than are those who earn less.
- Sheraton’s customers are NFL fans. We examined the customer bases of 318 companies across 20 industries. The level of NFL fandom ranges from a high of 74% of Sheraton’s customers down to 48% of Empire BCBS’ customers.
September 8, 2016 1 Comment
You can download the infographic (or poster) below. I hope you enjoy it.
Here are links to download versions of the infographic:
The bottom line: Good things happen you engage your employees.
September 1, 2016 Leave a comment
Last year, Temkin Group had a great time celebrating CX Day. This year, CX Day will be held on October 5th and we’re planning another exciting celebration.
Temkin Group has labelled 2016 The Year of the Emotion for customer experience. As you’ll see below, we’re continuing that theme in our CX Day plans:
- Thought leadership video: Bruce will interview renowned author and thought leader Barry Schwartz, in a pre-taped webinar entitled “Infusing Humanity Into CX.”
- Webinar with Jen. Jen Rodstrom will present The Fundamentals of Customer Experience at 9:00 AM ET
- Webinar with Aimee. Aimee Lucas will present Building a Customer-Centric Culture at 1:00 PM ET.
- Free research. Anyone who attends either of the two Temkin Group webinars will receive a code for downloading a free copy of the report, Lessons in CX Excellence, 2016.
- Free eBook. We’ll be publishing a new eBook, “25 Tips for Tapping into Customer Emotion” that will be available to download for free.
- CX and Emotion video. We plan to unveil an fun new video showing the importance of customer emotions in customer experience.
- CX Infographic. We’ll publish a new version of “The Ultimate CX Infographic” that’s been very popular over the last few years.
- Research discount. We’ll provide a discount code via twitter that will give a 15% discount on any research purchased during CX Day (12:01 AM ET to 11:59 PM ET).
The bottom line: Join Temkin Group in celebrating CX Day 2016!
August 30, 2016 Leave a comment
In a previous post, I described how today’s management techniques reflect outdated assumptions of technology-enabled practices, human behavior, and the meaning of success. That’s why organizations must shift to what I’m calling Modernize Leadership.
I’m writing individual posts for each of the eight key changes required to modernize leadership. In this post, I’m examining the shift from:
Strategize and Plan to Learn and Adjust
Here’s some more information to better understand this shift:
Here are some ways in which leaders must change how they view the world:
- Leaders spend a lot of time with their leadership teams fine-tuning precise strategies and laying out high level plans, hoping that their Powerpoint slides will come to life throughout their organizations. Unfortunately, employees need to make adjustments in order to operationalize elements of any strategy. As a result, many strategies and plans fall apart when those adjustments don’t live up to the original plans. Sometimes leaders can force their organizations to initially come close to delivering on their strategies, but there’s no way to consistently live up to those expectations.
- Leaders amass a lot of information to develop their strategies and plans. Unfortunately, the information they use to make those decisions can often change between the time that they make decisions and when things get rolled out. The pace of change is accelerating in most industries, which shortens the useful lifecycle of the analysis that leads to decisions.
- The improving technology for collecting data and doing analysis is making it easier to more frequently understand what’s happening in most organizations. This makes it much easier to make decisions more frequently, instead of waiting until the annual strategy cycle.
As Winston Churchill once said:
“To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often.”
Modernized Leadership Actions
Here are some ways in which leaders should act based on a modernized perspective:
- Increase strategic planning frequency. If you make most of your important strategic decisions once a year, then you’re likely losing connection with the marketplace. At least make key strategic decisions on a quarterly basis, and look to get it monthly. The shortened cycles will push you to make learn and adjust a continuous activity.
- Test, test, test. Instead of blindly executing on a large strategic plan that defines a single direction, you need to be constantly experimenting with multiple, smaller ideas. But don’t start this process unless you are committed to actively learn from them and adjust your activities.
- Embrace failures. As you become more nimble in your decision making, you’ll be making more decisions which will lead to a larger number of smaller failures. In most cases, there’s a lot that you can learn from things that don’t work out the way you expected. You have to create a thirst for learning from these situations, and keep from looking for blame.
- Double-down on successes. Part of being better at learning and adjusting is the ability to invest (time, energy, capital, etc) on ideas that appear to have strong potential. You need to be prepared to more aggressively shift resources to activities that show promise, even if it means more quickly closing down some other activities.
The bottom line: You need to learn and adjust more frequently.
August 29, 2016 Leave a comment
Don’t worry, we’re not turning into pollsters. However, we did find that Hillary Clinton has a 19-point lead over Donald Trump…
In Temkin Group’s latest consumer benchmark study of 10,000 U.S. consumers that was just fielded in August, we asked consumers about their plans for the upcoming presidential election. Clinton and Trump supporters are identified as the people who are currently planning to vote for each candidate.
Given all of the other questions that we ask, we now have a fairly comprehensive profile on the presidential candidates’ supporters. But we’re not going to use the data to drive any projections or provide it to political analysts. We’re just going to look for some interesting elements to share.
Temkin Well-Being Index of Candidate Supporters
We publish the Temkin Well-Being Index (TWBi) annually as a gauge of the overall welfare of the U.S. population, examining how happy, healthy, and financially secure they feel. So I thought it would be fun to examine the TWBi of the candidates’ supporters and compare it to our Q1 2016 U.S. results. As you can see in the chart below:
- TWBi is high for both candidates. Both candidates’ supporters have a higher TWBi than what we found across the U.S. in our Q1 report. Clinton supporters, however, have a 2-point higher TWBi than do Trump supporters.
- The largest gap is in financial security. Clinton supporters have a 4-point gap with Trump supporters, who are 5-points above the overall Q1 U.S. score.
- Clinton supporters are healthier. Clinton supporters are 2.5-points healthier than Trump supporters, who are 3-points healthier than the overall Q1 U.S. score.
- Both groups are happier. Trump supporters are slightly happier than Clinton supporters, but they are both about 3-points higher than the overall Q1 U.S. score.
Other Interesting Tidbits
Here are some additional findings: Read more of this post
August 24, 2016 4 Comments
Why do employees leave their companies for another job?
To examine this question, I tapped into our Q3 2015 consumer benchmark study which included more than 5,000 U.S. full-time employees. The analysis compared two groups of employees, those who were likely to look for a new job in the next six months and those who were not.
Compensation does not appear to be a significant driver, if one at all. As you can see below, employees who do not believe that they are fairly compensated are not much more likely to look for a new job than those who feel that they are appropriately paid.
The most significant drivers of an employee looking for a new job is how they feel about the work that they do and their pride in their company.
The bottom line: Employees want meaning in their work.
August 22, 2016 Leave a comment
In case you missed it, we labeled 2016 as The Year of Emotion in our annual listing of CX trends. To help organizations better understand customer emotions, we created the Intensify Emotion Movement. Why did we put so much of a focus on emotion? Because it drives loyalty.
We tapped into our recent consumer benchmark study to examine the connection between how consumers rate the emotional component of their interactions and their loyalty across 20 industries. [Note: The emotional data is from the emotion component of the Temkin Experience Ratings]
In the graphic below, we examined the average across all 20 industries. Compared with consumers who had negative emotional experience, consumers who had positive emotional experiences are:
- 15.1 times more likely to recommend the company
- 8.4 times more likely to trust the company
- 7.8 times more likely to try new products and services
- 7.1 times more likely to purchase more from company
- 6.6 times more likely to forgive company after a mistake
The bottom line: Want loyal customers? Provide positive emotional experiences.
August 17, 2016 Leave a comment
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:
- Is Net Promoter Score a Savior or a Demon? (July 2015)
- Customer Effort, Net Promoter, And Thoughts About CX Metrics (August 2014)
- 9 Recommendations for Net Promoter Score (NPS) (June 2011)
- My Closing Thoughts on Net Promoter (January 2009)
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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.