Part 19 (2/2)
Rework turned out to be the best ure 10-5 shoork in the fore of Rework Itthat the picture or iets can be affected by the way you present it Let's look quickly at a couple of different representations of the exact saures 10-6 and 10-7 have the sa on the first and the scale on the second
Figure 10-6 Percentage of Rework background colors reversed Figure 10-7 Percentage of Reith scale increased froine the many permutations possible that can affect the viewer's perception of the data One may make you feel the data is ”bad,” another that the data is ”all right,” and another ood”
The interpretations of the metric based on how it is presented h co for-anos look; not with how the charts look or how they make you or your unit look
It is critical that you understand expectations and how to evaluate the charts presented You're looking for trends and anooodness” based on the colors or values This is the reason I have atteive these charts only neutral colors and even leave off any obvious demarcations of the values that constitute an Opportunity for I Expectations Table 10-3 shows the expectations for percentage of rework
We again were able to use percentages-which provided a consistent view of the different ulation), we si a consistent form, a consistent view (the custorades” for each We were able to keep to this established set of nore was defined by the number of unique custoless But si it into context in the fore of custo it, we looked at a year at a time We showed the nu total) so we could see slow months from more active ones When we showed the measures over time, we started with a blank slate each year This always put us below expectations at first, and showed a steady increase over the year until at the end of the year, ell within expectations (see Figure 10-8)
Since this always gave the irade) of an Opportunity to Improve until the second quarter, we relooked at the presentation of the infor the wrong story Our usage wasn't lower at the beginning of the year-ere incorrectly starting with a clean slate each year
Figure 10-8 sho the usage, when viewed over a year's tiives the impression that there is an anoe: first time callers cumulative over time So, a better representation was to have theperiod of time We could show it over a full year's tih historical data, or a s three month or six month total as well as the twelve month total Whichever we chose, we'd have to detere of unique customers do we expect to use our services in a year, half a year, or a quarter?
Another factor to consider was the expected frequency of use for the service For services that were likely to be used only once a year (like a car tune up), the service provider would measure first time callers over an annual period
If the service were a see, it would , it would depend on how often you would expect customers to come back to use your service or buy your product Even a restaurant would work in this her-scale restaurant may expect to see repeat customers on a monthly or quarterly basis, while a fast-food restaurant her frequency
The measure of unique customers can easily be combined with repeat customers Most businesses rely on repeat customers for the majority of their income Repeat-customer rates speak directly to the relationshi+p the business has with their custorow, much less survive, the business must satisfy their customer base so that they earn their trust If the customers like your services or products, they will eventually coain
In the case where you are selling only one product or service, and the need for repeat purchases are rare, the satisfied customer is still your best salesperson Rather than measure repeat customers, you may want to measure referrals Remember the story of my laptop purchase (Chapter 7)? A week later, because of the selection, price, but hter to the same store to buy her laptop Normally I wouldn't buy another computer for three or four years
Of course, this store sold more than computers and they should y from them A purer exaanizations Struggle So Hard to Iood read But how many sales should I expect to the saht think total sales are the only e et the nuanization; or the number of referrals-sales in which the buyer was influenced to buy ement of another reader Another s that accompany those reviews Of course, if I sell another book (like this one), I would want to measure repeat customers if I could How many people buy both books? If the reader liked one, hopefully they liked it enough to read the other, expecting a certain level of quality and information
The reason Fred Reichheld's predictors of promoters and detractors has -the kind you can't buy-is critical to a business's growth New customers are nice to have, but repeat custorowth
In the case of our Service Desk, we expected custoy issues on a quarterly basis If they were calling only once or twice a year, ita different source for solving their IT proble to solve their issues on their own If they were calling weekly it anization's product line and service catalog had toofrequent assistance
The expectations can be the sainally at the expectations for a full year, we logically shouldn't expect as high an amount of first time callers (unique users) for a three e was healthy for the period reported, we chose to review the data first If you aren't sure, a si the ure 10-9 gives us the picture without expectations so that we can use the data to deterure 10-9 First ti totals (without expectations) Based on the picture presented by thethree-month total, the norm looked to be between 5 percent and 15 percent When I spoke with the teah this would create a picture that showed the Opportunity for Iht to the Expectations should be set at 20 percent, e from 10 percent to 20 percent Because of the measures, I pushed them to find out why they chose 20 percent The ansas that ”15 percent was just a little too low” So, I pressed souessed, the ansas, ”it's the next value”
So I set the range at 10 percent to 175 percent Don't let conventions keep you fro the correct expectations
Don't let conventions keep you froure 10-10 shows the three- total expectations for first tiure 10-10 First ti totals (with expectations) Table 10-5 captures the expectations in table for the proper measures for unique customers, and their expectations, we looked at our other e of respondents who chose the Service Desk as their primary service provider in our annual survey Table 10-6 shows the expectations we identified for the survey results
Figure 10-11 shows the percentage of survey respondents who listed the Service Desk as their first choice when seeking assistance with their Infore of custoh the results for 2008 were not an ano year that we had to investigate to find out why The only determination of cause we could find was that in 2008 respondents were asked to pick their top three preferences The Service Desk was listed as one of the top three choices for 59 percent of the respondents The next two years the question only allowed one answer-the top choice/preference You've seen how the charting can change the perception of theexample of how measures can be totally different based on how the data is collected
As mentioned, we could also add a measure on repeat custoes, we could produce a measure of the percent of repeat custoain this could be on a three-, six-, or twelve-ood news is that this ave us the count of unique customers Where unique customers were compared to total possible customers (customer base), repeat custoiven period
The final category of measure we used hat most people think of as the first to collect-customer satisfaction surveys
Custoain ere lucky since the data was already being collected, compiled, and analyzed for us As mentioned, we had to decide which view of the data worked best Basically we had to determine the measure to build fro this e on the 5-point Likert scale Our leadershi+p wondered what toproblem solvers, they didn't leave the solution to the departe to They reasoned if they were better than the ”national average” or the average of their co well In reality this would only tell thee They could claim to be in the top half If ere really lucky, we'd find the following: Our peers were using the same questions that ere The third-party provider had an impressive list of customers, but they did not have all of our peers or athe sa to share their average grades
Our peers detere the same way-they could discount repeat custoorize their customers differently, or they could not include certain customers-like internal users of the Service Desk Another difference could be if they surveyed only a sannment for an extended period of time So, e'd have instead as a bench of so benchful
My second argument was that even when compared to a valid benchmark, it only showed hoe did versus the standard selected-not hoe were satisfying our customers We could feasibly be at the ”top of our class” and still be well below our custoe on your Report Card, chances are your parents will not be happy If you tell them that you are the top student in your class they e schools A Report Card should tell you hoell you are doing regardless of your position in your graduating class Once you knoell you are doing (or have done) it is a bonus to kno you rank with your peers
My third and last arguful to the organization before finding benchmarks Benchmarks should only be used as an enhancement to the information-not act as the definer of it The ure 10-12 shows the average grade Even though I argued against this as being less ful than other viehen you add the expectations, even this e Custorade I still wanted a better representation of thepro to change to a 10-point scale, we had to translate the 5-point scale to thewhere a custo 5s promoters, and 1, 2, or 3s detractors This was an attempt to match Reichheld's 1s6s (detractors), 7s and 8s (neutral), and 9s and 10s (promoters) While this was not perfect (or optiain were ”erring on the side of excellence” But showing this ratio (highly satisfied vs not satisfied) proved proble, it still was difficult for o so: ”So, for every 1, 2, or 3 we received, we had twelve 5s?”
”Yes, your ratio of promoters to detractors elve to one”
”What about the 4s? Why aren't we counting 4s?”
”Because 4s are being considered neutral We can't tell how they'll 'talk' about our service They ht 3s were neutral?”
”Threes are in the middle, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, and we believe that if someone can't say they were satisfied (4 or 5) then they will definitely talk badly about our service-they will detract from our reputation”
”Well if we leave out 4s, we'redataso it's not a complete picture”