Questions for client satisfaction surveys

A reader sent this question yesterday:

Hello Mark. I discovered your name while googling the topic of Client Satisfaction Surveys. I am wondering if you happen to know of any simple 3-5 questions that businesses have asked in person to clients while discussing a current or just completed project? Thank you Mark in advance for any assistance you can provide. Dave

The response here is worthy of deeper research than this brief blog posting indicates. The right answer gets into the (controversial) territory of Fred Reichheld's Net Promoter Score -- and the concept that "satisfaction" is not enough: You want your clients so enthusiastic that they will eagerly recommend your business to their friends, and even complete strangers.

The key question, according to Reichheld, is: "How likely are you to recommend our company to friends of colleagues?"

What about the other questions? Our general business consultant, Bill Caswell, recommends you keep your surveys to no more than three questions, as you will capture 80 per cent of the key information in these responses -- and results are lost in longer surveys, either because people won't complete them, or our minds are lost in the chaos of too many questions.

So, what about the other two questions? I'll leave it to you, but think they should relate to what you think is a key operational sensitivity; something you sense may need improving. Remember, while you are hoping for good news in the survey, what you really want to discover is if things need to be fixed, so if the question(s) are troubling you, they probably are right to ask.

I invite readers here to share their thoughts on this issue, as well.

10 out of 10?

The Hilton in London, ON, is a fine, clean, and efficient hotel. But it can't earn a 10 out of 10 on surveys by asking for it. Tripadvisor.com rates it 16 out of 29. Number 1, by the way, goes to Homewood Suites, also part of the Hilton Group. Next time in town, I'll stay there.

Everywhere in this hotel, in the lobby, on each floor, in the lounges, and in cards in the room, you see this sign and message:

Welcome to the Hilton London.

As a valued guest you may receive a survey after your departure asking how your stay was at our hotel.

Our goal is to receive a 10 out of 10 for our overall service score

If we have fallen short of a perfect 10, please dial zero and allow us the opportunity to make it right.

The Hilton Team.

Ugh. Is this hotel really interested in providing great service, or is its staff/management interested in obtaining a really high survey score. The service here is okay, nothing bad, nothing truly "wow, this is out of the world exceptional", the room is clean (but has an 80s look to the carpet and furnishings), prices are reasonable, nothing wrong, I'd stay here again, but, oh, is it really a 10 out of 10?

No.

Will I dial zero and allow the hotel the "opportunity to make it right". Why? The place isn't bad, they've provided everything essential for my stay, met all the basic standards and so on. But the incessant survey message suggests they've fallen into the survey and measurement trap, where the survey means more than the substance, and the score means more than what really matters.

In a book on leadership, (sorry, don't have the copy here so can't remember the author's name), the writer describes how he inadvertently walked into a hotel staff room and saw a full-face mirror on the exit door, with this message: "Look at yourself, and see how others see you". Great service providers, like great hotels, do not plaster their surveys in front of their guests; they look introspectively and find the answers within -- and the guests get the message without being told it.

Ten out of 10 service is something you have, you share, and you are: It isn't your survey.

Making professional staff accountable

Bill Caswell leads a seminar on Making Professional Staff Accountable. The result, for me, are insights in how to measure our employees' success in client relations and marketing.

Yesterday, in the midst of the challenges and chaos of multi-tasking as our business grows, I took three hours for a program by Bill Caswell, "Making Professional Staff Accountable". I thought the topic would be peripheral to our business -- but relevant for this blog; especially for mangers at architectural and engineering offices, responsible for supervising talented professional employees.
Indeed, many of the people in the room with me live in different spaces -- including managers at law offices, and government crown corporations. But Caswell addressed some of the major issues I've been struggling with in building out your business plan: How do you ensure your team achieves the highest level of performance, and how do you measure this effectively?
Underlying these observations (and explaining the relevance to this blog) is the fact that perhaps 80 per cent of marketing success within the construction industry is defined by the quality of your actual work product and, in creating that product, the quality of your employees and their relationships with each other and your clients.
To summarize a simple non-mathematical equation:

Great employees + great work quality + great relationships = great marketing.

(The equation of course is NOT mathematical because the employees, quality, and relationships all build on each other; that is, they attract each other so the actual numbers on the left side of the equation will multiply rather than simply add to marketing effectiveness if all is working the way it should).

Caswell advocates establishing for each job some very simple and easily measurable performance indicators; no more than three, which can be assessed quickly and simply. The assessment of these indicators should also be simple, with only three choices: Exceeding expectations, Meeting Expectations, or Not Meeting Expectations (which can be translated to a traffic signal, with Green, Orange and Red indicators).

In defining these expectations, Caswell emphasises, "Only items over which the employee has control should be measured". This is vital -- you can't impose stuff on your employees without giving them the power to decide, to act, and be in control of their responsibilities, if you wish them to be properly accountable. In defining expectations, obviously the priority should be on the client interests -- that is, the person/group to which the employee reports (or, in the context of this blog, the interactions of the employees/business with your clients). Again, Caswell uses some common sense -- he advocates you focus on the most important 80 per cent of the job responsibilities in developing these measurement tools; you can spend much time worrying about the 20 per cent remaining, but it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things.

The expectations with a feedback loop from the clients then are incorporated into the quarterly employee evaluation. This evaluation, Caswell notes, should not be tied to compensation -- that should be assessed separately. (This is wise, of course, because evaluation systems quickly can be 'gamed' when money is involved!)

Some of my colleagues in the room enjoyed the theory, but pointed out problems. The concepts might be nice in theory, but how do you implement them in a unionized work force, or within a government bureaucracy, where individual managers really don't have the authority or control to implement these processes. Caswell acknowledged these limitations, but added that people can make changes within their own scope of responsibility, and when they do, the larger organization often takes positive notice.

Of course, since I own the business, I don't have these constraints, and in general I like the approach. I'll summarize my take-aways (though if you investigate this stuff you may find other things of value):

• Many measuring systems are quite complex, with gradations and multiple scoring. The "three choice" model, essentially: Less than satisfactory, satisfactory, and more than satisfactory, is appealing because it is simple -- it won't be hard for someone to give a simple check-box on a report sheet -- and lends itself to really easy to follow graphical dashboard images (the traffic signal).
• The suggestion that not more than three things be measured for each employee, and you only measure the top 80 per cent of relevant performance elements, again, keeps the process simple and easy to follow. This also means it is much easier to act/resolve and fix problems.
• Finally, and most importantly to me, I can see how this measurement system can link the employee performance to our marketing assessment.

If we have a very simple measure of client satisfaction, we can tell if our employees interacting with the clients are getting it right. Of course, this process is not exactly the one described by Fred Reichheld (Net Promotor Score) and you will notice earlier postings in this blog questioning traditional intrusive client satisfaction surveys. My sense, however, is that we won't impose on clients and can get some very good feedback (maybe 80 per cent of what we are seeking) with the truly simple three-choice satisfaction question, allowing room for comments.
I will test the concept in the next couple of weeks and see if we indeed have the means to gather meaningful, and quick, assessments of client/employee quality and satisfaction.

Client surveys and marketing consultants

You will find some useful resources on the Cynosure Communications website, including copies of the articles Recession Marketing -- What Have You Got Lots of Now? and Cold Calls Make You Sweat?

Marcy Steinberg of Cynosure Communications sent this worthy response to my email to her requesting permission to reproduce comments posted on the SMPS Listserve. These are truly worthy observations about surveys and seeking client feedback for your work.

Thanks for checking in with me -- I really appreciate it. And I happen to agree with your opinion. I actually believe in training design staff on how to implement an ongoing client satisfaction program of their own, and it includes visits, not just phone calls. The training is not so much about surveys (hateful things) but about how to comfortably and effectively chat up a client so he or she will be open, and "gently blunt."

When we outsiders are hired, though, it is often when a firm has done very little of that kind of thing in a long time. And maybe they have gone through a change; the founder has retired; they have lost someone many of their clients loved; or they suspect a problem but aren't sure what it is and are timid about researching it themselves -- particularly with previous clients they haven't spoken to in a long while. So, after doing the first round of research for them -- all by phone, AFTER a letter has arrived from the principal, and NOT from a script -- I encourage the A/E/C firms to take over from there.

I do NOT believe in conducting such research FOR them every four years, as some
consultants do. If a firm continually uses an outsider, it can appear they are too lazy or timid to stay tuned to their clients themselves.

Oh -- when I say I do not use a script -- that is not quite true. For purposes of making the nice charts people like to see, and for being able to compare apples to apples, I do use a list of questions. I just don't necessarily stick religiously to it. This is qualitative research, not quantitative. Some of the folks I interview actually want talk at length about any number of things that may not even be in the survey. I go with the flow. And I call my client the moment I hang up the phone if the interviewee has just told me about a current problem that has been left unattended, or about upcoming work.

Anyway -- thanks for alerting me to your use of my material in your blog. I shall now subscribe to your blog -- it looks good. I also now REALLY need to get my website updated!!! Yikes. Haven't done that, since I took a break from my business for a few years, while trying out the "employee" role.

Be well

Marcy

Marcy Steinberg Cynosure Communications www.cynosurecommunications.com 3321 W. 30th Ave. Denver, CO 80211 303-477-3095 720-940-9016 mobile.

I really appreciate these remarks. Marcy's approach, to me, is the correct model for an outside consultant -- if consultants do their work well, they should be able to put themselves 'out of business' with their clients -- guiding them sufficientlyso they won't depend on their services to do the work. Paradoxically, this attitude actually strenghtens the client/consultant relationship, as I've found in working with Bill Caswell of Caswell Corporate Coaching Company. He taught me how to hold regular weekly and bi-annual planning and budget meetings. We're having our major bi-annual meeting on Monday and I suppose we can now do these on our own, without any facilitation or external support. But I want Caswell to be there -- to reinforce the messages and ideas and add a trusted external perspective to our processes.

I'm wary, however, of so-called "coaching" programs offered by some big-name consultants. These are devices, I'm afraid, to generate ongoing revenue for the consulting organization while using much lower level talent than the consulting leader who attracted the interest. I pass on these offers.

Client surveys -- additional observations

Here is another observation on the value of customer satisfaction surveys from SMPS member Marcy Steinberg of Cynosure Communications in Denver, Colorado.

My experience with client satisfaction and other kinds of customer research for my architecture and engineering clients confirms both Frank's and Jim's experience. Definitely have had positive reaction from most interviewees, including one who said "no one has ever called to ask my opinions or feedback before." And the client who said that regularly hired many A/E/C companies!

Like Frank, I have also found that the letter in advance, from an owner/principal,
makes for a very high participation rate, and I, too, had one interviewee contact its lawyer first. I also had one facility manager say, "I've been waiting for XYZ to call me personally -- I have a file of complaints to review with them on this latest project. Are they afraid to call me themselves? Tell them if they want to know what's going on, they have to talk to me personally."

In that case, the architecture firm was in the middle of a project with the client in question, and I had advised the firm that it would get the response it did. So -- for specific, current projects, don't use an outsider. Be in the communication flow from start to finish and get to the problems fast. For general satisfaction research, however, outside interviewers often get you the most information, if for no other reason than it is what they know best how to do, while designers know best how to design. SOME designers are excellent at doing their own customer research -- usually in smaller firms. Those who are good at it in large companies are the ones who take their clients with them when they set up their own firms!

I certainly respect Mary's perspective, and that of the others who have joined in with their observations.

But something is nagging me here, and it is this. All the people speaking about the value of the surveys are in the business of administering/giving the surveys -- they are not at the receiving end of the survey process!

Many people are polite and courteous about the survey exercise, either because that is their natural approach, or there are previous or future possible business relations with the surveying organization. And, conceivably, some businesses could be so blind to their inadequacies that the best way to find the negative responses outlined in some of these survey calls is through an objective third party's initiative.

My perception the person on the receiving end of the survey process. Intrusive phone surveys now rank in irritation level to me equal to telemarketing calls especially if they are scripted exercises administered by drone-like surveyors. A personal call and follow up survey from a truly trained and knowledgeable person (at the conclusion of a large contract/project) would of course not be so bad, but I have to wonder why this follow up couldn't be handled more effectively by someone within the organization with seniority and sensitivity. (I know, the survey proponents say, people won't be so honest unless an outside opinion is sought -- and that may be the case, but I hope companies using these outside consultants for this sort of validation don't abrogate their own responsibilities to check in and follow up with previous clients!)

In other words, I'll accept that high level, personal surveys have their place -- but please keep your phone room callers away from me!

Other opinions about "client satisfaction surveys"

My observations on the SMPS Listserve yesterday provoked two additional postings, which I will relay here.

Jim McKeen of Strategic Marketing Associates in Stow, Ohio wrote:

With all due respect to Mark's comments, I feel compelled to weigh in on this issue.

Having conducted surveys as a profession for the past 11 years, I can say with great confidence that client surveys - including satisfaction surveys -are neither an irritation nor an intrusion if the process is managed properly. In fact, to the contrary, we find that clients are generally happy to provide their input because they know it will impact future service quality. And as a side benefit, most clients are impressed with the fact that their supplier respects their opinions enough to ask for it - "The Voice of the Customer".

The fact is, if managed properly, the percentage of clients that find surveys irritating
and intrusive is low, and you simply don't interview them. You say "not a problem, thanks for your time, and have a great day". And that's the end of it.

So cheer up Mark and any others out there that see the benefit of gaining the clients' perspectives, but have concerns about their reception to the process. It's really just a matter of management and technique, and it's done all the time.

Later in the day, Architectural marketing consultant Frank Smith in Smyrna, Georgia, wrote:

I second Jim McKeen's comments. If properly handled surveys are not intrusive. I have been conducting Client Satisfaction surveys for Clients of mine for over 20 years. I learned after the first couple that the secret to success was to have my Client send a letter to the subjects of the survey saying that I was going to call them. As a result I have consistently had a "hit rate" of 80 per cent.

I have never had a prospect not talk with me, although one in New York called his
attorney first! On a typical survey I will ask for the names of 40 contacts knowing that I will get the 36 responses contracted for in a timely fashion.

Always have an disinterested, experienced outside consultant conduct the survey. It is the only way you can get true value.

Points noted. And, pragmatically, a "client satisfaction survey" can be an effective way to gather intelligence and develop leads for new projects and commissions -- systematically it may be one of the best and quickest routes to refilling your order book in times of economic slowdown.
But I'm still uncomfortable with most of the survey efforts I've seen attempted and I automatically continue to put most survey calls on the polite "decline to participate" list.

I much prefer the strategy outlined by Ford Harding in his comment to my last posting. Enclose a business reply card with invoices, with just a few questions, and have the postpaid reply card be directed to the company president. As Harding notes, few complete the card, but if there are issues, the ones that respond are generally serious and worthy of immediate attention.

The "client satisfaction survey" is not the solution

"Marketers should run away from phrases like 'administering surveys'!," writes Pamela Rigling Caffrey of John Poe Architects Inc. in Dayton. "It's all about people and relationships!"

Pamela Rigling Caffrey, Director of Marketing at John Poe Architects, Inc. in Dayton, Ohio, responded yesterday, as I did, to this question posed by another Society for Marketing Professional Services (SMPS) member on the SMPS listserve:

My firm is investigating the implementation of a Customer Satisfaction Survey that will be administered to clients after the completion of projects.

I have been tasked with developing a handful of questions that would be asked of each individual.

I'm curious if there are any other firms who also conduct this type of survey and if you would be willing to share the questions you are asking?

I responded citing some previous entries in this blog:

Everyone: There is a lot of literature about customer satisfaction surveys, with special interest in the "Net Promoter Score" (Fred Riechheld) -- the indication of whether a client is likely to recommend your business/service to others.
Trouble is, it can be a challenge to get people to respond to your survey, and the actual surveying process can both be intrusive and irritating (and efforts can be made to 'game' the results). This makes formal structured surveys, either in person or online, somewhat debatable for high value/low volume services that I believe most SMPS members provide.

I would love to develop a practical survey where we could obtain adequate response without client irritation/intrusion because the client "net promoter" numbers would be a truly useful and effective cross check against pure financial/cost/revenue/profit
measures -- certainly as an indication of future business health (and to justify employee bonuses, as well).

I've blogged on this topic a few times; this blog entry leads to information about Riechheld's thesis (and controversy about it):

http://constructionmarketingideas.blogspot.com/2007/09/net-promoter-score-controversy-idea-is.html

and this entry reviews the practicality of using e-surveys(common for retailers and high volume marketers:

http://constructionmarketingideas.blogspot.com/2008/02/e-surveys-practicality-for-our-industry.html

But, frankly, Pamela's response is much better:

It is critical to communicate with clients not only at the completion of a project, but throughout it's duration. As you well know, many clients have multiple projects in the works. Lagging in client services at the 30 or 40 per cent completion phase may cost you the next job.

I also think it's very important in our industry not to let e-mail and survey instruments and other non-personal tools overshadow the vital nature of direct human contact! Rather than create a survey, why not take the client to lunch regularly throughout the project or call them on the phone?

So much is lost in not observing the non-verbals. When you meet with the client or talk to them directly, I would always give them the opportunity to do all the talking. Make sure they have the chance to discuss their relationship with your staff assigned to their job with candor. I think it's also critical for design firms to monitor the service and responsiveness of sub consultants and contractors. This can be very helpful in determining who you team with the next time! And don't forget to ask them what projects they have coming up.

Marketers should run away from phrases like "administering surveys"! It's all about people and relationships!

Absolutely correct! Client satisfaction surveys may have a place for mass market products/services, but even these processes are often gamed by employees worrying more about the survey numbers than the meaningful relationships. If surveys are to be effective, they need to be natural and non-intrusive and totally voluntary (in other words, I think it is virtually impossible to achieve positive results by using telemarketing techniques to draw out responses -- the pure act of making the outbound telemarketing call is an often unwelcome intrusion on the client's life -- if it is a scripted survey call, rather than a meaningful check-in to assure that all went well.)

E-Surveys: Practicality for our industry

Mindshare President Rich Hanks

Mindshare Technologies offers a rather effective survey/client evaluation resource -- but it appears this will be useful only for larger businesses/builders. Smaller businesses and subcontractors may find they need to obtain client feedback through much more informal processes.

Early today, I observed one of the better applications of the e-survey for client follow-up. Hertz sent via Mindshare Technologies, a simple four question survey, with the most important Fred Riechheld's "Net Promoter" question saved for last. (I wished I had saved the questions exact wordings and sequence: they were useful, but -- as is the case of any well-designed survey -- once you complete the thing, you aren't allowed to set up a repeat performance.)

However, as I looked deeper into this matter, I recalled the challenges I faced in setting up our own advertiser surveys. Response is far too low to be useful; as I suspect it would be for virtually anyone in our business. We -- even on the simplest scale -- engage in projects that often require days, weeks or months of client interaction; unlike the quick, mass, transactional base relationships of retailers or even rental car companies. (In the latter, we may be 'intimate' with the product -- the rental car -- for a week or two, but we hope not to spend anywhere near that time at the rental counter!)

So, with the help of jigsaw.com, I found the email address of Mindshare Technologies president Rich Hanks and asked him some questions about his service. Here is his response.

The most favorable use of customer feedback systems as robust as Mindshare's is in a situation where there is repetitive, transactional-type activity occurring - we work in about 25 industries where that happens - banks, restaurants, retail, car rental, airlines, golf courses, health care, etc etc.

Having said that, we do work with quite a number of construction-related organizations - Big Box suppliers, commercial builders, condo developers, time-share sales, and a residential builder or two. I assume you've been to our website to get my email address, so you've seen that we don't publish our client's names purposely. If you'd like, and I can inquire of several clients and see if they'd be willing to talk with you - but it is our policy to ask first.

Cost depends on volume of course.

The reason pricing is a bit hard to do, is because we work with companies from 8-reporting units, doing 100 surveys per month each, to a company with 35,000 reporting units across the globe doing about 65 surveys per month each.

We charge as a subscription service (like cable tv or cell phones) and not per survey. But that might be hard for your readers to translate. So, if I look at a "typical" large-scale developer, the fee would probably be around $2,000 US set-up and then the survey cost would translate to something like $1.00 per survey or less.

Yes, it seems, the e-survey techniques are best for retailers and mass marketers, or large volume organizations. I've asked Rich Hanks for the more specific examples (though I respect his point about confidentiality and obtaining permission before quoting or naming his company's clients!)

Maybe the survey worked

Bob Kruhm, our North Carolina publisher, sent this email to me tonight:

Mark,

I’m interested in the survey you sent to NC advertisers. Who received it? On Tuesday I spoke to (client name). She acknowledged receiving your survey and commented it seems a good idea to ask just five questions with an appreciative preface. She plans to copy the survey format for her own clients. I’m surprised you didn't get a response from her....
One of the benefits of your visit in January is to meet our advertisers and get direct feedback. I hope to invite several advertisers to the ASAC Triangle chapter meeting.
Bob

I've removed the client's name from the email because we didn't request nor receive her permission to publish it, but obviously I'm happy to see this result.
Notably, my initial test survey (of 500 plus names) received just seven responses; suggesting a zero response to a list of 60 names is in line with expectations. So the survey may actually be 'working' -- it is important to combine it with first-hand client communication and feedback, ideally in an informal and natural way, however.

Client surveys -- some thoughts

This posting, Client Satisfaction Surveys: Yea or Nay? by Charles Green (Trusted Advisor Associates), wisely points out that conventional surveys don't really work for professional service firms -- but strategic, and well-planned review meetings with clients (not necessarily on a strict annual schedule) can be very effective.

I think Green's article could be very useful for many of this blog's readers, but it doesn't solve my own problem.

The challenge with our business is that clients often purchase individual advertisements either to support an association (for which we either publish a publication under contract, or are writing a special feature report), or to support one of their own clients, usually in the context of a special feature/report about the client's business or project.

These advertisers of course are adhering to the principals of client service that I advocate frequently -- your current customers/clients are the most important, and if you do something to help them in their own marketing and promotion, you of course are helping your relationship with them (and less directly, but no less significantly), helping your own business through downstream support of their marketing process.)

My problem is that despite this referred relationship, we are providing the service, and wish our clients to receive value beyond just keeping their own clients happy. This blog originated, in fact, as part of the service process -- I thought by providing useful marketing suggestions and ideas, our clients would gain benefit that transcends their advertising within our newspapers.

The uncompleted client survey

This image is from the Resources -- Client Surveys page of the website from Conceptual Construction and Design, Inc. in Denver, Colorado. I don't know how well their surveys work -- but will ask them!

After we published the December issues of our newspapers in Ontario and North Carolina, I sent out 60 five-question client surveys to our advertisers. I deliberately kept the survey short, and sought to ask very brief questions that, ideally, would provide the kinds of insights to indicate whether we are doing things right. I also offered respectful opportunities for feedback and comment -- and avoided the horrendous multi-page, dozens of complex question surveys that rightfully no one in their right mind would answer.

Our response to date. Nothing. Zero. Nada. Zip. Some people who read the email opened the survey questionnaire, but none completed it.

Hmm, why is this happening, and what can I do about it?

First, I'm cautious -- I think the one thing I find more irritating to a conventional telemarketing call, is a survey call. I simply decline to participate in ALL phone surveys, no matter what (I suppose if my best customer asked me to participate, I would, but I certainly would not be interested in responding if I was the customer.) On a consumer level, this issue reared its head when I purchased a new car a few years ago. The sales rep told me the survey call would happen, and if I could put in a good word it would help. Besides feeling this was somewhat fake, I simply hate phone surveys. So No.

Alright, but here I was using a simple online survey. And I will complete these, if they are simple, and I feel strongly about things, either good or bad. If good, it doesn't hurt to share the good news. If bad, I've learned through experience that the well-run business will get the word, and make good!

So, does that mean the fact that no one responded that we didn't do anything great, but didn't do anything really bad? Like, kind of mediocre? Maybe. Maybe not. I just don't know. With absolutely no response, I can't measure anything, except that no one responded.

This raises some important questions, because the books I am reading emphasise the importance of metrics -- in measuring our data and determining success -- but if the measurement process is intrusive or inconvenient, what are we really learning. And if no one responds to a non-intrusive survey, how can we know what is happening?

Usually in this blog, I'm ready to offer advice and suggestions. But this one has me stumped, so far. I'll read and do some research and share whatever findings I can discover in future issues. But if you have some thoughts, please let me know. I can send you the survey I just tried. You can respond by the comment function or by email to buckshon@constructionnrgroup.com.