Problem detecting method

The problem-detecting method belongs to the problem-oriented measuring method of service quality and focuses exclusively on the deficiencies in the provision of services. This variant of troubleshooting was developed in-house at an advertising agency . The method developed by the advertising agency BBDO is the discussion of customer problems on specified cases through questioning and looking at customer reviews. The focus here is on the analysis of the frequency of the problem occurring during the service provision, as well as the extent and intensity in the perception of the customer.

The problem detecting method represents a conventional market research method that aims to generate the largest possible pool of problems with existing products. The logic behind this is that customers find it difficult to express their needs and unfulfilled wishes, but they know very well about existing problems with the products they are using. A number of product modifications and innovations can be derived from this pool of problems.

properties

First, the problem-detecting method is customer-oriented, i. In other words, the measurement approaches are viewed from the customer's perspective. She is involved in the service process and works as a co-producer. It is usually applied by means of a questionnaire that contains questions about quality and satisfaction. Second, it is subjective; That is, the quality perception is determined by the customer. They measure the service exclusively according to their personal requirements and expectations. These requirements and expectations arise from ideals, ideas on the part of the provider and so on. Third, it is problem-oriented. This means that the method mainly only analyzes negative events. The attempt is made to quantify problems and identify their relevance and new problems.

The relevance of the customer problem depends on the frequency in the service creation process and according to customer perception. In principle, this method should not be viewed solely as a tool for measuring customer satisfaction; it should be viewed as a supplement to other methods, since complete information cannot be obtained independently from the problem-detecting method, because it detects the existence of problem directories identified by other methods, such as B. the Critical Incident Technique , requires. The reason for this is the fact that the problem-detecting method is primarily used to determine the significance of the problem.

The problem detecting method in relation to service quality and customer satisfaction

A central topic in the business administration discussion today is service quality. Above all, however, their recording and measurement is discussed. In order to analyze this question in detail, one must first deal with the term “ quality ”. The term quality can be differentiated in a large number of definition approaches: product-related, customer-related, manufacturing-related, absolute and value-related approaches. The main differences relate to the perspective. When determining the service quality, product-related (objective) and customer-related (subjective) quality terms play a special role. They represent important points that are of great importance for the determination of the service quality, for example product characteristics and customer satisfaction / customer perception. Quality is the central success indicator for the performance of service companies in target markets. This success is measured by the company's quality management . The main task of quality management is to meet the company's performance in accordance with customer requirements. This point is very important because an essential criterion in the assessment of companies and their services by customers is the ability of the companies to solve problems and their behavior in the situation. Because customers don't require the service to be perfect. Instead, they expect the company to act as soon as possible when solving problems. This shows how strongly the service quality is related to customer satisfaction. That is why it is discussed a lot in marketing research these days. On the one hand, customer satisfaction is triggered and influenced by the behavior of the consumer and, on the other hand, also how the consumer will assess the product in the future. It is created by comparing the individual expectations of consumers before and after their experience with the product. Thus, customer satisfaction is not always consistent and depends on the situation and the emotional state of the consumer.

application

When using the problem-detecting method, the customer is specifically asked about known individual problems. The main considerations are the frequency with which these occur and the value the customer attaches to their elimination. From these key figures, the Lindqvist index is calculated for each problem, which ultimately determines a ranking of the individual problems.

Problem detection has already found practical application in a variety of empirical studies. As an example, reference is made to a survey that Lindqvist carried out among cruise participants. This service area is particularly interesting and problem-prone due to the interaction of a large number of individual services (passenger transport, hotel accommodation, restaurant meals, duty-free shopping, entertainment).

Lindqvist identified a total of 81 problem areas, which were assessed using the Lindqvist index, which can be calculated from the following formula:

{\ displaystyle {\ frac {\ sum _ {i = 1} ^ {n} \ displaystyle (a_ {i} + b_ {i})} {n}}}

The individual variables in this formula have the following meanings:

{\ displaystyle a_ {i}}

indicates how strongly the respondent agrees with the respective statement ( i ).

{\ displaystyle b_ {i}}

indicates how important it is to the respondent to eliminate the problem ( i ).

n is the number of respondents.

Based on the calculation of the indices, Lindquist arranged the problems according to the level of the Lindquist indices.

With regard to the application of the problem-detecting method, it can be stated in the light of the preceding statements that it appears to be fundamentally helpful to gain knowledge of the frequency and valence of problem areas. Particularly in the case of repeatedly used services within a limited period of time or in the case of recurring situations within a long-term service provider-customer relationship, the question of the frequency of occurrence appears sensible with regard to standard problems, since the customers are faced with the high switching costs associated with the time commitment or the impossibility rate the change (cruise) higher than the benefit associated with a potential change and thus cannot react or react with an immediate migration. The recording of the frequency of the occurrence of the problem must, however, be associated with a previously clearly specified period of time, since otherwise the frequency data obtained can be related to the entirety of the contacts and services within a time unit. If this necessary prerequisite is included in further considerations, it becomes clear that a precise application of the problem-detecting method makes a problem-, customer- and time-related differentiation of the frequency recording appear necessary. Accordingly, an individual survey of the problem frequency should generally be dispensed with in favor of a general survey regarding the occurrence of the problem.

target

As part of the problem-detecting method, attempts are made to determine the urgency of the problem-solving process. The method is based on the assumption that the more frequently a problem occurs and the more annoying or significant its occurrence is perceived by the customers, the more urgently needs the attention of the service company's management. In contrast to the above-mentioned methods, however, there is no general discovery of problems, but the respective significance of the problems from the customer's point of view is recorded. Consequently, it is only a supplementary method of quality measurement that always requires knowledge of customer-relevant problems as a prerequisite for its application.

execution

The basic procedure for the problem detecting method takes place in several steps:

Determination of a problem list with the help of the sequential event method, the complaint analysis, the critical incident technique, group discussions, interviews with customers, the contact staff or the management.
Compression of the problem list according to relevance and redundancy aspects.
Creation of a questionnaire with statements on the individual problems. There are three questions for each problem category. You can ask about the frequency with which the problems occurred, but also about the perceived relevance of the problem or the possible solutions known to the customer. First, you will be asked whether the problem occurred at all. If the question is answered with “yes”, questions about the extent of annoyance and the actual or planned reaction behavior of the consumers (completed or planned change of provider, completed or intended further telling in the personal environment, etc.) are recorded.
The questionnaire is then submitted to the relevant inquiries, i. H. It collects data from customer statements by means of written, oral or telephone surveys.
Evaluation of the data and presentation in problem indices or diagrams (e.g. which problems are particularly common? Which problems are particularly serious? How do certain problems develop over time?). For this purpose, point values are first assigned to the forms of reaction, so that relevance values for annoyance and reaction behavior result from multiplicative linking of the scale values. With the data on the frequency of the problem across all respondents and the relevance value, two important key figures are then available for each problem, which can be analyzed in a differentiated manner using a two-dimensional diagram.

Advantages and disadvantages

The problem-detecting method is dependent on the other feature and event-oriented methods. This method is controllable and suitable for all services.

The disadvantage of this method is that the problem classes to be scaled have to be known before the investigation and thus no new problem areas can be identified. As a supplement to the method portfolio, however, this instrument makes perfect sense, especially when it comes to prioritizing problems. Therefore, this method is only an addition to the other methods.

The problem-detecting method is not sensibly used for customers who have little or no experience with a product or service or for particularly negative experiences that only occur very rarely. One of the main advantages of this method lies in the comprehensive collection of problems that provides a multitude of opportunities for product improvement. Due to the task at hand, problems in the use and application of the products are particularly evident. This means that product development can work specifically on customer-oriented solutions instead of thinking about product features that customers judge as more or less important. The method is also particularly suitable for the improvement of problems in the creation of services. However, it also provides suggestions for creative new solutions in the form of product and process innovations. It sensitizes to situational problems that cannot be determined with a satisfaction analysis. The multitude of problems to be assessed can turn out to be disadvantageous when using this method. One tries to take this into account by arranging the problem cards in separate boxes with five departments. This turns the task into a “card game” for the respondents and avoids the occurrence of a fatigue effect. The method is well proven and can be continued in the form of creative development workshops. This method was used, for example, in the beverage industry to work on an improved form of packaging, which was introduced to the market with great success.

evaluation

There are a number of alternatives with regard to the formulation of the questions and their evaluation. In the original version of the advertising agency BBDO, the problem frequency ("Frequency") and the problem relevance ("Importance") were determined. On the other hand, it was asked whether the customer is aware of possible solutions for the problem, for example from the competition (“pre-emptibility”). A multiplication of the scale values resulted in a problem value for each event, which could be classified according to the level of the point values. This enabled a simple overview of the problems that occur more frequently and for which no solutions are known. It is questionable, however, whether such a determination of the solution approaches is absolutely useful from the customer's point of view. If, for example, the competition is not yet aware of any problem solutions, this is not yet an indicator that the problem is (not) as urgent as possible. If, on the other hand, a competing company had already developed potential solutions, this fact would significantly increase the urgency of the problem resolution.

Martin (1981) evaluated the questions according to three parameters in his variant. These are “frequency”, “botheredness” and “credibility”. For each problem, he asked the test subjects three questions, which they should evaluate in relation to the three parameters mentioned. With "frequency" the test persons should rate the problem with regard to its frequency. In contrast, “botheredness” evaluates the extent to which they are annoyed by the problem. The last parameter was “credibility”, which is supposed to assess how the test persons assess the possibility for the service provider to solve the problem. After adding the scale values for frequency and botheredness, the result is the “problem impact scores”, which show the intensity of the problem. The “credibility scores” show to what extent a company can offer solutions to problems in the opinion of the test subjects.

Lindqvist (1987) wanted to know from the respondents how strongly they agree with problem statements and how urgently these problems need to be resolved. From this he calculated the problem index, which shows how serious the problem is. The problem index can be calculated from the sum of the respective scale values divided by the number of respondents. The larger the index, the more serious the problem.

Brandt / Reffett (1989) used three parameters to evaluate the problem in their variant. These are “frequency”, annoyance (“botheredness”) and the company's effectiveness in solving problems (“effectiveness”). The “problem score” can be determined from the scale values for frequency and annoyance. This represents the significance of the problem. It makes sense to graphically display the frequency / annoyance and problem significance / problem-solving effectiveness diagrams separately. This enables important information to be read about the priority of corrective actions.

A clear commonality with all three variants is the question of the frequency of problems. However, it does not make sense in all cases when surveying customers about their consumption problems, for example with first-time and one-time customers (e.g. renters of a rental car due to an accident damage), with experiences with services that are fundamentally or by the customers surveyed inquiries can only be made discontinuously and at longer intervals (e.g. vacation trip, hospital stay) and with regard to aspects that can only arise once within the service provision process (e.g. cumbersome filling out of forms when being admitted to the hospital), if exceptionally negative perceived experiences (bed bugs in the hotel room) when consumers do not take the risk of repeating the problem and immediately migrate or have migrated. It makes sense to ask about the frequency of services that are used several times or of standard problems that exist in long-term customer relationships. Second, there are repeated situations or problems that cause customers to churn in response that are rejected by customers because, in their opinion, the switching costs are higher than the potential benefits.

Another thing all variants have in common is the question of the extent of anger. The problem intensity is determined from this question. Instead, the variant by Martin appears in 1981; Brandt / Reffett recommendable as it takes into account respondents' emotional concerns heavily compared to Linqvist, who is more focused on problem solving. However, there are two problems with the annoyance value; it is quite high for all problems and says nothing about the behavior that results from this annoyance, which greatly affects the success of the companies. The reason for this is the fact that the urgency of a problem solution becomes clear if the planned reaction behavior of the customer is also taken into account when recording the problem solution.

The comparison of the criteria “pre-embtibility” and “problem effectiveness” shows that problem effectiveness makes the most sense. This is because the companies' responsiveness is perceived. In view of the fact, however, that often the cause of the annoyance lies precisely in the fact that companies do not react appropriately when problems arise from the consumer's point of view.

A further development of the problem detecting method is the frequency relevance analysis . The problem class is determined and your position is then displayed in an evaluation grid.

literature

Manfred Bruhn : Quality Management for Services , 2008, p. 183
MO Kaiser: Success Factor Customer Satisfaction , 2005, p. 166
MO Kaiser: Compact customer satisfaction , 2006, p. 107
MO Kaiser: Success Factor Customer Satisfaction , 2005, p. 192
Bruhn (2004), p. 137 f .; see. Meffert / Bruhn (2000), p. 231 f.
Hans H. Hinterhuber / Kurt Matzler (eds.): Kundenorientierte Unternehmensführung , 6th edition 2009, p. 432
Manfred Bruhn / Bernd Stauss (eds.): Service quality, concepts - methods - experiences , 2nd revised and expanded edition, Wiesbaden 1995, p. 393, ISBN 978-3-322-99412-7
Bernd Stauss / Bert Hentschel: Procedure for problem discovery and analysis in the quality management of services . (Contributions to the discussion by the Ingolstadt Faculty of Economics, No. 2, 1990)
Bernd Stauss / Bert Hentschel: The quality of services: conception, measurement and management . (Contributions to the discussion by the Ingolstadt Faculty of Economics, ISSN 0938-2712 No. 10)
Bruhn / Stauss: Service quality: concepts, methods, experiences . 3rd edition, Gabler 2000
S. Fließ, B. Lasshof (2006): Controlling of service processes . In: S. Reinecke, T. Tomczak (Ed.): Handbuch Marketingcontrolling. Gabler

Individual evidence

↑ Manfred Bruhn: Implementation of quality management for services . In: Quality Management for Services . Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 2010, ISBN 978-3-642-13809-6 , pp. 401-425 .
↑ Marc Oliver Kaiser: Success factor customer satisfaction . 2012, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-642-32552-6 .
↑ Insa Sjurts: I . In: GABLER KOMPAKT-LEXIKON media . Gabler, Wiesbaden 2006, ISBN 978-3-8349-0191-0 , pp. 107-114 .
↑ Success factor customer satisfaction . 2012, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-642-32552-6 .
↑ Bruhn 1994, p. 5 f.
↑ Stauss / Hentschel 1990, p. 233 ff.
^ Heribert Meffert, Manfred Bruhn: Service Marketing . 2000, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-322-94833-5 .
↑ Customer-oriented corporate management . 2009, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-8349-8051-9 .
↑ Bernd Stauss: Service quality . Revised and expanded 2nd edition. Gabler Verlag Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, Wiesbaden 1995, ISBN 978-3-322-99412-7 .
↑ Bernd Stauss, Bert Hentschel: Method of problem discovery and analysis in the quality management of service companies . In: Integrative service management . Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden 1994, ISBN 978-3-409-13171-1 , p. 369-396 .

[1] Manfred Bruhn: Implementation of quality management for services . In: Quality Management for Services . Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 2010, ISBN 978-3-642-13809-6 , pp. 401-425 .

[2] Marc Oliver Kaiser: Success factor customer satisfaction . 2012, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-642-32552-6 .

[3] Insa Sjurts: I . In: GABLER KOMPAKT-LEXIKON media . Gabler, Wiesbaden 2006, ISBN 978-3-8349-0191-0 , pp. 107-114 .

[4] Success factor customer satisfaction . 2012, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-642-32552-6 .

[5] Bruhn 1994, p. 5 f.

[6] Stauss / Hentschel 1990, p. 233 ff.

[7] Heribert Meffert, Manfred Bruhn: Service Marketing . 2000, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-322-94833-5 .

[8] Customer-oriented corporate management . 2009, doi : 10.1007 / 978-3-8349-8051-9 .

[9] Bernd Stauss: Service quality . Revised and expanded 2nd edition. Gabler Verlag Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, Wiesbaden 1995, ISBN 978-3-322-99412-7 .

[10] Bernd Stauss, Bert Hentschel: Method of problem discovery and analysis in the quality management of service companies . In: Integrative service management . Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden 1994, ISBN 978-3-409-13171-1 , p. 369-396 .