If there is one sine qua non condition for guaranteeing the ROI of Customer Experience studies, it is to maximize their actionability, by involving the teams concerned in the exploitation of the results, and why not even upstream in the design of the metrics. This is the key conviction developed here by Lea König and Truong Nguyen (OpinionWay), who outline the approaches that can be used to achieve this ambition.

MRNews: What are the most striking trends in the needs expressed by brands in terms of Customer Experience?

Truong Nguyen (OpinionWay): We need to clarify a point of context, the fact that Lea and I co-direct OpinionWay’s Mystery Shopping activity. We are therefore particularly interested in the question of quality of service and the experience that brands deliver to their customers, specifically at all points of contact. Most of our clients work in Retail/Commerce departments, and not very often on the Insights/ Market research side. They are very business-oriented, and their No. 1 obsession is the actionability of research results.

Lea König: The first and most obvious development is that brands have gradually shifted their expectations of sales teams. The « relational » component is taking precedence over the transactional dimension. In the past, sales teams were expected to deliver sales first and foremost. Today, they still ask them to sell, but also and above all to ensure the quality of the connection established with customers. This has important repercussions…

The first and most obvious development is that brands have gradually shifted their expectations of sales teams. The « relational » component is taking precedence over the transactional dimension (…). This has major repercussions…

Which ones?

TN: The first consequence is that brands are increasingly concerned with consumers’ emotions. How do they feel? What memories do they retain of their experiences? This, of course, has a major impact on research. We need to take an interest in these emotions, but also understand them by grasping their causes. This means that our data collection must be very « facts and feelings » oriented. This is essential if we want the information to be « actionable » for our interlocutors.

The first consequence is that brands are increasingly concerned with consumers’ emotions (…). This, of course, has a major impact on research. We have to take an interest in these emotions, but also understand them by grasping their causes.

LK: A second consequence is that brands are asking us more and more for guarantees about the « representativeness » of the people responding to our surveys. When we talk about their perceptions, there must be no doubt as to whether they are in this or that income bracket, or about the nature of the brands they are customers of… This has also led us to rethink the way we interview consumers. To capture their emotions, we need to put them in the right frame of mind, using tips to get them to commit to their answers. We also need to treat them with great care, especially when it comes to open-ended questions. This has led us to do a great deal of research, via AI, on the subject.

A second consequence is that brands are asking us more and more for guarantees as to the « representativeness » of the people responding to surveys. 

Do you see any other notable changes in brands’ needs?

TN : The development of omnichannel sales is an important phenomenon to take into account. Where we used to focus on what was happening on a specific channel, physical stores in particular, we now have to integrate the fact that customer journeys are more often than not omnichannel, with all that this implies for them as well as for the brands.

The development of omnichannel is an important phenomenon to take into account. 

Is ROI a major concern for your contacts?

LK: Yes, absolutely. And this is largely for the reasons we mentioned in the preamble. Unlike the people who work in research, most of the people we talk to work in profit centers. As a result, they have a strong and natural orientation towards operations and business. They buy research that they know will have a real ROI for them.

Most of our contacts work in profit centers. As a result, they have a strong and natural orientation towards operations and business. They buy research that they know will have a real ROI for them.

TN: For a study to have an ROI, the first condition is that it be used. This brings us full circle to the « actionability » requirement we mentioned earlier. For our part, this encourages us to constantly ask ourselves who the end-user will be. It could be a marketing manager, a sales manager… Our aim is to engage them, taking into account the context in which they can act and make decisions.

For a study to have an ROI, the first condition is that it be used. This brings us full circle to the « actionability » requirement already mentioned.

Let’s come to this key question: what prisms do you think should be used to make the best diagnoses of these issues?

LK: Our vision is that it is imperative to combine the measurement of opinions – or more broadly, perceptions – with the observation of facts, and in particular behavior.

TN: This applies to consumers, but also to the brand itself. We ask our contacts and/or the managers concerned about their intentions. What do they concretely expect from their contact personnel? What selling ceremony have they defined? How do they think this differs from the practices of the industry’s leading brands? Which brands, if any, do they consider to be good benchmarks, even in remote sectors? Once we have the answers to these questions, we can go out into the field to see and measure what’s actually happening. This is the mission we entrust to what we call « inPulsers », investigators who play the role of « mystery shopper ». They interact with the staff in contact with a very open interview guide, but in this way they have precise indications of what they need to observe. If the brand’s intention is to be associated with technical expertise, pedagogy, but also with a form of kindness, research needs to validate that this is the case. This also applies to what competitors are doing. Here again, it’s important to observe the facts to make sure what’s realistic, and to rule out false impressions. The strength of the inPulsers is also that we bring them together in focus groups, post-field, to debrief their experiences in the presence of the brand.

Our vision is that it is imperative to combine the measurement of opinions – or more broadly, perceptions – with the observation of facts, and in particular behavior (…). This applies to consumers, but also to the brand itself.

Don’t brand intentions run the risk of being out of step with customer expectations?

LK: It’s imperative that the design of the target customer experience be defined with these in mind. The systems we are talking about are therefore intended to be part of a more « global » knowledge base, complementing studies carried out on customer expectations and NPS-type studies in particular. We should point out, however, that we work a great deal in the luxury goods sector, where players are keen to display their uniqueness, and can therefore take quite « proactive » options. We also have to take this into account.

Beyond diagnostics, how do you help brands optimize their customer experiences?

TN: We rely heavily on a system we’ve designed with this in mind, which we call « Voice of Teams ». The first step in this approach is to interview front-line staff, using what we’ve learned from our inPulsers. We seek to understand the customer experience that these teams believe they deliver. And also the obstacles they experience. If they’re not putting into practice something important in the target experience, we need to understand why. Is it because practical conditions prevent them from doing so? Because they’re not well trained to do so? Or simply because they don’t believe in it? The answers to these questions are extremely enlightening as to the nature of the corrective actions to be implemented.

Your approach is to compare the brand’s intentions with what is actually put into practice with consumers. Isn’t this a way of countering the abuses we sometimes see in the use of NPS? …

LK: That’s one way of looking at it. When salespeople ask customers to rate them well, simply because they are incentivized on these indicators, it means that the measurements are completely misused. This must be avoided at all costs…

TN: These excesses are possible. But we shouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. The NPS remains a powerful and enlightening tool, not only in terms of its metrics, but also via the answers to open-ended questions, which provide valuable indications for action. It gives customers a voice. But like any tool, it must be used wisely by brands. And it needs to be combined and « correlated » with other observations to achieve the right level of actionability. Our intention is not to say that we need to start from scratch with the programs we have mentioned, such as Voice of Teams or inPulsers. But that they can make a significant contribution when combined with other Voice of the Customer-type tools such as NPS or mystery-shopping studies. This is what enables teams to have a synthetic vision, with a key KPI like NPS, but also to have the « steps » to identify what to act on.

The NPS remains a powerful and enlightening tool, not only through its metrics, but also through the responses to open-ended questions, which provide valuable indications for action. It gives customers a voice. But like any tool, it must be used wisely by brands.

You mentioned the use of open-ended questions in NPS approaches. Isn’t it particularly difficult to use them properly?

LK: Yes, but artificial intelligence and what we call ‘Large Language Models’ have enabled us to make considerable progress. After a great deal of testing and experimentation, we were able to identify a truly effective multilingual solution, which has the capacity to spontaneously propose groupings of ideas. While remaining agile in its (mutual) enrichment with our analysts.

Is there anything else you’d like to add, especially for the brands’ teams?

TN: If there’s one piece of advice we think is important, it’s to involve front-line staff as much as possible in both the development and operation of these Customer Experience systems. On the other hand, what you absolutely must avoid is the famous « tyranny of metrics » that Jerry Z. Muller describes in his book. Muller’s book, which we highly recommend reading. Otherwise, as the author shows with numerous examples, you’ll very quickly end up with the wrong end of the stick. Metrics should not be an end in themselves, but an aid to better action in the service of both customers and the company.

 FOR ACTION 

– Interacting with the interviewee: @ Lea König and @ Truong Nguyen