Frankly, when you think about it, if the Net Promoter tool is being used as it should operationally—and any gaming affects mitigated or otherwise weeded out—then the “score” or the NPS should pretty much reflect what I call the customer/consumer “sentiment” metric that is derived from those rich customer engagement media resources—the other tools—I talked about in my comment. It IS hard work to finally get it right, but when both are executed flawlessly and across the enterprise, it just becomes a way of doing business, and everyone in the loop reaps the benefits.

“Consumers who sometimes feel they are being surveyed to death often criticize the Net Promoter system. Many of these consumers also feel it is not very authentic, because companies often like to cheat the system by prepping customers beforehand or even rewarding them in advance for returning perfect 10 scores. The auto industry is historically notorious for this bad practice.”

I believe there is a similar, unintended trend happening, thanks to the ubiquity of Net Promoter. The fact is that everyone knows the question now, including the science and agenda. I'm sure this is debatable, but my hunch is that deep familiarity with the question leads to bias which leads to gaming.

However, back to Deb's point, if the purpose of Net Promoter is to operationalize and imthe improvement of customer relationships and drive a company’s cross-functional engagement, then perhaps the gaming can be overcome.

Consider an organization that dutifully uses the Net Promoter system, monitors the loyalty metrics and, perhaps, even goes so far as to allow customers to write in comments on the very survey that derives the NPS. Those surveys are often administered by a third party, and the data is input into one of too many customer databases where it usually sits siloed within the company’s “customer satisfaction” department. Mary may have been blown away by the product and customer experience, and Paul may have expressed anger over the same, but no one in the company really “hears” this and thus, there can be no response; no action.

Consumers who sometimes feel they are being surveyed to death often criticize the Net Promoter system. Many of these consumers also feel it is not very authentic, because companies often like to cheat the system by prepping customers beforehand or even rewarding them in advance for returning perfect 10 scores. The auto industry is historically notorious for this bad practice.

I don’t think anything will ever substitute for full on customer and consumer engagement via the many traditional and social media channels available to companies that are willing to do the work, willing to listen and willing to be accountable for the results. The NPS is limited in that it typically only produces a metric that (1) is derived from customer input and (2) reports after-the-fact information.

Companies that are truly on the cutting edge of continually cultivating lifetime advocates are constantly monitoring and participating in the conversations that abound about their brands—in real time. They tend to pull in customers and build their advocacy base because they demonstrate real transparency; they are authentic and credible. They’ve taken care to create a customer experience that is at least commensurate with the brand and they have integrated that important business component throughout the organization so that everyone knows what it takes to deliver on the promise. That’s how great brand reputations and trust and loyalty are built over time. Not just by chasing a metric.

And when things go awry—as they will from time to time—these great companies seek to optimize all of the above and get out ahead of the problem—in real time. Their humility is honest and believable. Failing at that, the greatness fades, and the brand may be irreparably tarnished. Just ask Tiger Woods—or Toyota.

Frankly, when you think about it, if the Net Promoter tool is being used as it should operationally—and any gaming affects mitigated or otherwise weeded out—then the “score” or the NPS should pretty much reflect what I call the customer/consumer “sentiment” metric that is derived from those rich customer engagement media resources—the other tools—I talked about in my comment. It IS hard work to finally get it right, but when both are executed flawlessly and across the enterprise, it just becomes a way of doing business, and everyone in the loop reaps the benefits.

“Consumers who sometimes feel they are being surveyed to death often criticize the Net Promoter system. Many of these consumers also feel it is not very authentic, because companies often like to cheat the system by prepping customers beforehand or even rewarding them in advance for returning perfect 10 scores. The auto industry is historically notorious for this bad practice.”

I believe there is a similar, unintended trend happening, thanks to the ubiquity of Net Promoter. The fact is that everyone knows the question now, including the science and agenda. I'm sure this is debatable, but my hunch is that deep familiarity with the question leads to bias which leads to gaming.

However, back to Deb's point, if the purpose of Net Promoter is to operationalize and imthe improvement of customer relationships and drive a company’s cross-functional engagement, then perhaps the gaming can be overcome.