The Startling Truth About Traveling With the Top 1%

by Colin Shaw on July 21, 2016

There’s been a lot of press recently about the decline in the American Middle Class and the rapid increase in the incomes and net worth of people at the very top of the socioeconomic scale. Increasingly, these high income people have lifestyles that don’t involve mingling with everyone else. They segregate themselves in posh gated communities, send their kids to private schools and camps, and join elite social clubs.

These trends have led travel companies to rethink the experiences they offer to customers, especially the ones with lots of money to spend. They are starting to realize that the ultra wealthy who segregate themselves at home also want a separate, ultra-luxury experience on the road.

Read More...
Colin ShawThe Startling Truth About Traveling With the Top 1%

Posh Pools and Easy A’s: Students as Customers in Higher Education

by Mark Marone on July 20, 2016

In a recent New York Times article, writer Frank Bruni laments the erosion of higher education as a result of the growing adoption of a consumer model positioning students as customers and colleges as mere providers of goods and services. This trend toward the development and marketing of upscale amenities such as resort-style pools and water parks, state-of-the-art fitness centers, and restaurant-style dining halls at the expense of investment in areas critical to academics is said to be transforming colleges and universities into “country clubs with libraries.” Indeed, students are now calling the shots and their demands are eliciting unprecedented reactions by many schools.

To be fair, higher education is only following the herd. The move toward putting the end user’s wants and needs at the center of an organizational strategy (optimizing the customer experience) is being adopted everywhere, beyond the hospitality and retail settings where it was first envisioned to every area of business, including B2B, healthcare and even the federal government.

Read More...
Mark MaronePosh Pools and Easy A’s: Students as Customers in Higher Education

An Amazing Experience: Personalize your CX Today!

by Colin Shaw on July 19, 2016

Many of you will have seen this video of a little girl whose parents surprised her with a new doll?

 

The doll is special because it has a prosthetic leg – just like its recipient. It’s hard not to get choked up as you watch her burst into tears as she hugs her new friend for the first time.

Read More...
Colin ShawAn Amazing Experience: Personalize your CX Today!

Truth Bared about the Realities of Customer Experience Implementation!

by Colin Shaw on July 14, 2016

What do a Bank, an Airline, and an Online Retailer Have in Common?

Consorsbank, Lufthansa, and Zalando—three very different companies—have both undertaken a Customer Experience improvement program. Consorsbank is a bank; Lufthansa is an airline; Zalando is an online clothing retailer. Whilst they each have their unique challenges, their insight on Customer Experience shows us the common obstacles that all of us face when tackling such an important facet of our business.

Econsultancy heard from the people working on the Customer Experience improvement efforts. In a recent article on their blog, representatives from each company shared excellent tips based on each of their involvement so far:

Read More...
Colin ShawTruth Bared about the Realities of Customer Experience Implementation!

Connecting Satisfaction With Behavior: Does The Service-Profit Chain (or The Employee Engagement-Profit Chain) Still Work?

by Michael Lowenstein on July 13, 2016

Michael Lowenstein, Ph.D., CMC Thought Leadership Principal, Beyond Philosophy

The Service-Profit Chain, an enterprise performance and financial results concept introduced by Gary Loveman, James Heskett, W. Earl Sasser, and Leonard Schlesinger in 1994 in Harvard Business Review, and in a 1997 book by the last three authors, can essentially be explained as follows: It is a theory of business management which links employee satisfaction to customer loyalty and profitability. For the past two decades, it has been the analytical foundation used by many organizations to assess the health of their company.

There is an ongoing, fundamental flaw with the Service-Profit Chain, not surfaced with much attention when the concept was first introduced, or given any examination frequency since that time. Its foundation of employee satisfaction is built on shifting sand. Namely, the connection between satisfaction and behavior, whether by customers or employees, has been challenged and largely refuted in study upon study.

Here’s a summary which encapsulates the difference between satisfaction and loyalty as metrics, expressed by Susan Wyse of Snap Surveys in a June, 2012 post: “Customer Satisfaction is a measurement of customer attitudes regarding products, services, and brands. Customer Loyalty on the other hand has two definitions. Customer Loyalty consists of loyalty behavior (also referred to as customer retention) which is the act of customers making repeat purchases of current brands, rather than choosing competitor brands. Secondly, Customer Loyalty encompasses loyalty attitudes which are opinions and feelings about products, services, brands, or businesses that are associated with repeat purchases.”

So the key takeaways from Ms Wyse’s summary is that satisfaction principally measures attitudes, which are passive, reactive, and tactical, and that this metric has little connection to value-related behavior. Adding to the shortcomings of this metric, it also tends to be what is known as a “lagging indicator”, which will often drop faster following a negative experience than it will improve following a positive one.

What’s true for customer attitudes relative to behavior can also be applied to employees. Industrial psychologists and organizational behaviorists have been studying employee satisfaction for over 30 years, assuming that the level of staff satisfaction correlates with impact on measurable results. However, as one major study concluded: “Researchers have been unable to confirm a relationship between employee satisfaction and business performance.”

This is almost identical to the oft-proven determination, of which Susan Wyse’s explanation is one example, that a high level of customer satisfaction has relatively little bearing on loyalty behavior. And, for purposes of this discussion, it is the influence of employee satisfaction attitudes on customer behavior which is at the core of the Service-Profit Chain’s claimed linkage. Going the next step, beyond employee satisfaction, does their engagement profitably drive customer behavior?

First, what does employee engagement, which has been around for over twenty years, actually mean? Kevin Kruse, a former VP of Kenexa (now part of IBM) and a leadership contributor to Forbes magazine, defined employee engagement as “the emotional commitment the employee has to the organization and its goals.” Coincidentally, this definition was also done in a June, 2012 article. Note that Kruse’s concept, like other ways that engagement is understood within HR circles, does not include any mention of customers, customer experience, or value delivery.

His perception of employee engagement, though it recognizes the power of emotional commitment, is simply another iteration of many seen over the past two decades. They are all about alignment and productivity, and all make assumptions about the influence of engagement on customers.

Since first entering active HR use, employee engagement has had many meanings and interpretations, but relatively little of it has to do, by conceptual definition, specifically with impact on customer behavior. Thorough analysis conducted by The Conference Board in 2006 showed that, among twelve leading engagement research companies, twenty-six key drivers of engagement could be identified, of which eight were common to all:

• Trust and integrity – How well do managers communicate and ‘walk the talk‘?
• Nature of the job – Is it mentally stimulating day-to-day?
• Line of sight between employee performance and company performance – Do employees understand how their work contributes to the company’s performance?
• Career growth opportunities – Are there opportunities for growth within the company?
• Pride about the company – How much self-esteem do the employees feel by being associated with their company?
• Coworkers/team members – How much influence do they exert on the employee’s level of engagement?
• Employee development – Is the company making an effort to develop the employee’s skills?
• Relationship with one’s manager – Does the employee value relationship(s) with manager(s), and is there trust and credibility between the levels?

Again, typically, there is little or no mention/inclusion of ‘customer‘, ‘customer focus’, or ‘customer value’ elements either in measurement or analysis of employee engagement. Though it is recognized that customer experience, and resultant behavior, can often be impacted by engagement, it is more tangential and inferential than purposeful in nature.

Kruse, whose definition of engagement comes close to the ‘line of sight’ driver identified above, has created his own version of the Service-Profit Chain, as applied to employees, i.e. the Engagement-Profit Chain. He believes that engaged employees care more, are more productive, and use discretionary effort on behalf of the company’s goals, which leads to:

– higher service, quality, and productivity, which leads to…

– higher customer satisfaction, which leads to…

– increased sales (repeat business and referrals), which leads to…

– higher levels of profit, which leads to…

– higher shareholder returns (i.e., stock price)

It’s all very linear and very assumptive. In the article, Kruse flatly states: “Engaged employees lead to better business outcomes.” Over 250,000 people have viewed his article, so it has had broad coverage. Like the Service-Profit Chain, the core flaw in the concept Kruse put forward in his thesis is that higher satisfaction, and even higher emotional commitment, by one stakeholder group, in this case employees, will drive the behavior of another stakeholder group, in this case customers. Unless the employee’s emotional commitment is focused on customers, customer experience optimization, and product or service value delivery, there is likely to be only marginal influence on customer behavior.

Read More...
Michael LowensteinConnecting Satisfaction With Behavior: Does The Service-Profit Chain (or The Employee Engagement-Profit Chain) Still Work?

Stop Now! Six Mistakes Being Made With Your Digital Experience

by Colin Shaw on July 12, 2016

In case you missed it, the world has gone online! If you haven’t gone online with your Customer Experience, too, it’s time. To be honest, if you haven’t begun, you’re late. The digital transformation of your present Customer Experience is long overdue.

Consider this graph of which devices customers use at home:

Read More...
Colin ShawStop Now! Six Mistakes Being Made With Your Digital Experience