Bits and pieces on
delivering success to our users

Return to Latest

Not Always the same people

Do the same few members at your Club give most of the feedback? Call it a creeping realization or a longitudinal hunch, but Zoom meetings are kind of a weird place to have eureka moments. During two consecutive meetings, I was struck by two statements that pretty much threw me off with my head spinning. The first one gave me a stomachache begging for Alka-Seltzer. The second one was soothing enough to want to hear more. Were the following statements pure assumptions about Club culture or real insights grounded in reality? "It's true we have high NPS and CSAT scores. However I think it's always the same few Members who give feedback. How useful is that?" said the Director of Marketing at a reputable city Club, as she stared directly into my eyes. I blinked. Repeatedly. The other statement was by the General Manager of a large golf club: "Prior to automation, we used to get only the complainers. But I'm amazed how much positive feedback we've been getting since Happometer automated our process." I discarded Alka-Seltzer immediately. The next morning I usain bolt-ed to the office to face my colleague: "Drop everything without hesitation, let's get the facts straight" from Happometer's production oven. Hours later, we savored the baked goods, and they tasted great! We measured the spread of unique data points about club member feedback. The scatter graph (not shown here) showed a wide spread with little deviation from the standard across clubs. As the graph bar indicates (see below), on average 61% of all feedback comes from unique club members who responded once. Those who responded twice are a far 17%. From there it's a steeper decline, where only 8% responded 3x, before it drops close to less than 1% for those who responded 10x or more. The city Club of the aforementioned Director of Marketing turned out to have a whopping 82.7% of feedback by unique members who responded 3x or less, only 13.7% 4x to 9x, and a minute 3.6% 10x or more. She had an incorrect perception. As for the GM at the golf club, 78% of feedback at his club is positive (4.78 points below the mean) which is consistent with golf clubs in Happometer's Big Data analytics. He's right, automated feedback channels naturally encourage members to share why their experience was positive. Club services improve the most when members highlight the strengths of such services. Staff's learning rests on their grasp of what they're doing well, more so than what they're doing poorly. In summary, no, it's not the same few members who give the majority of feedback. Having repeat respondents is great, underscoring their desire for receiving excellent services, but repeaters are the minority by far. A wide base of respondents is indeed the majority. —IA

Standard deviation is affected by such factors as club size, date range, frequency control settings, and channels, which vary from one club to the other. We excluded records from hotels and restaurants.

Accolades with Matthias Kiehm

The 'Quin House team and the indefatigable Matthias Kiehm are busy creating great experiences for their club members. Managers and front-of-house colleagues expand their scope by attentively listening to, and acting on, feedback across channels to better understand the experience that a member is having in real-time and near-real-time.

go ahead: Make my day!

We have to be in constant dialogue with our patrons. The world is simply changing, and it's important to stay close to the pulse of the community on the effectiveness of changes to our services.

David Leonard, President
Boston Public Library

Team Happiness is not aspirin

Artificial Intelligence is all the rage these days. However isn't the term intelligent design (no religious pun intended) a better way to describe the natural and non-robotic sensibilities of human beings? This is especially true in the context of business decision making, critical thinking, and processing large amounts of information. So in terms of human interactions in the workplace, let's start with the basics in case anyone has forgetten the following original commandments ( pun intended, again):

  • HR departments are not filing cabinets.
  • Team happiness is not an Aspirin or a mere survey.
  • And we know that working in HR isn't Happy Hour.
Full article here...

go ahead: Make my day!

Happometer provides us with exactly what we need in terms of reaching thousands of our customers with a click of a button. It makes it easier to access data in real-time and to clean up our database. The team at Happometer is hands-on and would help solve any problem swiftly.

Chadi Abou Daher
Director of Customer Services
MEA-Air Liban

go ahead: Make my day! Again.

...The service is incredible... Happometer's team finds solutions to any challenges, and tweaks the program to suit your business every step of the way.

Charlotte Moore
Dir. of Learning & Development
Palazzo Versace Hotel

The NPS Big Picture

Tom has Jerry. Laurel has Hardy. When lacking immersive context, NPS has eNPS the way dumb has dumber. To better appreciate NPS—or net promoter score—and its offspring the Employee-NPS, think of "Artificial Intelligence" then take away "intelligence." Anytime Net Promoter is served to respondents as an orphaned one-question survey, you'll end up with one vague index that offers little insights or context. Full article here...

Accolades with Jon Grooms

We're happy to bring value to Ballantyne Country Club and contribute to its success. Looking forward to a long-term relationship with David Lee's team.

A voice to Reckon with

Successful market initiatives and innovations are often linked, if not rooted, in academic laboratories. The University of Michigan represents an impressive model for listening to the voice of the employee. I am pleased to summarize and share my notes about U-M's team engagement project. It's a worthwhile read for corporate leaders, HR professionals, and college administrators. Full article here...

is customer feedback fair?

Marissa Conrad, whose article appeared in "Ideas" section of The Boston Globe on May 8, makes the assumption that "anything less than five stars is considered failure," then goes about questioning the fairness and meaning of customer service feedback. The title of her piece is "Please Tell Us How Much You Liked This Article." I didn't like it enough to give it five stars, Marissa, but it's still a good read therefore not considered failure! Full article here...

Explore a good fit?