4.2 Article

Customer satisfaction - dilemma of comparing multiple scale scores

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2022.2028547

关键词

customer satisfaction scales; feedback rating and scores; consumer scorecard; CSI; satisfaction index; quality rating; Likert scale comparison

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most businesses utilize customer satisfaction scores, but comparing scores from different scales can be challenging. This study proposes a method to convert customer satisfaction responses from one scale to another and compares ten different scales. The findings suggest that the 10-point ordinal scale and the percentage scale are more suitable for measuring and converting satisfaction scores.
Most businesses use customer satisfaction scores. It is difficult to compare scores obtained on one scale with another. For instance, if an organisation is rated 4 on a 5-point scale and another organisation is rated 3 on a 4-point scale, should they be considered equal or different? If the approximation is applied, e.g. considering a score of 8 on a 10-point scale as 80% on a percentage scale, it can be incorrect. This study suggests a mechanism by which customer satisfaction responses from one scale can be converted to an estimated response on another scale. Ten satisfaction scales of varying length are compared by collecting responses from over 400 participants. Data are analysed using correlation and polynomial regression methods. Methodology and matrix to convert scores are prescribed. Merits and demerits of different scales are presented. It is observed that the 10-point ordinal scale is more suitable for the measurement of satisfaction and for inter-scale conversion. A percentage scale is also a good option for this purpose. Scales of less than 7-point length are not proved good from a score conversion perspective. The study will help individuals, organisations, and business analytics companies analyse customer satisfaction data measured on multiple scales.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据