NPS consistency for global engine manufacturer

Customer-focus had greatly improved with the large-scale implementation of NPS a few years previously, but inconsistently so. Measurements were random: some business units, touchpoints, account teams and franchised repair centres were contacting detractors within 24 hours, resolving problems and successfully closing the loop. Some were hardly engaging with NPS at all. The Asian office for example surveyed their top 100 customers monthly; the Swedes, every six months; in India, no surveys at all.

Data expertise

In a rigorous 6-week assessment period, we used our specialist data collection and analytics expertise to understand how and where NPS was – and wasn’t – working within the business. We made 75 separate recommendations to the client and led them to prioritise seven: those that would be easiest to implement and those that would have the greatest impact on the NPS score.

Focus on strategic winners

We recommended a ‘re-rollout’ of NPS to the most strategically important customers. Taking the biggest 20 corporate accounts (worth $2-100million each), we designed a customer satisfaction survey to map the level of advocacy among the 30-40 key people within each account. Based on these NPS results, our client was able to identify individual detractors and promoters and develop targeted plans to improve advocacy levels. For the first time, business units knew the drivers behind their scores and knew how robust each account actually was.

Brand consistency in franchised repair centres

The client had included all 300 of its US engine repair centres in the original NPS programme but local execution was random: some repair centres had their managers following up NPS surveys, other units had pooled resources and hired a central person to respond customers. To deliver a consistent brand experience we recommended that all managers be directed to do their own follow-ups. We provided managers with simple guidance on how to follow up detractors, passives and promoters.

Link scores with bonuses more fairly

We found errors in the way NPS scores were being collected and related to compensation. In many cases, survey response numbers were not high enough to be statistically significant and any bonuses awarded for high scores were unjustifiable, even unfair. We recommended that the client recalibrate bonus incentives for high NPS scores; we changed data collection streams to get more robust volumes so the link between compensation and score was truly representative.

Calling in Futurelab to refresh NPS has enabled this client to not only raise its satisfaction score across the tricky distribution side of the business, but also to grow revenues in key strategic accounts.

If you would like a health-check for NPS in your complex business, please get in touch.




Leave a Comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.