Skip to main content
Log in

Derived vs. stated importance in customer satisfaction surveys

  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A common problem faced while analysing data from customer satisfaction surveys is the comparison of stated and derived importance for a set of satisfaction dimensions. Stated importance is defined as the straightforward customer preferences for the weight of a satisfaction criterion, while derived importance is estimated by a regression-type quantitative technique using customer judgments for the performance of this set of criteria. This paper presents a methodological framework for the comparative analysis of the derived and stated importance, given that significant differences are usually observed between them. The evaluation of derived importance is based on the MUSA method, while a sorting regression model for ordinal variables is used to estimate stated importance. This proposed model uses linear programming techniques and follows the principles of preference disaggregation approach. The main result of the analysis refers to the development of a dual importance diagram, which combines the derived and stated importance of the criteria. Also, this diagram may introduce the principles of Kano's approach for defining different quality levels and may give the ability to classify customer requirements. The implementation of the proposed approach is illustrated through several real-world applications and the presented results are focused on the development of improvement strategies. Future research is also discussed through this paper, including alternative formulations for modelling this particular problem.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, D.R. and T.R. Rao (2000). Analysis of customer satisfaction data. ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger R. Blauth and D. Boger (1993). Kano's methods for understanding customer-defined quality. The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, vol. Fall, 3-35.

  • Beuthe, M. and Scannella, G. (1996). Applications comparées des méthodes d'analyse multicritére UTA. RAIRO Recherche Operationelle vol. 30(3), 293–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beuthe, M. and Scannella, G. (2001). Comparative analysis of UTA multicriteria methods. European Journal of Operational Research vol. 130(2), 246–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doumpos, M. and C. Zopounidis (2002). Multicriteria decision aid classification methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin A. and J.R. Häuser (1993). The voice of the customer. Marketing Science, vol. Winter, 1–27.

  • Grigoroudis E., Samaras B., Matsatsinis N.F. and Siskos Y. (1999a). Preference and customer satisfaction analysis: An integrated multicriteria decision aid approach. In: Despotie D.K., Zopounidis C., (Eds.). Proceedings of the 5th Decision Sciences Institute's International Conference on Integrating Technology & Human Decisions: Global Bridges into the 21st Century vol. 2, 1350–1352.

  • Grigoroudis, E., Malandrakis J., Politis J. and Siskos Y. (1999b). Customer satisfaction measurement: An application to the Greek shipping sector. In: Despotis D.K, Zopounidis C, (Eds.). Proceedings of the 5th Decision Sciences Institute's International Conference on Integrating Technology & Human Decisions: Global Bridges into the 21st Century vol. 2, 1363–1365.

  • Grigoroudis, E. and Y. Siskos (2002). Preference disaggregation for measuring and analysing customer satisfaction: The MUSA method. European Journal of Operational Research vol.l43(l), 148–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, N. (1996). Handbook of customer satisfaction measurement. Gower Publishing, Hampshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinterhuber, H.H., H. Aicher and W. Lobenwein (1994). Unternehmenswwert und Lean Management. Manz-Verlag, Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huiskonen and Pirttila (1998). Sharpening logistics customer service strategy planning by applying Kano's quality element classification. International Journal of Production Economics vol. 56-57, 253-260.

  • Jacquet-Lagrèze, E. and J. Siskos (1982). Assessing a set of additive utility functions for multicriteria decision-making: The UTA method. European Journal of Operational Research vol. 10(2), 151–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kano N. (1984). Attractive quality and must-be quality. The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control, vol. April, 39–48.

  • Lowenstein, M.W. (1995). Customer Retention — An integrated Process for Keeping Your Best Customers. ASQC Press, Milwaukee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matzler, K. and H.H. Hinterhuber (1998). How to make product development projects more successful by integrating Kano's model of customer satisfaction into quality function deployment. Technovation vol. 18(1), 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matzler, K., H.H. Hinterhuber, F. Bailom and E. Sauerwein (1996). How to delight your customers. Journal of Product and Brand Management vol. 5(2), 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihelis, G., Grigoroudis, E., Siskos, Y., Politis, Y. and Malandrakis, Y. (2001). Customer satisfaction measurement in the private bank sector. European Journal of Operational Research vol. 130(2), 347–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naumann, E. and K. Giel (1995). Customer Satisfaction Measurement and Management: Using the voice of the customer. Thomson Executive Press, Cincinnati.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, R. L. (1996). Satisfaction: A behavioral perspective on the customer. McGraw- Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen, X.X., Tan, K.C. and Xie, M. (2000). An integrated approach to innovative product development using Kano’s model and QFD. European Journal of Innovation Journal vol 3(2), 91–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, Y. (1984). Le traitement des solutions quasi-optimales en programmation linéaire continue: Une synthèse. RAIRO Recherche Opérationnelle vol. 18, 382- 401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, Y. (1985). Analyses de régression et programmation linéaire. Revue de Statistique Appliquée vol. XXXII, 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, Y. and D. Yannacopoulos (1985). UTASTAR: An ordinal regression method for building additive value functions. Investigaçao Operacional vol. 5(1), 39–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, Y., Grigoroudis, E., Zopounidis C. and Saurais, O., (1998). Measuring customer satisfaction using a collective preference disaggregation model. Journal of Global Optimization vol. 12, 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siskos Y., Grigoroudis E., Politis Y. and Malandrakis Y. (2001a). Customer satisfaction evaluation: Some real experiences. In Colorni A., Paruccini M., Roy (Eds.). A-MCDA: Multiple criteria decision aiding. European Commission, Joint Research Center. EUR 19808 EN, 297-314.

  • Siskos, Y., Politis, Y. and Kazantzi, G. (2001b). Multicriteria methodology for the evaluation of higher education systems: The case of an engineering department. Operational Research An International Journal vol. 1, 17–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siskos, Y. and Grigoroudis, E. (2002). Measuring customer satisfaction for various services using multicriteria analysis. In: Bouyssou, D., Jacquet-Lagrèze, E., Showinski, R., Vanderpooten, D., Vincke, P., (Eds.). Aiding decisions with multiple criteria: Essays in honor of Bernard Roy, 457–482. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, K.C. and Pawitra, T.A. (2001). Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano's model into QFD for service excellence development. Managing Service Quality vol.11(6), 418–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vavra, T.G. (1997). Improving your measurement of customer satisfaction. ASQC Quality Press, Milwaukee.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zopounidis C. and Doumpos M. (2001). A preference disaggregation decision support system for financial classification problems. European Journal of Operation Research vol. 130 (2), 402–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to E. Grigoroudis or O. Spyridaki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grigoroudis, E., Spyridaki, O. Derived vs. stated importance in customer satisfaction surveys. Oper Res Int J 3, 229–247 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936403

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02936403

Keywords

Navigation