1<!DOCTYPE html>
2
3Anonymous
4/bestp
5/bestp/domrep.nsf
611841A17AC78D5D585257809006E2542
8
9
10
11
12
13
140
15
16
17/bestp/domrep.nsf/products/customer-complaint-resolution-capturing-insights-to-drive-business-improvements?opendocument
18
19opendocument
2054.234.114.202
21
22
23www.best-in-class.com
24/bestp/domrep.nsf
25BMR




Products & Services

Customer Complaint Resolution Excellence: Capturing Insights to Drive Business Improvements

ID: PCS-210


Features:

6 Info Graphics

26 Data Graphics

200+ Metrics

13 Narratives

5 Best Practices


Pages: 52


Published: Pre-2013


Delivery Format: Shipped


 

License Options:

close

Single User: Authorizes use by the person who places the order or for whom the order was placed.

Sitewide: Authorizes use of the report for a geographic site. All people at site can view the report for a year and copies can be printed.

Corporate: Authorizes use for the entire company for a year and copies can be printed. No limitations for usage inside the company.

Buy Now

 

919-403-0251

  • STUDY OVERVIEW
  • BENCHMARK CLASS
  • STUDY SNAPSHOT
  • KEY FINDINGS
  • VIEW TOC AND LIST OF EXHIBITS
Complaint resolution groups fulfill a key role not just in resolving customer complaints involving service claims and other issues, but also in capturing critical customer feedback and data from which to drive quality and continuous improvement in the supply chain and throughout the organization.

This Best Practices, LLC report examines complaint resolution excellence, focusing on the areas of service claim resolution performance and the reduction of overall complaint volume. The study also probes key strategies and tactics for translating Voice-of-the-Customer and customer complaint data into business insights and improvements across organizational channels.

Key topic areas include:

• Complaint Resolution Groups: Structure, Roles & Responsibilities

• Listening to Customer Complaints to Glean Improvement Insights
• Service Claim Resolution Benchmarks
• Reducing Complaint Volume
• Complaint Process Automation & Analytics
• Driving Improvements via the Complaints Process
• Lessons Learned: Turning Customer Complaints into Business Improvements


Industries Profiled:
Manufacturing; Medical Device; Pharmaceutical; High Tech; Telecommunications; Consumer Products; Diagnostic; Energy; Health Care; Biotech; Utilities; Shipping; Diversified; Aerospace; Financial Services; Chemical; Technology; Insurance; Defense; Automobile; Retail; Research; Internet; Computer Hardware; Computers; Science


Companies Profiled:
3M; Abbott Laboratories; Amway Global; Agilent Technologies; Alere; Ashland Inc.; Autoliv; Avaya; Avery Dennison; Baxter Healthcare; Bayer Healthcare; British American Tobacco; Cargill Corn Milling; Chevron; Coca-Cola; Cooper Power Systems; Depuy; Douglas Pharmaceuticals; Dow Corning; Edwards Lifesciences; Exel; FedEx; Fresenius USA; Inc.; GE; Genentech; Genzyme; GlaxoSmithKline; Hewlett-Packard; Hospira; Johnson & Johnson Health Care Systems; LORD Corporation; Lubrizol; Markem-Imaje; MedImmune; NAMSA; Netcom; NextGenTel; Novartis; Pyrotec; Redcats USA; Roche Diagnostics; Rockwell Automation; SABIC Innovative Plastics; Sandhill Scientific Inc.; Sartorius Stedim Biotech; Sazerac Company; Sigma-tau Pharmaceuticals; Solvay Advanced Polymers; Sun Motor Group; Tata Motors; Telecom New Zealand; Terasen Gas; Thermo Fisher Scientific; W.R. Grace


Study Snapshot

Sixty representatives from a total of 58 companies participated in this research. The vast majority of participating companies support either national or global manufacturing operations.

Best Practices, LLC used both field surveys and interviews to complete this study. All participants contributed survey data, while deep-dive interviews were also conducted with several complaint resolution leaders to harvest additional key insights.

Sample Key Findings

Most Companies Do Not Use Penalty Systems or Incentive Systems to Reduce Complaint Volume: Whether to provide superior service to key customers and accounts or to reduce the overall number of service claims filed, few companies employ a penalty system (12%) or an incentive system (20%). The processes and benefits of these systems are therefore not well-established. When dealing with both key customers and problematic customers on claim issues, companies generally adopt flexible approaches. In fact, only 6% of companies automatically deny late service claims from the latter group.

Non-Centralized Complaint Management Structures Are Common in Companies Providing High-Volume Customer Support
: Companies that support a large number of product orders and manage hundreds or thousands of service claims per month tend to distribute complaint management across the organization in hybrid, and especially decentralized, management models. Companies employing a centralized complaint management structure managed an average of just 8,547 customer orders and 169 service claims each month. In contrast, companies employing de-centralized complaint management structure managed an average of 64,605 customer orders and 1,725 service claims each month.

Late Deliveries Are the Largest Source of Service Claims: Benchmark companies ranked late deliveries as the complaint category responsible for generating the largest number of service claims as compared to other claims types such as shipment errors, damages, and shortages. The tracking and resolving of Product Quality complaints also represents a key focus area for many complaint resolution groups.


Table of Contents

Project Overview
  • Benchmark Class Profile
  • Key Findings
  • Complaint Resolution Groups: Structure, Roles & Responsibilities
  • Listening to Customer Complaints to Glean Improvement Insights
  • Service Claim Resolution Benchmarks
  • Reducing Complaint Volume
  • Complaint Process Automation & Analytics
  • Driving Improvements via the Complaints Process
  • Lessons Learned: Turning Customer Complaints into Business Improvements