Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDepartment of Physical S.docx

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
Department of Physical Sciences
Home Work # 4 & 5
PS 103 � Technical Physics�I
Due Date: Oct 3, 2014 (Friday)
Name:
Date: September 23, 2014 (Tuesday)
Semester: Fall-2014
Section:
Total point: 20
Important:
• Home work is due in the beginning of the class on the date
mentioned above.
• Please note that providing answers without showing any
working will not qualify as correct. So to get
full points show EACH AND EVERY STEP.
• Please answer all questions neat and clean in as much detail as
you can.
• All the conventions followed in the homework are same as that
of lectures.

Question# 1:- You throw a ball vertically upward from the roof
of a tall building. The ball leaves your hand
at a point even with the roof railing with an upward speed of
15.0 m/s; the ball is then in free fall. On
its way back down, it just misses the railing. Find
a) the ball’s position and velocity 1.00 s, 2.00 s, 3.00 s, and
4.00 s after leaving your hand;
b) the ball’s velocity when it is 5.00 m above the railing;
c) the maximum height reached;
d) the ball’s acceleration when it is at its maximum height.
e) At what time after being released has the ball fallen 5.00 m
below the roof railing? and what will
it’s speed be at that time?
f) At what time after being released has the ball fallen 2.00 m
below the roof railing? and what will
it’s speed be at that time?
Question# 2:- The boat in Figure 1 is heading due
north as it crosses a wide river with a velocity of
10.0 km/h relative to the water. The river has a
uniform velocity of 5.00 km/h due east. Determine
the magnitude and direction of the boat’s velocity
with respect to an observer on the riverbank.
Figure 1: Problem-2
1

Question# 3:- A batter hits a baseball so that it leaves
the bat at speed v0 = 37.0 m/s at an angle ↵ 0 =
53.1�.
a) Find the position of the ball and its velocity
(magnitude and direction) at t = 2.00 s.
b) Find the time when the ball reaches the high-
est point of its flight, and its height h at this
time.
c) Find the horizontal range R that is, the hor-
izontal distance from the starting point to
where the ball hits the ground. Figure 2: Problem-3
Question# 4:- Two tanks are engaged in a training exercise on
level ground. The first tank fires a paint-filled
training round with a muzzle speed of 250 m/s at 10.0� above
the horizontal while advancing toward the
second tank with a speed of 15.0 m/s relative to the ground. The
second tank is retreating at 35.0 m/s
relative to the ground, but is hit by the shell. You can ignore air
resistance and assume the shell hits at
the same height above ground from which it was fired. Find the
distance between the tanks
a) when the round was first fired and
b) at the time of impact.
Question# 5:- Workmen are trying to free an SUV
stuck in the mud. To extricate the vehicle, they use
three horizontal ropes, producing the force vectors

shown Figure 3.
a) Find the x� and y�components of each of the
three pulls.
b) Use the components to find the magnitude and
direction of the resultant of the three pulls. Figure 3: Problem-5
Question# 6:- Two horses are pulling a barge with
mass 2.00⇥103 kg along a canal, as shown in Figure
4. The cable connected to the first horse makes an
angle of ✓1 = 30.0
� with respect to the direction of
the canal, while the cable connected to the second
horse makes an angle of ✓1 = 30.0
�. Find the initial
acceleration of the barge, starting at rest, if each
horse exerts a force of magnitude 6.00 ⇥ 102 N on
the barge. Ignore forces of resistance on the barge.
Figure 4: Problem-6
Question# 7:- Two dogs pull horizontally on ropes attached to a
post; the angle between the ropes is 60.0�.
If dog A exerts a force of 270 N and dog B exerts a force of 300
N, find the magnitude of the resultant
force and the angle it makes with dog A’s rope.
2

Question# 8:- A 68.5-kg skater moving initially at 2.40 m/s on
rough horizontal ice comes to rest uniformly
in 3.52 s due to friction from the ice. What force does friction
exert on the skater?
Question# 9:- You walk into an elevator, step onto a scale, and
push the “up” button. You also recall that
your normal weight is 625 N. Start answering each of the
following questions by drawing a freebody
diagram.
a) If the elevator has an acceleration of magnitude 2.50 m/s2,
what does the scale read?
b) If you start holding a 3.85-kg package by a light vertical
string, what will be the tension in this string
once the elevator begins accelerating?
Question# 10:- A box rests on a frozen pond, which serves as a
frictionless horizontal surface. If a fisherman
applies a horizontal force with magnitude 48.0 N to the box and
produces an acceleration of magnitude
3.00 m/s2, what is the mass of the box?
Question# 11:- Boxes A and B are in contact on a hor-
izontal, frictionless surface, as shown in Figure 5.
Box A has mass 20.0 kg and box B has mass 5.0
kg. A horizontal force of 100 N is exerted on box
A. What is the magnitude of the force that box A
exerts on box B? Figure 5: Problem-11
Question# 12:- Two objects of mass m1 and m2, with
m2 > m1, are connected by a light, inextensible
cord and hung over a frictionless pulley, as in Ac-
tive Figure 6. Both cord and pulley have negligible
mass. Find the magnitude of the acceleration of the

system and the tension
Figure 6: Problem-12
Question# 13:- A 150-N bird feeder is supported by
three cables as shown in Figure 7. Find the tension
in each cable.
Question# 14:- An object with mass m1 = 5.00 kg
rests on a frictionless horizontal table and is con-
nected to a cable that passes over a pulley and
is then fastened to a hanging object with mass
m2 = 10.0 kg, as shown in Figure 8. Find
a) the acceleration of each object and
b) the tension in the cable.
3
3 6 x M M n o v e m b e r / D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 8
the voice
Getting more from
of the customer
Organizations don’t have to fall short when it comes to
leveraging insights drawn from the voice of the customer.

M M n o v e m b e r / D e c e m b e r 2 0 0 8 x 3 7
At first glance, the news looks good for
buyers and consumers: Improving the customer experience is a
top priority in a
majority of companies. At least that’s what these organizations
say in advertise-
ments, annual reports and other communications—as well as in
statements made
by their leaders and senior executives. A March 15, 2005
Forrester Research survey
by Bruce D. Temkin, Customers Will Get More Attention in
2005: Survey of NA Firms
Identifies Customer Experience Priorities, for example, found
that 96% of senior ex-
ecutives say improving the customer experience is either critical
or very critical to
the future success and growth of their companies.
Unfortunately, a closer look reveals the rest of the story: The
same Forrester
Research survey indicates that a majority of firms confess to
delivering “sub-par
experiences to customers.”
Perhaps there would be less cause for alarm if the results of the
foregoing sur-
vey were exceptional—but they are not. Findings from other
recent studies suggest
that trends in customer service and satisfaction are stagnant, or
even declining.
One 2007 global benchmarking study by D. Berenbaum and T.
Larkinby (How to
Talk to Customers, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass) showed a

reduction in customer satis-
faction from 82% to 68% in the last year alone. According to J.
McGregor, writing in
Business Week (February 21, 2008), results
of the J. D. Power and Associates 2008 Cus-
tomer Service Champs study also revealed
a decline in customer service ratings in a majority of industries.
Furthermore, this
pattern in customer satisfaction and service quality scores does
not appear to be
confined to just the last couple of years. In fact, in nearly every
industry that has
participated in the American Customer Satisfaction Index
(ACSI) survey since
its inception in 1994, current scores are essentially the same as
they were in that
baseline year, or else they have declined—in some cases,
substantially. (It is true
that upward or downward swings in ACSI scores have been
observed over the
years, and these variations are more pronounced in some
industries than others.
But a comparison of the most recent ASCI scores to those from
the 1994 baseline
are either negligible or reveal a decline. Details are available at
www.theacsi.org.)
So if companies really believe that improving customer
experience is such a
top priority, why aren’t there more improvements in customer
satisfaction? Many
explanations have been offered. Some assert that buyer
expectations and require-
ments have risen, and that customers simply are not as easily

satisfied as they
were in the past. Others blame cutbacks in service and staffing
due to challenging
economic conditions. Still others suggest that companies
themselves aren’t quite
sure how to deliver great service, or have failed to enable their
employees and
partners to do so.
B y D. R a n d a l l B r a n d t
They say it is a top priority, but a majority of companies are not
improving their customers’
experiences. One reason is that many of these companies
continue to struggle to put the voice
of the customer (VOC) to work. Here we examine the specific
challenges that are preventing
companies from using VOC data to improve the customer
experience, and offer some general strategies for addressing the
most vexing of these challenges.
There also are skeptics. In the collective opinion of this
crowd, the emperor has no clothes—or as one observer put
it, “despite their rhetoric, most organizations have not made
a significant and sustained commitment to customer satisfac-
tion” (Denove, C. and J.D. Powers IV (2006). Satisfaction: How
Every Great Company Listens to the Voice of the Customer.
New

York: Portfolio; p.1).
Most likely, there is some measure of truth in each of the
preceding perspectives. However, after decades of working
with organizations in automotive, financial services, retail,
hospitality, telecommunications and other sectors, my col-
leagues and I have concluded that there may be at least
one additional factor in play. Simply put, a lot of companies
are trying—but have yet to figure out—how to improve
customer experience by putting the voice of the customer
to work.
It is true that many organizations recognize the value
of the voice of the customer (VOC). Investments made by
organizations in VOC methods and processes have grown
steadily from the early 1980s to the present. Today, hundreds of
organizations regularly conduct surveys, solicit comments and
complaints and gather data from other VOC sources in order
to identify and pursue opportunities to improve customer
experiences and relationships. In fact, according to a study by
A. Wilson (“Attitudes Towards Customer Satisfaction Mea-
surement in the Retail Sector, International Journal of
Marketing
Research, 2002, 44, 2, pp. 213-222) at least one study indicates
that customer satisfaction data collection “is typically the larg-
est item of firms’ annual expenditure on market intelligence,
and is often the only systematic market intelligence that a firm
generates.”
But while capturing the voice of the customer is one thing,
putting it to work is quite another. The trouble is most orga-
nizations have not implemented the necessary methods and
processes for integrating the voice of the customer into day-to-
day management and operations—and this is inhibiting their
ability to use VOC-driven insights to improve the customer
experience.

The purpose of this article is to offer a closer look at the
specific issues and challenges that are preventing companies
from using VOC data to improve the customer experience.
Subsequently, we share some general strategies for addressing
the most vexing of the challenges.
Our research
Just how effective are companies at integrating the voice
of the customer into day-to-day management and operations?
How successful are these companies in taking action based
upon intelligence and insights derived from VOC sources?
What are the specific issues and challenges that inhibit transla-
tion of VOC data into practices and policies that lead to im-
proved customer experiences and/or achievement of desired
business results?
These were the questions that led us to conduct the 2007
Maritz VOC Practices and Challenges Survey. Specifically,
there
were two basic objectives to the survey:
• Determine how managers assess their organization’s over-
all effectiveness in putting the voice of the customer
to work.
• Identify specific issues and challenges that may inhibit the
ability of organizations to integrate and deploy the voice
of the customer.
Using input from exploratory research with numerous
clients, along with discussions with our own account manag-
ers and subject matter experts, we developed a list of 22 VOC
issues and challenges that were repeatedly mentioned. This list
was used to design items included in the survey instrument,

which also contained questions about overall effectiveness at
VOC integration and deployment.
We targeted managers of “Blue Chip” companies, with a
total of 131 managers completing the online survey. Indus-
tries represented include automotive, consumer electronics,
electric and gas utilities, retail banking, healthcare, hotel and
lodging, information technology, insurance, pharmaceuticals,
transportation and telecommunications. Approximately 80%
of the managers interviewed came from marketing research,
consumer research, marketing, customer service or brand man-
agement. (Since the data obtained from these interviews are
proprietary, we have kept the names of managers and compa-
nies confidential.)
what did we learn?
For the most part, the results of the survey confirm what
my colleagues and I have suspected for some time: Most
organizations are not where they want to be when it comes to
exeCUtive
briefing
integrating and deploying insights drawn from the voice of the
customer.
• Of the managers surveyed, 75% indicated their organiza-
tions are either struggling or at least need to improve at
integrating the voice of the customer into day-to-day
management and operations.

• Of the managers surveyed, 81% indicated that their organi-
zations are either struggling or at least need to improve at
taking action on the basis of the voice of the customer.
• At least 50% or more of these managers indicated that
their organizations have been able to successfully address
the following:
• Gain senior management buy-in to the importance
of VOC.
• Maintain awareness of VOC purpose and goals.
• Select survey and other customer metrics.
• Convince managers/partners that surveys are accurate.
• Get internal clients/partners to understand VOC.
• Use customer survey as part of the management
dashboard.
• Use inbound customer complaints to manage
relationships with individual customers.
• Use survey results as a basis for defining action items.
• Use customer survey data to manage relationships with
individual customers.
• On the flip side, at least 50% or more of these managers
indicated that their organizations continue to struggle to do
the following:
• Integrate multiple sources of VOC data to define
priorities.
• Demonstrate the link between customer and financial
metrics.

• Link VOC to internal operational metrics.
• Integrate VOC and VOE (voice of employee) data.
• Clarify survey action items so owners know what to do.
• Pinpoint practices/processes that must be improved.
• Communicate action plans to address survey action
items.
• Get internal clients/partners to act on VOC information.
Thus, on the “good news” front, a majority of organizations
have been generally successful at (a) establishing awareness
and buy-in regarding the importance of the voice of the cus-
tomer, (b) selecting and capturing VOC data and metrics, (c)
using these metrics to “keep score,” and (d) using these metrics
to take action on a limited scale (e.g., to manage individual
customer relationships).
On the other hand, most still perceive the need to improve
with regard to (a) integrating multiple sources of VOC data to
develop insights and establish priorities for improving the
customer experience, (b) linking VOC data/metrics with
other business process and results data/metrics, and (c) taking
action.
The results of the 2007 Maritz VOC Practices and Challenges
Survey are consistent with the findings of at least two addition-
al and relatively recent studies. Neil Morgan and his colleagues
conducted a study of 37 companies spanning multiple indus-
tries (N.A. Morgan, E. W. Anderson, and V. Mittal, “Under-
standing Firms’ Customer Satisfaction Information Usage,”
Journal of Marketing, July, 2005, pp. 135-151). They observed
many of the same problems reported by managers who partici-
pated in our survey:
• In most of the firms studied, there is little or no integra-
tion of customer survey data with other customer data

and/or relevant data from elsewhere in the firm.
• In all but one firm, measures of customer satisfaction are
not linked to actual customer purchase behavior and/or
financial results.
• Data are distributed to managers without identifying
root causes or fixes to guide action planning.
• Insights from customer satisfaction measures are not
distributed to frontline employees and/or many func-
tional areas that could and should use them to improve
quality and service.
• Customer satisfaction data tend to be used to support
decision making in a very narrow and tactical, rather
than broad-based and strategic, fashion.
Similarly, a study reported by The Gantry Group (The
Gantry Group (2008). Best Practices for Customer Satisfaction
Programs) indicates that the following are the three biggest
challenges faced by companies trying to improve their cus-
tomer satisfaction initiatives. (A copy of this study may be
obtained at www.gantrygroup.com.):
• Achieving the necessary customer satisfaction data
detail to pinpoint where in our business processes
the problems originate
• Distilling customer satisfaction data into actionable,
high-impact recommendations
• Tying customer satisfaction to organizational
performance
All of the preceding findings suggest that organizations

may go through a developmental process of VOC integration
and deployment, such as the one illustrated in Exhibit 1. Dur-
ing the early stages of this process, companies progress from
building awareness and buy-in regarding the importance of the
voice of the customer—through capturing and analyzing VOC
data and reporting key insights/action items derived from
these data. Much of the action taken in response to the voice
of the customer is relatively limited in scope, such as using
customer feedback to respond to individual customer prob-
lems or complaints. Most organizations we surveyed currently
are somewhere in these early to mid-stages of this process.
In order to progress to a more advanced stage of VOC inte-
gration and deployment, organizations must develop methods
to (a) make different VOC data sources “work together,” (b)
link the voice of the customer to business processes and results,
and (c) develop effective processes for taking action based
upon VOC data, so that the voice of the customer is success-
fully integrated into day-to-day management and operations.
A few of the organizations we surveyed have progressed to
this stage, but they are in the minority.
Clearly, there is more to success at putting the voice of the
customer to work than just capturing and sharing VOC data
with managers, and telling them to use it. Yet this appears to
be as far as many organizations have gotten in their efforts to
integrate and deploy the voice of the customer.
So, what can be done?
Strategy 1: Adopt a uniform set of customer experience

categories, and apply it consistently to all VOC data sources.
It is a common (and unfortunate) practice for organizations to
use multiple category schemes to analyze data from various
VOC sources. Thus, one set of categories or attributes is used to
construct survey rating items; a slightly different set is used to
sort, code and tabulate answers to open-ended survey ques-
tions; and yet another set is used to organize inbound cus-
tomer comments captured at Web sites or via contact centers.
A consequence of this practice is that managers cannot make
direct, apples-to-apples comparisons among results obtained
from these VOC sources.
So, what are companies that have successfully integrated
multiple sources of VOC data doing? Here is what two of the
managers we surveyed, who indicated their company has
“developed an effective method of addressing this challenge,”
had to say:
“Client feedback is collected from multiple channels using
standard business categories and sub-categories. The applica-
tion of these consistent categories to ever-increasing volumes
of client feedback is finally paying dividends, in the form of
management being ‘convinced’ by quantitative reporting (met-
rics) associated with ‘non-quantitative’ client feedback.”
“We combine survey data with transactional data from our
CRM database using a common set of categories.”
Essentially, these organizations have created a uniform set
of customer experience categories that are consistently applied
in organizing and analyzing VOC data from multiple sources,
regardless of whether the data are metric or non-metric,
qualitative or quantitative. Such an approach makes it pos-
sible to determine if results and conclusions drawn from one
VOC data source converge with those drawn from one or more
other VOC data sources. For example, the “convergence map”

shown in Exhibit 2 presents hypothetical results for an insur-
ance company illustrating how survey ratings can be com-
pared with inbound customer complaints (obtained through a
customer contact center) to identify priorities for improvement.
In this case, both high levels of customer dissatisfaction re-
flected in surveys and a relatively high incidence of complaints
suggest that “promptness of claims handling,” “explanation of
coverage,” and “ease of doing business via the Web site” are
areas in which the company can improve (see upper right-
hand quadrant). This conclusion is being drawn from more
than one VOC data source, which often leads to increased con-
fidence that the “right” elements of the customer experience
have been targeted. Furthermore, if category importance infor-
mation is available, it can be juxtaposed on the elements in the
convergence map to refine the prioritization process. With such
information added, elements of the customer experience that
are highest in importance and in need of improvement (based
on multiple data sources) would be given the highest priority
for action planning and implementation.
Strategy 2: Make linkage a standard feature of VOC
analysis and reporting. Most organizations struggle to link
VOC data to other measures of business processes and results,
such as internal operational metrics, measures of employee
experience and engagement, and/or financial and market
performance measures. For example, here are some comments
managers made in connection with linking customer data to
financial and other key business results:
“Most leaders ‘get’ the importance issue, but monetizing
key customer measures is still a work in progress, we’re work-
ing hard on it, and we’re not yet there.”
“An executive committee has been tasked with develop-
ing ways to demonstrate the link (between customer survey

metrics and business results), but nothing concrete has come
out of this.”
n exhibit 1
A continuum of VOC integration and deployment
Most organizations
are here
Early stages
of integration
and deployment
Bu
ild
a
w
ar
en
es
s
of
im
po
rta
nc
e

of
V
OC
Ac
hi
ev
e
bu
y-
in
to
im
po
rta
nc
e
of
V
OC
Ca
pt
ur
e

VO
C
da
ta
An
al
yz
e
VO
C
da
ta
Re
po
rt
in
si
gh
ts
a
nd
ac
tio

n
ite
m
s
Ta
ke
a
ct
io
n
on
lim
ite
d
sc
al
e
Li
nk
V
OC
to
b

us
in
es
s
pr
oc
es
se
s
an
d
re
su
lts
Ta
ke
a
ct
io
n
on
br
oa

d
sc
al
e
In
te
gr
at
e
VO
C
in
to
m
an
ag
em
en
t a
nd
op
er

at
io
ns
Only a few
organizations
are here
Advanced stages
of integration
and deployment
“We are still challenged to link (customer survey) results to
business results such as revenue or market share.”
Linkage analysis can and should be performed routinely
as part of an organization’s effort to integrate the voice of the
customer into day-to-day management and operations. For
instance, establishing a clear connection between a customer
loyalty metric and actual customer retention and revenue
helps build a “business case” for managing and improving
customer experience. There are many ways to establish such a
connection, and the key is to adopt the approach that is most
appropriate for your market and industry. For details on how
to link customer and financial metrics, see Brandt, et al., 2004,
“Burden of Proof,” Marketing Research, Fall, 14-20; and
Brandt,
2007, “For Good Measure,” Marketing Management, January/
February, 20-25.

Customer metrics also can and should be linked to inter-
nal operational measures, so that targets for the latter can be
aligned with customer needs and expectations. For example,
the analysis illustrated in Exhibit 3 shows how variations in
claims handling cycle time are related to higher or lower levels
of customer satisfaction with “promptness of claims handling.”
Such an analysis provides insight into where to “set the bar”
for cycle time in order to achieve the desired level of customer
satisfaction.
Generally speaking, the insights derived from linkage
analyses enable managers to see and “connect the dots.” Man-
agers see why managing the customer experience matters and
how business processes and activities can/should be aligned to
achieve such improvement.
Strategy 3: Implement a formal process for translating
VOC data into action. Many companies struggle to take action
based on the voice of the customer, and a number of the man-
agers we surveyed specifically commented on this:
“We have not been able to convert client satisfaction results
into action to fix local problems.”
“There is lots of talk about using survey results to drive
change, but little concrete action so far.”
“The challenge for us is to get data that is actionable
enough for use by individual engineers or project teams.”
A prevalent practice in far too many organizations is to
hand customer feedback to managers, accompanied by instruc-
tions to “use the results to take action.” The consequences?
Quite often no action is taken and/or the impact of actions

taken is unclear:
• Responsibility for the customer issue may not be clear,
which can result in no one taking ownership (or the
wrong parties taking ownership), and ultimately no ac-
tion (or ineffective actions) being taken.
• Insufficient detail regarding what the customer wants,
needs or expects may make it difficult to determine
what actions should be taken.
• Unless business processes or practices that directly
impact the customer issue are identified, the organiza-
tion may end up “fixing” the wrong things (or doing
nothing).
The three-step process illustrated in Exhibit 4 is a system-
atic approach to moving from data to action.
n exhibit 3
Aligning customer satisfaction and internal performance targets
Customer
dissatisfaction
threshold
C
us
to
m
er
s

at
is
fa
ct
io
n
w
it
h
“p
ro
m
pt
ne
ss
o
f c
la
im
s
ha
nd
li
ng

”
Actual claims processing time
Higher
Lower
Shorter Longer
n exhibit 2
Convergence map integrating survey and inbound complaint
data
Incidence of
inbound customer
complaints
Higher
• Ease to understanding
billing statements
• Competitive pricing
• Variety of coverage
options
• Accuracy of
billing statements
• Agent’s knowledge
of products
• Agents response

to requests
• Ease of policy renewal
• Ease of making
policy changes
• Availability of agent
• Promptness of claims
handling
• Explanation of
coverage
Lower
Lower Higher
Percent “dissatisfied” ratings from surveys
Adopting such a formal process for translating VOC data
into action plans furnishes an effective approach for addressing
five of the most vexing challenges discussed earlier:
• Identifying owners of customer-driven action items
• Clarifying survey action items so owners know what
to do
• Pinpointing practices and processes that must be
improved

• Communicating plans to address action items
• Getting internal clients/partners to act on VOC
information
By taking the time to carry out the recommended process,
an organization puts itself in a very good position to make im-
provements because: (a) The people and parts of the organiza-
tion that impact the targeted element of the customer experi-
ence have taken ownership of it; (b) Managers have a detailed
understanding of what the customer wants done (or done dif-
ferently); and (c) Specific processes, activities, and other busi-
ness enablers that furnish the means of addressing the targeted
element of the customer experience have been identified.
Essentially, the organization is better prepared for action,
because it has taken the “guess work” out of customer-driven
improvement. The organization has constructed a bridge on
the road from data to action. This requires some extra effort,
but it increases the odds of success substantially.
Moving forward
Senior executives may make commitments to being
customer-driven, and they may acknowledge the importance
of the voice of the customer. Companies can make investments
in capturing, crunching and sharing insights derived from
VOC data. These steps will allow organizations to make some
progress toward putting the voice of the customer to work.
However, unless the necessary methods and processes of VOC
integration and deployment are put in place, progress likely
will be stalled. The results of our research reinforce the last
point: Most organizations have not progressed beyond early-
to-mid stages of VOC integration and deployment because
they have not yet implemented the necessary strategies.

There are three strategies that may enable organizations
to move to an advanced stage of VOC integration and
deployment:
• Adopt a uniform set of customer experience categories
and apply it consistently to all VOC data sources.
• Make linkage a standard feature of VOC analysis
and reporting.
• Implement a formal process for translating customer
data into action. n
about the author
D. Randall Brandt is vice president of customer experience
and loyalty at Maritz Research. He may be reached at
[email protected]
n exhibit 4
A three-step process for translating VOC data into action
Customer-driven
action item
identified
Do we know who is
responsible for this
action item?
Do the owners have
sufficient under-
standing and detail?
Have the relevant

business “enablers”
been identified?
Develop and
implement appropriate
action plan
“Drill-Down” into
the issue for clarity
and granularity
Pinpoint the
relevant operations,
processes, policies,
and other business
enablers
Determine owners
of customer-driven
action item
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDepartment of Physical S.docx

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDepartment of Physical S.docx

Ähnlich wie Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDepartment of Physical S.docx (12)

Mehr von jack60216

Mehr von jack60216 (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical UniversityDepartment of Physical S.docx