Customer Surveys - "Give me a 10"

[Cami]

Back to my question I posted above then. If they're this useless, why have them? Why ask customers to do them instead of hiring a new department in the company to sit and complete some fake surveys for you?

Have you ever read the Dilbert comics? They explain why companies act like this quite well.

As an example, a company I worked for had employee reviews. The RULE is that you are not told of any compliments your boss receives about you, but you are told of any complaints. The theory is that if you only hear bad feedback, you'll work harder so that you don't get any bad feedback. Does this make sense? Of course not. Are they going to change their ways? Of course not. Why? Inertia, refusal to admit mistakes, and bassackward understanding of what constitutes EFFECTIVE motivational techniques. In other words, stupid people rise to mid-management positions where their stupid ideas become policy.

[Sophie Jenkins]

Personally, I would go by what the survey says instead of what the employee says.  I don't think I've ever seen a survey that didn't give a written scale (like "From 1 to 10 where 1 is "not very good" and 10 is "excellent"").  If the company lies on their survey - asking for a 1-10 scale and really only wanting true/false - that's their issue to fix and not something I want to have to correct for.

This sounds very much like the people who, when informed that in much of the US servers get paid below minimum wage and are expected to have tips fill in the difference, refuse to tip in order to encourage the system to change.

If you're not willing to fulfill the social contract of tipping, don't go out to eat. If you're not willing to speak the language of the survey, don't fill out the survey.

The only people who get hurt in either case are the people who have no power to effect change.

Corporate would definitely re-evaluate the survey process if they suddenly stopped getting any results back whatsoever.

[Calistoga]

We have these random surveys that print out on some of receipts at my place of work that ask for a 1-5 score.

The kicker?

Getting a 4 is EXACTLY the same as getting a 1. It looks just as bad on us and we get chewed out just as much. This might be why so many places emphasis the "Give me a 10!" thing- it's literally all or nothing, either you're perfect or you suck.

[Sharnita]

Personally, I would go by what the survey says instead of what the employee says.  I don't think I've ever seen a survey that didn't give a written scale (like "From 1 to 10 where 1 is "not very good" and 10 is "excellent"").  If the company lies on their survey - asking for a 1-10 scale and really only wanting true/false - that's their issue to fix and not something I want to have to correct for.

This sounds very much like the people who, when informed that in much of the US servers get paid below minimum wage and are expected to have tips fill in the difference, refuse to tip in order to encourage the system to change.

If you're not willing to fulfill the social contract of tipping, don't go out to eat. If you're not willing to speak the language of the survey, don't fill out the survey.

The only people who get hurt in either case are the people who have no power to effect change.

Corporate would definitely re-evaluate the survey process if they suddenly stopped getting any results back whatsoever.

I think there is a very clear indication of the intention to go by the language of the survey.  The problem is that apparently some people are expected to divine on at least some surveys that they aren't supposed speak the language of the contract but rather some other, secret language.  If you believe there is a social contract to know and speak that language then I heartily disagree with you.  That would be like arguing that being informed of an 18% autogratuity in reality obligates everyone to tip 25% and we should all know that and tip accordingly or not go out to eat.

[camlan]

I bought a new car recently and was warned by the saleman that I'd be getting a follow up survey from the company, they are big on customer service and rate anything less than 9/10 as bad.

I like him and the car so I did it but I do think it's a bit unfair on the sales staff. Some customers are never going to be happy no matter what you do so they skew the results.

Had a similar survey the last time I bought a car. Wasn't going to do the survey, but I'm a bit OCD about user manuals, and I'd read the owner's manual for the car from front to back. There was a massive problem with the instructions for installing a child safety seat--I think an entire line of text was dropped out. It was early enough in internet days that there was no way to contact them on-line, and the woman doing the survey called the day after I'd read the manual, so I took the darn survey just so I could tell her about the problem.

If it had been something about how to clean the floor mats or the like, I wouldn't have bothered. But a child safety seat--that's a different story.

[Sophie Jenkins]

Personally, I would go by what the survey says instead of what the employee says.  I don't think I've ever seen a survey that didn't give a written scale (like "From 1 to 10 where 1 is "not very good" and 10 is "excellent"").  If the company lies on their survey - asking for a 1-10 scale and really only wanting true/false - that's their issue to fix and not something I want to have to correct for.

This sounds very much like the people who, when informed that in much of the US servers get paid below minimum wage and are expected to have tips fill in the difference, refuse to tip in order to encourage the system to change.

If you're not willing to fulfill the social contract of tipping, don't go out to eat. If you're not willing to speak the language of the survey, don't fill out the survey.

The only people who get hurt in either case are the people who have no power to effect change.

Corporate would definitely re-evaluate the survey process if they suddenly stopped getting any results back whatsoever.

I think there is a very clear indication of the intention to go by the language of the survey.  The problem is that apparently some people are expected to divine on at least some surveys that they aren't supposed speak the language of the contract but rather some other, secret language.  If you believe there is a social contract to know and speak that language then I heartily disagree with you.  That would be like arguing that being informed of an 18% autogratuity in reality obligates everyone to tip 25% and we should all know that and tip accordingly or not go out to eat.

That's not what I said at all.

Being informed of how the surveys work behind the scenes is like being told that servers don't make minimum wage. I don't expect anyone to know either piece of information without being told first. That would be totally unreasonable!

However, being told and then insisting upon behaving in a way that hurts people who don't deserve it- that's where the social contract comes in. Once you know how the surveys work, despite the untrue phrasing used on the surveys themselves, either take it into account or don't do the survey.

I'm not asking anyone to lie. Far from it! I'm only explaining how the corporate offices actually read the surveys. It's not an intuitive and reasonable system- if it were, we would not be having this conversation at all!


An example I personally witnessed: A cashier, one of our best and friendliest employees, gave out a survey (it printed with the receipt automatically), and the customer was livid about their whole visit, due to the fact that the "employee" they'd asked for help had claimed to not be an employee.

(spoiler alert: they were, in fact, another customer, and the angry customer had totally ignored the actual employees offering to help him. the situation was pretty hilarious at the time.)

The cashier was given a 2 of 5 survey score by this customer. So corporate ordered that she be written up. The general manager fought  the write-up, because not a single thing about the customer's anger was the cashier's or even the store as a whole's fault.

That cashier- a friendly, sweet, kind-hearted woman who worked hard and was never late and only wanted to help customers, eventually got fired because she got too many surveys with 4 out of 5's on them. Corporate didn't care- they only wanted a body to ask all their questions and take money. But the morale and actual customer service levels in our store directly suffered as a result of corporate being obtuse about surveys.


Taking surveys the way you think is right is fine, but shouldn't you care enough about the people around you to take into account new information about how they work?

[Outdoor Girl]

That's why I will only do a survey now if I have a complaint.  I'm not willing to give out top marks unless the service was exceptional so I won't do it at all if I was just happy with the service I received.

[Cami]

Personally, I would go by what the survey says instead of what the employee says.  I don't think I've ever seen a survey that didn't give a written scale (like "From 1 to 10 where 1 is "not very good" and 10 is "excellent"").  If the company lies on their survey - asking for a 1-10 scale and really only wanting true/false - that's their issue to fix and not something I want to have to correct for.

This sounds very much like the people who, when informed that in much of the US servers get paid below minimum wage and are expected to have tips fill in the difference, refuse to tip in order to encourage the system to change.

If you're not willing to fulfill the social contract of tipping, don't go out to eat. If you're not willing to speak the language of the survey, don't fill out the survey.

The only people who get hurt in either case are the people who have no power to effect change.

Corporate would definitely re-evaluate the survey process if they suddenly stopped getting any results back whatsoever.

I think there is a very clear indication of the intention to go by the language of the survey.  The problem is that apparently some people are expected to divine on at least some surveys that they aren't supposed speak the language of the contract but rather some other, secret language.  If you believe there is a social contract to know and speak that language then I heartily disagree with you.  That would be like arguing that being informed of an 18% autogratuity in reality obligates everyone to tip 25% and we should all know that and tip accordingly or not go out to eat.

That's not what I said at all.

Being informed of how the surveys work behind the scenes is like being told that servers don't make minimum wage. I don't expect anyone to know either piece of information without being told first. That would be totally unreasonable!

However, being told and then insisting upon behaving in a way that hurts people who don't deserve it- that's where the social contract comes in. Once you know how the surveys work, despite the untrue phrasing used on the surveys themselves, either take it into account or don't do the survey.

I'm not asking anyone to lie. Far from it! I'm only explaining how the corporate offices actually read the surveys. It's not an intuitive and reasonable system- if it were, we would not be having this conversation at all!


An example I personally witnessed: A cashier, one of our best and friendliest employees, gave out a survey (it printed with the receipt automatically), and the customer was livid about their whole visit, due to the fact that the "employee" they'd asked for help had claimed to not be an employee.

(spoiler alert: they were, in fact, another customer, and the angry customer had totally ignored the actual employees offering to help him. the situation was pretty hilarious at the time.)

The cashier was given a 2 of 5 survey score by this customer. So corporate ordered that she be written up. The general manager fought  the write-up, because not a single thing about the customer's anger was the cashier's or even the store as a whole's fault.

That cashier- a friendly, sweet, kind-hearted woman who worked hard and was never late and only wanted to help customers, eventually got fired because she got too many surveys with 4 out of 5's on them. Corporate didn't care- they only wanted a body to ask all their questions and take money. But the morale and actual customer service levels in our store directly suffered as a result of corporate being obtuse about surveys.


Taking surveys the way you think is right is fine, but shouldn't you care enough about the people around you to take into account new information about how they work?

Parking my POD right here.

[Barney girl]

Disclaimer - I dislike doing surveys myself as I find them boring.

That said we are a firm which is independently audited to achieve a particular quality mark and one of the many items we're audited against is client feedback. [I deal with compliance and wonder if I'll ever have to time to do my main job there's so much I have to check and audit for quality standards].

We used to send out questionnaires to clients, but gave up on that as most won't returned. It was generally only if there was a very high or very low comment they came in. We moved over for a while to telephone surveys, but that wasn't ideal, so are putting in hand emails with a short survey.

It would be pointless to us if those came back with only full marks as we wouldn't learn from them. Ultimately we see the surveys as way of finding out where we have problems and putting them right. If a client doesn't like us they'll not only never come back, but they'll tell ten other people as well. We'd rather know at early stage that there are issues.

What it boils down to is - please don't tar all surveys with the same brush. Some may be for genuine reasons.

[Twik]

I fill out surveys if I like the service, and want them to get the props for it.

The only time I'd pass in a survey with bad ratings is if the service had been atrocious, and I was looking for a storm of Biblical proportions to fall on everyone involved.

[Sophie Jenkins]

Disclaimer - I dislike doing surveys myself as I find them boring.

That said we are a firm which is independently audited to achieve a particular quality mark and one of the many items we're audited against is client feedback. [I deal with compliance and wonder if I'll ever have to time to do my main job there's so much I have to check and audit for quality standards].

We used to send out questionnaires to clients, but gave up on that as most won't returned. It was generally only if there was a very high or very low comment they came in. We moved over for a while to telephone surveys, but that wasn't ideal, so are putting in hand emails with a short survey.

It would be pointless to us if those came back with only full marks as we wouldn't learn from them. Ultimately we see the surveys as way of finding out where we have problems and putting them right. If a client doesn't like us they'll not only never come back, but they'll tell ten other people as well. We'd rather know at early stage that there are issues.

What it boils down to is - please don't tar all surveys with the same brush. Some may be for genuine reasons.

I see you used the term "clients." I presume you're not in a retail/food service field? What I'm talking about are the surveys in retail and food service, which have been used exactly as I described by every establishment that I and my friends have worked for.

[Calistoga]

On the same kind of note, I've recently started getting PHONE CALLS the day after a hospital visit where the receptionist basically asks me all those types of questions. To me this is like...300 times worse, because I feel bad saying "Well honestly, the doctor I saw was horrible" to an actual person.

[DottyG]

Sophie, I just thought of something else.  A lot of times, the survey doesn't ask for the name of an employee.  And there have even been times when there's not a question for the date/time or anything else that could possibly be linked to a specific person.

So if a negative one is completed, how is one employee hurt by it?  If they're punishing everyone that works there at all times of the day or night for survey with a 9 instead of a 10 on it, the place has more problems to deal with than my little 9.

[DottyG]

It seems to me that the companies could save on the cost of these surveys and actually give themselves all raises with the money, if that's the final intent anyway.  If all they want is a bonus check, skip the middleman and the farse of getting the customers' opinions.

[Twik]

Yes, but that overlooks the "Dilbert Principle". This way, they *feel* that they are doing something useful, even though they're not.