Methods for assessing customer satisfaction with a service. Modern methods of studying customer satisfaction. Research on consumer expectations

“Customer satisfaction is the overall assessment of the experience of companies' customers in purchasing and using products, services or services provided by those companies.”

The ultimate goal of customer satisfaction research is to retain repeat customers. There are various approaches to measuring customer satisfaction: national customer satisfaction indices (American, Swiss and European) have been developed on a national scale. In preparation for joining the WTO, a Russian consumer satisfaction index was created, which is made up of three indicators (general satisfaction, comparison of satisfaction with customer expectations and ideal ideas about the product and service). In individual industries, these indicators are calculated with different weights. The “comparison with expectations” indicator is based on a direct comparison of the service received with the consumer's expectations, and the “comparison with the ideal” indicator is based on his personal ideal ideas about the product or service. A 10-point system is used to evaluate the answers.

Having bought a product, the consumer will be either satisfied or dissatisfied with it. If the product meets the expectations, the consumer is satisfied, if it exceeds them, the consumer is very satisfied, if it does not meet them, he is unsatisfied. Satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the product will affect the subsequent behavior of the buyer. If satisfied, the buyer is likely to buy the product next time. In addition, a satisfied customer tends to share favorable product reviews with others. Attracting a new customer is much more difficult than keeping an old one, and the best way to keep one is to satisfy.

In case of dissatisfaction, the buyer can: refuse to use the product, return it to the seller, write a complaint to the company; contact a lawyer or some group that may be able to help him achieve satisfaction; just stop purchasing this product in the future. Plus, a dissatisfied customer is more likely to share their disappointment with other potential customers. In all cases, the salesperson who fails to satisfy the customer loses something.

The satisfaction survey process measures overall satisfaction with a product (service) and satisfaction with the attributes of a product or service, which are identified either through expert judgment or through qualitative research.

Customer satisfaction methodological surveys fall into two categories:

1. The first method is comparative, when the quality of products or services is compared with competitors or with some kind of ideal.
2. The second method is non-comparative, when the quality of products or services is broken down into components, and consumers evaluate the satisfaction of each of the components and its importance.

Customer satisfaction surveys are conducted using both qualitative and quantitative research.

Example 45. Key indices for assessing the level of satisfaction for a qualitative assessment of customer satisfaction in a retail store:

price level, including in comparison with competitors;
breadth and depth of the assortment;
additional services;
professionalism of staff, friendliness and willingness to help;
store location and transport accessibility;
overall satisfaction with the store;
loyalty (the only store for me, the first for me, an obligatory of several key ones, the intention to make repeat purchases in this store, the intention to recommend).

Example 46. Project for a quantitative study of the level of customer satisfaction in the automotive industry

Purpose of the study: to prepare an information base for making decisions on improving a certain model or level of service provided, including the launch of new services, as well as to increase sales.

Research objective: to identify the degree of customer satisfaction in the following areas: car; purchase and after-sales service.

Object of research: the opinion of car owners regarding the services provided by a car dealer.

Sample size and structure: the sample size depends on the size of the target audience (car owners of cars of a certain brand purchased / produced in a certain period of time). The sample structure depends on the target audience of a particular car brand.

Key parameters of automotive customer satisfaction survey:

identification of common problems during vehicle operation;
detailed analysis of the interior (dashboard, interior upholstery, color, quality of plastic);
detailed analysis of the exterior (design of the body, wheels and tires, color, car optics);
identification of shortcomings in the driving properties of the car (suspension, engine, handling, braking system, maneuverability);
assessment of the general level of comfort of the car (options, airbags, radio quality, functionality of sensors and devices);
revelation of deficiencies in the service of the seller's salon when selling a car;
identification of problems with the car service (service station work schedule, communication culture and personnel qualifications).

The customer satisfaction survey took place in two stages.

Qualitative stage. At this stage of the study, a series of focus groups are carried out to identify common problems when using a car or visiting a specific service center. Consumers are recruited for the car brand of interest, which has been in operation from 6 weeks to two years.

Quantitative stage. At this stage of the research, formalized personal interviews are carried out, within the framework of which typical problems and shortcomings of a car or a service center are identified. At this stage, the problems and shortcomings identified at the focus group stage are investigated.

At the first stage of work on measuring the level of customer satisfaction, good results are obtained by using qualitative methods. Deep penetration into the problem allows us to compile a list of the most significant product evaluation criteria for consumers, about which he expresses his satisfaction or dissatisfaction. It also identifies priorities in the needs and expectations of consumers, trends in needs in the future. At the second stage of the work, quantitative research is carried out, the toolkit of which includes two main blocks of questions: an assessment of the key characteristics of the product that form the satisfaction (dissatisfaction) of consumers and an assessment of the degree of importance of each of these characteristics for the respondent.

The satisfaction rating includes the following indicators:

1. Trust in the company / brand / product.
2. Loyalty to the company / brand / product.
3. Factors affecting satisfaction.

The degree of trust is determined by several criteria that are the basis for making a purchase. Among them are the past experience of using the goods of this company, the history and image of the brand, the correspondence of advertising information to the real state of affairs in the organization, etc. All these criteria have different weight in the overall assessment of trust, therefore it is necessary to focus on the weighted average value, as well as to correlate it with similar indicators from competitors. Usually, trust develops after the first contact with the company and is based on two or three dominant factors, which will determine the likelihood of subsequent purchases.

Loyalty - a positive attitude of consumers towards everything related to the activities of the organization, products and services produced, sold or provided by the organization, to the company's personnel, the image of the organization, trade marks, logo, etc.

Table 14 shows indicators that determine behavioral and perceived loyalty.

Complex loyalty does not have its own separate indicators, as it is a combination of behavioral and perceived loyalty. When conducting research and interpreting the results, one should take into account the dependence of types of loyalty on two groups of factors: the specifics of the industry and the specifics of the consumer (Table 15).

Table 14

Indicators characterizing the types of customer loyalty

Behavioral Loyalty Indicators

Indicators of perceived (perceptual) loyalty

Number of repeat purchases

Share of buyers making a purchase

Duration of cooperation Share in the “pocket” - the share of the company's purchases in the total purchases of the client Share in the gross income of the company provided by buyers making repeat purchases The amount or share of the increase in the size of the purchase of the same service (product) over a certain period of time

Insensitivity to an increase in the price of one's own service (product) or to a decrease in prices by competitors The number of additional company products purchased by a consumer in a certain period of time

Relative constancy of the purchase amount for the same service (product) over a certain period of time

Time since last purchase, frequency of visits, customer costs for the period

Satisfaction level Awareness Recommendations (already given and possible)

Image of a brand or company Willingness to purchase other services (products) under this brand Expressed intentions to continue cooperation or change a brand or company Preference for a brand or company through separation from competitors

Table 15

Factors determining the type of customer loyalty

Industry factors determine the general feasibility of customer loyalty management and do not determine the choice of the type of loyalty:

severity of competition. Loyalty management is required only in case of high competition;
stage of the life cycle of the market for a product or service. During the growth phase, new customers are more important, and during the maturity and saturation phases, existing customers;
the degree of differentiation of the product category. In the categories of non-branded goods and services, it is impossible to establish a link between loyalty and profitability, so loyalty management is impractical. On the contrary, for brands, that is, goods and services with a high degree of differentiation, customer loyalty is one of the most important indicators of their strength.

Consumer factors determine the choice between types of loyalty:

switching costs (switching barriers) are terms used in strategic management and marketing to describe the obstacles that a consumer must overcome in order to change the supplier of a product or service. Companies that have been able to create high switching costs by creating switching barriers can track “baseline” satisfaction levels or focus on behavioral loyalty metrics. With low switching barriers, the relevance of managing perceived loyalty increases;
product involvement. The higher the product involvement, the more significant is perceptual, or perceived, loyalty, and, accordingly, the lower its level, the more important is the formation of behavioral and, to a lesser extent, perceptual loyalty;
the frequency of purchases and the frequency of other types of interaction with the seller (for example, contacting technical support) determine the importance of behavioral loyalty.

With a high frequency of purchases, it is necessary to ensure high values \u200b\u200bof indicators for behavioral loyalty, and with low - high values \u200b\u200bof indicators for perceived loyalty;

Number of buyers. If the product is intended for a narrow circle of consumers, then the loss of one customer can be a significant loss for the company, and therefore it is necessary to constantly monitor the satisfaction and brand image (the company's reputation). For goods and services of mass demand, in most cases, you can limit yourself to measuring only behavioral loyalty - a decrease in its level will be a sign that the company has problems related to the perception of consumers of its activities.

To determine the type of loyalty, the classification of industry and consumer factors is used, given in table. sixteen.

Table 16

Situations of choosing the type of loyalty depending on industry and consumer factors

Preference for the type of customer loyalty	Significance of industry and consumer factors
Behavioral loyalty	Weak differentiation of supplier offers Low product engagement High switching barriers High purchase frequency High number of buyers
Perceived (perceptual) loyalty	Infrequent or one-time purchases Large gaps between purchases
Complex loyalty	Medium to strong differentiation of supplier offers High product engagement Low switching barriers Low and medium purchase frequency Limited number of customers

Considering customer loyalty as a consequence of customer satisfaction, a number of authors are developing methods for measuring loyalty. In domestic and foreign practice, it is popular to measure loyalty by the NPS method (Net Promoter Score), which is based on one question: "How likely are you to recommend us to your friends?" The consumer makes a choice on an 11-point scale. According to the results of the answers, all respondents are divided into three groups:

“Promoters” (who gave 9-10 points) - clients who are loyal to the company and are ready to recommend it to their acquaintances (the so-called lawyers);
“Neutrals” (who gave 7-8 points) are passive clients of the company who are generally satisfied with the company, but do not seek to recommend it to others;
“Critics” (who gave 1-6 points) are not satisfied with the company and will not recommend it (perhaps, looking for an alternative).

Loyalty ratio NPS is calculated as the difference between the percentage of “promoters” and the percentage of “critics”. So, if “promoters” are 35%, “neutrals” 50%, “critics” 15%, then the value of the NPS index is 35% - 15% \u003d 20%, respectively. The average value of the NPS index for the FMCG market is 16%.

D. Aaker, a leading specialist in the field of brand management, defines loyalty as “a measure of the consumer's brand loyalty”. In his opinion, loyalty shows the degree to which a consumer is likely to switch to another brand, especially when the chosen brand undergoes changes in price or some other indicators. With increasing loyalty, consumers' propensity to perceive the actions of competitors decreases. Quantitatively, loyalty to a product (brand) can be defined as the attitude of consumers who buy a given product (brand), most often, to consumers who simply buy this product (brand).

To say that a consumer is loyal to a product (brand), he must: Prefer this product (brand) to all others; have a desire to make a second purchase and continue to purchase this brand in the future; be satisfied with the product (brand); be insensitive to the actions of competitors. In addition, in the structure of consumer loyalty, the emotional component should prevail over the rational one.

Also, the degree of loyalty can be characterized as the probability with which the consumer is ready to temporarily accept some unsatisfactory conditions of interaction with the company due to a positive attitude towards it, that is, to maintain commitment. Usually, loyalty is formed in the course of many years of cooperation with a particular company or consumption of a certain product / service, when this experience becomes part of a person's lifestyle and it is difficult for him to change the established foundations.

Satisfaction is determined by the presence of certain qualitative factors, when, in addition to solving any pressing problem, the buyer receives added value from interacting with the company or consuming its products.

Consumer orientation: the market of a producer of services and goods has transformed into a consumer market. Ultimately, the quality of services is assessed only by the consumer and depends on his needs and wishes; In tourism organizations, the marketing of relations with the consumer must be worked out and put on the level of partnership, that is, continuous work with the consumer; It is the responsibility of the travel agency to be interested in the level of customer satisfaction with services! USA (calculations of sociologists): a regular client of a travel agency brings him more than 50 thousand dollars, a restaurant - several thousand, a hotel - more than 100 thousand dollars. Reducing the churn of consumers by only 5% can increase the profit of an organization by 25 -85%

Unsatisfied customers: Spread their negative opinion about the organization, which undermines its image; Resolving customer complaints plays a significant role in keeping them alive for the organization - complaint resolution reduces customer churn from 91 to 18 out of 100;

The most important aspects of the analysis of consumers of travel services, which influence the strategic orientations of travel organizations: Analysis of the purchasing value of a travel product; Segmentation of the tourist services market; Motivation of consumers of tourism services; Analysis of customer satisfaction with the services provided and identification of unmet needs; Consumer attitude to tourism products and tourism organizations; Factors influencing consumers of tourism services and their decision-making process to purchase services.

Approaches and methods of studying, analyzing and assessing consumer satisfaction: transforming consumer expectations into the integral value of the tourist product The integral value of the product produced by the organization is determined by the following factors: Features and properties of the product, no shortcomings; The technical quality of a product, characterized by tangible aspects of the service process (excellent organization, modern equipment, comfortable premises, impeccable appearance of employees, etc.) Functional quality, reflecting the process of direct interaction between the consumer and the organization's personnel.

The ratio of the cost and value of a tourist product for the organization representing it and the consumer: In this case, the value of the product produced by the travel agency is determined by the sum of three components: variable, fixed costs and profit; ... Although this is the accountant's business ...

Determination of the assessment of customer satisfaction with the organization's services on the basis of their survey: Consists of determining the quality indicators of services that most characterize these services from the point of view of consumers; The total number of consumers who indicated each of the selected indicators; For each indicator, the ratio of the number of consumers who indicated this indicator to the total number of consumers is calculated, after which the resulting ratio is multiplied by 100% (that is, the percentage characterizes the assessment of consumer dissatisfaction with this quality indicator);

Study of consumer satisfaction indices using the example of the Swiss index of consumer (customers) satisfaction According to this method, customer satisfaction depends on two main factors: the customer's benefit from the purchased product or service and the customer orientation of the organization - the manufacturer of this product (service); The more important these factors are, the higher the client's benefit from using the product (service), the greater his satisfaction and the higher his assessment of the given product (service), and the higher the organization's focus on the client; The data collection model for building the index includes the following components: specific factors of satisfaction, customer satisfaction, dialogue with the customer, customer loyalty.

Assessment of stakeholder satisfaction with the organization's activities: The organization's stakeholders are the following groups: Customers and end users; Organization employees; Owners (investors): shareholders, individuals or groups, including the public sector, with a specific interest in the organization; Suppliers and partners; Society in the form of various associations and government structures that the organization or its products influence

Methodology of M. Kruglov and G. Shishkov: based on a preliminary assessment of the organization's compliance with the interests of each of the interested parties in three areas: the level of compliance with the requirements; the possibility of non-compliance with the requirements; the absence of risks in case of non-compliance and requirements

Determination of customer satisfaction with the quality of the services provided by the organization The indexation of the degree of customer satisfaction is used, which allows to quantify the contribution to the general opinion of consumers about the quality of the considered components of the product (service); It is based on a survey of consumers regarding the importance (weight) of quality indicators and their assessment, as well as finding several options for assessing consumer satisfaction as separate components of quality and finding a generalized assessment for all components.

It shows a significant contribution of meaningful information obtained while measuring feelings and expectations in relation to the importance of the properties of products and services provided to the consumer. Describes the document formats used to present results that clearly target improvement actions.

Introduction

In accordance with the principles proclaimed in the first section of the document "Mission of BICC General Cable", and with the aim of complementing the quality information system with elements of judgment that allow for process management, focusing on the consumer, in 1996 it was decided to conduct the first serious study on measurement IPM (measurement of customer satisfaction). However, there was a strong belief that the information this index would provide would be of great benefit to the development of strategies to help drive the Spanish market through the development of customer loyalty.

The second study was carried out in 1998, and in such a retrospective, having estimates of the achieved positive effects, one can present the accumulated experience to the society.

Customer Satisfaction Index

Customer Satisfaction Index (IUP)there is an indicator that synthesizes information about the customer's perception of the quality of products and services provided by the manufacturer. The IEP provides information from the client's point of view, while measuring feelings and expectations and allowing the identification of profiles and trends in quality, prioritizing improvement opportunities and motivating them to achieve them. The index takes into account the relative importance of the properties of products and services provided to the consumer.

The calculation of the IEP is based on the assessments made by the clients against a set of quality indicators developed for this purpose. The results of the estimates of these indicators are weighted using weighting factors, and the sum of this weighting is the value of the IEP.

Research base for obtaining IEP

This study took into account the main types of clients, depending on:

their market functions (wholesalers, contractors, utilities, etc.),
sales level (A, B, C ...),
geographical area (Andalusia, Catalonia, Center, North, etc.)

For each type of client, two groups of indicators were established - structural and variables.

Structuralmetrics are metrics that do not change over time and that form a dynamic system for measuring perceived quality. In this case, it is a question of comprehending the level of overall satisfaction with the services provided, supplemented by results related to the degree of importance that the client attaches to these services.
Variablesindicators are those indicators that can change from measurement to measurement in accordance with the needs of the company for specific information. Such indicators can be, for example: opinions and assessments of clients regarding the positive and negative aspects of the services offered; an opinion on future services; knowledge of the most important customer needs that could give rise to new opportunities or hazards; analysis of responses to implemented improvement plans; the image and profile of BICC General Cable for its customers compared to those of its competitors.

Study specifications and report of results

They represent various technical aspects that are included in this type of statistical study and in the content of the reports in which the results are presented.

You can conduct surveys of all customers or a selection of them. In any case, it must be ensured that the procedure used ensures that the results obtained from the sample are representative of all clients. Initially, a survey was prepared to measure the overall perception of satisfaction, but I also wanted to obtain indicators of satisfaction with various quality parameters related to the given product and related services. The information was collected in the course of a general market survey and, therefore, had to include important measurements of the customer's assessments, expectations and perceptions and intentions regarding their future behavior.

General population.The target population for the study was composed of clients in Spain.
Inspection technique.The method used was a double face-to-face interview using survey guidance and structured questionnaires, as well as telephone interviews with structured questionnaires.
Sample.In the course of the study, about 70 face-to-face interviews and 80 telephone interviews of clients were conducted, scattered across different geographic areas.
Sampling error.The margin of error was calculated for the final population with a 95.5% confidence level by type of customer. The total error adopted in the past study was 6.85%.
Sampling system.Choosing the right sample of clients is fundamental. For the first study, it was decided to select a representative set that would take into account different types of clients and different geographic areas. For each typology of clients, the choice was mixed: some were determined in a selective way with the selection of the most representative clients for whom it was important to have information, and the rest of the sample was drawn up in an arbitrary way.

The second study used a methodology to survey groups of the same clients who responded in the first survey. Clients who for some reason left this group were replaced by others with the same typological profile. This shows the importance of the selection and definition of sample components.

Field work.Interviews were conducted by specially trained consultant interviewers.
Presentation of results.Calculations were made in terms of frequencies, arithmetic mean, standard deviation, criterion of statistical significance, and IEP.
The duration of the period.It means the time during which the field work was carried out, which in this case took about 40 calendar days.
Incidents.Incidents that have occurred during the field work are required to be noted because they can help to understand the results, influence them or condition them.
Conclusions and recommendations.Specific conclusions were drawn in relation to various aspects of quality, customer typology, sales volumes, geographic areas. A positioning map was presented, results of comparison with competitors were obtained and areas in which it was necessary to be equal to the best were identified, as well as a general conclusion and recommendations were given.

Indicators

During the study, 21 indicators were used, which were grouped into seven quality factors (Table 1). Clients were asked to rate the importance for them of each of the elements that determine the quality of products or services, almost without assessing the current work of any company. This made it possible to arrange the indicators in order, at the same time establishing the degree of importance of each indicator, and, therefore, to assess the weight of each indicator in the entire group of indicators.

results

Different readings of customer satisfaction indices (IUP).

The results were presented in the form of tables, in which for each indicator the weight, the assigned score and the resulting IUP.Based on the sum of all indicators, a total FTI(Table 1).

Table 1. Table of indicators

Factor	ID. №	Index	The weight	Score	FTI
Products
		Providing technical characteristics Product range Modernization of products Launch of new innovative products
Pre-sale service
		General Product Consulting Consulting on special purpose products
Administrative documentation
	7	Clarity of received invoices
Customer service
		Effectiveness of dealing with incidents and problems Telephone sales service performance Courtesy of staff Staff productivity The effectiveness of the relationship between engineers and wholesalers during sales Ease of making contacts by phone
Industry information
	14	Industry aspects of information
Purchase orders
		Delivery characteristics Completeness of purchase orders Short delivery times Advance warning of non-delivery
Commercial support
		Manufacturer support in commercial promotions Visiting sellers for commercial purposes
Total IEP \u003d 7.45

For clarity, it is very useful to present the results obtained in the form of a histogram, aligning the starting point with the value of the total FTI(fig. 1). Another graph that is helpful too is the comparison FTIdifferent clients based on their typology (Fig. 2).

Figure: 1. Assessment of quality indicators

Figure: 2. Distribution of IEP by type of client

Table and graphs in Fig. 1 and 2 were also used to present the results obtained for each type of client. In this case, it is very interesting to look at the estimates of indicators depending on the type of customers, located on the same graph (Fig. 3). Similar steps can be taken to compare IPM by customer type based on sales and geographic areas.

Figure: 3. Assessment of quality indicators by types of customers

In addition to the results obtained at the general level, the resulting data was processed to obtain a weighted contribution to the result made by each client, depending on the ratio of sales of the same product to the total sales. These results are presented as weighted results.

Another type of information obtained is the comparative presentation of the IEP depending on the degree of customer loyalty to the given company. The degree of commitment to the company was expressed in three gradations: high, medium and low.

Positioning map

Figure: 4. Positioning map: conceptual analysis

A very useful way to analyze the results obtained is to use a positioning map for quality indicators (Fig. 4), along the axes of which the degree of significance of the indicator and the level of satisfaction with it are plotted. Arranging the indicators in four quadrants has the following conceptual value:

High level of relevance and high level of satisfaction.Such indicators need to be maintained, since these are indicators that, while important for determining quality, record a level of satisfaction above average.
High level of importance and low level of satisfaction.These are indicators that need to be improved in the short term. They, being the yardstick of quality, do not satisfy the client at a (relatively) optimal level.
Low level of significance and high level of satisfaction.Probably irrelevant metrics. Metrics that measure value added, mark differentiation from competitors, and can be success factors for a company.
Low significance and low level of satisfaction.Such indicators need to be improved in the medium and long term. These are those indicators to which the consumer does not show a preferential attitude in their assessments, as well as those with a lower degree of satisfaction. IUP.Such indicators over time can give rise to reasons for dissatisfaction depending on the evolution of their importance.

A positioning map is drawn up for general FTI(Fig. 5) and for each of the considered types of clients. By analyzing the distribution of indicators, with an emphasis on those that are located in the quadrant "should be improved in the near future", one obtains the information necessary for the development of improving actions.

Figure: 5. Map positioning indicators

Comparison with competitors for IEP

In addition to analysis FTIit was decided to clarify the position of BICC General Cable relative to the main competitors in the market for each of the specified indicators. Competitors with whom it would be interesting to compare ourselves were selected, and they were included in the corresponding questionnaires. For each of these competitors, the IEP was calculated and compared with those of the company, which became a source of best practice.

Zone of acceptance of indicators

This zone is an estimate of the relative position of the indicators to the level of quality that users or consumers are willing to accept. Zones are defined by data collected from the group of producers analyzed. The data obtained for each indicator is presented in a graph (Fig. 6), in which the initial data are divided into three zones:

Risk zone.This zone is characterized by levels of perceived quality that are lower than those that the consumer is willing to accept.
Eligibility zone.This zone includes the quality levels that the consumer is willing to accept.
Zone of differences.This area is characterized by quality levels that are higher than expected or required. The indicators located in the difference zone are those indicators that generate added value and, therefore, contribute to the creation of customer loyalty by creating differences (in terms of quality compared to other competitors - ed.).

Figure: 6. Assessment of indicators relative to the zone of acceptance

Opinions

When describing the main parameters of the IEP study, it has already been indicated that the second group of target indicators is formed by variable indicators. A set of questions was drawn up, such as:

What is your opinion on BICC General Cable (positive or negative)?
What are the positive and negative aspects of competing in the market?
What aspects could improve customer relationship with BICC General Cable?
What aspects does the company in question need to improve in its relationship with its customers, and which of these aspects is BICC General Cable capable of handling?
To what extent are certain aspects of concern?
What aspects of the services provided by BICC General Cable are desirable for improvement?
What specific details are of concern?

Habits

Another type of information that the research allowed to obtain is information about the habits and customs of clients. For this purpose, a series of questions was formulated. Here are some of them: “What manufacturers do you work with? Who makes purchasing decisions? What is the application frequency? What is the average inventory level? " etc.

Image

It was also interesting to know the image of both your company and competitors' companies in the eyes of consumers. To this end, questions were drawn up on product properties, known services, purchasing levels, etc.

Conclusion

Measuring the consumer satisfaction index provides an extremely valuable tool for assessing external influences on the client, namely, the quality of products and services that are offered to him. The information provided by these measurements serves as a guide and guidance in developing traffic strategies, not only in terms of customer satisfaction, but also in terms of fostering loyalty in them.

The expectations that were at the beginning of the first study in 1996 were more than fulfilled. As a result, it was decided to take measurements FTIon a regular and periodic basis. The second version of the study was carried out in 1998, which allowed us to see the evolution of the process, the effect of the actions taken on the results of the first study, and trends.

Measurement of the customer satisfaction Index. - 43th EOQ Congress Proceedings, Madrid, 1999, pp. 105-113.

Φ. Rodriguez, Marketing and Logistics Manager,
F. Creus, Quality Manager, Commercial Department, BICCGeneralCable,
Spain

Translation: V.A.Korolkevich

posted in section: Quality Management

find more articles

As you know (see clause 1.7.2), the first among the eight principles of quality management is the principle of "customer orientation". An important condition for the implementation of this principle is monitoring the degree of customer satisfaction of the organization.

The principle of "customer orientation" is now the main condition for the successful development of any organization, since since the 1970s, due to the development of the market, the emergence of a large number of good products, the consumer has the opportunity to choose and determine the requirements for the product and its price. The manufacturer's market, characteristic of the 1950s and 1960s, has transformed into a consumer market.

The objectives of assessing customer satisfaction are as follows.

1. Determination of consumer requirements for the main activities of the organization, including the quality of products, analysis of the dynamics of these requirements.

2. Taking these requirements into account in the design and manufacture of products, at all stages of their implementation and operation, including disposal.

3. Bringing these requirements to the attention of all employees of the organization.

4. Assessment of the competitiveness of products.

5. Development of corrective and preventive actions to improve the QMS, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization.

The most common method for assessing customer satisfaction is the scoring method. Let us show the scheme of application of this method by the example of assessing the opinion of consumers about the work of a school cafeteria.

Table 3.10 shows the intermediate and final results of assessments of the importance for consumers of various types of cafeteria activities (components of the customer satisfaction tree), the quality of these components and the general index of customer satisfaction with the cafeteria.

Hundreds of consumers were asked to rate:

Significance of 9 components of the cafeteria work identified by the supplier (components of the customer satisfaction tree) according to a five-point system (Table 3.8);

The quality of these components (tree components) according to a five-point system (Table 3.9).

Table 3.8. An example of assessing the importance of the components of the organization's work

Columns I and II (see Table 3.10) show the results of a consumer survey on the importance of cafeteria services (tree components) to meet the demands and needs of consumers. Moreover, in column I, the average value of the assessment of the importance of each component of the tree is displayed, and in column II, the significance (weight) of the component for the consumer, corresponding to this assessment, in comparison with other components proposed to him.

As can be seen from the table (see Table 3.10), the quality of the offered food is very important for the visitors of the cafeteria, so all the respondents rated this component of the tree at 5 points. As a result, the average value of the assessment of the importance of food quality also turned out to be 5.

At the same time, the majority of cafeteria consumers do not care what service methods were used, so some of them did not even put down any assessment of this component of the cafeteria's work. When calculating the average value of the assessment, their opinion was taken into account by the number 0, and as a result, the average assessment of the importance of the service method for one hundred respondents turned out to be 0.8. Summing up the average values \u200b\u200bof assessments of all the proposed components of the cafeteria work gave 25. For the subsequent analysis of the survey results and the development of a quality improvement program, it is more convenient to represent the weight of each quality component as a percentage of all others. So, from column II it is clear that the quality of food for the consumer is 20% of all considered components of the quality of the cafeteria, and the methods of service are only 3%.

Table 3.10. An example of a methodology for assessing the quality of an organization's work by consumers

Columns III – VII show the number of respondents who gave one or another rating to the existing quality of the cafeteria. From the analysis of the above data, it becomes clear the low rating score for the importance of service methods given by the consumers of this cafeteria. As can be seen from the table, 73 out of 100 respondents are satisfied with the existing method of serving in the cafeteria, and the remaining 27 are at a loss to answer. Apparently, they do not have the opportunity to compare it with any other. At the same time, in contrast to the passive assessment of the significance of individual components of the tree, all respondents took part in assessing the quality of execution of all components, as evidenced by the figures given in column VIII. Column IX gives the average of the café quality scores for each tree component.

To determine the degree of customer satisfaction with the proposed product, customer satisfaction indices are usually used, calculated according to the results of a consumer survey on the quality of the product, which he assesses on a five-point system. The degree of customer satisfaction is assessed using three indices, represented by figures enclosed in brackets (see Table 3.9): (1) - ratings "bad" and "unsatisfactory"; (2) - rating "satisfactory"; (3) - ratings "good" and "very good". This indexing allows you to formalize the organizational work of the company based on the needs and expectations of the user.

For the subsequent analysis of consumer satisfaction, the survey results are usually presented in one of three ways (see Table 3.9, a, b,from). The transition from the absolute values \u200b\u200bof the assessments given by the respondents to their percentage in meeting consumer expectations is shown in Fig. 3.2.

Figure: 3.2. Graphs of the correspondence of the absolute values \u200b\u200bof the consumer's assessments of the degree of their satisfaction as a percentage without taking into account (and ) and given (b)satisfaction index (1)

It is in accordance with the methods of presentation given in the table above (see Table 3.9) (a, b, c)survey results are formed columns XI-XII in the following table (see table. 3.10), where in columns X and XI the degree of customer satisfaction is presented in percentage terms, and in column XII - in absolute values.

When organizing the collection and processing of information about customer satisfaction, the recommendations given in.

Customer Satisfaction and Assessment

Principles are formulated and a customer satisfaction management model is developed. To measure customer satisfaction, it is proposed to apply the profile method, in which indicators are grouped according to similar features; the profile method determines the complex and integral values \u200b\u200bof the measured value. An example of measuring the level of satisfaction of consumers of an automobile plant is given.

Organizations today are investing heavily in programs that aim to retain customers as they depend on maintaining and increasing the company's profits. For the successful operation and development of the organization, it is necessary to accurately understand the needs of its client and the degree of his satisfaction. The ISO 9004: 2000 quality management system standard prescribes mandatory monitoring of the satisfaction of its own consumers (clients, customers, buyers). A methodologically perfect system for assessing customer satisfaction is an effective tool for forecasting and increasing the competitive position of a business. Measuring customer satisfaction provides an enterprise with the information it needs to maximize the economic impact of having satisfied and loyal customers. Measuring customer satisfaction allows you to:

1) determine consumer needs and the relative importance of these requests;
2) understand how consumers perceive your products and the organization as a whole and whether the activities of your organization meet their needs;
3) identify those areas where performance improvements will give the greatest increase in customer satisfaction;
4) identify areas where manufacturer personnel have inadequately set customer priorities;
5) set goals for improving goods and services and control the process of this improvement;
6) increase profits by increasing consumer loyalty and retention.

The experience of companies successfully operating in the market has shown that ensuring customer satisfaction today brings great dividends in the future. For example, IBM has found that a 1% increase in their customer satisfaction rate generates $ 500 million in additional sales over the next 5 years. The world's largest auto concern Toyota has revealed significant differences in financial performance between the best and worst dealers in terms of customer satisfaction (Table 1). It was found that dealers who are most successful in customer satisfaction have significantly higher financial performance than dealers who do not work well for the company's image.

customer satisfaction management

Satisfied consumers from all positions are beneficial to the company, since, firstly, there is a very high probability that they will become regular customers and will help to save money on attracting new customers, and secondly, they are ready to pay a certain margin, since they have already been convinced as a product provided by this organization, thirdly, they will recommend their friends to buy your product. New customers resulting from such recommendations are very beneficial because you don't spend money on acquiring them and they usually become good customers, since existing good customers tend to recommend people like themselves. The Harvard Business School coined the “three Rs” - retention, related sales, and referrals - to underscore the importance of customer retention.

Companies annually lose from 10 to 30% of their consumers primarily due to imperfect systems for meeting their needs. According to J. Campanella, one frustrated buyer can tell an average of 35 more potential customers of the company about his problems, and this secondary effect can have a devastating effect on future sales volumes.

True, F. Kotler gives a more modest figure - 11. But this is not a little, because each of the 11 dissatisfied buyers will tell their friends about it. As a result, the number of potential customers who receive negative information about the company will increase exponentially. A disgruntled customer is damaging the company far more than the money he will no longer spend on its product.

Currently, many domestic companies declare in one aspect or another that their goal is to satisfy the consumer as much as possible. This dictum, in fact, means nothing, since in a competitive economy there is not a single company that seeks to satisfy its customers to the least degree.

To increase the competitiveness of their products, performance results, to retain customers and achieve their loyalty to enterprises, first of all, it is necessary to establish a system for assessing customer satisfaction. According to the American Consumer Society, keeping an old consumer is 5 times cheaper than acquiring a new one. Despite the clear benefits of consumer satisfaction, there is little research in this area. An example of this is the lack of a generally accepted objective methodology for assessing customer satisfaction, managing its level and, as a result, a large number of dissatisfied customers. Many buyers are dissatisfied with the quality of certain domestic goods, and manufacturers continue to produce them without a significant improvement in quality for a long period.

The study of the consumer satisfaction index shows that 25% of buyers are not satisfied or remain unhappy with the purchased goods or services. Even worse, 95% of these buyers prefer not to complain - either because they don't know where, or they don't want to waste energy.

A striking example of the influence of consumer satisfaction on a manufacturer's market positions is the domestic automotive industry. Consumer dissatisfaction with the quality of cars produced by Russian manufacturers led to a decrease in their market share from 68% in 2004 to 22.6% in 2009 (Q1), while the share of imported cars increased from 22 to 51.2% (Fig. 1). The picture could be even sadder for Russian manufacturers, but the "customs umbrella", price advantage and constant financial support from the state are still saving the domestic auto industry from complete collapse. The main reason for the plight of car factories is the low level of management. Over the past 3-5 years, before the start of the economic crisis in the fall of 2008, the financial position of car factories was not bad, there were opportunities to raise the level of quality of products, update the model range, and take into account the requirements of consumers more fully. Unfortunately, there was no significant improvement in the quality of products during this time, the lag in technical level from foreign cars was not overcome, the car service did not improve significantly, the wishes of consumers were not taken into account. As a result, more and more consumers gave preference to foreign cars. Ignoring customer requirements always ends in the same way - business failure.

When problems arise with the PM, enterprises, as a rule, develop their own methods for measuring it. Due to the imperfection of the PM measurement technique, conclusions are sometimes made inadequate to the situation. Unfortunately, for many manufacturers, PM management begins and ends by measuring its level, since this procedure is required by the quality management system. But the results of the assessment should be the beginning of painstaking work to improve all aspects of the enterprise, especially those for which customers expressed dissatisfaction. Based on the monitoring results, successful enterprises not only eliminate problem areas of their activities, but also take measures to anticipate consumer claims. Are there many such manufacturers? Unfortunately, we rarely see products of “exciting quality” when a customer discovers completely unexpected benefits or characteristics in a product that unambiguously lead to deep customer satisfaction.

For example, the Neva-2M walk-behind tractor consumes an average of 0.3 liters of gasoline to process a plot of 10 acres. Extreme fuel efficiency with high reliability causes deep customer satisfaction with this walk-behind tractor.

UE is conditioned by the perception of the product (service) by a specific consumer and the degree to which the real product meets his expectations. It is like beauty: one and the same object may please some, others may not. Each consumer, due to individual differences, makes his own requirements for the object, and the properties of the object are the same for everyone, hence the disagreements in the assessment results. Taking into account this circumstance, we mean consumer satisfaction as an individual assessment category, which is formed as a result of comparing at a specific time a set of indicators of a real "expanded" product (service) with consumer expectations. An "extended" product includes both the essence of the product (level I) and everything that is associated with it (level II). For example, for a car, the essence of a product is a complex of its technical and economic indicators implemented in it, and level II is the quality and development of service, advertising, availability and price of spare parts, delivery time after order, discounts, leasing, provision of another car during repairs, etc.

The PM category is studied in order to manage its level, that is, to ensure that the maximum number of buyers' expectations coincide, or even better "overlap" with the characteristics of the product (service). For effective management of the PM level, it is necessary to clearly understand the formation mechanism and factors affecting the PM, knowing the level of which, firstly, it will be possible to develop an objective method for measuring it, and secondly, to take reasonable steps to improve the characteristics of the product and the impact on the consumer. The perception of the product (Fig. 2), which serves as the basis for the formation of the UE, is influenced by a variety of both internal (personal) and external factors, different combinations of which lead to an ambiguous assessment of the same product by different buyers. This is the essence of expanding the individualization of the production of goods (services), even consumer goods (for example, cars, houses, cell phones, shoes, etc.)

Successful enterprises manage PM on a systematic basis. In particular, they have a program for increasing the PM, a system for periodically measuring it has been established; a large number of consumers (more than 200) are being investigated; both quantitative and qualitative research is carried out; perfect measurement methods are applied; work is carried out under the constant supervision of senior management; the team is informed about the results of the assessment; customer feedback and contact with an unsatisfied customer has been established; never accuse the client of anything; compensate for customer losses and make discounts on repeat purchases; based on the results of the PM assessment, management decisions are promptly made; material remuneration of employees is linked to the level of PM, etc.

These proven effective processes should be used when developing a PM management system.

To obtain objective measurement results and increase the level of the UE, it is necessary to comply with the fundamental requirements for the management of the UE. Taking into account the main directions of development of the theory of management, marketing, PM management, qualimetry, accumulated scientific and practical knowledge in this area, the following basic principles of PM management are formulated.

1. The principle of scientific validity indicates that the proposed PM management model should be based on scientifically grounded provisions in the field under study and on advanced experience, not contradict socio-economic laws, establish objective links between its content elements with other categories of the subject area.
2. The principle of modeling is that management is carried out cyclically on the basis of identifying bottlenecks, reserves, trends and patterns in changing market conditions and the level of PM, comparing indicators with similar indicators of competitors, developing measures aimed at increasing the performance of the enterprise to the level competitors.
3. The principle of continuity of management is due to the dynamism of phenomena in the external and internal environment of the enterprise. Continuous monitoring will allow management to timely identify threats, trends in the development of markets, goods, production and management technologies, and make timely adjustments to the PM management process, avoiding losses.

Improving PM is a “no-destination trip” and the enterprise must continually move forward on that journey.

4. The principle of customer orientation follows from the purpose of the functioning of an enterprise in a market economy. In a competitive economy, the well-being of an enterprise is achieved in one way - by satisfying customer requirements.
5. The principle of complexity expresses the fact that management decisions should be developed taking into account all aspects of the external and internal environment of the enterprise. The PM management model should integrate market factors with the internal indicators of the company's vital activity.
6. The principle of improvement, which consists in the possibility of continuous improvement of the PM management model, depending on changes in the conditions of the external and internal environment.
7. Completeness and reliability of information is a necessary attribute for the successful implementation of the model. Compliance with the principle of scientific character of UP management largely depends on the completeness of information support for management processes and requires extensive, diverse and reliable information. In addition, both consumers and employees of the enterprise should be familiarized with the results of the PM assessment.
8. The principle of uniformity means that compared objects should be evaluated according to the same indicators and according to the same methodology.

Compliance with this principle will ensure the comparability of the results of the individual assessment of competing enterprises.

9. The principle of truthfulness is necessary to avoid making erroneous management decisions. "Embellishment" of the PM indicators of the assessed object, underestimation of competitors' indicators leads to a distortion of reality, to the adoption of incorrect management decisions.
10. The principle of relevance means that the model should correspond to the problem being solved, that is, its application should solve managerial problems in the field of PM management.
11. The principle of dialecticity implies that the PM management model should consider the studied phenomena and factors in development.
12. The principle of compliance with the laws of qualimetry. Measuring its level remains a key element in the PM control system, since it is impossible to control what is not measured. The task is to quantitatively assess the quality category "UP". The solution to this problem is based on the theoretical provisions of qualimetry. The result of the PM assessment should be obtained in compliance with the following qualimetry requirements: suitability, sufficiency, uniqueness, reliability, quantifiability, integrity, individuality, flexibility, ease-of-use, efficiency, improving, quantitative, uniformity, globality, uniqueness, comparability, reproducibility, sensitivity, monotony, accuracy, dynamism, controllability, scale, economic efficiency.

Taking into account the aforementioned fundamental provisions, a PM management model was developed (Fig. 3). The essence of this model is that through exploratory research, the expected appearance of the product is formed, and according to the results of quantitative research, the real appearance of the product is revealed by questioning, which are compared with each other. Further, firstly, a decision is made on the UP, and secondly, a direction of actions is outlined to improve its level.

The process of improving the PM is carried out with an “eye” to competitors: using the same methodology, the PM is measured by the products of competitors and their results are compared with the results of the object being evaluated. This approach allows to strengthen the competitive position of the manufacturer in the market, not only improve the PM through its own innovations, but also take into account the innovations of competitors, and more fully identify the commitment of potential buyers. Indeed, if your buyer went to a competitor, it means that he found something that you do not have.

Parallel measurement of the PM level for its own and competitors' products greatly simplifies the planning of measures to improve the PM. A simple everyday principle suggests: what consumers like about competing products will like them in your products.

Improvement of the PM in the model is carried out regardless of the result of the assessment continuously in the cycle "measurement - analysis of results - development of measures - implementation of measures - measurement". At the beginning of the PM improvement cycle, there is a measurement of its level, so the enterprise must have a reliable PM measurement tool.

A biased assessment of the studied category can lead to the adoption of erroneous management decisions, unjustified complacency.

The PM measurement algorithm, in fact, is simple, but it has many nuances that determine the objectivity of the assessment. The first nuance is related to the choice of indicators. There are many factors that combine to reproduce "customer satisfaction". Therefore, firstly, it is necessary to decide which indicators to take to evaluate the PM, secondly, how many indicators to take to obtain a reliable result, and thirdly, how to determine the weights of the adopted indicators.

The first problem is solved by conducting exploratory studies (see Fig. 3), which are qualitative. In contrast to quantitative research, qualitative research involves obtaining a large amount of information from a small number of consumers. A lot of information is needed, because at this stage the task is to understand what is important for consumers, what questions to include in the questionnaire. Qualitative research provides a lot of information and insight, but because it only involves a small number of consumers, it cannot be statistically reliable. In the course of search research, conducted through “in-depth interviews” or conversations in focus groups, a list of the most important indicators of the product and what is associated with it is established from the point of view of the consumer.

Based on the interview results, a list of indicators is formed that are most significant for the consumer. What if their number turns out to be too large (more than 100) or, conversely, small (less than 10-20)? The author in the work found that the result of a comparative assessment of the quality of objects depends on the number of adopted indicators. For a reliable assessment of objects, it is recommended to take at least 40 single quality indicators. When forming a questionnaire and developing a method for measuring PM, it is advisable to adhere to this recommendation. So far, unfortunately, this issue has not received due attention in practice. Thus, OJSC “KamAZ”, in accordance with the requirements of the quality management system certified according to ISO 9000: 2000, measures UE of trucks on a quarterly basis. The survey involves 150-200 auto enterprises of various sectors of the economy. In parallel, it is assessed on a 10-point scale of UP by products of MAZ, UralAZ, KrAZ and foreign manufacturers according to 23 indicators, which are grouped according to 6 criteria:

1. Product quality (reliability, safety, operating costs, technical characteristics, design, ergonomics, environmental friendliness).
2. Warranty and service (quality of repair, availability, cost of service).
3. Engine (build quality, reliability, maintainability, fuel consumption, cost and consumption of spare parts, ease of transmission control).
4. Personnel (competence, efficiency).
5. Price (pricing policy, prices for spare parts and materials).
6. Deliveries (compliance with delivery dates, vehicle condition, equipment).

It should be noted that the list of UE indicators used in OJSC KamAZ is incomplete. For example, among the quality indicators there are no such important indicators for consumers as adaptability to operating conditions, design complexity, aesthetics, functionality, comfort, etc. The nomenclature of indicators must necessarily include those whose absence clearly causes dissatisfaction. For example, for cars, this is the presence of an air conditioner. True, an increase in the values \u200b\u200bof these indicators does not increase satisfaction. Installing two air conditioners in a car is unlikely to delight buyers. Practice shows that the delight is caused by the presence in the object of elements of "exciting quality", that is, what the buyer did not expect. For example, in the rain, the windshield wipers of the newly purchased car automatically turned on, and the owner did not know that his car was equipped with a rain sensor. Delivering such pleasant surprises to consumers is a direct path to winning their hearts. True, at the same time, the rest of the quality indicators of the product must be at their best, otherwise these "surprises" can become a source of irritation and, as a result, dissatisfaction. Does a car need the same rain sensor, which, for example, has difficulty changing gears or the wheel is out of balance?

As for the weight of indicators, when there are several dozen of them, it is unlikely that any buyer is able to determine the numerical values \u200b\u200bof the coefficients of their weight, and the reliability of the comparative assessment of objects is largely determined by the method used to calculate the weight coefficients. In such cases, it is advisable for similar criteria to combine the entire set of indicators into 5-10 groups and, during a survey, ask consumers their priorities. Psychologists have established that when the number of managed objects is 7 or less, the situation is well controlled and the object is manageable, so it is not recommended to inflate the number of groups of PM indicators. The values \u200b\u200bof the weighting coefficients of the groups of indicators can be most objectively calculated by the method of analysis of hierarchies (AHP). In the work, based on numerical experiments and comparing the calculated values \u200b\u200bof the integral quality of goods with the data of expert assessments based on the results of field tests, it was found that among the methods for determining the weight coefficients of indicators of objects, the most objective is the use of MAI.

Comparative assessments do not exclude the calculation of the integral indicator of the PM without taking into account the weighting factors, since in this case, if we make a mistake, it will apply to all competitors. However, there is a danger that you outperform your competitors in terms of the least significant attributes for consumers and, having received an integral indicator that surpasses your competitors, you will be complacent. Therefore, the assessment of PM should be carried out taking into account the weight of the indicators. A relaxation in this issue is possible in the fact that a complex PM indicator for any characteristic within a group can be calculated without taking into account weights on the basis of the assumption that all indicators are equally significant within a group.

When developing a method for measuring UE, it is difficult to choose a measurement scale. As a rule, when measuring UP, a 4- or 5-point scale is used: “very satisfied”, “satisfied”, “not satisfied”, “very dissatisfied”. Satisfaction is expressed as a percentage. Unfortunately, this leads to a rather crude measurement. Most companies get 75-85% satisfaction. Even poorly performing organizations can easily observe 60%. The difficulty is that in such a study it is very difficult to discern the improvements occurring from year to year. The accuracy of the study is such that changes of 1 or 2% are within the statistical error of calculations and do not mean real changes.

For making management decisions, it is not important whether the consumer is “not satisfied” or “very dissatisfied”, therefore it is proposed to use a 3-level rating scale: “delight” - 2 points; “Satisfied” - 1 point; “Not satisfied” - 0 points. Separating “delight” from “satisfaction” is necessary to predict the number of loyal customers. It was found that a strict relationship between customer satisfaction and customer loyalty is observed only with high satisfaction. Research by companies such as AT&T, Rank Xerox, and The Royal Bank of Scotland found that 95% of consumers who responded “excellent” and “very satisfied” to the survey subsequently become loyal to the company, and only 65% \u200b\u200bof those who replied "satisfied". According to Xerox, customers who are completely satisfied with the company's products are 6 times more likely to make a repeat purchase within the next 18 months than customers who are simply satisfied with the product. This explains why many organizations with experience in measuring PM believe that only "top marks" of the company's performance can be considered acceptable.

Taking into account the above remarks, a method for measuring the UE is proposed, which is based on the method of profiles for measuring the quality of objects. Preparation for research, consumer surveys are conducted according to the algorithm shown in Fig. 3. In order to increase certainty, a 3-step scale is used when questioning: "excellent (delight)" - 2; "Satisfied" - 1; "Not satisfied" - 0.

The adopted indicators are grouped according to similar criteria, they are used to calculate complex group indicators of the PM, which makes it possible to identify problem areas of the enterprise.

The results of the questionnaire are processed using the analytical version of the profile method, according to which the absolute values \u200b\u200bof the unit indicators of the UE first lead to relative values, and then the complex group factor of the UE is determined using the formula:

where n is the number of single indicators in the i-th group; Yi1, Yi2,…, Yin - relative values \u200b\u200bof unit indicators of the object included in the i-th group. Relative values \u200b\u200bfor direct indicators are found by the formula:

and the relative values \u200b\u200bfor reciprocal indicators - according to the formula:

where Pij is the quantitative value of the j-th indicator of the i-th group; Pij max is the maximum value of the j-th indicator among the compared objects.

Direct indicators are those indicators, an increase in the values \u200b\u200bof which increases the level of satisfaction, inverse - on the contrary.

The integral indicator of the UP of the k-th manufacturer is determined taking into account the weight coefficients of the groups of indicators by the formula:

where UPi is a complex indicator of the UP of the i-th group; ? i is the weighting coefficient of the i-th group of quality indicators.

The weight coefficients of the groups of indicators of UE are determined on the basis of the application of the MAI. The main advantage of the MAI is that the weights of the indicators are not assigned by a direct volitional method, but are determined on the basis of paired comparisons. At the same time, however, the choice of the degree of superiority of one indicator over another remains uncertain (intuitive). The reliability of the use of the scale of relations is confirmed by the results of a comparative analysis of many other scales. The effectiveness of the use of MAI has been proven both theoretically and practically in solving multi-criteria problems of evaluating objects in various spheres of the economy.

Table 2 provides an example of a measurement methodology for evaluating PM for products from a truck manufacturer and three of its competitors. UP is assessed by 46 indicators, which are divided into 8 groups.

Group indicators of UP are determined by formulas (1) - (3) without taking into account weights, and the integral indicator - by formula (4).

The results of the assessment show that the evaluated manufacturer in terms of PM is inferior to competitor No. 4, which has the best results among the compared manufacturers in 5 groups of indicators out of 8, and the evaluated enterprise - only in terms of economic indicators and warranty service. In the future, based on the analysis of PM indicators, measures are developed to increase its level. Consumers of the products of the evaluated enterprise express dissatisfaction with the design of the car, fuel consumption, corrosion resistance of the units, the quality of repairs at service centers, the condition of the car upon delivery, and the complete set. The enterprise must first of all take measures to improve performance in these areas. When developing activities, the experience of those competitors who have high PM in these areas will be useful.

The proposed model for managing the PM level is an effective tool for increasing the competitiveness of an enterprise, since only by satisfying the consumer to the fullest, it is possible to strengthen the market position of the manufacturer. The structuredness of the task of measuring PM makes it easy to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the enterprise and its products, therefore, to develop activities with a focus on the performance of competitors.

The model is universal: choosing the appropriate indicators in table. 2, you can measure the UE of any product or service.

Literature

1. Hill N., Self B., Roche G. Measurement of customer satisfaction according to ISO 9000: 2000. - M .: Technologies, 2004.
2. Glushakova T. Measurements of customer satisfaction and enterprise management [Electronic version]. - Access mode: http://ateh.ru/conten/
3. Campanella J. Economics of quality. Basic principles and their application. - M .: Standards and quality, 2005.
4. Faskhiev Kh.A. How many indicators are needed to reliably assess the quality of goods? // Marketing in Russia and abroad. - 2008. - No. 1.
5. Faskhiev Kh.A. Determination of the weight of the quality indicators of cars and their components // Truck. - 2008. - No. 4.
6. Faskhiev Kh.A., Krakhmaleva A.V. Assessment of the level of competitiveness of trucks and their engines // Marketing in Russia and abroad. - 2004. - No. 5.
7. Saati T. Decision-making. Hierarchy analysis method. - M .: Radio and communication, 1989.
8. Kotler F. Marketing in the third millennium: how to create, conquer and keep the market. - M .: AST, 2000.

It might be useful to read: