AUTOFORUM - Informed and innovative

Getting value from customer feedback that is not always what it seems

Dec 06, 2024 Liezel Jonkheid, Consumer Psychology Lab


Getting value from customer feedback that is not always what it seems

 

Opinion piece by Liezel Jonkheid, Director and Founder of the Consumer Psychology Lab 

Part 1

A friend recently shared his experience of providing feedback after buying his new vehicle. As a Voice of the Customer specialist, his response really brought it home to me that customer feedback might not always be as it seems at surface level. He experienced frustrating moments during the purchase journey, including the car arriving late, without the agreed specs and price disputes, resulting in senior management intervention. After this, he was asked (read: coerced) by the young sales consultant to rate his experience as “10” when he got the survey call.

 

Despite the unpleasant experience, when the research agent called, he gave a high score. His reasoning for not giving his honest feedback was interesting and rational. He described it as follows: “I felt emotionally blackmailed initially, but as I reflected, I realised this young sales consultant, like my own son, was trying his best to earn a living. My feedback could jeopardise his earnings if I shared my true feelings and corresponding rating. He clearly lacked the maturity and training, and it was not entirely his fault. So, I went back on my original intention to rate my true experience. If I’m honest, I was probably hoping that some other customer will also cut my son some slack someday if he did not deliver the best service experience.”

 

This projection is one of many reasons why customers might only provide half-truths in their service rating feedback. Others include -

• Sympathy - for the frontline staff

• Time lapse - memory is exaggerated by the emotional impact of the experience (good or bad).

• Apathy - too much effort to fully engage in the feedback process.

• Hopelessness - the belief that nothing will be done to remedy the situation.

• Halo effect - the interaction and experience with one is assigned to all.

• Speak no evil - unwilling to criticise, afraid an individual will be punished, or a belief to look on the “bright side”.

• Avoidance - prefer not to give feedback (due to inconvenience, bad timing) and wanting to get rid of the obstacle (the caller).

• Rationalisation - assigning valid reasons for experience or rating.

• Guilt trip – staff put undue pressure on the customer to rate the experience more favourably than deserved to avoid losing incentives.

 

The question is, do false truths serve any purpose? If customers don’t share their honest feedback, how does the feedback help organisations to improve customer experience? And why are organisations not digging deeper in their customer surveys to ensure that they really get to the bottom of customer feedback that is authentic?

 

There are a number of reasons for this:

• Legacy & purpose: Organisation may be stuck with legacy systems, churning out survey emails to customers without further consideration. The cost to amend could be too high or resistance to change may be embedded in ignorance.

• NPS trumps reason: The organisation may be solely focused on chasing the “industry” metrics like NPS or CSAT scores, rather than understanding the problems. When results are positive, motivation to review the current feedback format may be absent.

• Inside-out: The results are embedded in the KPI structure and driven to achieve targets or incentives. NPS or CSAT are built into the business’ performance structure.

• Yes but…: The questions in the survey don’t cover what customers actually want to say, and open-ended questions are challenging to analyse.

• Timing: When feedback is requested, it’s not right for the purpose – too soon/late.

• No chiefs: No-one owns the management of the surveys in the organisation.

• CX side-plate: Survey results are not used as part of regular business practice or conversations.

• CX silence: Results are not shared with everyone in the organisation, so no one knows how they perform (except top management).

• CX focus:  The intention of VOC is not to understand and learn (growth mindset), but to chase results (fixed mindset)

• Numbers over words: Results are only analysed in terms of metrics, not the customer’s narrative.

• Fix this now: Focus is on solving immediate problems, rather than using the information to understand how to enhance customer experience.

 

These are the realities for many organisations. Without a defined and considered Voice of the Customer (VoC) programme, sending surveys to customers provides little value to an organisation, and even less to customers who share their feedback. Too often organisations boast about their NPS or CSAT scores, even when in reality the customers’ experience is at best accidental. There is a classic saying in research - “garbage in, garbage out!”

 

In part 2 of this series, we’ll unpack how business can use customer feedback effectively, given the potential half-truths offered by customers, and the importance of getting the fundamentals of your Voice of the Customer programme right in order to improve customer experience.
Back