Framing is Everything (or, "My time under twilight sedation")

This entry was originally going to be a service review about Norton Audubon Hospital, where I recently underwent a minor medical procedure.

At the start of my visit, my judgment was arguably impaired from anxiety.

At the end of my visit, my judgment was definitely impaired from the “twilight sedation.”

[Seriously, there’s probably nothing they could have done to me under twilight sedation that would not have seemed totally groovy.]

So while I think I experienced tremendous care and service, and while I am more than happy to assign our “5 Magnets” ranking to the visit, I’d feel weird about it.

So instead of doing a review, let’s focus on an area where I KNOW the hospital excelled, and that’s on the post-procedure survey.

Altogether now: “The customer survey is another form of customer communication, and as such, it reflects the values of the administering brand.” I know, you’re tired of hearing it.

But Norton really nails this. They sent me a postcard letting me know that the survey was on the way, and the framing of the communication was perfect (see below; emphasis added).

 

It’s a given that any good communication about a follow-up survey be focused on providing better customer experiences. And the postcard from Norton definitely meets this criterion. From the title of the post card to their request to help them “improve,” the tone is pitch-perfect in terms of focusing on enhancing their service.

So that’s a great start.

And then it really blows my mind by also offering an even more genuine, cogent, and (dare I say) heart-warming purpose for the survey, which is to “recognize staff members who provide outstanding service.”

Joy!

If you read this site regularly, you know that I believe in identifying, recognizing, and rewarding star players. That’s how you improve the service of your entire team.

Also, this is a very positive frame that gives the respondent a great reason to want to take the survey.

That is, people who received great care will be motivated to fill-out the survey in order to thank & reward the people that took great care of them (that’s certainly how I felt).

So great job, Norton!

Until next time, here’s to the power of twilight sedation!

Update on July 27, 2010 by The Magnetic Group

Addendum: Also, I wanted to mention that the positive frame from the post card was followed-through in the actual survey.

Its introduction also focused on Norton's desire to improve the quality of its care, and again mentioned their desire to recognize "employees who perform outstanding work."

Put a face on your survey

Commenting our recent post about The Weather Channel’s inept survey, Duncan Stuart shared a simple, yet ingenious idea:

• “One thing I do with online surveys is post my contact details and email link. Oh yes, I get whacked for this and that - but every criticism helps me hone my craft. In balance I get more thank you emails than I get negatives. But a shame that somebody at Weather Channel didn't put their name and face to the questionnaire. They might have got immediate feedback, fixed their remedial problems and relaunched with much greater success.” –Duncan Stuart

There are several reasons to applaud and emulate his courageous approach.

If you buy into my belief that surveys are another form of customer communication, then what sends a better message to your customers: an anonymous survey with nothing but instructions and questions, or a personalized questionnaire that puts a face and a name to the work while inviting feedback and engagement?

(If you answered “the former,” please surf elsewhere; it’s just not going to work out between us.)

People don’t want to feel like just a number, and they don’t want to feel processed.

Instead, they want to feel a connection to other people, and they want to feel empowered to respond to the intention of the survey as well as its content.

My guess is that respondents who know the creator of the survey –and know that they can offer input on the experience– feel more valued, and that this translates into more serious, lengthy, and thoughtful responses.

And as Duncan mentions, I’m sure that a survey designer who invites comments about her/his instruments will learn far more about how to be an effective survey designer than someone who eschews such contact.

Personal Testimony

I recently created an internal survey for a large bank. But before we fielded it company-wide, we performed some validity testing.

We watched employees take the survey, and had them talk through the questions and answer options with us.

In addition to being incredibly illuminating (the survey we ended up fielding was quite different from the one we had cooked up in the lab, and far more effective, too), it was an amazing opportunity to connect with the employees and really get their insights on the survey-taking experience.

We learned about the unique connotations of certain in-house terms that could skew the results.

We identified questions that could be deemed as diminishing to certain departments.  

And we discovered new topics that needed to be explored.

In the end, we had better flow, better wording, better answer categories, and a superior instrument in every way.

And all of these great things happened because we (the survey creators) sat face-to-face with them (the survey takers) and had wonderful interactions about the entire scope of the project.

In addition to discussing the survey specifically, we covered:

• Why do the employees think the bank is doing this survey, and why now?
• What events and/or tensions are driving the situation?
• What makes an employee really open up and be honest on a survey?

At the end of the day, we learned far more than we ever would have had we just sat behind our desks and remained anonymous.

Sure, we would have had data. But it would have been far less rich than what we ended up with.

Best of all, everyone benefits. We learn more as professionals, the respondents have more appreciation for the survey process, and our clients learn even more great information.

Cheers!

Transparency Matters

The big controversy involving Research 2000 (R2k), a Maryland-based polling company, serves as an excellent reminder that documentation and transparency are crucial to maintaining high credibility.

A prominent R2k client recently fired the company and now alleges that R2k did not provide accurate data. His claim is based on an analysis that suggests a high level of implausibility of R2k’s data, and that implies that R2k fabricated some or all of the data.

R2k vehemently denies the allegations, and they claim that legal ramifications prevent them from fully exonerating themselves at this time.

Transparency & Documentation

We have no idea who’s telling the truth in this one, and The Magnetic Group has no connection to either party.

What we DO know is that there’s a simple remedy that could resolve this issue within the hour: R2k could simply produce the digitally recorded audio conversations of every interview to prove their authenticity.

We digitally record our interviews for every project we undertake. If one of our clients were to request a recording of every interview, we can deliver it within moments.

It’s a simple matter of documentation and transparency.

Sure, it takes time, money, and effort to save and file all of this data. But when you see dust-ups like this one, you realize how important it is.

The Temptation

Thinking beyond this case, it’s clear that temptation exists for research houses to cut their costs by conducting fewer interviewers than they are paid to provide. It’s simple math: if you are paid for 500 interviews, actually performing only 200 interviews will save the research company money.  

And maybe the research company can apply extrapolation and advanced algorithms on the 200 interviews they did conduct to provide good estimates at what the results would have been for a true sample of 500 people.

But unless they are completely transparent about using this technique, it’s fraud. If a research company promises a client a random sample of 500 people, that’s what it needs to deliver.

And research providers need to be ready to offer concrete documentation to prove that they lived up to their obligations.

Please Rate This Question on a Scale of 1 to 5…

Everyone knows that surveying customers is a great source of feedback about your business.

But not as many companies understand the power of surveying their customers about their surveys.

It seems obvious, but is often overlooked. Research departments labor over instructions, question wording, and scales. They hold multiple meetings to discuss flow and answer options.

But they forget that taking a survey is a customer experience, not much different than visiting a web page or viewing a flyer.

The implicit message of a survey is: “This was commissioned by our company and reflects the values of our company.”

So if it’s boring or tedious or poorly crafted, what will that say about your business?

And it’s so simple to know if your surveys are sending the wrong messages…just ask your customers.

Thanks, Now Get Lost

Basic fact: taking a survey is a part of the customer experience.

It's a prime opportunity to show customers that you care about them and that you're a smart and thoughtful company.

But if you don't do it well,  you can also show customers that you are disorganized and have poor communication skills.

So why do so many companies let junior researchers & programmers write surveys with NO oversight from communications professionals?!?

I just agreed to take a 15-minute survey. After a few questions, I was screened out, and here's how they broke the news to me.

First, I was never "interested" in the survey. I agreed to help you out after you asked me to.

And you're going to talk to me about "quotas" and "categories" instead of thanking me for my patronage or saying something to build the relationship?

• Customers deserve better.
• Companies deserve better from their researchers.

"You met my expectations, and I'm not mad about it!"

I was writing bonus checks and wanted to make sure they were included in our payroll record. So I placed a quick call to ADP just to check: 

Me:  Did I do this right?

ADP: Yes, everything looks fine. Anything else I can help you with today?

Me: No, thanks. That’s all I needed.

ADP: Okay, have a great day. 

The next week, they sent me a survey asking if my expectations of the call center had been met or exceeded.

I indicated that they had met my expectations; and they had. I expected a quick Yes/No, and I got one. That was all I needed.

Case closed, right?

Nothing is Wrong. Really!

Three voicemails from ADP followed. I felt stalked.

They REALLY wanted to know what they could have done to exceed my expectations.

It was as if I had had a horrible experience and they were trying to defuse it and redeem me as a customer. But nothing had gone wrong.

And what could they have done better?  I had a simple question; they answered it quickly and correctly. There wasn’t anything more I wanted or needed. 

And it bothers me that my ADP representative may have been penalized for doing exactly what I wanted. 

In this instance, meeting my expectations was the best-case scenario, and it happened.

So why is money being wasted on trying to figure out what went wrong when nothing went wrong?

Bottom line: Don't rely on a single question to gauge customer satisfaction. It's more nuanced than that.

Guest Post: “Can you imagine a world…”

[editor’s note: Being in customer service research, we hear many horror stories of surveys gone awry. Here’s one of our favorites, as told by Robyn Davis Sekula, who recently survived a very poorly done satisfaction survey by her bank.]

A few weeks ago, I got a call from my bank. I like my bank. The tellers are friendly and call me by name even before they see my deposit slip. They even called me at home recently to tell me they’re closing the branch I frequent. I have two checking accounts, a savings account, a safe deposit box and one of my children’s college savings accounts with them. I’ve banked with them for almost eight years.

So, when they called to ask me about my experiences with them, I was happy to spend a few minutes filling them in.

First, they asked me about a branch I visit only occasionally. But I thought I’d be nice and play along anyway.

The interviewer would read a statement, and I’d reply with a 1 for ‘strongly disagree’ or a 5 for ‘strongly agree.’ Ok, fine. I did my best. We flew through the questions at a brisk clip. On questions when I had no idea, I’d pick a three or four. Isn’t that what everyone does?

Then we got to one statement that stopped the entire interview.

“I cannot imagine a world without XYZ Bank.”

I sat in silence. “What? Are you serious?” I asked. I started laughing. I cannot imagine a world without my children, my husband, sunshine, and chocolate. But a bank? Really? The surveyor said, “That’s what it says.” So I gave that a two.

How can a bank seriously wonder if it’s one of the most precious things in life?

And what good does this question do, anyway? Why does it serve this bank to know that? If it gets a 3.5 average, what happens? Does the bank call a party planner, play “Celebration” by Kool & the Gang at a party with a balloon drop and give out cake to employees? If they get an average of a 2, do they have long, ponderous meetings with a consultant where they try to figure out how they went wrong? What exactly do they DO with that information?

It doesn’t tell them anything. If I have a relationship with more than one bank, it doesn’t tell them if I like them better – and if so, why. Frankly, the bank I have my mortgage with is a treat to deal with, too, but it also has its flaws. I’d be happy to compare and contrast and tell you something you could actually use. But, my dear bank didn’t ask me that.

We continued to move through the survey, and I was asked if I had ever had a problem with the bank. I said yes, so I was given another statement to either agree or disagree to: The problem was resolved to my satisfaction. In truth, I had never brought the problem to the bank’s attention. I just simply hadn’t taken the time to do it. I told the surveyor the entire problem, and at the end, he said, “So what number would that be?” He had no place on his form to actually write down what the problem was. To the bank’s credit, they did have someone call me to try to help. It still isn’t solved, but that’s because I haven’t had the time to work it out.

Really great customer service surveys provide space and time for surveyors to listen as much as they talk. They let customers really tell them how good they are – or how poor – in comparison to their competition. They might even glean insight into how to move past being an institution to being something they look forward to visiting.

I can imagine a world without my bank. I’d just …. go to another one! Sorry, dear bank. You’re not a spouse. You’re not nearly as fun as my children. You aren’t nearly as tasty as chocolate. You’re necessary. I like you, but yes, I can imagine life without you.

[Robyn is a media and marketing consultant. She spent most of her pre-freelance career as a newspaper reporter, and last worked at Business First. Her clients include Ivy Tech Community College, the Family Investment Center in St. Joseph, Missouri, the Jeffersonville Carnegie Library Foundation and English, Lucas, Priest and Owsley, a law firm in Bowling Green, Kentucky. Robyn writes advertising, brochure and web site copy, and press releases. You can contact her here.]