Listening carefully to what customers think about a brand or product is important; after all they are the lifeblood of every business. This is important in hospitality, an industry principally concerned with seamlessly executing emotionally centred transactions, where customers both consciously judge “bundled factors” such as service speed, standards, price and product quality alongside subconscious feelings relating to personal identity/status, fairness and warmth. Undoubtedly the Holy Grail for the industry is some form of algorithm that indisputably links customer service and sales. A solution was proposed by Fred Reichheld in his famous article “The One Number You Need to Grow” in the Harvard Business Review in December 2003) in which, outlining research from 1999 to 2002 on airlines, internet service providers and car rentals, he argued that Net Promoter Score – NPS – was the key customer loyalty/sales growth analytic, stating;

“… If growth is what you’re after, you won’t learn much from complex measurements of customer satisfaction or retention. You simply need to know what your customers tell their friends about you …” 

But what is Net Promoter Score, how much faith does the industry place in it and does it work? 

Essentially, NPS is based around a single question: “How likely are you to recommend this brand/outlet to family and friends?” This is accompanied by a Liker scale rating of ten (very likely) down to zero (not at all). Customers who score the brand 9 or 10 are classed as promoters, 7 or 8 passives and 0 to 6 detractors. NPS is calculated by subtracting the percentage of detractors from promoters (ignoring the passives), with any score of over 50% being deemed extremely good. Furthermore, it is postulated, companies/brands that increase their NPS scores will also, through generating extra customer recommendation, advocacy and promotion, increase their sales. Additionally, those companies that have higher NPS scores relative to their competitors also, according to some limited empirical studies, grow more quickly. 

Certainly many big players within the hospitality industry place a lot of faith in NPS, even linking staff incentives to the numbers, using paper-based and/or electronic survey instruments, overseen by “expert” customer service agencies, to track scores on a daily, weekly and monthly basis. Indeed, one major organisation in the sector has made consistent references over the past two years in its quarterly trading/profit updates to the progress it is making in “transforming” its service culture, as evidenced through its increasing NPS scores. Unfortunately, these increases in NPS have not, as yet, translated into sector out-performance. Other organisations I have studied during the course of writing a four-book series on multi-unit enterprises have also failed to find commensurate sales bounces linked to increasing NPS scores. So what is going on? Why don't increases in NPS scores not necessarily translate into growth? What are some of the principal problems with NPS? Here are four suggestions:

The first thing to say about NPS is that it measures existing user attitudes about whether or not they are inclined to recommend. It does not measure real actions; whether or not the respondent actually does recommend and their audience acts upon their recommendations. Its coalescence around “family and friends” is also hampered by the contaminant factors such family proximity (near or close?) and “friends” actually valuing the recommender’s opinion. 

The next issue relates to the fact that although companies might be increasing NPS, they are largely in the dark about how their competitive set is performing. Claiming that healthier NPS will result in growth is clearly fallacious if competitors are already generating NPS momentum of a far higher base. Metaphorically speaking, companies that are reporting great NPS victories on the Western Front need to check out whether their competitors have already designed the neutron bomb that will end the war. 

Good science relies on data that is valid, reliable and replicable. Given that service providers in some companies are rewarded (or punished!) according to NPS outcomes, some might feel compelled to ask/alert only visibly delighted customers, or faithful regulars, to fill in paper-based and/or on-line surveys. This skewing of data renders NPS invalid and unreliable, as does basing NPS on small samples extracted from habitual users who suffer from measurement fatigue.

The last major problem with the measure is that while it solicits the opinions of existing traffic, it fails to capture what lapsed and non-users think of the brand. Essentially, companies can end up measuring a declining band of “ardent adherents”, missing out on important intelligence on why the wider customer market refuses to engage with their product.

Other problems relating to NPS include its poor motivational powers (telling staff that 52% is good is a tough sell), its correlation with wider survey questions (such as speed, quality and amenity), confusing mathematics (20% promoters allied to 80% passives is judged to be the same as 60% promoters minus 40% detractors) and cultural insensitivity (some cultural groups are programmed to answer more positively or negatively than others). 

So where does this leave us? After all, many boards and executives have bought into the efficacy of a simple metric which many of them believe ,if they increase it, will lead to sales growth nirvana. What I would argue, based on my research, is that, first, NPS reliably collated, free from “cheating”, from a valid representative sample, is a useful measure of existing user attitude/opinion, which if it goes up indicates greater satisfaction amongst this group. However, sounder customer metrics, that can be used in tandem in NPS and – in my view – give better indicators of growth include repeat-visit frequency, new user adoption and “word of mouse tracking” (social media brand “hits”, “likes”, searches and comments). Second, and connectedly, I believe there is a correlation between declining NPS and falling sales because the group that is being measured is expressing weaker loyalty which does, indeed, translate into actions (such as staying away). I would, therefore, mischievously pose the question whether or not NPS is better at predicting decline rather than growth, given that those being surveyed can translate their opinions into actions. In the meantime, in spite of the benefits of NPS insight, the search for a single customer metric that indisputably predicts growth goes on.

The US restaurant industry is evolving faster than ever and below are the ten trends that our consultants and experts believe may be transformative in 2015. Predictions are based on Technomic research including consumer and operator surveys and site visits, backed up by data from its Digital Resource Library and vast MenuMonitor database.

1. Lights! Camera! Action!: Dining is no longer just a personal experience, but a staged event that imparts bragging rights. Plating and lighting are increasingly designed with phone snapshots and social-media sharing in mind. Customers collaborate to put on the show; menus, marketing, even charitable efforts are crowdsourced.

2. Small-minded: Small is in: Diners demand petite plates and flexible portions; units are smaller with shrunken, laser-focused menus, multi-use equipment and expanded hours to leverage fixed costs; labour pressures mean leaner staffing and more technology (though a backlash is brewing as many diners seek to unplug and be waited on).

3. Foodservice everywhere: Alternative forms of foodservice swallow share—from retailers’ ever-more-sophisticated onsite restaurants to fresh-food-and-drink vending to enterprises that deliver ingredients to your door. Meanwhile, in the restaurant world, fast casual shakes out, segment lines blur further, pop-ups proliferate and demand for tech-enabled delivery heats up.

4. Signature beverages: Cocktails may come in kegs; classics like the Negroni ride the retro wave but get competition from new wine, beer and cider cocktails; flavourful and flavoured whiskeys trend up along with spiced rums and liqueurs. Operators are increasingly differentiating themselves with non-alcohol drinks, too—from handcrafted or small-batch sodas to pressed juices to health-halo teas.

5. There’s something about Asia: Asian foods have been trending for years, but the world’s biggest and fastest-moving continent always delivers something new. In 2015, look for the breakout of Korean, mainstreaming of Vietnamese and upscaling of spicy ramen noodles, the quintessential Asian street food.

6. Bitter is the new bold: Look for darker coffees, deeper chocolates, next-gen cruciferous veggies like cauliflower and collard greens, hoppy beers and cocktails with the bite of bitters.

7. DIY health: More consumers care about healthy eating—but what does that mean to them? Menus increasingly display pick-and-choose options for everyone from gluten-free eaters to vegans to paleo-diet partisans; offerings are switched out as nutrition fads and fashions come and go.

8. Micro-local: The stay-close-to-home spirit heightens interest in everything from house-purified water to regional seafood to locally manufactured products like beers and liquors. Even as the supply chain consolidates, speciality and city-wide distributors gain share. An “anti-chain” ethos prompts chains and multi-concept operators to debut quasi-independent restaurants fine-tuned to local market demands.

9. Up with people: The meaning of corporate social responsibility evolves as consumer concerns shift to the human factor. Diners care that restaurants deal fairly with their employees and offer opportunities for advancement. Others in the food chain also gain visibility as farmworker and Fair Trade movements win victories.

10. Channeling Z: The challenge of appealing to all ages intensifies as younger diners step up demands for speedy high-tech service, heightened experiences, louder music and kinetic visuals – and a new teen cohort of digital natives begins to make its voice heard.

Sometimes an invention comes along that seems so obvious when you see it, but still took a genius to think up. Look at the spork, for example – the combination spoon-and-fork that instantly solved those perennial “eating food with one hand” problems. Or “Throx” – socks sold in sets of three, so that when you lose one in the washing machine, you still have a pair left. Or the Dogbrella, an umbrella for dogs, designed to stop your pooch getting wet in the rain. Now another brilliant idea has arrived – the Nosh Knocker, from Just Eat, the online takeaway service. Based loosely on the cat flap, the Nosh Knocker allows people to order food to be delivered by their local take-away without any of the embarrassment that personal interaction with the deliveryman can bring.

According to Graham Corfield, UK managing director at Just Eat: “With 74% of our customers claiming to have been embarrassed by what they are wearing when they answered the door to a takeaway delivery driver, 64% missing a crucial part of a TV show, and 8% being caught naked when the delivery driver showed up, we knew we had to take action. So we have commissioned TakeawayInnovations.org to create a prototype device to limit those embarrassing moments. If demand is strong and it goes into production, our customers will be able to relax, safe in the knowledge that they don’t need to show their faces to the outside world once they’ve chosen their food from Just Eat’s unrivalled list of 22,500 restaurant partners. Now that in itself is a mini fist pump moment.”

The Nosh Knocker, which involves a flap cut in a customer’s front door through which the takeaway food can be pushed, is “a game-changing device that will revolutionise the lives of Britain’s takeaway lovers,” according to Just East. It goes on to say: “Creating a more streamlined takeaway-to-sofa experience, the Nosh Knocker eliminates the need for any human contact, sparing delivery drivers from having to witness you in your 2004 faded festival T-shirt or Harry Potter PJs.”

The Nosh Knocker “abolishes all awkward door-step dalliance with the delivery driver,” Just East says. “Friendly deliverers can now simply ring a bell that plays your favourite takeaway-inspired tunes and slide your tasty takeaway through the door – think Pavarotti for pizza or Mariachi for Mexican. Not only that, but the advanced illumination interface means it’s never been easier to see your beloved bhuna or sweet ’n’ sour sensation”

The Nosh Knocker (patent pending) “has you covered for nearly 82% of standard takeaway deliveries – although anything super-sized may take a bit more force to fit through,” the company says. “Failing that, XXL pizza boxes can easily be folded in two and passed through the portal. Customers may just need to iron them out the other end once they are inside.”

For those worried about mess, the high-tech flap “brings together an innovative red plastic design with cutting-edge, wipe-clean technology for enhanced hygiene, and is also fully lockable to stop food thieves such as cats, badgers and that sticky-fingered neighbour from getting their hands on your grub.”

The Just Eat Nosh Knocker is “the ultimate must-have for any discerning takeaway-lover, food enthusiast or weary worker who just wants to relax after a long day at the office,” the company says, and it is encouraging consumers to visit http://www.just-eat.co.uk/blog/the-nosh-knocker/ to register their interest.

Here at Propel Info we are always ready to hail marketing innovation, and the Nosh Knocker certainly looks to us to be a winner in persuading even the most solitary to climb about the home-delivered food bandwagon (or moped). We only have one problem: rather than being brought out in November, shouldn’t this have been launched on April 1?

Steve Wilkins, our chairman, sent me this, which I thought might be of interest to a number of operators.

A famous restaurant in New York City decided to work out why they kept getting bad reviews. I have summarised (quite a lot) its post, which studied the behaviour of 45 customers in 2004 and 2014, on Craigslist:

“Having been in business many years, we noticed that the number of customers we serve on a daily basis is almost the same today as it was ten years ago …and that one of the most common complaints on review sites against us was that service was slow. We decided to hire a firm to help solve this mystery. Like most restaurants in NYC we have a surveillance system – ten years ago we used high capacity tapes to record all activity. The firm we hired suggested we locate some of the older tapes and analyse how the staff behaved ten years ago versus how they behave now. The date stamp on the old footage was Thursday July 1, 2004. We loaded up the footage on a large monitor and, next to it on a separate monitor, loaded up the footage for Thursday July 3 2014, with roughly the same amount of customers as ten years before. This is what we found:

• Customers are seated and are given menus. Out of 45 customers, three requested to be seated elsewhere.

• Customers on average spent eight minutes before closing the menu to show they are ready to order.

• Waiter shows up almost instantly to take the order.

• Appetisers are fired within 6 minutes; obviously the more complex items take longer.

• Out of 45 customers, two items are sent back.

• Waiters keep an eye out for their tables so they can respond quickly if the customer needs something.

• After guests are done, the cheque is delivered, and within five minutes they leave.

• Average time from start to finish is: 1.05

• Customers are seated and are given menus. Out of 45 customers 18 requested to be seated elsewhere.

• Before even opening the menu they take their phones out. Some are taking photos while others are simply doing something else on their phone.

• Seven out of 45 have waiters come over right away. The customer showed them something on their phone and spent an average five minutes of the waiter’s time. Given this recent footage we asked the waiters about this and they explained those customers had a problem connecting to the Wi-Fi and demanded that the waiter help them.

• Finally the waiters are walking over to tables to see what the customers would like to order. The majority have not even opened the menu and ask the waiter to wait for a bit.

• Customers open the menu, place their hands holding their phone on top of it and continue doing whatever on their phone.

• Waiter returns to see if they are ready to order or have any questions. The customer asks for more time.

• Finally they are ready to order.

• Total average time from when the customer was seated until they placed their order was 21 minutes.

• Food starts getting delivered within six minutes. Obviously the more complex items take way longer.

• 26 out of the 45 customers spend an average of three minutes taking photos of their food.

• 14 out of the 45 customers take pictures of each other with the food in front of them or as they are eating the food. This takes an average of another four minutes as they review and sometimes retake the photo.

• Nine out of the 45 customers sent back food to reheat. Obviously, if they didn’t pause to do whatever on their phone the food wouldn’t have gotten cold.

• 27 out of the 45 customers asked their waiter to take a group photo. 14 of those requested the waiter retake the photo as they were not pleased with the first photo. On average this entire process added another five minutes and obviously caused the waiter not to be able to take care of other tables he/she was serving.

• Given in most cases the customers are constantly busy on their phones, it took an average of 20 minutes more from when they were done eating until they requested the cheque.

• Furthermore once the cheque was delivered it took 15 minutes longer than ten years ago for them to pay and leave.

• Eight out of 45 customers bumped into other customers or in one case a waiter (texting while walking) as they were either walking in or out of the restaurant.

• Average time from start to finish: 1.55”

This experience really resonated with me – the phone is going away from now on when I eat out.