Complaint management controlling consists of three areas: evidence controlling, task controlling and cost-benefit controlling.
Evidence controlling determines the extent to which customer dissatisfaction is expressed in complaints. It reveals the extent of non-articulated (“unvoiced”) and non-registered (“hidden”) complaints, and thus makes the real size of the ‘annoyance iceberg’ visible.
The focus of task controlling is the specification and monitoring of quality and productivity standards. In the course of subjective task controlling the quality of task fulfillment is monitored from the complainants’ point of view. For this purpose the satisfaction of complainants with all aspects of complaint handling is measured and satisfaction and loyalty standards are set.
Objective task controlling defines objective quality and productivity standards for all task modules of complaint management. The operational control of complaint management tasks can be carried out using the Complaint Management Index (BMI) which provides a quick overview of to what degree the defined quality and productivity targets have been reached.
Cost-benefit-controlling serves to assess the profitability of complaint management.
The costs of complaint management are recorded and analyzed in cost controlling either according to traditional cost accounting or by means of activity-based costing.
The purpose of benefit controlling is the monetary evaluation of the information benefit, the retention benefit and the communication benefit of complaint management. The information benefit can be estimated primarily on the basis of the reduction of warranty and guarantee costs resulting from the use of complaint information. The retention benefit consists of the revenues and profits generated by those customers who could be retained by complaint management. The communication benefit lies in the revenues and profits generated by those customers who could be won by positive word-of-mouth communication of satisfied complainants. The Return on Complaint Management (RoCM) can be used as a measure of the economic efficiency of complaint management.
- Anton J (2007) Call center management by the numbers. Perdue University Press, West LafayetteGoogle Scholar
- Goodman JA et al (2000) Turning CFOs into quality champions. Qual Prog 33(3):47–54Google Scholar
- Heskett JL et al (1997) The service profit chain. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Kumar V (2008) A customer lifetime value. Now Publishers, HanoverGoogle Scholar
- Malthouse CE (2013) Segmentation and lifetime value models using SAS. SAS Institute, CaryGoogle Scholar
- Reichheld FF (2003) The one number you need to grow. Harv Bus Rev 81(12):46–54Google Scholar
- Reichheld FF (2006) The ultimate question: driving good profits and true growth. Harvard Business, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Reichheld FF (2011) The ultimate question 2.0: how net promoter companies thrive in a customer-driven world. Harvard Business, BostonGoogle Scholar
- Ruf S (2007) Würden Sie diese Methode einem Freund empfehlen? In: Verband Schweizer Markt- und Sozialforscher (ed) Jahrbuch 2007. vsms Alpnach, Switzerland, pp 38–40Google Scholar
- Servicebarometer (2017) Kundenmonitor 2017. Servicebarometer, MünchenGoogle Scholar
- Stauss B, Hentschel B (1992) Messung von Kundenzufriedenheit. Marktforschung and Management 36(3):115–122Google Scholar
- TARP (1979) Consumer complaint handling in America: final report. U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs, WashingtonGoogle Scholar