Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 7:48:48 GMT
Here we share temkin's arguments to support his claim: whether you're a net promoter score (nps) promoter, passive, or detractor, I'd like you to participate in a discussion around a potential new metric, the true loyalty measure (tlm). My vision from 15 years ago on nps for more than a decade, I have helped organizations that were not using nps, considering using nps, introducing nps, expanding nps, and abandoning nps. While there have always been partisan groups that strongly advocate for or against nps, I have historically been a very moderate supporter. I never liked measurements or the underlying pressure to focus on a number, but I did like how some organizations were able to use it as a catalyst for positive change. My opinion on nps has been consistent over that time: the measurement is much, much less important than the system that is built around it. These excerpts from four posts (out of probably dozens I've written about nps) provide a good idea of my views: in july 2007, in “net promoter and satisfaction battle for king of the ring,” I advocated choosing a single cx metric to drive alignment and also proclaimed that nps is not the “ultimate” measure for a customer relationship.
In january 2009, in "My closing thoughts on net promoter" I described that "Despite nps's flaws and drawbacks, it has been enormously successful in catalyzing the attention of senior executives to the issue of customer experience." customer; “it has made the customer experience relevant to management.” I also explained that “the key value of nps is not as a metric, but as part of an Buy Bulk SMS Service approach to improving customer loyalty. The role of nps is to segment the good results (promoters) from the bad results (detractors) so that the company can diagnose the drivers of each of those situations. In july 2015, in "Is the net promoter score a savior or a demon?" «I wrote «the reality is that the metric itself is much less important than how it is used. "I would rather use a less optimal metric in a way that drives positive improvements throughout an organization than have a perfect metric that doesn't result in as much impact." in march 2021, in “ advice for propelling your net promoter score program “, I offer my latest recommendations on the best way to evolve an nps program. One piece of advice is to focus on two fundamental questions: “while nps is not the definitive question, there are two questions that should be on every executive's lips: what have you learned? And what improvements are you making? Why change nps now? The nps has had a good journey and should continue to be valid in organizations where it continues to promote positive behaviors .
However, there have always been concerns about the effectiveness of the measure and the metric may have reached the end of its useful life: while an 11-point scale was fine when nps was introduced and people didn't have smartphones, it doesn't translate very well to a mobile environment. The scale responses are dramatically different between countries. For example, after a good experience in india, the consumer's nps is 64. But after a good experience in japan, the nps is only -47. More and more companies are misusing nps by applying it as a transactional metric or adjusting survey design to emphasize the detractor/passive/promoter segmentation. People are getting tired of answering the question they've been seeing for over 15 years. (potential) introduction of tlm or the true loyalty metric should we throw out the notion of an enterprise-wide customer experience metric? Absolutely. Although nps has its flaws, there is no denying the value that nps has created in organizations when it has been used to catalyze change by drawing the attention of executives, driving four action loops, and incorporating continuous critical behaviors such as huddles.