Annex A
ENTERPRISE INNS—CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
SURVEY 2004
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
This is the 2nd survey of this type that we
have conducted (the first was run by an outside agency in June
2003). This year's survey was undertaken in-house and was designed
to achieve a number of key objectives:
— To measure any movement in the levels
of customer satisfaction over time.
— To seek information on service level
developments (actual and proposed).
— To assess the current overall levels
of customer satisfaction.
METHOD
355 licensees were consulted (by appointment),
during the first three weeks of May 2004.
They were asked a number of questions relating
to their opinions on the quality of the service and support provided
by the business and for example:
— What goods and services would you
expect to receive from an excellent PubCo?
— How does EIP score against that level
of expectation?
— Other information (eg what training
courses would help you most).
— Would you recommend EIP as an example
of an excellent Pub Company?
INDUSTRY BACKGROUND
AT THE
TIME THE
SURVEY WAS
COMPLETED
— Crehan vs Inntrepreneur—successful
tie claim by ex tenant in long running dispute—judgement
21/05/04.
— Trade and Industry Select Committee—announced
Pubco inquiry.
— Government announced a crackdown
on anti social behaviour consistent with the overall aims of the
alcohol harm reduction strategy.
OVERALL SATISFACTION
LEVELS
There was a significant improvement from last
year, with 84% saying they would definitely, probably or maybe
recommend Enterprise as an example of an excellent Pub Company.
GAP BETWEEN
EXPECTATION AND
DELIVERY
High expectation levels were expressed by licensees,
with a significant number of customers seeing everything as being
very important. For this reason, caution must be exercised in
drawing conclusions based upon a comparative analysis.
Blue shows expectancy levels. Red shows gap
between expectation and delivery.
AREAS OF
GREATEST IMPORTANCE
TO LICENSEES
The area of greatest importance as expressed
by licensees was "Beer deliveries" at 98.5%. The second
most important area was the "Ordering process" at 98.4%.
ANALYSIS OF THE GAP BETWEEN LICENSEE EXPECTATION
AND EIP DELIVERY
|
Areas of greatest gap
(Last year's scores are shown in Italic)
| |
|
| Start up business support | (-36%)
| (-33%) |
| Brand owner support | (-34%)
| (n/a) |
| Training | (-36%)
| (-34%) |
| Property repair support | (-34%)
| (est-40%) |
| Marketing/Promotions/Business Support | (-41%)
| (-47%) |
Areas of below average gap
(Last year's scores are shown in Italic)
| |
| Head office support | (-31%)
| (-31%) |
| Ordering process | (-29%)
| (-24%) |
| Regional Managers | (-24%)
| (-25%) |
| Deliveries | (-22%)
| (-31%) |
|
ANALYSIS OF
INDIVIDUAL COMMENTS
At the end of the survey, respondents were asked if there
was anything else they would like to tell us. All individual comments
have been analysed, and here are the main points:
— (14%) state beer prices are a major issue.
— Other main concerns are:
— Getting through to telesales.
— Delivery issues.
— Not seeing RM or RPM.
— Many licensees say they are very happy with the
service they receive from EIP.
CONCLUSION
The main conclusions of the 03/04 survey can be summarised
as follows:
1. Overall, 84% of licensees think we are definitely,
probably or maybe an excellent pub company.
2. Licensee expectations of service are high.
3. Levels of customer satisfaction have improved over
last year.
4. Some areas of concern have however been expressed:
(b) Rent setting and reviews.
(c) Support of new licensees.
(e) Ease of contacting telesales.
(f) Need for money saving deals.
(g) Understanding the licensees' business needs.
(h) Offering general promotional and business support.
(i) Value for money with training.
5. Whilst levels of overall satisfaction are improving,
there is scope for the business to improve it's service in a number
of specific areas.
OUTCOMES AND
NEXT STEPS
The next steps are/(have been):
1. Presentation to the Executive (complete).
2. Letter to all licensees confirming the completion
of the exercise (completed).
3. Results and Executive brief to Divisional Directors
and Heads of Department.
4. Publish headline results in Eagle Eye (due October).
5. Divisional Directors s and Heads of Department present
to own teams (ongoing).
6. Divisional Directors and Heads of Department to examine
results in detail and feedback to Executive areas for focus and
plans to address gaps in licensees satisfaction (ongoing).
7. Consideration as to frequency of future surveys.
8. Continued inclusion of customer satisfaction. criteria
within the annual employee bonus schemes.
Guy Arnold
Field Operations Director
Gordon Harrison
Operations Director
September 2004
| 
