Net Promoter Score (NPS) and Wild Elephants

A recent article bout the shortcoming of the Net Promoter Score (NPS) has a paragraph towards the end that is particularly telling of the kind of argument that is used to justify the implementation of the MPS:

"For the research community [the NPS is] a brilliant thing because it’s enabled us to have real impact at top level," says viral marketing researcher Paul Mardsen on his Viral Culture blog. "After having been emasculated for years as these people who speak in hieroglyphics and commission studies that end up getting filed away, it’s increased our exposure to board-level business. What NPS does is it speaks their language. It’s the simplicity of the model that has been attractive, and has made research intelligible at board level."

The research and approach that lead to the justification remind me of an old story:

A man comes to a bus stop and finds someone there clapping his hands and making all manner of strange noises with his mouth. The man asks the one making the noises: "Quite a racket there! What are you trying to accomplish with all that noise?"

The other replies: "I am scaring off the wild elephants"; "wild elephants? What wild elephants? There are no wild elephants here?!" To which the other replied: "You see?? It's working!"

NPS apologists seem to be following the same logic used by the noisy man in this story.

Comments

[Suzanne Obermire]

What a great analogy. I had to laugh.

What this discussion has really brought to light (in my opinion) is the sad fact that analytical types have done a horrible job of communicating their findings to senior management. Hence, the need for a 'simple' metric that can be easily understood.

As someone who deals with analytics every day, I know that it's key to take the extra time to translate findings to my audiences' language. You absolutely have to package data differently for the Direct Mail manager than for the CFO, as an example. It's obvious that their needs are different, and the impact the analysis has on their jobs are totally different.

This argument cements the need to make sure that if we want research findings to be understood, accepted and acted-upon, we really have to ensure that they're presented with the right focus, in the right language and targeted specifically to the audience.

[Amy Madsen]

Numerous companies - such as HSBC, Charles Schwab, Philips, Intuit, Experian, LEGO, T-Mobile - are improving their businesses with Net Promoter. Should any of your readers be interested in learning about these successes, here is a link - many of the links to go to write-ups of presentations from executives from these companies: .

Indeed, one of the bloggers is Dr. Paul Marsden, who you reference above.

[Adelino de Almeida]

Amy:

I am flattered that, once again, you're trying to increase readership of a blog about NPS at my expense. Maybe you should read my post a bit more closely!?

[Jeffry Pilcher]

I'm not a fan of NPS, but I would have liked to see the link Amy provided. Unless she's a chronic comment spammer, the censorship seems petty.

[Larry Freed]

Great post! I love the wild elephant story. Some interesting stories and details coming out on NPS. Check out http://www.freedyourmind.com/?p=53 and http://www.customerthink.com/system/files/netpromoter_serious_flaws_tarnish_simple_idea.pdf by yours truly and a great article by Bob Thomspson at CustomerThink, http://customerthink.com/article/ultimate_loyalty_metric_grow_your_business .

Bottom line - NPS doesn't work. Don't get sucked into the hype.

[John Marden]

As quoted above, "...NPS doesn't work. Don't get sucked into the hype."

NPS only works if you use it for something. You interview promoters to understand how to improve your marketing mix and communications. You interview detractors to understand where you improve your processes.

Many Market Researchers dislike Net Promoter Score because it is such a straightforward metric. The number does not mean a thing if done only once with no follow-up.