P. 1
Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Survey

Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Survey

|Views: 31|Likes:
Published by Nemanja Brkić
Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Survey
Customer Satisfaction and Loyalty Survey

More info:

Published by: Nemanja Brkić on Apr 01, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/27/2013

pdf

text

original

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY

Report prepared for:

Content
 

About the study Research findings

Cement traders  Best cement producer overall  Overall relationship  Strategic measures  Brand image  Customer experiences  Overall priorities  Highlights Cement users  Best cement producer overall  Overall relationship  Strategic measures
March 2010 2

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

Content
Brand image  Customer experiences  Overall priorities  Highlights Concrete users  Customer profile  Customer needs and expectations as RMX plants choice factors  Brand image  Customer experiences  Loyalty profile and the drivers of loyalty  Overall priorities  Highlights

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

3

ABOUT THE STUDY .

. Clear Advice.About the study  Key objectives:   Cement segment  Evaluate the overall strength of relationship Holcim shares with customers (traders and users)  Assess customer-perceived quality of all product. system and people interfaces of Holcim  Benchmark performance of Holcim with that of Lafarge and Titan  Analyze the impact of each dimension of performance on loyalty to derive key priorities  Derive key improvement areas and strengths based on impact and competitive performance Concrete segment  Provide a comparative evaluation of Holcim’s performance against selected benchmarks  Determine the drivers of customer engagement  Determine an engagement profile of Holcim’s customer base  Provide research insights to support Holcim’s customer strategy March 2010 5 Fresh Thinking.

out of which were 68 Titan.About the study  Methodology  Cement segment  Phase 1: Exploratory research with key Holcim stakeholders  Phase 2: A quantitative study using a structured questionnaire  Face-to-face interviews with a sample of: – 270 cement traders. Clear Advice. 5 companies having other suppliers as main)  Fresh Thinking. 182 Holcim. and 77 Lafarge customers  Quota sample designed to reveal key market differences and cover the Holcim relevant customer segments and micromarkets  Respondent who had dealings with asked to evaluate the relevant cement company Concrete segment  70-90 minutes long in-depth interviews with the decision making representatives of concrete users in Belgrade  Total sample: 15 respondents (10 companies having Holcim as a main supplier. and 119 Lafarge customers – 186 cement users. March 2010 6 . out of which were 40 Titan. 116 Holcim.

Clear Advice.About the Study Cement segment: sample spread Customer Segment Construction material retail Cement wholesale Pre-cast elements production Construction company Dry-mortar production Investment company RMX plant Overall 262 68 70 127 23 40 25 Holcim 174 46 44 72 14 21 15 Lafarge 119 26 27 58 9 23 12 Titan 67 13 16 29 4 7 5 Cemex 10 4 4 2 0 2 / * Some of the companies are at the same time involved in more than one type of business – multiple answers possible. March 2010 7 . Fresh Thinking.

About the Study: CustomerView Model for the cement segment Customer Experiences Products Prices Ordering Delivery Sales Rep Invoicing Administration Technical Support Advertising Seminars/ Events Branding Promotions Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. Market Factors Affective Engagement Brand Image Overall Loyalty Continuance Engagement March 2010 8 .

RESEARCH FINDINGS .

CEMENT TRADERS .

Best overall 11 .

OVERALL: Best Producer Nominations % 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 31 1 1 0 65 96 99 One of the things that can be used as an indicator that Holcim and Lafarge are the key competitors to each other while Titan is seriously lagging behind. 12 12 27 20 10 8 Holcim Lafarge Titan 0 Holcim Lafarge Titan Cemex Optima Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. Quality is most often stated to be the reason for best producer nominations for all three cement producers in Serbia. March 2010 . The other two key nomination factors are connected with the quality of cooperation and the specific factors of the market demand . is even a simple fact that only 2/3 of Titan customers nominate them to be the best producer.

Overall relationship 13 .

Key behavioural dimensions (behaviours of loyal customers) associated with loyalty in this market are:     Follow recommendations Seek advice Use new products Fresh Thinking. March 2010 14 . with Titan lagging behind. Clear Advice.SUMMARY: Overall Relationship  Holcim and Lafarge are at par on overall loyalty index.

 Fresh Thinking. not ready to say “definitely would” to any of the behavioural statements. This situation actually shows how specific is the cement market. i. but being prone to reevaluating costs and benefits of the cooperation more often. March 2010 15 .e. Clear Advice. with customers being very difficult to really emotionally bond.SUMMARY: Overall Relationship  Analysis of the loyalty segments show that a quarter of the trade customers are disloyal and not committed to any company.

The analysis shows competitive advantage both Holcim and Lafarge have over Titan. March 2010 16 16 . Clear Advice.OVERALL: Index of Customer Loyalty Loyalty index is derived from the mean scores on loyalty variables. It is indexed and adjusted to reflect the distribution of the loyalty segments. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 63 63 53 0 Holcim Lafarge Titan Fresh Thinking.

Clear Advice.585 Recommend to friend or family 54 53 46 0.617 Only use its pruducts 29 34 4 0.587 Continue using in future 63 66 63 0.665 Follow any recommendations Shown are significant differences at p<0. How many Holcim customers (%) gave highest ratings HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower March 2010 17 17 .645 Seek advice 41 47 30 0.1 52 57 38 0.556 Prepared to use more 0 Definitely would 20 51 40 60 80 49 52 The higher the number stronger the item indicates loyalty Fresh Thinking.583 Share information for better service 30 32 13 0.643 Use new products and services 44 47 45 0.OVERALL: Key Indicators of Loyalty Base = 182 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box% How many competitor customers (%) gave highest ratings 0.

despite the fact that the differences were not significant even on p<0. On the other hand.   Fresh Thinking. Lafarge is consistently performing slightly better on both key. and other indicators of loyalty. Clear Advice. it is obvious that Holcim and Lafarge are doing better on all loyalty indicators.1.OVERALL: Key Indicators of Loyalty Although the only significant differences are between Holcim and Titan on “only use its products” and “share information for better services”. March 2010 18 .

OVERALL: Size of Loyalty Segments % 100 90 80 70 60 26 24 26 21 22 36 50 40 30 20 10 0 23 22 26 30 32 12 Loyalty segmentation is based on the 8 loyalty questions and the ratings given. While strongly loyal customers are those that tend to give top ratings. In comparison to Holcim and Lafarge. Disloyal Holcim Strongly Loyal Lafarge Favourable Titan Wavering Fresh Thinking. Titan has less strongly loyal. disloyal customers are the ones not giving any top ratings at all. March 2010 19 19 . Clear Advice. and more wavering customers.

Strategic measures 20 .

Clear Advice. thus indicating that the emotional and perceptual response overrides the more rational response. . Key indicators of Affective Engagement are:    Feeling secure Feeling proud  Key indicators of Brand Image are:   Understands/ helps my business Reliable partner/ can trust/ credibility March 2010 21 Fresh Thinking.SUMMARY: Strategic Measures  Customer loyalty is driven primarily by Affective Engagement and Brand Image.

Clear Advice. Titan strategic indices are significantly lower. While Holcim and Lafarge stand side by side. continuance and brand image. March 2010 22 22 .LOYALTY: Indices of Strategic Measures 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 65 65 56 65 67 57 66 66 59 Indices of strategic measures are derived from the mean scores on affective/continuance engagement/ brand image. Affective Engagement Continuance Engagement Brand Image Holcim Lafarge Titan Fresh Thinking. the more favourable state is. Higher the index. They are adjusted in order to reveal the distribution of the customers’ rating of indicators of emotional bonding.

35 Overall Loyalty 0. Brand Image 0.13 Continuance Engagement The higher the number the higher the impact on loyalty March 2010 23 . Clear Advice.LOYALTY: Impact of Strategic Measures Customer Experiences Products Prices Ordering Delivery Market Factors Affective Engagement 0.12 0.52 Sales Rep Invoicing Administration Technical Support Advertising Seminars/ Events Branding Promotions Fresh Thinking.

752 Many aspects that are much better 40 40 19 0.752 The company I feel close to 45 48 38 0.748 I am attracted because of its values 42 38 28 0. March 2010 24 24 .815 I feel really secure and taken care of Strength of Association 44 49 32 0. Clear Advice.708 I trust its products and services 55 57 41 0.653 People would approve of my choice 0 46 20 40 60 80 47 27 Strongly agree HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.Base = 182 LOYALTY: Affective Engagement Performance/ Top Box% 0.780 I feel proud to say 47 47 30 0.693 Usually first comes to mind 47 59 32 0.

March 2010 25 . Lafarge tends to be the company that more often comes to mind when cement production mentioned. Lafarge and Holcim consistently outperform in comparison to Titan.   Fresh Thinking. Although with similar performance.LOYALTY: Affective Engagement  The most important indicators of emotional bonding is feeling secure and taken care of as well as feeling pride to be a customer of a certain producer. Clear Advice.

LOYALTY: Continuance Engagement
Base = 182 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box%
0.849 Meeting your needs & expectations

50

58

31

0.806

Overall quality

58

61

34

0.772

Overall experience

56

65

40

0.758

Overall satisfaction

48

57

36

0.736

Quality in relation to fees & charges

37

36

12

0.736

Better than others

28

37

4

Excellent/ Extremely +ve
Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

0

20

40

60

80
HOLCIM significantly higher

No significant difference

HOLCIM significantly lower

March 2010

26

26

LOYALTY: Continuance Engagement

Meeting the needs and expectations seems to be slightly more important for continuance engagement than the overall quality in case of traders. Showing the understanding of the market and the customers, again, is indicated as an important thing to achieve in order to try retain the clients.

Although Holcim is performing significantly better than Titan when it comes to indicators of continuance engagement, it is consistently underperforming in comparison to Lafarge: customers seem to find Lafarge to be more favorable.

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

27

LOYALTY: Market Factors
Base = 182 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box%
0.798 Switching would require too much time and effort Switching will cost me more than its worth Has special knowledge that would be difficult to learn quickly Switching might jeopardize my customer relations/ quality Because of existing commitments it would be impossible to switch Continue using since it gives me additional business Continue using due to additional services/support they offer Only reason I continue using is because I do not have a choice
0
Strongly agree
HOLCIM significantly higher

27 32 27 37 15 28 27 17
20 40 60 80

24

5

0.797

30

5

32

9

0.751

28

13

0.742

20

0

0.708

22

9

0.611

32

16

0.581

0.494

10

14

No significant difference

HOLCIM significantly lower

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

28

28

or that it would cost more than it is worth.  In comparison to Titan. Clear Advice. March 2010 29 .LOYALTY: Market Factors  Switching is mostly prevented by the customers’ perceptions that it would take too much time and effort. Holcim customers’ see switching as more difficult. Fresh Thinking.

LOYALTY: Brand Image Base = 182 Impact on Loyalty 0. March 2010 30 30 . Clear Advice.19 0.16 Performance/ Top Box% Really understands my business Is a reliable partner 36 55 54 61 28 39 40 54 38 68 33 62 59 69 32 45 46 56 40 61 58 55 52 45 55 56 48 65 54 20 40 60 80 HOLCIM significantly higher 24 53 41 54 14 23 27 Is a company you can trust Has credibility Wants to help my business grow Cares about its customers Treats all its customers equally Is easy to do business with Provides individualized solutions Is innovative Has professional staff Is dynamic.17 0.21 0. growing company Has leading products Is a socially responsible company Cares about environmental protection Follows consistent policies Is committed to quality Trusts its customers Is a strong company 53 26 37 53 57 47 37 24 40 53 39 64 48 44 55 67 65 65 54 49 60 65 47 71 60 Brings global knowledge to the local… Strongly agree 0 No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.17 0.

being perceived as a reliable business partner interested in customers business growth and improving credibility are the things that will influence the overall loyalty most. investing in showing better understanding of customers. having in mind the importance of understanding.  March 2010 31 . once more it becomes clear how vital it may be when Holcim clients claim that strict rules and procedures seem as if the market factors are not understood.LOYALTY: Brand Image  In terms of brand image development. In this light. and the relation with them is distrustful. Clear Advice. Fresh Thinking.

Customer experiences 32 .

and. March 2010 33 .SUMMARY: Customer Experiences  Key customer experiences driving loyalty among traders are to do with:      Products Invoicing & Payment Ordering Process Prices Administration Rep  Top-box scores indicate that key competitor Lafarge has an edge over Holcim on all of the above. although we cannot claim it to be a significant lead. Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. the findings are pretty consistent.

05 xx xx 0.EXPERIENCES: Impact on Loyalty Customer Experiences Products Prices Ordering Delivery Sales Rep Invoicing Administration Technical Support Advertising Seminars/ Events Branding Promotions Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.05 0.20 0.08 0.04 xx xx xx xx denotes insignificant impacts Market Factors Affective Engagement Brand Image Overall Loyalty The higher the number the higher the impact on loyalty xx xx March 2010 Continuance Engagement 34 . 0.

March 2010 35 35 . Clear Advice.05 0.20 0. Performance Base = 182 Impact on Loyalty 0.08 0.04 Performance/ Top Box% 33 39 49 21 52 46 8 46 67 18 0* 0* 0* Products Invoicing and payment procedures Ordering Prices Administration representatives Delivery and logistics Mass advertising Sales representatives Educational events and seminars Customer branding Technical support Informal events Warehouse promotional events 0 20 59 38 60 14 63 63 38 53 51 61 65 63 71 40 60 80 67 54 68 23 71 55 48 76 55 48 76 71 78 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower * No responses for Titan Fresh Thinking.EXPERIENCES: Impact vs.05 0.

EXPERIENCES: Impact vs. 91 20 40 60 80 86 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower March 2010 36 . Performance – Holcim and Lafarge among shared customers Performance/ Top Box% Products 59 61 Invoicing and paymet procedures 49 59 Ordering 73 73 Prices 5 17 Administration representatives 73 74 Delivery services 56 72 Sales representatives 65 71 Technical support 0 Excellent Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

Performance  Compared to Titan. Holcim seems to be doing better in terms of products. On the other side. it seems that Holcim has certain advantage in terms of delivery and logistics.EXPERIENCES: Impact vs. as well as in terms of customer branding. March 2010 37 . Clear Advice.  Fresh Thinking.

EXPERIENCES: Products (impact: 0.23 Quality of the packaging 51 53 47 51 29 51 54 50 43 0 20 40 60 80 59 53 0.23 Consistency of the product quality 68 54 45 Color of the cement 55 Applicability of products 55 54 Availability of needed pack sizes 63 22 Early compression strength 64 42 56 End compression strength 65 Setting time 59 47 Additive compatibility 67 75 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking. March 2010 38 38 .20) Base = 182 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 0. Clear Advice.

Although the only significant difference (p<0.EXPERIENCES: Products  Product consistency and the quality of the packaging are most important aspects of traders’ product experiences. March 2010 39 . customers tend to rate them slightly better on all product relevant aspects.05) stems from the fact Lafarge offers different pack sizes.  Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

Clear Advice.08) Base = 182 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 0.EXPERIENCES: Invoicing & Payment (impact: 0.23 26 19 58 57 62 41 20 20 28 0 20 40 60 80 38 41 Discount policies 27 28 70 Sending invoices on time 71 Invoice layout 69 66 Accurate invoicing Policy on refunds and damaged products Flexibility of the terms of payment 75 79 42 48 24 27 Bonuses and incentive schemes 33 26 Currency of the price list 39 37 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking. March 2010 40 40 .46 Terms of payment 0.

Clear Advice. March 2010 41 .  Previously identified higher level of trader’s satisfaction with more flexibility both Lafarge and Titan tend to exhibit. is once more shown here. Fresh Thinking.EXPERIENCES: Invoicing & Payment  That improvements may be important in invoicing and payment is obvious according to the fact that both Lafarge and Titan are doing slightly better on different relevant aspects.

05) Base = 167 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 0. Clear Advice.EXPERIENCES: Ordering (impact: 0.26 Simplicity of the procedure 56 65 59 Flexibility of the procedure 51 57 54 Taking the order accurately 62 66 61 Availability of the requested volumes 60 65 68 Possibility to place orders when needed 55 61 63 Excellent 0 20 40 60 80 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking. March 2010 42 42 .

the key suggestion is to keep it as simple as possible – that is the most relevant aspect of the ordering experience.  Fresh Thinking. March 2010 43 . It seems that in general both Holcim and competitors show similar performance on this touchpoint.EXPERIENCES: Ordering  When it comes to ordering process. Maintaining the good performance therefore is the only thing that should be done. Clear Advice.

EXPERIENCES: Prices (impact: 0.05) Base = 182 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 24 Quality in relation to the prices 9 21 Clearly informing you on the price changes 42 52 38 0 20 40 60 80 Excellent/ Extremely good HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. March 2010 44 44 .

16 Accessibility .easy to contact 68 73 Courtesy 74 71 Ability to explain policies adequately Processing the orders without mistakes Offering relevant information when asked 67 52 68 69 66 55 Ability to finish tasks in a timely manner 68 73 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.EXPERIENCES: Administration Rep (impact: 0. March 2010 45 45 . Clear Advice.20 61 51 58 66 55 58 51 60 0 20 40 60 80 64 63 Handling of complaints/requests 57 65 0.33 Easy to deal with 0.04) Base = 182 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 0.

to be able to handle complaints and to be easy to contact.EXPERIENCES: Administration Rep  The most important things about sales representatives is that they have to be easy to deal with. Clear Advice. March 2010 46 .  Fresh Thinking. The fact that this touchpoint is impactful on loyalty. makes it one of key improvement priorities. paired with Holcim performing slightly poorer than both Lafarge and Titan.

Overall priorities 47 .

March 2010 48 . the same is also a priority based on bottom-2-box scores in:   Payment terms Discount policies Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.SUMMARY: Overall Priorities While Lafarge scores are higher as compared to Holcim on all the key customer interfaces. it’s more noticeable in:    Invoicing & Payment (+17%) Prices (+10%)  Not only Holcim seems at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to invoicing and payment process.

PRIORITIES: Customer Experiences Lower than/ Equal to Competition Products Key Ordering Drivers Prices Invoicing Higher than Competition Administration Sales Rep Other Areas Delivery Advertising Seminars Colour code: Key Priority Secondary Priority Key Strength Key Competitor: LAFARGE Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. March 2010 49 49 .

Clear Advice.PRIORITIES: Key Attributes Lower than/ Equal to Competition PRODUCTS: Packaging quality PRODUCTS: Consistency of quality INVOICING: Payment terms Key INVOICING: Discount policies Drivers ORDERING: Simplicity of procedure ADMINISTRATION: Easy to deal ADMINISTRATION: Complaint handling ADMINISTRATION: Accessibility SALES REP: Frequency of visits SALES REP: Accessibility DELIVERY: In agreed time Other ADVERTISING: Can relate to Areas SEMINARS: Well organised Higher than Competition Colour code: Key Priority Secondary Priority Key Strength Key Competitor: LAFARGE Fresh Thinking. March 2010 50 50 .

00 Colour code: Maintenance Area Impact on Loyalty 0.04 0.31 0.01 0.00 Key Priority Fresh Thinking.60 0.80 0. March 2010 51 51 .03 0. Clear Advice.60 0.01 0.PRIORITIES: Attribute Ranking Experience INVOICING INVOICING PRODUCTS PRODUCTS ADMINISTRATION ORDERING ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION Payment terms Discount policies Packaging quality Consistency of quality Complaint handling Simplicity of procedure Easy to deal Accessibility Key Drivers Bottom-2-Box % 35.05 0.05 0.25 0.01 Secondary Priority Priority Index 1.63 0.01 0.64 3.03 0.02 0.33 45.57 6.18 0.01 0.01 0.

Other areas 52 .

SUMMARY: Customer Experiences  What matters most for traders on the level of specific experiences are the following:     Delivery and logistics – delivering at the agreed time Sales representatives – frequency of visits and ease to contact Mass advertising – being able to relate to it Educational events – well organized Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. March 2010 53 .

Highlights .

thus indicating that emotional response overrides rational response. Clear Advice. March 2010 55 .  Analysis of loyalty segments show that a quarter of the customers are disloyal and not committed to any company. Titan is clearly lagging behind both.Research highlights: cement traders  While Holcim and Lafarge are at par on overall loyalty index.  Fresh Thinking. Customer loyalty is driven primarily by Affective Engagement and Brand Image.

though cannot definitively establish that it has a significant lead yet. March 2010 56 . Clear Advice. with payment terms and discount policies the top priorities for Holcim currently. Fresh Thinking.  The above is more noticeable in case of invoicing and payment process.Research highlights: cement traders  Top-box scores indicate that Lafarge has an edge over Holcim on all key customer experiences.

CEMENT USERS .

Best overall 58 .

Lafarge and Titan customers. Good cooperation and closeness of the cement plant are also very important drivers for all cement customers. Lafarge is seen as the best among most of its customers (87%).OVERALL: Best Producer Nominations Most of customers using Holcim products (82%) perceive Holcim as the Best Cement Producer. Similarly. while almost 40% of them nominate Lafarge. March 2010 . On the other hand. 59 59 % 100 90 80 70 60 5 6 13 50 50 40 30 20 10 0 87 82 39 7 Holcim Holcim Lafarge Lafarge Titan 11 Titan Note: Type of producer used is question with multiple answers Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. only ½ of Titan customers nominate Titan. Quality is the main criteria for choosing the best cement producer among Holcim.

Overall relationship 60 .

Clear Advice. while Titan is slightly behind.  Key behavioral dimensions associated with loyalty among cement users are: o o Follow recommendations Use new products  Analysis of the loyalty segments however show Lafarge has almost 1½ times as many ‘Strongly Loyal’ customers as Holcim. March 2010 61 61 . Fresh Thinking.SUMMARY: Overall Relationship  Holcim and Lafarge are at par on overall loyalty index.

Clear Advice. Titan is a slightly distant third. March 2010 62 62 .Overall: Index of Customer Loyalty While Holcim and Lafarge are at par on overall loyalty index. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 63 30 20 10 0 63 53 Holcim Lafarge Titan Fresh Thinking.

65 of of of all Holcim Lafarge Titan Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. March 2010 63 63 . Index Customer Loyalty is similar level among three companies.Construction and RMX in Belgrade: Index of Customer Loyalty 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 67 68 Among this group customers.

727 Only use its pruducts 33 35 14 0. March 2010 64 64 .OVERALL: Key Indicators of Loyalty Base = 116 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box% 0.731 Recommend to friend or family 65 74 39 0.639 Continue using in future 71 72 50 0.754 Follow any recommendations 54 65 37 0.624 Share information for better service 0 Definitely would 23 20 40 60 80 30 15 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.746 Use new products and services 41 55 18 0.642 Seek advice 42 51 26 0. Clear Advice.705 Prepared to use more 51 46 33 0.

as well as with readiness to use other products from supplier’s palette. Fresh Thinking. March 2010 65 65 .  Although scores do not show significant differences (p<0. Clear Advice.OVERALL: Key Indicators of Loyalty  Key indicators of Loyalty are related to following supplier’s recommendations concerning products.1). there is a tendency of Lafarge slightly outperforming Holcim (p<0.05). while Titan comes at the end.

OVERALL: Size of Loyalty Segments
%

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

22

19 39 19

20

26

33

29

Analysis of loyalty segments however show Lafarge has almost 1½ times as many ‘Strongly Loyal’ customers as Holcim in the current sample of cement users.

37 25

25 7

Holcim has less “Strongly Loyal” customers than Lafarge, but more compared to Titan.
Disloyal

Holcim Strongly Loyal

Lafarge Favourable

Titan Wavering

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

66 66

Construction and RMX in Belgrade: Size of Loyalty Segments
%
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

21 14

13

13

38 36 100

Lafarge has more ‘Strongly Loyal’ customers than Holcim in this group of customers.

29

38

Holcim Strongly Loyal

Lafarge Favourable Wavering

Titan Disloyal

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

67 67

Strategic measures

68

Key indicators of Affective Engagement are: o o o  Feeling secure Feeling proud Feeling close to  Key indicators of Brand Image are: o o Global knowledge/ leading products (Stature) Understands my business (Empathy) March 2010 69 69 Fresh Thinking. . which indicates that the emotional and perceptual response wins over rational response. Clear Advice.SUMMARY: Strategic Measures  Affective Engagement and Brand Image are the dominant drivers of loyalty.

performing relatively similar on Affective and Continuance Engagement and Brand Image. Clear Advice. Titan regularly stays at lower level. March 2010 70 70 .LOYALTY: Indices of Strategic Measures 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Affective Engagement Holcim Continuance Engagement Lafarge Brand Image 66 66 53 65 67 56 66 68 58 Compared to Holcim and Lafarge. Titan Fresh Thinking.

50 Sales Rep Invoicing Administration Technical Support Advertising Seminars/ Events Branding Promotions Fresh Thinking.LOYALTY: Impact of Strategic Measures Customer Experiences Products Prices Ordering Delivery Market Factors Affective Engagement xx 0. Clear Advice.19 Continuance Engagement March 2010 71 71 . Brand Image 0.42 Overall Loyalty 0.

735 I am attracted because of its values 41 35 16 0.711 Usually first comes to mind 0 20 61 40 60 80 63 25 Strongly agree HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.747 I trust its products and services 56 57 39 0.835 The company I feel close to 49 54 19 0. March 2010 72 72 .838 I feel to say I feel proud to say I’mproud its customer 54 57 19 0.LOYALTY: Affective Engagement Base = 116 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box% 0.783 Manyaspects aspects are better than Many thatmuch are much better other producers 38 50 14 0.861 I feel really secure and taken care of 51 56 26 0.763 People would approve of my choice 53 57 32 0. Clear Advice.

Titan is regularly staying somewhat behind.  Holcim doesn’t differ significantly from Lafarge on Affective Engagement indicators. Clear Advice. feeling proud to be supplier’s customer and feeling close to the supplier. March 2010 73 73 . it can be relevant that while Holcim and Lafarge have relatively similar scores. Fresh Thinking. Yet.LOYALTY: Affective Engagement  The most important indicators of Affective engagement are related to feeling secure and taken care of.

812 36 34 0. Clear Advice.719 29 0.755 11 56 0. HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower March 2010 74 74 .844 44 14 59 0.LOYALTY: Continuance Engagement Base = 116 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box% 0.696 46 18 Quality in relation to cement prices Excellent / Extremely positive Fresh Thinking.825 32 63 0.

LOYALTY: Continuance Engagement  Meeting customers needs and expectations. Clear Advice.05 but <0. despite insignificant differences (p>0.  Again. Holcim (at level with Lafarge) have somewhat better performance than Titan.1) compared to competitors. Fresh Thinking. March 2010 75 75 . perception of overall quality and overall satisfaction with supplier are central indicators of Continuance Engagement.

808 Switching would require too much time and effort Switching will cost me more than its worth Has special knowledge that would be difficult to learn quickly 27 31 18 25 7 0.558 0.789 30 7 28 11 0.432 8 15 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.779 0.LOYALTY: Market Factors Base = 116 Strength of Association Performance/ Top Box% 0. March 2010 76 76 .689 19 0 0.677 25 11 0.752 Switchingmight might jeopardize jeopardize quality of my Switching my customer relations/ quality products Continue using due to additional services/support they offer Because of existing commitments it would be impossible to switch Continue using since it gives me additional business Only reason I contunue using is because I do not have a choice 0 Strongly agree 32 20 16 17 18 20 40 60 80 21 4 25 8 0. Clear Advice.

05 but <0. and money. Fresh Thinking. on one hand.1).LOYALTY: Market Factors  Market factors influencing Loyalty behaviour the most are Costs of switching in terms of time and effort.  Still without significant differences (p>0. on the other. March 2010 77 77 . Clear Advice. Titan’s being again slightly outperformed by Holcim and Lafarge.

March 2010 78 78 . growing company Is a company you can trust Is a reliable partner Is a socially responsible company Cares about environmental protection Follows consistent policies Is committed to quality Trusts its customers Is a strong company Strongly agree 0 20 66 60 46 60 64 55 73 40 60 80 72 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.24 Performance/ Top Box% global to knowledge Brings globalBrings knowledge the local… Really understands my business Has leading products Wants to help my business grow Cares about its customers Treats all its customers equally Is easy to do business with Has credibility Provides individualized solutions Is innovative Has professional staff 38 51 68 62 62 29 42 50 54 63 29 59 65 68 60 49 61 25 46 42 69 61 45 62 70 66 69 65 63 42 65 69 50 32 22 26 19 22 16 43 46 22 43 50 39 44 36 23 32 46 46 30 50 Is dynamic.42 0. Clear Advice.LOYALTY: Brand Image Base = 116 Impact on Loyalty 0.37 0.

LOYALTY: Brand Image  Companies’ image attributes with the highest impact on Users Loyalty are “Brings global knowledge to local market”.  Although Holcim does not differ in a significant manner from competitors (95% confidence interval. “Really understands my business” and “Has leading products”. it is important to notice that Lafarge customers seem to believe more firmly that their cement supplier truly understands how their business works. March 2010 79 79 . Clear Advice. Fresh Thinking. but differs on 90% confidence interval). Titan has fairly less differentiated image than Holcim and Lafarge.

Customer experiences 80 .

 Overall the key drivers indicate a value-seeking customer. with prices directly associated with value perception and the key attributes of products (quantity/economy and applicability/ ease) also contributing to it. Clear Advice. Fresh Thinking. March 2010 81 81 .SUMMARY: Customer Experiences  The core offering that drives loyalty among cement users comprises:  Products Prices   Top-box scores on the abovementioned drivers for key competitor Lafarge are somewhat higher than for Holcim.

EXPERIENCES: Impact on Loyalty Customer Experiences Products Prices Ordering Delivery Sales Rep Invoicing Administration Technical Support Advertising Seminars/ Events Branding Promotions Fresh Thinking. 0.22 0. Clear Advice.09 xx xx xx xx xx xx xx xx Affective Engagem ent Market Factors Brand Image Continua nce Engagem ent Overall Loyalty xx xx March 2010 82 82 .

EXPERIENCES: Impact vs. Clear Advice. March 2010 83 83 . Performance Base = 116 Impact on Loyalty 0.22 0.09 Performance/ Top Box% Products Prices Ordering Administration representatives Invoicing and payment procedures Delivery and logistics Sales representatives Mass advertising Educational events and seminars Technical support Informal events 0 46 18 53 48 35 47 53 35 36 29 67 20 40 60 80 61 28 32 25 36 36 25 25 72 64 47 48 59 47 63 55 50 31 33 0 0 0 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.

33 20 40 60 80 33 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower March 2010 84 84 .EXPERIENCES: Impact vs. Clear Advice. Performance – Holcim and Lafarge among shared customers Performance/ Top Box% Technical support 80 0 Delivery services 38 17 Prices 17 17 Invoicing and paymet procedures 8 33 Administration representatives 25 34 Ordering 58 58 Sales representatives 25 13 Products 0 Excellent Fresh Thinking.

Fresh Thinking. including the most important ones. Titan can be described as underperformer – lower level of performance is found in all process areas except Prices (which can be seen as its main strength among Users). March 2010 85 85 . Performance  Experience with products and product prices are of most relevance for Users Loyalty.  Although there are no significant differences. Clear Advice. general picture shows that Lafarge has slightly better performance than Holcim on most of experience areas.EXPERIENCES: Impact vs.

Clear Advice.26 Excellent HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking.29 Performance/ Top Box% Quantity needed in comparison Applicability of products Color of the cement Quality of the packaging Availability of needed pack sizes Consistency of the product quality Early compression strength End compression strength Setting time Additive compatibility 0 20 53 58 48 55 27 58 56 57 52 67 40 60 80 57 62 67 68 57 68 68 70 68 79 26 46 26 30 10 43 33 37 48 40 0.22) Base = 116 Impact on Touchpoint 0. March 2010 86 86 .EXPERIENCES: Products (impact:0.

March 2010 87 87 . end compression. Clear Advice. Holcim significantly underperforms when it comes to availability of needed pack sizes.  Consistently.EXPERIENCES: Products  Most important characteristics for overall evaluation of Products are “Quantity needed” and “Applicability”. Still. Fresh Thinking. what is noteworthy is the fact that users top rate the Lafarge cement color. but not significantly. setting time and additive compatibility more often that Holcim and Titan. outperformed by Lafarge. early compression.

09) Base = 116 Impact on Touchpoint Performance/ Top Box% 19 Quality in relation to the prices 24 0 Clearly informing you on the price changes 23 36 29 Excellent/ Extremely good 0 20 40 60 80 HOLCIM significantly higher No significant difference HOLCIM significantly lower Fresh Thinking. March 2010 88 88 .EXPERIENCES: Prices (impact: 0. Clear Advice.

EXPERIENCES: Prices  “Quality in relation to prices” and “Clearly informing about prices changes” attributes do not have important influence on overall evaluation of Prices touchpoint. Fresh Thinking. March 2010 89 89 . Clear Advice.

Overall priorities 90 .

particularly in: o o Ordering (top box +19%) Administration (top box +16%)  Though the primary focus should be on the product efficiency. it could extend to other areas of operational efficiency as well. Clear Advice. such as: o o o Taking order accurately Promptness in delivery Invoices sent on time March 2010 91 91 Fresh Thinking.SUMMARY: Overall Priorities  While Lafarge scores higher on the key drivers it is ahead in other areas as well compared to Holcim. .

March 2010 92 92 .PRIORITIES: Customer Experiences Lower than/ Equal to Competition Products Key Drivers Prices Higher than Competition Invoicing Other Areas Ordering Delivery Administration Sales Rep Colour code: Key Priority Secondary Priority Key Strength Key Competitor: LAFARGE Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010 93 93 . Clear Advice.PRIORITIES: Key Attributes Lower than/ Equal to Competition PRODUCTS: Quantity needed PRODUCTS: Applicability Higher than Competition Key Drivers INVOICING: Payment terms INVOICING: Invoices on time ORDERING: Taking order accurately ORDERING: Simplicity of procedure Other DELIVERY: Promptness Areas ADMINISTRATION: Easy to deal ADMINISTRATION: Offering information SALES REP: Authority to decide SALES REP: Your interest as priority Colour code: Key Priority Secondary Priority Key Strength Key Competitor: LAFARGE Fresh Thinking.

Other areas 94 .

areas of customer experiences of less importance concerning their relation with loyalty are invoicing and payment. . ordering. delivery and logistics.taking the order accuretely and simplicity of the procedures Delivery and logistics .promptness Administration representatives – easy to deal with and offering relevant information when asked Sales representatives – authority to make decisions and having your interest as a priority March 2010 95 95 Fresh Thinking. Most important indicators on specific experiences are the following:       Invoicing and payment – terms of payment and sending invoices on time Ordering . educational and informal events and technical support. mass advertising.SUMMARY: Customer experiences  When users are question. administration and sales representatives.

Highlights 96 .

  Fresh Thinking. Titan is a slightly distant third. March 2010 97 97 . Clear Advice.Research highlights: cement users  While Holcim and Lafarge are at par on overall loyalty index. indicating that emotional and perceptual response wins over rational response. Analysis of loyalty segments however show Lafarge has almost 1½ times as many ‘Strongly Loyal’ customers as Holcim in the current sample of cement users. Affective Engagement and Brand Image are the dominant drivers of loyalty.

indicating that emotional and perceptual response wins over rational response. point towards a value-seeking market with the key attributes of products (quantity/ economy and applicability/ ease) further buttressing this hypothesis. Clear Advice.Research highlights: cement users The key drivers Products and Prices among customer experiences.   Affective Engagement and Brand Image are the dominant drivers of loyalty. March 2010 98 98 . Fresh Thinking.

CONCRETE USERS .

Customer profile .

commercial and industrial objects). low raise (infrastructural)  Apart from general constructors.Customer profile  Construction companies included in this study were from the following segments   high raise (residential. March 2010 101 . Clear Advice. finishing contractors were included as well (stamped concrete) Fresh Thinking.

or they like to make sure they have back-up opportunities Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. March 2010 102 .Customer profile Typical situation is the one where the construction company uses at least 2 or more concrete suppliers due to either:    having more building sites so they are choosing according to location.

March 2010 103 .Customer profile  Apart from Holcim. Clear Advice. surveyed companies buy concrete from:         Gradijent Mobil Beton Delta 90 Arma Inzenjenring Beton Elita Kop Art Gradnja Gradjevinar Kocic Gemex        Beton Plus Icikom Imkop Sigrad Ager Marmil Cemprom Fresh Thinking.

while the services of other concrete producers are being used from about a year to 18 years. Annual volumes of concrete in this group vary from 500 to 8000 cubic meters of concrete. March 2010 104 . Clear Advice.Customer profile   Holcim customers are buying concrete from Holcim RMX within previous 2 years. typical being around 2 000 to 3 000 cubic meters Fresh Thinking.

Customer needs and expectations as RMX plants choice factors .

at the same time. are. March 2010 106 . Clear Advice. the key factors taken into consideration when RMX plants are being chosen.Key customer needs: overall Price/quality ratio Terms of payment Plant location  Vehicles and equipment Available quantities  General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking. Main customer needs and expectations can be classified in several categories These categories.

 Price concern is widely shared among the concrete users – it is connected with business profitability Still. is mentioned in terms of reliability and stability 107   March 2010 . the users do not claim there are substantial market differences in terms of prices. although Holcim is being sometimes pointed out as the one with higher prices. Clear Advice. The other facet of this factor.Key customer needs: price/quality ratio Price/quality ratio Terms of payment Plant location Vehicles and equipment Available quantities General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking. quality.

are more often seen among the smaller companies. while the larger companies tend to prioritize quality. although would prefer cheaper product. 108 March 2010 . together with less caring about the quality. have serious doubts weather the quality could remain the same   It is noticeable that price concerns. Clear Advice.  The core of the price and quality issues is the price/quality ratio Concrete users.Key customer needs: price/quality ratio Price/quality ratio Terms of payment Plant location Vehicles and equipment Available quantities General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking.

and some of them also allow compensation Out of the 15 surveyed companies. but I can’t afford risking not to get concrete if I have a cash flow problem”   For all of the competitor RMX plants there is either a chance for deferred payment (15-60 days).Key customer needs: terms of payment Price/quality ratio  Terms of payment Plant location Vehicles and equipment Available quantities General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. and I can like Holcim people and their professionalism. and it is always mentioned as one of very important things in choosing the concrete producer “I can care about the quality as much as I like. Advanced payment is very unfavorable among the concrete users. just 2 did not mention Holcim terms of payment being a problem at all 109 March 2010 .

 Plant location is a very important factor Some companies insist that the plant must not be more than 30 minutes away from the building site  March 2010 110 .Key customer needs: plant location Price/quality ratio Terms of payment Plant location Vehicles and equipment Available quantities General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

depending on the application.Key customer needs: vehicles and equipment Price/quality ratio Terms of payment Plant location Vehicles and equipment Available quantities General flexibility Delivery accuracy Recommendation Reliable laboratory Special concrete types Fresh Thinking. smaller pumps (line pumps) are more suitable. 111  March 2010 . Clear Advice. since they normally pump concrete at lower volumes. construction companies have some specific needs:  For companies engaged in high raise it is very important that the company has large pumps (such as trailer-mounted boom concrete pump) capable of pumping at very high volumes For companies engaged in low raise. for these types of companies it is sometimes also very important that the supplier has small vehicles that can enter specific building sites.  Apart from the need for the equipment to be modern and reliable. as well as for finishing contractors.

Brand image .

bringing worldwide experience to this market . March 2010 113 . whose employees are very professional Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice. reliable. a company that keeps its promises. respectful.Brand image  Image of Holcim is pretty distinctive and differentiated among the concrete users in Belgrade  It is seen as a global company.

Brand image  Holcim’s image is underlined with different affective tone in two main groups:  Among the loyal customers. readiness to listen to their clients and the ability to respond to their needs Fresh Thinking. March 2010 114 . to the standard image of Holcim as a serious company they add the Holcim proactivity. Clear Advice. Holcim is respected as being foreign and reliable because there is always a set of rules and procedures that are being followed. so the customers can be sure about what they can expect.

claiming that they have to follow the procedures although they themselves are really very nice Fresh Thinking. this image of a reliable company has a negative undertone – it is seen as arrogant. and. as much as they are reliable. they (both Holcim as a company and it’s employees) are showing a deep disrespect for the Serbian market and it’s uniqueness. March 2010 115 . and those that do not intend to use Holcim services although they haven’t been working with them before. some of the people from this group sometimes do have some understanding for the employees though. Clear Advice.Brand image  Among the migrating customers.

Customer experiences .

March 2010 117 .Touchpoints  The key touchpoints examined in this study were:         Ordering Sales representatives Administrative personnel Invoicing and terms of payment Prices Delivery and logistics Technical support Educational/informal events Ordering Educatio nal/infor mal events Sales represen tatives Technica l support Touchpoints Administ rative personn el Delivery and logistics Prices Invoicing and terms of payment Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

Touchpoints – Holcim performance INVOICING AND TERMS OF PAYMENT Accurate. which makes advance payments even more difficult as a way of doing business. Clear Advice. advance payments. problems with banking sector cause even more dissatisfaction – payments sometimes take time to be seen on the account of the supplier. . processed without problems Lack of flexibility. emergency deliveries are basically impossible due to this March 2010 118 Fresh Thinking.

March 2010 119 .Touchpoints – Holcim performance Good value for money. loyal customers don’t consider it as too high or as vital for their decision PRICES A bit higher. vital decision making factor for less profitable or smaller companies Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

so in some cases it is difficult to differentiate Holcim from the main competitors Despite this fact. but the drivers’ manners as well) Fresh Thinking.  March 2010 120 .Touchpoints – Holcim performance benchmarked  Majority of the companies that were surveyed do not have any significant complaints about the companies they are working with. Clear Advice. it can be said that Holcim is significantly outperforming when it comes to delivery and logistics (primarily due to technical capabilities.

Clear Advice. March 2010 121 . Holcim representatives are perceived as distinct due to their professionalism and respecting the world standards in business communication  Fresh Thinking.Touchpoints – Holcim performance benchmarked  Performance in what can be called the human capital touchpoints is very good Although the competitors in fact also have kind and friendly staff.

disrespectful of the local market conditions and distrustful towards its customers  “Serbia is not still ready for the European way of doing business. but we have recognized that we need to change it. we are surviving on this market. Everyone owes money to everyone. Thanks to that.Touchpoints – Holcim performance benchmarked  Still. Clear Advice. .” March 2010 122 Fresh Thinking. and it is completely unreal expecting a long-term cooperation with a supplier that charges you in advance. How could I pay something in advance. Supplier that expects that just shows deep misunderstanding of the market. Holcim is experiencing significant underperformance that mainly stems from the strict ordering and terms of payment procedures – it is not just the main hindrance in cooperation and an obstacle in gaining new customers. but a serious challenge in forming a strong brand on the local market – it makes the company look arrogant. we insisted on advance payments. if there are 7 companies that owe me money? When we started our business here during the nineties.

Loyalty profile and the drivers of loyalty .

can most probably be found only in the group of larger companies. In terms of the type of loyalty profiles.Loyalty profile  Generally speaking. and among the companies that are present on the market for a long time – they tend to by more concrete and to be involved in multiple construction projects preferring having a stable and constant relation with one or two suppliers. Clear Advice. the main impression is that loyalty is not very high among the construction companies. it can be said that emotive loyalists. strongly feeling the chosen concrete producer is the best for them. Fresh Thinking.  March 2010 124 .

Clear Advice.Loyalty profile  Loyal customers can be said to be mostly from the groups of deliberative loyalists – they frequently reevaluate purchase decision and reaffirm the chosen company based on merits It seems that majority of surveyed Holcim customers could fall into this loyalty segment. although in a few cases it was possible to sense the existence of certain emotional bonding that was due to excellent relations with the Holicm representatives 125  Fresh Thinking. March 2010 .

They didn’t deliver the agreed quantities. March 2010 126 . Clear Advice.” Fresh Thinking. prompted to reevaluate decisions based on a set of specific events  “They (Delta 90) have failed to achieve what they have promised. and the quality of concrete was not as agreed.Loyalty profile  Among the possible migrators. we can find three different types of customers:  Dissatisfied migrators – they are actively dissatisfied.

” “We’d immediately change the supplier the moment on the market appears a supplier that can deliver quality concrete that is even 1 RSD cheaper. Clear Advice. This is business. sometimes they might seek variety (smaller companies)    “I don’t think we will be working with them (Holcim) anymore.” Fresh Thinking. they do not really understand my business. March 2010 127 . They are very rigid.Loyalty profile Deliberative migrators – they are frequently reevaluating purchase decision and choosing new supplier based on merits.

Loyalty profile

Lifecycle migrators – purchase decisions based on change in need

“We change suppliers depending on the building site, we need the supplier to be as close as possible” “I might work with them (Holcim) if it proves that we need small pumps again, because they are the only that have them. Otherwise they do not suit us.”

Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

128

Main drivers of loyalty

From the analysis of the main needs and expectations, as well as the loyalty profiles of the surveyed companies, it clearly follows that understanding the business needs and specific conditions of work of a construction company is the key driver of loyalty. A supplier that understands is the one that has a certain flexibility, and is able and willing to respect specific company working setting.
Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

129

Main drivers of loyalty

What is closely connected with this perception of understanding, is the need for building trust that is a two way process. Holcim’s strict rules and procedures challenges trust-based business relationship, that turns out to be very important for customer loyalty. Apparent lack of intensive emotional bonding is another proof of this group of customers being harder to reach and impress, and the concrete suppliers being less successful in building loyalty than it is the case in some other industries.
Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

March 2010

130

Highlights .

March 2010 132 .Research highlights: concrete users  Holcim RMX is perceived as delivering a high quality products and service Still. Clear Advice. in the group of the companies using other concrete suppliers it is sometimes not really seen as the company significantly outperforming compared to it’s competitors which is an obstacle for the company business growth   Construction industry proves to be an industry where it is not easy to form loyal relationships with the concrete users – they are very demanding. profit oriented. difficult to impress Fresh Thinking.

for the growth of the company it would be vital trying to show the understanding for the way of doing business on the local market – that proves to be the key driver of loyalty What has to be kept in mind is the consistent finding from customer research which shows 60 to 80 percent of lost customers across all industry segments reported on surveys just prior to defecting that they were "very satisfied" or "satisfied.Research highlights: concrete users  Although maintenance of the quality and service standards is one of the key priorities.  March 2010 133 .“ Fresh Thinking. Clear Advice.

Clear Advice. nicely polished. that jeopardizes the company position. it is exactly this sense of customers that the company either does not follow their needs due to global procedures. March 2010 134 . good mannered. or because they are foreigners.Research highlights: concrete users  In the cooperation with Holcim. but denying this market the right to be treated according to its uniqueness. Fresh Thinking.

MASMI THANKS YOU 135 .

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->