Being insightful

November 27, 2008

I’ve read the new ‘guide’ on insight and its not a hard read…

My ususal grief is with the quote, that’s reproduced in it:

“A deep ‘truth’ about the customer based on their behaviour, experiences, beliefs, needs or desires, that is relevant to the task or
issue and ‘rings bells’ with target people.”

Government Communication Network’s Engage Programme

I, of course prefer my own version that I’ve produced at ESD-Toolkit and EiP conference:

“Citizen engagement will only occur successfully (providing satisfaction) when insight around the citizen and their community is available, and as a result the resulting service to the citizen is focused upon dealing with the citizen’s needs.”

The partial apology for this appears on page 9:

“While the exact term used in practice may vary, the tools and the principles used for both customer and citizen insight are broadly the same.”

So, why don’t we stick to calling them citizens?

On page 10 of the guide is a use of customer insight from Westminster City Council where they have conducted targeted surveys of customers shortly after they have accessed council services to identify tangible ways in which each service could be improved and gauge customer satisfaction. Since starting in 2006, 130 improvements have been implemented, which is an excellent example of what I’m trying to capture in my research.

In the last couple of days I’ve added still more products to my list of NI14/satisfaction systems and company-table-v2 is now available. One of them CRT Ltd have an interesting report of research on their site – it doesn’t appear to have been published yet, so I can’t point you to it in a journal – but it states that:

“The vast majority of shoppers were happy to give customer feedback, but didn’t know where they could on the proviso that it met the 5 minute limit rule. 80% of those surveyed wished to give feedback on exit or by the counter. This represents a great opportunity for retailers and service providers to hear fresh customer satisfaction views. Within the customer rules – it must be: Onsite
Quick
Visible
At the end of the transaction ”

 

Thompson & Sheth, Coventry University, 2008″

 


Going critical!

November 25, 2008

It’s just out, and despite its few pages and quite large download size (>1Mb) I haven’t read the final version yet.

Yes its: “insight: understanding your citizens, customers and communities” – the report from RSe commissioned by the IDeA, that incorporates the ‘wholesome’  bits from IDeA Community of Practice online conference in the summer, plus added feedback and examples from those who had anything to provide.

The picture of “babushka” on the cover coincides nicely with the other document I was linking it to: “Critically Classifying: UK E-Government Website Benchmarking and the Recasting of the Citizen as Customer” by Benjamin Mosse and Edgar A. Whitley of the Information Systems Group at LSE. The version I’ve just read is from the latest “Info Systems Journal” but I’ve since found a working paper on the LSE web site and a conference paper from 2004 or thereabouts. Not easy reading, even for me with a first degree in philosophy, along with many hours working on Heidegger and his continental brothers and sisters, but inline with the “babushka”, Mosse & Whitley use the onion skin analogy to describe Heidegger’s Ge-stell theory , the selective or uncritcal representation of the real world and how web site benchmarking can become caught up in this!  They have also picked up on the danger of using the citizen as customer metaphor, which was a bee in my metaphorical bonnet throughout the IDeA online conference, although I was deriving my argument from older philosophers, the Greeks, but I have also employed Hirschman’s theory of exit, voice and loyalty and other sources! They also pointed me to a lot more reading on the customer versus citizen debate.

I do hope the IDeA report is easier going…


Sayonara satisfaction

November 21, 2008

I have to thank Mark Stephens for posting the link to the interesting piece (below) on the NI14 online community on the IDeA web site.

I wasn’t too keen on the concept of eel collagen makeup, but I don’t have to wear it, however the company and its management methods sound fascinating. After several bad business experiences over the years they’ve made a success and primarily because the customer is made king and that has had the effect of empowering the employees. The thought of a senior manager ringing a customer back within ten minutes from the sniff of a complaint to sort things out obviously has the desired effect, along with their associated community and environmental policies. The staff manually log 8000 communications a day, which are all reviewed by corporate maangement and which generate 400 suggestions for improvement, for which action plans are created. They are making positive use of complaints. Read it for yourself:

http://www.evolvingexcellence.com/blog/2008/10/jke-day-2-saishunken-cosmetics—customer-care-trumps-a-factory.html?cid=139869522#comments


Viewing the market

November 19, 2008

Having mentioned GovMetric and Mavis over recent months I felt it fair to list the other suppliers of systems specialising in NI14 and/or satisfaction, other than the pure customer relationship management (CRM) systems that have been adapted to record ‘avoidable contact’. If anybody knows any other systems, please let me know. I’m not saying that any are any good, and I know some are very expensive and some quite limited but one of these days I’ll prepare a comparison chart:

www.singularity.co.uk

www.opinion-8.com

www.rostrvm.com

www.govmetric.com

www.mavisnet.com

www.opalresponse.com

Another two added on the 20th November:

http://www.iizuka.co.uk/service-delivery-transformation.html

http://counciltracker.u-l.org.uk/home/index.php

A brief comparison table added  as a PDF 21 November 2008: company-table


California dreaming

November 18, 2008

Considering further Wendy’s presentation at the EiP conference about Egg and my own dilemna in attempting to develop a parimonius model, I came across a relatively recent piece from the University of California campus at Berkeley: “Bridging the ‘Front Stage’ and ‘Back Stage’ in Service System Design” by Glushko and Tabas.

In my own presentation at the EiP conference I bemoaned the use of sophistry or semantics in achieving practical service models but I find the paper mentioned introducing some more, having highlighted the problem, but in this case I can forgive it because they explain their usage.

In fact one might compare the “moments of truth” they describe with the statement:

   “A deep ‘truth’ about the customer based on their behaviour, experiences, beliefs, needs or desires, that is relevant to the task or issue and ‘rings bells’ with target people.”

  Government Communication Network’s Engage Programme

Ah, the wonders of marketing speak! Give me IT gobbledegook anytime…

However, I consider this a useful thought model that sees e-government from a “systems thinking” perspective.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.