Survey Software, Web Survey, Online Surveys, and Enterprise Feedback Management solutions from Vovici

Your email:
   

Welcome to the Listening Post!

Your single source for everything Voice of the Customer (VoC) and Customer Experience (CxP). And, don’t forget you can follow us on twitter @vovici, or come check us out on Facebook and join the Vovici Network on LinkedIn.

 

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Net Promoter Score (NPS) Criticisms and Best Practices

 

The Net Promoter Score®, popularized by Fred Reichheld in his book The Ultimate Question: Driving Good Profits and True Growth, is one of the simplest loyalty measures. Customers are asked "How likely is it that you would recommend us to a friend or colleague?" and then provide a rating from 0 ("Not at all likely") to 10 ("Extremely likely").

The measure is called the "net promoter" score, because detractors are subtracted from promoters, to provide the estimate of how many more promoters than detractors the organization has. Detractors are defined as respondents rating their likelihood to recommend 6 or less, with promoters only those who rated their likelihood a 9 or 10 (respondents who selected 7 or 8 are considered neutral). The NPS measure can run from -100% (0% promoters, 100% detractors) to 100% (100% promoters, 0% detractors), with typical measures in the 30-40% range.

NetPromoter

Traditional customer-satisfaction measures typically omitted willingness to recommend, instead focusing on aspects like perceived value, customer satisfaction, corporate image, and rational and emotional commitment (see the ACSI model).

Avis, HP and IBM are among the many prominent adopters of NPS. The benchmark is popular for its simplicity, and Reichheld claims it correlates to company growth. Critics contend that it doesn't, that its 11-point scale has lower predictive validity than other scales, that the segmentation of promoters/neutrals/detractors is arbitrary and that other questions may be better predictors of growth rates:

  • Not the Most Important Customer-Satisfaction Question - "We find no support for the claim that Net Promoter is the 'single most reliable indicator of a company's ability to grow' (Netpromoter.com 2006; Nicks 2006). Although we do not have access to the raw data from which these claims were made, we were able to compare some of the exemplar cases of Net Promoter with the ACSI, which Reichheld (2004) reports does not correlate with growth. Instead, we found that when making "apples-to-apples" comparisons, Net Promoter does not perform better than the ACSI for the data under investigation... The clear implication is that managers have adopted the Net Promoter metric for tracking growth on the basis of the belief that solid science underpins the findings and that it is superior to other metrics. However, our research suggests that such presumptions are erroneous. The consequences are the potential misallocation of resources as a function of erroneous strategies guided by Net Promoter on firm performance, company value, and shareholder wealth." - Timothy L. Keiningham, Bruce Cooil, Tor Wallin Andreassen, & Lerzan Aksoy, "A Longitudinal Examination of Net Promoter and Firm Revenue Growth"
  • Doesn't Accurately Differentiate Promoters and Detractors - "The rule-of-thumb score classes proposed by Reichheld (promoters are those respondents who give a likelihood of recommendation of 9 or 10 while the detractors give 6 or less) are not supported statistically, mask important changes and potentially mislead management that there is negative NPS when this may not be the case." - Ken Roberts, Forethought Research Australia. Further, the standard NPS question itself is unipolar (willingness to recommend) but Reichheld's analysis treats it as bipolar (willing to detract vs. willingness to promote).
  • Less Accurate than Composite Index of 3 Questions - "In his Harvard Business Review article ‘The One Number You Need to Grow', Reichheld maintained that since his tests showed propensity to recommend to be the single question that had the strongest statistical relationship to future company performance, there was no point asking any other questions in customer surveys... a single item question is much less reliable and more volatile than a composite index." - Customer Satisfaction - The customer experience through the customer's eyes, Nigel Hill, Greg Roche and Rachel Allen, p. 7
  • Fails to Predict Loyalty Behaviors - "This research examines different customer satisfaction and loyalty metrics and tests their relationship to customer loyalty behaviors. The goal was to test the robustness of the customer-level analysis conducted by Reichheld and Satmetrix, which served as the foundation of their Net Promoter research. Contrary to Reichheld's assertions, the results indicate that recommend intention alone will not suffice as a single predictor of customers' future loyalty behaviors. Use of multiple indicators instead of a single predictor model performs significantly better in predicting customer recommendations and retention." - "The Value of Different Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Metrics in Predicting Customer Retention, Recommendation, and Share-of-Wallet" (Timothy L. Keiningham, Bruce Cooil, Lerzan Aksoy, Tor W. Andreassen, Jay Weiner). NPS is attitudinal rather than behavioral, measuring how many people say they would be likely to recommend, rather than how many are doing so. A large body of research indicates that claimed intention is a better reflection of present attitudes than future behavior (Bird, Ehrenberg and Barnard).
  • Performs Worse than Satisfaction & Liking Questions - The paper "Measuring Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: Improving the ‘Net-Promoter' Score" by Daniel Schneider, Matt Berent, Randall Thomas and Jon Krosnick counterintuitively demonstrates that "satisfaction" and "liking" are better predictors of recommendations than "likelihood to recommend".
  • Performs Worse than Other Scales - Schneider et al also demonstrate that the 11-point scale has the lowest predictive value of any of the scales tested. The authors recommend a 7-point scale with labeled ends and midpoint for the willingness-to-recommend question but also recommend a bipolar scale for a reworded variant.

As a result of this mounting criticism, only 19% of customer-feedback professionals agreed in a March 2008 survey that the NPS is a better predictor of growth than other loyalty questions and indices; 40% were neutral ("Customer Feedback Professionals Do Not Believe the NPS Claims", Hayes).

Despite these criticisms, NPS remains popular because it is well marketed, easy to understand and its model makes intuitive sense: every organization wants more promoters than detractors.

Some suggested best practices for using the Net Promoter Score in your organization:

  • By all means, include the willingness-to-recommend question in your surveys.
  • Use a customer loyalty index consisting of the willingness-to-recommend question with other questions relevant to your business (see Apostle Model Best Practices for one suggested index).
  • Do not use the 11-point scale advocated by Reichheld, which is arbitrary in its assignment of promoters and detractors and has lower predictive validity than other scales. Reichheld shows flexibility as to the actual scale used; his original work showcases Enterprise Rent-A-Car, which uses a five-point scale in their research (treating 5 as promoters). Instead, use the seven-point bipolar scale recommended by Schneider, Berent, Thomas and Krosnick :
How likely is it that you would recommend us or recommend against us to a friend or colleague?
      • Extremely likely to recommend against
      • Moderately likely to recommend against
      • Slightly likely to recommend against
      • Neither likely to recommend nor recommend against
      • Slightly likely to recommend
      • Moderately likely to recommend
      • Extremely likely to recommend
  • As Reichheld suggests, use a follow-up open-ended question to probe why a respondent selected the choice that they did.
  • Calculate the Net Promoter Score primarily for comparison to other firms, but use an arithmetic mean of your responses for internal tracking and benchmarking, as this will provide a more stable measure over time.

If you have time to read one white paper on the Net Promoter Score, read "Measuring Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty: Improving the ‘Net-Promoter' Score". Its authors include Jon Krosnick, the foremost researcher on questionnaire design, and Matthew Berent, Staff Survey Researcher with Intuit, which is one of the firms often cited for its use of NPS.

Update (9/09/09): Net Promoter Score is a Misnomer 

Comments

Interesting post and good links. 
 
I largely agree with the points made that it can't be trusted as a single measure, and I like the specifics mentioned here. 
 
We actually wrote a post as well on the topic back in January, sparked by an article in Quirks.
Posted @ Friday, June 12, 2009 8:44 AM by David
The devil is in the detail. Whichever scoring system is used, the key is to ask "why did you score us that way" and then analyze those responses. Understanding the key drivers behind satisfaction/advocacy allows action to be taken and products/services to be improved.
Posted @ Friday, June 12, 2009 8:47 AM by Neil Hartley
Jeffrey, 
 
Thanks for a well written post. As you know, I have been an opponent for NPS and just about any other single-metric validation for a long time. There is no way that a single metric, no matter how well worded or researched, will provide a trusty, verifiable view of the company's effectiveness in dealing with clients. 
 
I think that NPS took off the same as any diet fad takes off: it sounds simple, credible, and someone in Wichita KS did it once and lost 20 pounds in 2 weeks. It must work. In addition, if everyone else is doing it, then it cannot be wrong - right? 
 
Fred leveraged his name and position to further a damaging way for companies to measure themselves, and created a method for companies to remain mediocre by comparing their NPS to others and think that they "must be doing it right if everyone else is at the same level". 
 
I wish NPS were to go away so organizations can go back to understanding exactly what it is that they are supposed to measure to ensure their continuity and to retain their customers (I wrote about this on my blog in the last couple of weeks). 
 
Ok, thanks for the forum... getting off the soap box now :) 
 
Esteban
Posted @ Friday, June 12, 2009 8:49 AM by Esteban Kolsky
Companies should not be comparing themselves to other companies. Rather, they should be comparing themselves to how they were yesterday and the day before. 
 
More at Internet Presence Management and Net Promoter.
Posted @ Thursday, July 16, 2009 8:07 AM by Marco
To commenters Pat and Esteban...NPS is just what you say: a single metric. It's not a full-blown, Venus on the halfshell brand, marketing campaign and call center. It's the roots. From that, you then need smart and energetic people to put it into context and make something grow.
Posted @ Tuesday, November 03, 2009 2:27 PM by Denise ds
In adopting best practices for satisfaction surveys, the suggestion to use a 7-pt scale is interesting. NPS (which we have to compute) is really a unipolar question: Not At All Likely to Extremely Likely; which would point to a 5-point scale.  
 
 
 
The 7-point scale suggested here actually asks two questions: "How likely are you to recommend us?" and "How likely are you to recommend against us?". One could argue that this approach "isn't really" NPS.  
 
 
 
In either case, you have the score mapping issue, and I'm more comfortable mapping 5-pt answers to Promoters(5s), "Omits," (4s) and "Detractors"(3,2,1). How would you map the 7-pt answers?  
 
 
 
Posted @ Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:07 PM by Greg Stanford
To Greg: I would caution using a 7-point scale. In my experience people relate better to a 5 or 10 point scale, and therefore their rating will more accurately reflect their views. When deciding which scale to use, we consider the depth of the relationship. For customers that have multiple experiences with the vendor over time, we typically utilize a 10-point scale for more variance. When transactions are typically more infrequent, we utilize a 5-point scale. Additionally, most of our clients implement surveys that begin with the NPS question, but also include additional questions to measure important experiences that will enable their operational team to identify areas of concern.
Posted @ Thursday, January 28, 2010 1:17 PM by Gail Willis
Thanks for the comments, Gail and Greg. I think it is always important to look to the extensive research on rating scale best practices rather than simply trust our past experiences. Five-point, fully labeled unipolar scales have the highest validity and reliability. The issue with NPS is that, as designed, it is a unipolar scale with a lopsided bipolar interpretation - no wonder that of the four scales tested by Keiningham et al it performed the worst.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:13 AM by Jeffrey Henning
I am very glad to get many information about net Promoter to complete my knowledge that will discuss in the class. According to the Score, are there any items in the expanding of theory if the range interval between 0-12. Would you please to tell me why only 0-10? Thank you!
Posted @ Tuesday, March 09, 2010 7:21 AM by Jenry Simanjuntak
i think NPS its just a way to have an idea about the way we are servning our customers, ad i do strongly agree that its important to ask WHY they rated that way, and another thing to consider is to split the question, and ask about the SERVICE (product) / people offering the service.
Posted @ Friday, April 02, 2010 11:58 AM by Luis R
Intent to recommend is a categorical question, not suited to an intensity scale. Moreover, if you don't exclude "non-referrers to banks" or whatever, your stats are just skewed. The NPS scale is double-barreled, since it combines propensity to recommend at all with propensity to recommend Bank of the Poconos.  
I've asked about reco behavior/intent for decades across verticals, often correlating it with other behaviors/beliefs, usually by asking something customized to the audience/brand on the order of: 
Would you recommend X to Y or Z? 
Yes, already have 
Yes, if an opportunity arose 
No, it wasn't worth it 
Maybe - I'm not sure yet  
I don't recommend Xes 
 
Too simple? Well, are you investing in order to create scores above 8, or are you trying to garner recommendations?  
 
 
Posted @ Wednesday, April 07, 2010 10:46 PM by Laurie Gelb
An interesting discussion. I thought it worth submitting some comment on the subject made by Professor Merlin Stone on the Dangers of NPS... <a>http://www.empathy.co.uk/downloadable/157889The%20Dangers%20of%20NPS.pdf<a>
Posted @ Friday, April 23, 2010 7:36 AM by Stuart Lamb
The link doesnt seem to have worked... here is the body of Prefessor Merlin Stone's comment: 
 
 
 
How to ruin you business in three easy letters – the dangers of NPS 
 
Just find out if your customers are promoters - enthusiasts who keep buying from you and urge their friends to do 
 
so too, passives - satisfied but unenthusiastic and easily winnable by competitors, or detractors - unhappy customers 
 
trapped in a bad relationship with you. Use this information to drive your business. So argues Fred Reichheld in 
 
“The ultimate question – driving good profits and true growth”. Subtracting the % of detractors from the % of 
 
promoters gives you a metric you can use to drive your company to achieve higher profits. The measurement is 
 
based on the answer to the question, “How likely is it that you would recommend (the company) to a friend or 
 
colleague?” is on an 11 point scale, with 0-6 being detractors, 7-8 being passives and 9-10 being promoters. One 
 
problem of this measurement approach is that quite different sets of responses can produce the same NPS. Also, if 
 
many of your customers are passives, is that better than most of your customers being detractors or recommenders? 
 
Of course, Reichheld agrees that you should take into account customer profitability, but there are many other 
 
important factors. So, if most customers don’t transact frequently with your company, the opinion of recentlytransacting 
 
customers is presumably more valuable than that of customers who last transacted a long time ago. If 
 
customer value fluctuates, and customers of different value levels tend to associate with each other, then the 
 
opinion of customers of rising value is more important than that of customers of falling value. For example, in 
 
banking, your most loyal customers may be old, traditional and high recommenders, and of declining value. What 
 
use is their recommendation to their friends who have no intention of changing their bank account? Better to have 
 
high net promotion amongst young customers. 
 
Of course, similar criticisms have been leveled at all the simplistic measures which consultants have for years 
 
encouraged large corporations to use, on condition, of course, that the consultants are used to develop a version of 
 
the approach that neutralises the above and other similar problems. And of course, you really do need some overall 
 
and segment profitability indicators to run alongside NPS (or whatever indicator of customer satisfaction you use), 
 
to avoid the situation of buying loyalty by cutting price or giving away too much promotionally. 
 
There is a more serious flaw when it comes to the world of contact centres. Reichheld advocates that the approach 
 
is applied to different departments within a company. So, for example, the sales force might have a low score, the 
 
contact centre a high score. What are the implications of this? Well, if the sales force are under pressure to achieve 
 
their numbers, and are not so keen to hear a customer’s objections, a lot of mis-selling might take place. Guess who 
 
picks up the problem in many cases? The contact centre of course. Does this mean that the either the sales force or 
 
the contact centre should be held accountable for scores, as recommended by Reichheld? My belief is that this 
 
would tempt contact centres to use the “who sold you this, then?” approach to curry favour with customers. 
 
Of course, many companies have adopted NPS and claim to be satisfied with it. Some claim to have used NPS to 
 
manage their company towards increased profits and customer loyalty. Not surprisingly, little publicity is given to 
 
companies that paid big sums to consultants to implement the approach and discovered that it did not help them 
 
determine what to do to improve the score, still less those who found that a rise in NPS was just a lagged indicator 
 
of customer satisfaction which arrived too late for them to steer their company by it. Most amusing of all, a recent 
 
Australian study showed that in many sectors, nearly all companies (mostly very profitable) had substantially 
 
negative scores, while Australian holiday destinations are massively positive, with one exception (a town which is 
 
not positioned as a strong holiday destination!). This seems more a reflection of Australian culture – we’ve known 
 
for some time that Aussies don’t love their large companies, particular mobile telephone companies and banks. 
 
My conclusion – NPS is like the Copernician theory planets had circular orbits. Until it was discovered by Kepler 
 
that their orbits were elliptical, complex additional circles were added (by assuming that a planet went round in a 
 
small circle, the centre of which in turn orbited the sun in a circle). NPS requires so many caveats and qualifications 
 
that claiming it to be “The ultimate question” is intellectually dishonest. It is a useful but not essential “focusing” 
 
question, amongst the many others we need to ask and answer about customers, their value, satisfaction with and 
 
attitudes to the many different aspects of what we do to or with them. 
 
Professor Merlin Stone is a Professor of Marketing at 
 
Bristol Business School
Posted @ Friday, April 23, 2010 7:56 AM by Stuart Lamb
This is a very old debate and misses the point of NPS. The segmentation of Promoters, Passive, Detractors allows an organization to focus on doing the right thing to improve the customer experience which subsequently improves growth through retention, repurchase and referrals.  
 
 
 
The reason why business leaders have adopted Net Promoter in mass is because it takes customer satisfaction measurement out of market research and into the operations of the business. Can anyone argue that "willingness to recommend" is a higher bar then "satisfaction"?  
 
 
 
Well after the original research, many companies are seeing the results. You can learn more about these success stories at netpromoter.com.
Posted @ Thursday, April 29, 2010 8:06 AM by Deborah Eastman
AMAMR virtual conference preso on DIY research trends shared that the popularity of NPS, which is much easier for organizations to do themselves, has reduced demand for traditional customer loyalty research services. Yikes! I definitely see a way for the two to co-exist and see the DIY loyalty research trend shifting back again once organizations realize that having a really cool tool doesn't replace a holistic approach to research...I use NPS within larger studies so my clients have 'a number' to refer to and to benchmark themselves, but the meat of their insights comes from other data we collect for them. 
Thx as always for stimulating interesting conversations, Jeffrey!
Posted @ Saturday, June 26, 2010 2:25 PM by Jen Berkley
I believe the NPS is a useful tool when used in the right manner. Follow up questions are key to driving success with this process. The other key, which is sad that many do not follow, is utilizing the feedback given and taking corrective action right then and there, otherwise NPS just becomes a number. Knowing your customer's business will also drive success. And, as someone said earlier, having enthusiastic, energetic people who are gathering this information and developing a relationship with the customer, turns the NPS to something more than just a survey and definetly tangible. 
 
Another important item to take note of, is finding out what the customer's rating scale is; by that I mean what do they think is a 10. We have people state "I never rate anything a ten." It could be assumed, therefore, that his 9 is a 10. Once again, the correct follow up question can come in to play here. 
 
I agree when used as a stand alone measurement, it could be a precarious base for a company, but using it with the right tools, people, and matrix, can produce value for the company and customer.
Posted @ Thursday, August 26, 2010 11:36 AM by Danielle Saullo
Over the years, I've become a fan of Reichheld's approach. In spite of the numerous criticisms mentioned above, the NPS does provide a management metric that is easy to understand by all parties and can thus be operationalized without asking frontline employees to earn a Ph.D. 
 
I often compare NPS to the analog speedometer on older cars' dashboards. Does it measure instantaneous velocity in all situations? No. Could it be more precise? Yes. Does it provide the information needed to do its job - absolutely. A quick glance and you know whether you are traveling too fast, too slow or just about right. And then you can make appropriate adjustments based on the feedback. 
 
So too with NPS. Better to have a measure that's approximately right but being used and fine tuned throughout the company than to have a perfectly precise measure that can only be implemented by an army of marketing researchers. 
 
Andy Perkins 
The Satisfaction Questionnaire Blog
Posted @ Tuesday, August 31, 2010 7:44 AM by Andy Perkins
I agree with Andy's comment above. Until there is a better measure, it's tough to beat a properly executed NPS question set. 
 
Criticize all you want, there is no better solution for brevity and usefulness.
Posted @ Friday, October 15, 2010 3:02 PM by Ryan
Informative post. I am an advocate of the NPS myself especially for its use in the health care sector. Of course it is not a tool to be used on its own but the impact of this system is far reaching.
Posted @ Wednesday, December 29, 2010 8:56 AM by Crystal
The NPS sounds like a great idea. My only real concern is that with businesses that have so many hands in the pot on a day-to-day basis who is to be held accountable if the detractors prevail? Are you able to hold someone accountable and potentially fire them for someone's opinion of whether they would recommend or not?
Posted @ Monday, February 14, 2011 2:21 PM by Tim
When I start my carrier in social media.we are help Dunk enfant full to know about the information.As of my knowledge Del.icio.us is the best of social book mark.
Posted @ Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:02 AM by chaususres dunk
Hi, I work in a networking company, and my NPS is always low. How to increase it, and whats the best way to maintain the high score of NPS?
Posted @ Thursday, June 16, 2011 5:39 PM by Athkar Taher
Im really loving this website, and hope this, as well as the excellent article some other  
 
 
 
individuals have written, can help people
Posted @ Saturday, October 29, 2011 1:12 AM by burberry outlet
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Latest Posts

Loading
What's New
Lessons from 2012 Voice of the Customer award winners
VoC on Twitter
Verint Blog
Verint Blog: Read the Latest from the Verint Systems Blog