Anon, you’ve opened a real can of worms, here. Your question raises several important issues:
1. Are the metrics of customer satisfaction the right ones to be using for actionable results?
2. What are the benefits/drawbacks to the importance/performance paradigm?
3. What’s the best source of questions for a survey?
4. What types of analyses will produce the most actionable results? (relates back to issue #1)
I’ll try to address these as succinctly as possible.
1. The metrics of customer satisfaction have repeatedly been shown to lack a substantive connection to business results (see Reichheld. See also Reidenbach.) People make purchase decisions – whether buying pizza, cars, insurance, or tractors – based upon their perceptions of the value received. And perceived value is a function of perceived quality relative to perceived price. This interaction of quality and price (plus image) is simply not addressesed with the metrics of satisfaction. For that, you need the metrics of value.
2. There are several problems with the importance/performance paradigm. One of those has already been addressed here, namely, the issue of respondent fatigue and attrition. Another has to do with the distinction between qualifiers and determiners. Qualifiers are “table stakes: typically very important, but typically not a source of differentiation. Airline safety would be a good example: very important, but probably not worth investing for differentiation.
3. I applaud the previous suggestion to couple surveys with focus groups, but would differ on the timing. Focus groups (and/or customer interviews) should be the source of your survey questions. For more information on designing good questionnaires based on value, I’d recommend the ASQ publication, Strategic Six Sigma for Champions: Keys to Sustainable Competitive Advantage, especially chapters 4 – 6.
4. Finally, you are correct in assuming that one of the primary analytical tools will be regression-based. But, for a market-focused definition of CTQs, you’ll need to precede your regression analyses with factor analyses. Then you’ll need to identify specific competitive value performance gaps – whether positive or negative – because these gaps will serve as the starting point in identifying and prioritizing Six Sigma projects. Chapters 1 – 3 of Strategic Six Sigma for Champions will explain just how that works
If you’d like more information regarding the issues you’ve raised, or have additional questions, you can contact me offline. Providing your organization with the type of information that can drive both competitive strategy and significant process improvements will make your services invaluable.
