ISE INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2017 Q3 RESULTS Announcement INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

Transcription

1 ISE INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2017 Q3 RESULTS Announcement INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

2 CSISG 2017 Q3 RESULTS F&B AND TOURISM INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

3 CSISG Methodology INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

4 How Well Did Companies Satisfy Their Customers? The CSISG Score Customer Satisfaction CSISG (Scale of 0-100) 1. Overall Satisfaction 2. Ability to Meet Expectations 3. Similarity to Ideal 4

5 CSISG Structural Model (For Q3 Sectors) Qn. Perceived Product Quality Qn. Perceived Product Customisation Qn. Perceived Product Reliability Perceived Product Quality Perceived Service Quality Perceived Overall Quality (After Recent Experience) Qn. Complaint Behaviour Customer Complaints Qn. Perceived Service Quality Qn. Perceived Service Customisation Qn. Perceived Service Reliability Qn. Price / Quality Qn. Quality / Price Perceived Value Customer Satisfaction Customer Expectations (Predicted Quality Before Recent Experience) Qn. Expected Overall Quality Qn. Expected Customisation Qn. Expected Reliability Qn. Overall Satisfaction Qn. Ability to Meet Expectations Qn. Similarity to Ideal Customer Loyalty Qn. Repurchase Intention Qn. Price Tolerance Denotes positive relationship between the drivers Denotes inverse relationship between the drivers 5

6 General CSISG Fieldwork Methodology Singapore citizens and PRs are interviewed at their homes. Homes are selected from a random address listing that matches the housing profile of Singapore resident population. (Not Applicable to Hotels Sub-sector) Departing tourists are interviewed at Changi Airport. Each respondent answers up to 21 CSISG questions and about 25 touchpoint questions about the company/brand they had recent experiences with. Each respondent evaluates only 1 to 2 companies/brands. Typically respondents per company would have answered the CSISG questionnaire. 6

7 Overview of Score Calculation Company Score Sub-Sector Score Sector Score National Score Local & Tourist Weights Company Weights Revenue / GDP Contribution Weights Incidence Study Identify companies with highest interactions with locals and tourists. Locals surveyed door-to-door. Tourists surveyed at Changi Airport. DOS population and STB Visitor Arrival data used to further identify proportion of locals and tourist customers. Revenue Share Study / DOS GDP Data Identify revenue contribution of each sub-sector to its respective sector. Identify GDP contribution of each sector to the total GDP of sectors measured in the CSISG. 7

8 CSISG 2017 Q3 Sub-sectors F&B Sector Tourism Sector Restaurants Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses REVISED Snack Bars & Food Kiosks REVISED Attractions Hotels Note: Prior to 2017, Cafes & Coffee Houses and Snack Bars & Food Kiosks were measured as one sub-sector Cafes & Snack Bars. 8

9 CSISG 2017 Q3 Quick Facts Sectors Covered Food & Beverages Tourism Survey Period Jul to Oct 2017 Total Questionnaires Completed 6,900 Locals 3,035 Tourists 3,865 Distinct entities measured 370 Entities with published scores 57 9

10 CSISG 2017 Q3 RESULTS INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

11 How Well Did Companies Satisfy Their Customers? CSISG 2017 Q3 Results Overview 74.2 Tourism 74.4 Hotels Luxury & Upscale Hotels 75.1 The Ritz-Carlton 74.6 Marina Bay Sands 74.2 Grand Hyatt 73.7 Hotel Michael 73.5 Pan Pacific Singapore 72.8 Shangri-La 72.2 Mandarin Orchard 72.1 Marina Mandarin Economy Hotels 70.6 Fragrance Hotel 69.5 Hotel Other hotels 73.3 Attractions 74.9 Sentosa 74.5 Singapore Zoo 73.9 Jurong Bird Park 73.4 S.E.A. Aquarium 73.2 Singapore Flyer 73.2 Gardens By The Bay 72.8 River Safari 71.9 Universal Studios 71.8 Adventure Cove 71.1 Night Safari 70.4 Singapore Discovery Centre 71.2 Other attractions 71.7 Food & Beverage 73.6 Snack Bars & Food Kiosks* 72.6 Old Chang Kee 71.0 Jollibean 74.2 Other snack bars & food kiosks 71.9 Cafes & Coffee Houses 73.2 Starbucks 70.3 Toast Box 70.2 Ya Kun 72.2 Other cafes & coffee houses 71.7 Fast Food Restaurants 72.9 Burger King 72.7 McDonalds 71.6 Mos Burger 70.7 Subway 70.4 KFC 70.3 Other fast food restaurants 71.5 Restaurants 73.5 Thai Express 73.5 Boon Tong Kee 73.4 Astons 73.0 Din Tai Fung 72.7 Sushi Tei 72.6 Jack s Place 72.6 Crystal Jade Kitchen 72.3 Ajisen Ramen 72.3 Nando s 72.0 TungLok Signatures 72.0 Swensen s 71.4 Imperial Treasure Noodle & Congee 71.4 Seoul Garden 71.2 Sakae Sushi 71.1 Fish & Co 71.1 Pizza Hut 70.6 Crystal Jade La Mian Xiao Long Bao 70.6 Manhattan Fish Market 69.9 Dian Xiao Er 69.6 Xin Wang Hong Kong Cafe 70.9 Other restaurants QUALIFIER FOR RESPONDENT (1) Recently interacted with companies/brands (Past 3 months for F&B, Past 6 months for Tourism) (2) Each respondent evaluates satisfaction with 1 to 2 companies/brands from different sectors * Refers to companies/sub-sectors significantly above their sub-sector/sector scores 11

12 Food & Beverages Sector Results INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

13 F&B Sector CSISG Trends 70 F&B Sector 78 Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Cafes & Coffee Houses Fast Food Restaurants Restaurants Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence No statistically significant change between the 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence 13

14 Scores Generally Statistically Similar Across Restaurants (Restaurants) Thai Express Boon Tong Kee Astons Din Tai Fung Sushi Tei Jack's Place Crystal Jade Kitchen Ajisen Ramen Nando's TungLok Signatures Swensen's Imperial Treasure Noodle & Congee Seoul Garden Sakae Sushi Fish & Co Pizza Hut Crystal Jade La Mian Xiao Long Bao Manhattan Fish Market Dian Xiao Er Xin Wang HK Café Other restaurants Restaurants Sub-sector CSISG: CSISG Scores (0 to 100 scale) No statistically significant year-on-year change in scores 14

15 No Statistically Significant Score Movements (Fast Food Restaurants) CSISG 2016 CSISG Fast Food Restaurants Food & Beverage Sector McDonalds 72.3 Burger King 71.0 KFC 70.4 Mos Burger 69.5 Subway 68.8 Other fast food restaurants Burger King 72.7 McDonalds Mos Burger 70.7 Subway 70.4 KFC 70.3 Other fast food restaurants E.g. of other fast food includes Popeyes, Carl s Junior, Long John Silver s 15

16 No Statistically Significant Score Movements (Cafes & Coffee Houses) CSISG 2016 CSISG Cafes & Coffee Houses Food & Beverage Sector Starbucks Starbucks 72.2 Other cafes & coffee houses Ya Kun 70.1 Toast Box Toast Box 70.2 Ya Kun E.g. of other cafes & coffee houses includes Delifrance, Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, TCC 16

17 Scores Statistically Similar To Each Other (Snack Bars & Food Kiosks) Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Sub-sector CSISG: 73.6 Old Chang Kee Jollibean Other snack bars & food kiosks (E.g. includes KOI, Dunkin Donuts, LiHo) CSISG Scores (0 to 100 scale) 17

18 CSISG & All Drivers For Restaurants Saw Upticks (Drivers of Satisfaction) Product Quality Service Quality Perceived Quality Customer Expectations Perceived Value CSISG Complaints Customer Loyalty Customer Expectations (Predicted Quality Before Recent Experience) Perceived Overall Quality (After Recent Experience) Perceived Value CSISG Snack Bars & Food Kiosks* Cafes & Coffee Houses* Fast Food Restaurants (+1.8%) (+2.4%) (+2.7%) (+1.3%) Restaurants (+2.4%) (+3.5%) (+4.7%) (+2.5%) Statistically significant year-on-year increase/drop at 90% confidence No statistically significant year-on-year change at 90% confidence *Note: No year-on-year comparison for Snack Bars & Food Kiosks, and Cafes & Coffee Houses 18

19 Tourists More Satisfied Than Locals For Restaurants And Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Cafes & Coffee Houses Fast Food Restaurants Restaurants Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists CSISG Locals Score Significantly Lower Locals Score Significantly Lower 78 Score (0 to 100) Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value GREEN/RED scores indicate Local performed BETTER/WORSE than Tourist respondents with statistical significance 19

20 Tourists More Satisfied Than Locals For Restaurants And Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Cafes & Coffee Houses Fast Food Restaurants Restaurants Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists CSISG Locals Scored Significantly Lower Locals Scored Significantly Lower Score (0 to 100) Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value GREEN/RED scores indicate Local performed BETTER/WORSE than Tourist respondents with statistical significance 20

21 But Locals More Satisfied Y-O-Y with All Drivers of Satisfaction Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Cafes & Coffee Houses Fast Food Restaurants Restaurants Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists Locals Tourists CSISG Score (0 to 100) Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Expect- ations Quality Value Statistically significant year-on-year IMPROVEMENT/DECLINE at 90% confidence Note: No year-on-year comparison for Snack Bars & Food Kiosks, and Cafes & Coffee Houses 21

22 Increase In All But One Of Locals Attribute Ratings (Restaurants Attributes Which Are Comparable Year-on-Year) Tourists Ease of making reservations Locals Waiting time to be seated Menu options to suit your needs Attentiveness of service staff Ability to accommodate to your needs Time taken to receive the food Serving portions Quality of food Quality of beverage Payment process Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) Statistically significant year-on-year IMPROVEMENT/DECLINE at 90% confidence 22

23 Locals More Satisfied with Most Attributes (Fast Food Attributes Which Are Comparable Year-on-Year) Tourists Locals Menu options to suit your needs Time taken to queue and receive order Ability to accommodate to your needs Payment process Serving portions Quality of food Quality of beverage Ease of finding a seat Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) Statistically significant year-on-year IMPROVEMENT/DECLINE at 90% confidence 23

24 Reasons for satisfaction rating Verbatim (F&B Sector) INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

25 F&B: Reason for Overall Satisfaction Rating (Verbatim Word Clouds Segmented by CSISG Score) Respondents With CSISG points burgers eating noodlesstaffs counter tea money thick juicy peri skin loved rich pizza enjoy meal polite clean size oily chicken menu offer coffee ice hot seafood dish tender portion mouth excellent quickly prepared sum items generous beef rice fried eat served tasty delicious feel stafflot service thai aromatic wait find fresh nice quality choose crew milk sushi ingredients flavour ambience friendlycomfortable order serving drinks love fish variety affordable reasonabledishes authentic chinese dim sold wide taste ramen meat fast price top toast soup dine set easy soft big efficient crispy cooked curry burger choices enjoyed attentive kaya Respondents With CSISG 0-50 Points tough worth served friendly make hard overpriced dry slow bland rude feel price bread quality fish cold smell small fried soggy service meatbad taste staff long chicken noodles customers serving eating queue expensive staffs eat order oily salty made cooked portion ordered tasteless burger coffee rice sauce bit poor fresh smile money 25

26 Top 5 Differentiators of Quality & Loyalty (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Restaurants Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality of food Quality of food Serving portions Efficiency of the ordertaking process Time taken to queue and receive order Time taken to queue and receive order Serving portions Staff's ability to communicate professionally Time taken to receive the food Ability to accommodate to your needs Attentiveness of staff Attentiveness of staff Staff's ability to understand your needs Time taken to queue and receive order Payment process Staff's ability to understand your needs Ambience of restaurant Time taken to queue and receive order Ability to accommodate to your needs Quality of the food Menu options to suit your needs Ambience of restaurant Quality of beverage Menu options to suit your needs Serving portions Cleanliness and orderliness of restaurants Staff's ability to communicate professionally Quality of beverage Time taken to receive the food Quality of food Quality of food Staff's ability to communicate professionally Staff's ability to understand your needs Note: Attributes ordered by descending order of impact 26

27 Top 5 Differentiators of Quality & Loyalty (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Restaurants Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality of food Quality of food Serving portions Efficiency of the ordertaking process Time taken to queue and receive order Time taken to queue and receive order Serving portions Staff's ability to communicate professionally Time taken to receive the food Ability to accommodate to your needs Attentiveness of staff Attentiveness of staff Staff's ability to understand your needs Time taken to queue and receive order Payment process Staff's ability to understand your needs Ambience of restaurant Time taken to queue and receive order Ability to accommodate to your needs Quality of the food Menu options to suit your needs Ambience of restaurant Quality of beverage Menu options to suit your needs Serving portions Cleanliness and orderliness of restaurants Staff's ability to communicate professionally Quality of beverage Time taken to receive the food Quality of food Quality of food Staff's ability to communicate professionally Staff's ability to understand your needs Legend: Service Process Service Staff Product Environment 27

28 Time to Receive Order A Common Differentiator (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Restaurants Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Quality of food Quality of food Serving portions Efficiency of the ordertaking process Time taken to queue and receive order Time taken to queue and receive order Serving portions Staff's ability to communicate professionally Time taken to receive the food Ability to accommodate to your needs Attentiveness of staff Attentiveness of staff Staff's ability to understand your needs Time taken to queue and receive order Payment process Staff's ability to understand your needs Ambience of restaurant Time taken to queue and receive order Ability to accommodate to your needs Quality of the food Menu options to suit your needs Ambience of restaurant Quality of beverage Menu options to suit your needs Serving portions Cleanliness and orderliness of restaurants Staff's ability to communicate professionally Quality of beverage Time taken to receive the food Quality of food Quality of food Staff's ability to communicate professionally Staff's ability to understand your needs Note: Attributes ordered by descending order of impact 28

29 Perceived Time Taken to Queue & Receive Order 100% Percentage of Respondents in each Wait Category Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks % Respondents 50% 0% Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 min* 10 mins * denotes that the sample size is too small (n<30). 29

30 Lower Satisfaction For More Than 10 Minutes Wait (Perceived Time Taken to Queue & Receive Order) 100% Percentage of Respondents Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks CSISG 78 % Respondents 50% 71 Scores (0 to 100) 0% Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 min* 10 mins 64 * denotes that the sample size is too small (n<30). Hence, no scores are shown. 30

31 Similar Trend for Loyalty (Perceived Time Taken to Queue & Receive Order) 100% Percentage of Respondents CSISG Loyalty Score Fast Food Restaurants Cafes & Coffee Houses Snack Bars & Food Kiosks 78 Statistically Significantly Lower Scores Statistically Significantly Lower Scores % Respondents 50% 71 Scores (0 to 100) 0% Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 min Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 min* 10 mins 64 * denotes that the sample size is too small (n<30). Hence, no scores are shown. 31

32 Similar Trend for Restaurants for More Than 20 Minutes (Perceived Waiting Time To Receive Food) 100% Percentage of Respondents CSISG Loyalty Score 78 Statistically Significantly Lower Scores % Respondents 50% 63 0% Less than 5 mins 5 to < 10 mins 10 to <20 min 20 mins 48 32

33 Tourism Sector Results INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

34 Tourism Sector CSISG Trends Hotels 70 Tourism Sector Attractions Statistically significant increase/drop between 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence No statistically significant change between 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence 34

35 Significant Increases Y-O-Y In Satisfaction & Most Drivers For Hotels Product Quality Service Quality Perceived Quality Customer Expectations Perceived Value CSISG Complaints Customer Loyalty Customer Expectations (Predicted Quality Before Recent Experience) Perceived Overall Quality (After Recent Experience) Perceived Value CSISG Hotels (+1.4%) (+2.2%) (+0.3%) (+2.6%) Attractions (+0.2%) (+0.4%) (+0.4%) (+0.6%) Statistically significant year-on-year increase/drop at 90% confidence No statistically significant year-on-year change at 90% confidence Note: Only Tourists are measured in the Hotels sub-sector 35

36 Perceived Quality Up For Hotels Product Quality Service Quality Perceived Quality Perceived Product Quality Perceived Service Quality Perceived Overall Quality Hotels (+2.2%) (+2.2%) (+2.2%) Attractions (+0.4%) (+0.4%) (+0.4%) Statistically significant year-on-year increase/drop at 90% confidence No statistically significant year-on-year change at 90% confidence Note: Only Tourists are measured in the Hotels sub-sector 36

37 Hotel Findings INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

38 No Statistically Significant Score Movements (Luxury & Upscale Hotels) 80 Hotels 74.4 CSISG 2016 CSISG Marina Bay Sands Tourism Sector Shangri-La Hotel 75.6 Ritz Carlton 74.9 Marina Mandarin 73.9 Pan Pacific Hotel 73.9 Swissotel The Stamford 73.6 Mandarin Orchard 73.3 Grand Hyatt Ritz Carlton 74.6 Marina Bay Sands 74.2 Grand Hyatt 73.7 Hotel Michael 73.5 Pan Pacific Hotel 72.8 Shangri-La Hotel 72.2 Mandarin Orchard 72.1 Marina Mandarin New hotel measured in 2017: Hotel Michael 38

39 Economy Hotels: Statistically Significant Increase 80 in CSISG For Fragrance Hotel Hotels 74.4 CSISG 2016 CSISG Tourism Sector Fragrance Hotel 69.5 Hotel 81 Hotel Fragrance Hotel

40 Top 5 Differentiators of Quality & Loyalty (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Luxury & Upscale Hotels Economy Hotels Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Cleanliness of the room Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Staff's ability to communicate professionally Ambience of the room Hotel facilities Ambience of the room Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Responsiveness of staff Reliability of the internet connection Hotel ambience Efficiency of the checkin process Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Comfort of the room Efficiency of the checkout process Cleanliness of the room Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Amenities in the room such as TV, air-con, and hair-dryer Staff's ability to provide local recommendations and information Note: Attributes ordered by descending order of impact 40

41 Top 5 Differentiators of Quality & Loyalty (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Luxury & Upscale Hotels Economy Hotels Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Cleanliness of the room Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Staff's ability to communicate professionally Ambience of the room Hotel facilities Ambience of the room Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Responsiveness of staff Reliability of the internet connection Hotel ambience Efficiency of the checkin process Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Comfort of the room Efficiency of the checkout process Cleanliness of the room Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Amenities in the room such as TV, air-con, and hair-dryer Staff's ability to provide local recommendations and information Legend: Service Process Service Staff Product 41

42 Attraction Findings INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

43 No Statistically Significant Score Movements 80 (Attractions) Attractions CSISG 2016 CSISG Tourism Sector Sentosa 74.3 Singapore Zoo 73.3 Universal Studios 73.1 S.E.A Aquarium 72.8 Jurong Bird Park 72.6 River Safari 72.3 Night Safari 72.2 Gardens By The Bay 72.1 MBS SkyPark 71.2 Adventure Cove 71.1 Other attractions 70.5 Singapore Discovery Centre Sentosa 74.5 Singapore Zoo 73.9 Jurong Bird Park 73.4 S.E.A Aquarium 73.2 Singapore Flyer 73.2 Gardens By The Bay 72.8 River Safari 71.9 Universal Studios 71.8 Adventure Cove 71.2 Other attractions 71.1 Night Safari Singapore Discovery Centre New attraction measured in 2017:Singapore Flyer E.g. of other attractions includes ArtScience Museum, Wild Wild Wet, MBS Skypark 43

44 Tourists More Satisfied Than Locals (Drivers of Satisfaction for Attractions) 80 Attractions Locals Tourists CSISG Score (0 to 100) Expectations Quality Value GREEN/RED scores indicates Local performed BETTER/WORSE than Tourist respondents with statistical significance 44

45 Rise in Drivers of Satisfaction Amongst Locals (Drivers of Satisfaction for Attractions) 80 Attractions Locals Tourists CSISG Score (0 to 100) Expectations Quality Value Statistically significant year-on-year IMPROVEMENT/DECLINE at 90% confidence 45

46 Locals More Satisfied with Most Attributes (Attraction Attributes Which Are Comparable Year-on-Year) Tourists Ease of getting to the attraction Locals Waiting time to get into the attraction Clarity of directions within the attraction Ease of getting around the attraction Friendliness and courtesy of the staff Staff knowledge about the attraction Amenities within the attraction Cleanliness of the attraction Entertainment and/or educational value of the attraction Food and beverage options Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) Quality of food and beverage given the prices Statistically significant year-on-year IMPROVEMENT/DECLINE at 90% confidence Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10) 46

47 Visiting With Families A Key Segment For Attractions (With Whom Did You Visit the Attraction With?) 80% Locals Tourists % % Respondents 40% 20% 0% Family Local Friends Tourist Friends Others Family Local Friends Tourist Friends Others 47

48 80 Rise in Satisfaction Amongst Locals Who Visited With Family (With Whom Did You Visit the Attraction With?) Locals Who Visited with Family Tourists Who Visited with Family Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence 48

49 Comparing Locals Who Visited with Family vs. Others (With Whom Did You Visit the Attraction With?) 80 Locals Who Visited with Family Locals Who Visited with All Others (Visited With Anyone Other Than Family) Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence 49

50 80 Higher Perceived Value & Loyalty Amongst Locals Who Visited With Family (With Whom Did You Visit the Attraction With?) Locals Who Visited with Family Locals Who Visited with All Others (Visited With Anyone Other Than Family) Locals who visited with Family have higher scores compared to those who visited with All Others 65 Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Customer Perceived Expectations Quality Perceived Value CSISG Customer Loyalty Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2017 and 2016 scores at 90% confidence 50

51 Top 5 Differentiators of Quality & Loyalty (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Attractions Hotels Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Ease of finding information within the attraction Range of activities/ exhibits Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Safety and security measures within the attraction Entertainment and/or educational value of the attraction Ambience of the room Efficiency of the checkin process Staff knowledge about the attraction Ease of getting around the attraction Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Helpfulness of staff Entertainment and/or educational value of the attraction Cleanliness of the attraction Efficiency of the checkin process Cleanliness of the room Range of activities/ exhibits Clarity of directions within the attraction Hotel ambience Hotel ambience Note: Attributes ordered by descending order of impact 51

52 Beyond Product, Service Remains A Key Differentiator (Top 5 Attributes with Impact on Quality & Loyalty) Attractions Hotels Quality Loyalty Quality Loyalty Ease of finding information within the attraction Range of activities/ exhibits Maintenance of the hotel's public area (e.g. lobby, corridors, lifts) Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Safety and security measures within the attraction Entertainment and/or educational value of the attraction Ambience of the room Efficiency of the checkin process Staff knowledge about the attraction Ease of getting around the attraction Ability of the hotel to accommodate to your needs or requests Helpfulness of staff Entertainment and/or educational value of the attraction Cleanliness of the attraction Efficiency of the checkin process Cleanliness of the room Range of activities/ exhibits Clarity of directions within the attraction Hotel ambience Hotel ambience Legend: Service Process Service Staff Product 52

53 Summary Overall, Food & Beverage and Tourism saw increases in satisfaction in Food & Beverage: Scores rose driven by more satisfied locals, especially in the Restaurants and Fast Food sub-sectors. As with last year both product and service elements were key differentiators of quality and loyalty. Generally, time taken to receive the order was a common differentiator in F&B with wait time of more than 10 minutes (20 minutes for Restaurants) seeing a marked decrease in satisfaction and loyalty. 53

54 Summary Tourism Sector: Rise coming from more satisfied Hotel customers with increase in perceived service and product quality. Attractions wise, locals were more satisfied in 2017, especially amongst the Family segment. Similar to F&B, generally, service elements remains a key differentiator of quality and loyalty. 54

55 ISE INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2017 Q3 RESULTS Announcement INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY