“When facing a reputation problem, most organizations simply rebrand. This is the safe route: stick with what you know but tell the public you are innovating, hoping they won’t notice you’re doing nothing of the sort. But Avaya CEO Kevin Kennedy saw the deeper problem behind Avaya’s NPS score and knew radical change was necessary… Even though the transformation Avaya underwent was risky, Kennedy saw an even bigger risk in that unfortunate NPS score. If customers didn’t like Avaya’s services, it was a bigger risk to stick to the game plan than it was to roll the dice on some new approaches.”
Uri Neren on HBR.
If there’s a statistic that’s taken telco by storm, it’s the NPS or Net Promoter Score (You can find some service provider NPS scores here BTW). NPS is a pseudo or indicator of an organisation’s ability to leverage word-of-mouth marketing, positively or negatively.
By measuring and tracking their NPS metric, companies are being transparent about how customers perceive them, taking the risk that the perception might not be great, but establishing a benchmark against which to seek improvement.
What do you think the outcome would be if OSS vendors / integrators took the risk of opening themselves up to NPS evaluation? Would the metric be highly positive, negative, or somewhere in between? If I were to judge the industry as a whole, I would give it a strong positive (the PAOSS domain name says it all), but I suspect the broader user community might judge OSS a little more harshly.
Now assuming that there are some OSS providers with negative results, is it a bigger risk to stick to the game plan than it is to roll the dice on some new approaches? I’d never thought of NPS through this risk lens before, so hat tip to Uri Neren for this insightful perspective.Read the Passionate About OSS Blog for more or Subscribe to the Passionate About OSS Blog by Email