6.4. Outlook and Critical Evaluation

“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not a single act, but a habit”

Aristotle (384 BC – 322 BC), Greek philosopher

The study scene and frame was more or less determined by many factors, which were not ideal for a survey, as they have been set and stipulated by the CEOs retirement. Therefore, the timeframe was quite tough and some compromises had to be made, e. g. we had to forego a survey in the home market Germany in order to meet the set deadline and in favor of presenting the topline findings before the retirement of the CEO. So the initial project target ended after the collection of findings, knowing that the results and the measurements and projects, which are developed after this survey in order to improve our customers satisfaction were all realized after the retirement of the CEO.

As this was the very first customer satisfaction survey of this magnitude, many pitfalls have been determined, e. g. the various legal regulations in the different markets, the determination and organization of a meaningful database, delays because of holiday seasons, etc. Also a certain bias cannot be excluded, as the customer database was provided by the countries and therefore the customers were probably pre-selected by the countries.

So this global customer satisfaction survey can only be seen as a pilot project with the aim of launching this study also in Germany and other important markets. In addition, the study needs to be repeated in order to draw sound comparisons and to see, if the right measurements were implemented and improvements realized.

To avoid these pitfalls, a guidance document will be created in order to facilitate future surveys. As customer satisfaction is a major element within customer management 57 , this guidance document will be provided to the Fresenius Kabi Quality Management department and included in the SOPs (Standard Operation Procedure) for better customer management. This standardized way of customer satisfaction analysis, could contribute to the existing customer management of Fresenius Kabi, which is at the moment concentrating on the standardized complaints management only.

The complaints management SOP was created to provide an overall standard for handling complaints within Fresenius Kabi and ensure that all complaints are reported and handled in an appropriate and standardized way. These measures were taken to prevent possible hazards to patients and to improve the quality of products. Creating a SOP for customer satisfaction or customer satisfaction analysis and management would ensure that customer satisfaction is taken seriously and gets the attention it deserves.

Such a detailed, extensive and budget intensive survey cannot be repeated every, or every second year, but it is worthwhile thinking about a modified and shortened version, which concentrates on the Net Promoter Score only. The reason is simple and already subject of discussion in chapter 2.3.2. The biggest advantage of the NPS is its low level of complexity but high level of plausibility. Because it is so simple and easy to understand on all levels by all employees, the acceptance of everybody involved will increase and thus also the will to change procedures for the sake of improvement.

Question number 19 is already aiming at this NPS, as it says: “On a scale of 0-10, where 10 is 'definitely will' and 0 is 'definitely won't', how likely are you to recommend each of these to others, as a supplier of generic injectable products?”⁵⁸

After evaluating the single ratings of each respondent, which I requested from the agency, I evaluated following results were determined per region:

Table 7: Net Promotor Score per region

These results can now be used for reporting and communication purpose. Moreover it will be easy to compare these numbers with future results. So it will be easy to monitor the performance and in addition the NPS can help to develop strategies for improvements.

The NPS can be applied to different areas and different operation levels and can be modified in order to aim on a specific topic. For example, if done on country level and with a smaller and determined customer base (and if meeting local regulations of data protection) one possible approach would be to identify the single detractors. Then the sales representative or the customer service could give each single detractor a call or visit this customer in order to find out the reasons for the low rating in a face-to-face meeting and to evaluate, what needs to be done in order to get a higher recommendation rate in future.

The NPS is sometimes criticized as being too simple, but repeatedly used, it will for sure show a trend and will make it easy to track if improvement measurements are effective or not. Together with the subsequent “Why-Question” the Net Promoter System reveals the needs, expectations and the real experience of customers. Only with this second question it is possible to really understand the source for a high or low recommendation rate and to act accordingly.

⁵⁷ Vossebein, U. (2000), p. 37
⁵⁸ APPENDIX C: Master Questionnaire: Q. 19