Nps goal setting let's get it started!

  • Published on
    01-Nov-2014

  • View
    8.232

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Transcript

<ul><li> 1. NPS Goal Setting AIESEC 2015 Quality MoS </li> <li> 2. Objective We understand the meaning behind the numbers of experiences we are providing We have a clear direction in providing a high quality experiences towards 2015 We are able to provide more while better experiences </li> <li> 3. Our ability in providing better experiences (GCDP) Key Facts 2012 NPS: 47 % of Promoters: 60% Response Rate: 20% Key Facts 2013 NPS: 38 % of Promoters: 55% Response Rate: 37% </li> <li> 4. Our ability in providing better experiences (GIP) Key Facts 2012 NPS: 45 % of Promoters: 61% Response Rate: 24% Key Facts 2013 NPS: 39 % of Promoters: 57% Response Rate: 37% </li> <li> 5. Our ability in providing better experiences (TLP) Key Facts 2012 NPS: 67 % of Promoters: 72% Response Rate: 20% Key Facts 2013 NPS: 57 % of Promoters: 64% Response Rate: 22% </li> <li> 6. Our ability in providing better experiences (TMP) Key Facts 2012 NPS: 51 % of Promoters: 62% Response Rate: 12% Key Facts 2013 NPS: 43 % of Promoters: 56% Response Rate: 13% </li> <li> 7. What Goals are we setting for? 2014 2015 Yearly NPS goa </li> <li> 8. Key Principles in goal setting </li> <li> 9. Key Principles Improving score is the primary message of NPS implementation setting the right goals is not a "one size fits all" proposition. By having trustworthy data and connect NPS goals to the core business strategy, the customers voice can serve as the organisation needs </li> <li> 10. How to do goal setting NPS? Set yearly NPS score by adding the impact of the issue towards NPS based on the classification Classify the detractor issue into small loop and big loop Small loop: short term tactical solution (6 12 months) Big loop: long term strategic solution (12 24 months) Define the key detractor issues Understand the impact of the detractor issues towards the NPS number (Using Waterfall Analysis tools) </li> <li> 11. Understanding Waterfall Analysis </li> <li> 12. Waterfall analysis Explanation Detractor Issues Promoter Issues Impact towards NPS Score Overall NPS Score </li> <li> 13. GCDP NPS Goal Setting </li> <li> 14. 1. Key Detractor Issue AIESECs Support during experience (-2.6) Job Description Clarity and Alignment (-2.3) Logistical support (-2.2) Opportunity to create positive societal impact (-1.7) Communication effectivity during acceptance procedure (-1.1) Integration by the hosting entity (-1) Note: Choose the self select issue which has highest impact towards NPS (E.g &gt;1) </li> <li> 15. 2. Classifying Detractor Issue Small Loop Communication (-1) Integration (-1) Big Loop Support (-2.6) Job Description (-2.3) Logistical Support (1.7) Societal Impact (1.1) </li> <li> 16. 3. Set GCDP yearly NPS Goal 2014 Expected Solved Issue: Communication (-1) Integration (-1) 2015 Expected Solved Issue Support (-2.6) Job Description (-2.3) Logistical Support (-1.7) Societal Impact (-1.1) Communication (-1) Integration (-1) Current NPS score: 38 Current NPS score: 38 2014 NPS score: 40 2015 NPS score: 48 </li> <li> 17. GIP NPS Goal Setting </li> <li> 18. 1. Key Detractor Issue AIESECs Support during experience (-2.5) Job Description Clarity and Alignment (-1.6) Logistical support (-1.5) Visa documents and information (-1.3) Communication effectively during acceptance procedure (-1.3) Integration by the hosting entity (-1) Note: Choose the self select issue which has highest impact towards NPS (E.g &gt;1) </li> <li> 19. 2. Classifying Detractor Issue Small Loop Visa documents and information (-1.3) Communication (-1.3) Integration (-1) Big Loop Support (-2.5) Job Description (-1.6) Logistical Support (-1.5) </li> <li> 20. 3. Set GIP yearly NPS Goal 2014 Expected Solved Issue: Visa documents and information (-1.3) Communication (-1.3) Integration (-1) 2015 Expected Solved Issue Support (-2.5) Job Description (-1.6) Logistical Support (-1.5) Visa documents and information (-1.3) Communication (-1.3) Integration (-1) Current NPS score: 39 Current NPS score: 39 2014 NPS score: 43 2015 NPS score: 48 </li> <li> 21. Summary of ELD NPS Goal </li> <li> 22. GCDP and GIP NPS Goal GCDP GIP 2013 2014 2015 2013 2014 2015 38 40 48 38 43 4822500 30000 38000 9000 13000 17000 </li> <li> 23. What about TMP/TLP? </li> <li> 24. How should your entity set NPS goals? </li> <li> 25. Entity Goal Setting Using the same steps and processes as the global goal are set Define the detractor issue Classifying detractor issue Set NPS Goal Using the regional zones as a benchmarking tools Compare the Goal of your NPS with other entity </li> <li> 26. Benchmarking your NPS Goal </li> <li> 27. Introducing you NPS Regional Zones! </li> <li> 28. Entity NPS Respon ses 1 Paraguay 83 6 2 Bolivia 75 24 3 Mexico 57 175 4 Peru 56 157 5 Chile 55 51 6 Ecuador 55 22 7 Argentina 51 354 8 Guatemala 50 16 Green Zone Entity NPS Respon ses 9 Brazil 49 1237 10 Venezuela 47 32 11 Colombia 35 426 12 Panama 33 24 13 Costa Rica 31 26 Yellow Zone Entity NPS Respon ses 14 El Salvador 11 9 15 Uruguay 11 9 16 Nicaragua 0 2 17 Dominican Republic 0 2 18 Puerto Rico 0 0 Red Zone IGN - iGCDP &gt; 50 25 - 49 &lt; 25 </li> <li> 29. Global vs National Goal Global goal is not a benchmark towards your entitys NPS Goal Setting Your Benchmark is based on the Zones! Its about creating more promoters through co- delivering the experience between hosting and sending entity </li> <li> 30. Lets deliver more while better experiences! </li> </ul>