Page 390 - Marketing Management
P. 390

DESIGNING AND MANAGING SERVICES | CHAPTER 13         367



           lower-profit tiers may get more fees, stripped-down service, and voice messages to process their
           inquiries.
              When the recent recession hit, Zappos decided to stop offering complimentary overnight shipping
           to first-time buyers and offer it to repeat buyers only. The money saved was invested in a new VIP
                                                53
           service for the company’s most loyal customers. Companies that provide differentiated levels of
           service must be careful about claiming superior service, however—customers who receive lesser treat-
           ment will bad-mouth the company and injure its reputation. Delivering services that maximize both
           customer satisfaction and company profitability can be challenging.
           MONITORING SYSTEMS Top firms audit service performance, both their own and
           competitors’, on a regular basis. They collect voice of the customer (VOC) measurements to probe
           customer satisfiers and dissatisfiers. They use comparison shopping, mystery or ghost shopping,
           customer surveys, suggestion and complaint forms, service-audit teams, and customers’ letters to
           the president.
              We can judge services on customer importance and company performance. Importance-performance
           analysis rates the various elements of the service bundle and identifies required actions.  Table 13.2
           shows how customers rated 14 service elements or attributes of an automobile dealer’s service
           department on importance and performance. For example,“Job done right the first time”(attribute 1)
           received a mean importance rating of 3.83 and a mean performance rating of 2.63, indicating that
           customers felt it was highly important but not performed well. The ratings of the 14 elements are
           divided into four sections in   Figure 13.5.
           •   Quadrant A in the figure shows important service elements that are not being performed at
               the desired levels; they include elements 1, 2, and 9. The dealer should concentrate on improv-
               ing the service department’s performance on these elements.




             TABLE 13.2     Customer Importance and Performance Ratings for an
                            Auto Dealership


                                                         Mean             Mean
             Number                                      Importance       Performance
             Attribute     Attribute Description         Rating a         Rating b
                1          Job done right the first time    3.83             2.63

                2          Fast action on complaints        3.63             2.73
                3          Prompt warranty work             3.60             3.15
                4          Able to do any job needed        3.56             3.00
                5          Service available when needed    3.41             3.05
                6          Courteous and friendly service   3.41             3.29
                7          Car ready when promised          3.38             3.03
                8          Perform only necessary work      3.37             3.11
                9          Low prices on service            3.29             2.00
               10          Clean up after service work      3.27             3.02
               11          Convenient to home               2.52             2.25
               12          Convenient to work               2.43             2.49
               13          Courtesy buses and cars          2.37             2.35
               14          Send out maintenance notices     2.05             3.33

             a
             Ratings obtained from a four-point scale of “extremely important” (4), “important” (3), “slightly important” (2), and “not im-
            portant” (1).
             b
             Ratings obtained from a four-point scale of “excellent” (4), “good” (3), “fair” (2), and “poor” (1). A “no basis for judgment”
            category was also provided.
   385   386   387   388   389   390   391   392   393   394   395