ISES INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2015 Q3 RESULTS. F&B and TOURISM INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

Similar documents
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX OF SINGAPORE 2017 Q3 SCORES FOOD & BEVERAGE AND TOURISM RESULTS OVERVIEW

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX OF SINGAPORE 2018

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

UNIV OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM US10066

GREAT WINE CAPITALS GLOBAL NETWORK MARKET SURVEY FINANCIAL STABILITY AND VIABILITY OF WINE TOURISM BUSINESS IN THE GWC

!!! Customer Preference Survey Report! First Edition [January 2016]

OKANAGAN VALLEY WINE CONSUMER RESEARCH STUDY 2008 RESULTS

The following slides collate the insights relating to food and drink only.

BC WINE INDUSTRY BENCHMARKING

RESTAURANT AND FOOD SERVICE MANAGEMENT SERIES EVENT PARTICIPANT INSTRUCTIONS

2009 Fast Food (QSR) Rewards Programs Consumer Insights

TOURIST SPECIAL INTEREST WINE TOURISM NEW ZEALAND FEBRUARY 2014

ACSI Restaurant Report 2014

RESEARCH UPDATE from Texas Wine Marketing Research Institute by Natalia Kolyesnikova, PhD Tim Dodd, PhD THANK YOU SPONSORS

ENJOY GREAT DEALS. with your hi!tourist EZ-Link SIM Card. Voted as the preferred prepaid card for tourists.

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF BEER TOURISM IN KENT COUNTY, MICHIGAN

Final Report. The Lunchtime Occasion in Republic of Ireland and Great Britain

FINE DINING SURVEY Great British Chefs. All rights reserved

APPENDIX 1 THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT - QUESTIONNAIRE

A Presentation of the Primary Research on Visitation to Wine Festivals and Wineries in British Columbia

SOUTH KOREAN WINE MARKET LANDSCAPE REPORT OCTOBER 2017

Health Promoting Malls

Supply & Demand for Lake County Wine Grapes. Christian Miller Lake County MOMENTUM April 13, 2015

CENTER TRT EVALUATION PLAN. Kaiser Permanente Worksite Cafeteria Menu Labeling. Evaluation Plan:

SAS - JMP Elite Sales Circle 2018

Nutrition Environment Assessment Tool (NEAT)

Food Service Opportunity at Toronto City Hall. Government Management Committee. P:\2016\Internal Services\RE\Gm16012re (AFS #22969)

BIS Foodservice offers an integrated data and research solution in the foodservice market

Leaving Certificate Applied

US Chicken Consumption. Presentation to Chicken Marketing Summit July 18, 2017 Asheville, NC


SPARKLING WINE IN THE UK MARKET. September 2018 Report

Global Concession Catering Market: Size, Trends & Forecasts ( ) December 2016

Report Brochure UK WINE RETAIL TRENDS December REPORT PRICE GBP 1,500 EUR 2,100 USD 2,400 AUD 3,300 3 Report Credits

A Comparison of X, Y, and Boomer Generation Wine Consumers in California

UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH FAIRTRADE PLAN

The Market for Northeastern Grown Hops 1

Executive Summary. N.C. Customers Give Their Local ABC Liquor Stores High Marks, Identify Ways to Improve Customer Service.

EXHIBIT ON THE 2019 TRADESHOW FLOOR! catersource.com

Report Brochure P O R T R A I T S U K REPORT PRICE: GBP 2,500 or 5 Report Credits* UK Portraits 2014

Company Coverage. Country Coverage. Global Coverage. Regional Coverage

QUICK SERVE RESTAURANT MANAGEMENT SERIES EVENT PARTICIPANT INSTRUCTIONS

Resident Student Dining Committee Minutes of Meeting

Measuring and Managing the Quality of Service in Hotels in Cyprus. Professor Christine Hope and Leontios Filotheou

Bottled Water Category Overview

SOUTH AFRICA BRAND REPORT

Foodservice EUROPE. 10 countries analyzed: AUSTRIA BELGIUM FRANCE GERMANY ITALY NETHERLANDS PORTUGAL SPAIN SWITZERLAND UK

The 2006 Economic Impact of Nebraska Wineries and Grape Growers

Executive Summary. The Lunchtime Occasion in Republic of Ireland and Great Britain

Produce Education Program 2015 Evaluation Report Comparison of Key Findings

Summary Report Survey on Community Perceptions of Wine Businesses

The Macao Tourist Satisfaction Index (MTSI)

What do we know about fresh produce consumption

VisitScotland Food & Drink QA Scheme. Taste Our Best. Criteria/Guidance Notes. Visitor Attractions

Restricted. Drink Healthy Match & Win Promotion. Frequently Asked Questions

UNIVERSITY OF PLYMOUTH SUSTAINABLE FOOD PLAN

Mooch Mystery Diner Report. Written and Complied by Sophie Fox, January 2017

2017 National Monitor of Fuel Consumer Attitudes ACAPMA

SPARKLING WINE IN THE CANADIAN MARKET

The China Wine Barometer (CWB): a look into the future

Using Data to Transform the Fast-Casual Customer Experience

An Examination of operating costs within a state s restaurant industry

Technical Memorandum: Economic Impact of the Tutankhamun and the Golden Age of the Pharoahs Exhibition

FOOD SERVICE FOOD SERVICE FOOD SERVICE. Food service: Food service. Dispensing prepared meals and snacks for on-premise immediate consumption

Work Sample (Minimum) for 10-K Integration Assignment MAN and for suppliers of raw materials and services that the Company relies on.

The Contribution made by Beer to the European Economy. Czech Republic - January 2016

Sommelier 9543 Certificate III in Hospitality (Operations) Sommeliers

UNIT TITLE: TAKE FOOD ORDERS AND PROVIDE TABLE SERVICE NOMINAL HOURS: 80

Previous analysis of Syrah

Results from the First North Carolina Wine Industry Tracker Survey

TEXAS WINE INDUSTRY OVERVIEW. Texas

NO TO ARTIFICIAL, YES TO FLAVOR: A LOOK AT CLEAN BALANCERS

Chick-fil-A Corporate Recognitions

Barista/Café Assistant

Global Foodservice Equipment Market: Industry Analysis & Outlook ( )

Saudi Arabia Iced/Rtd Coffee Drinks Category Profile

A Study on Consumer Attitude Towards Café Coffee Day. Gonsalves Samuel and Dias Franklyn. Abstract

THE FRENCH WINE MARKET LANDSCAPE REPORT SEPTEMBER 2017

Customers Perceptions of Metropolitan Train Services in Melbourne

Mystery Shopper. Fall 2017

New from Packaged Facts!

1 a) State three leadership styles used by a food and beverage supervisor. (3 marks)

Vending best quality for all. thanks to perfect BRITA water

1) What proportion of the districts has written policies regarding vending or a la carte foods?

Emerging Local Food Systems in the Caribbean and Southern USA July 6, 2014

$ BUY STARBUCKS CORPORATION (SBUX) Rena Kaufman. Valuation Methodology. Market Data. Financial Summary (7/1/2018) Profile. Financial Analysis

POSITION DESCRIPTION. DATE OF VERSION: January Position Summary:

2016 STATUS SUMMARY VINEYARDS AND WINERIES OF MINNESOTA

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Table of contents

Mango Retail Performance Report 2017

Food Waste Working Group Recommendations to MSDEC. Presented by Lisa Cassar Shaw

Predictors of Repeat Winery Visitation in North Carolina

Oregon Wine Industry Sustainable Showcase. Gregory V. Jones

Texas Wine Marketing Research Institute College of Human Sciences Texas Tech University CONSUMER ATTITUDES TO TEXAS WINES

NSW Food & Wine Festival February 7- March 1, 2015

Partnership Opportunities for Private Liquor Retail Stores in BC

Center for Responsible Travel Transforming the Way the World Travels

VINITRAC GLOBAL REPORTING EXAMPLES 2015

Improved Cookstoves Slide 1

Chicken Usage Summary

Transcription:

ISES INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2015 Q3 RESULTS F&B and TOURISM INSTITUTE OF SERVICE EXCELLENCE SINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY 1

CSISG 2015 Q3 CSISG 2015 Q3 Quick Facts & Sampling Results Overview Results and Highlights of F&B Sector Results and Highlights of Tourism Sector 2

The CSISG Score Customer Satisfaction CSISG 1. Overall Satisfaction 2. Ability to Meet Expectations 3. Similarity to Ideal 3

Overview of the CSISG Main Fieldwork Singapore citizens and PRs are interviewed at their homes. Homes are selected from a random listing of 40,000 household addresses that match housing profile of Singapore resident population. Departing tourists are interviewed at Changi Airport. All respondents answering for the airport were interviewed at the airport. Each respondent answers up to 17 CSISG questions and 24 touchpoint questions about a company they had recent experiences with. Typically 250 respondents per company would have answered the CSISG questionnaire. 4

CSISG 2015 Q3 Quick Facts Sectors Covered Tourism Food & Beverage Survey Period Jul Sep 2015 Total Questionnaires Completed 10,460 Face-to-face at residents homes 6,109 Face-to-face at Changi Airport 4,351 Distinct entities measured 849 Entities with published scores 29 5

CSISG 2015 QUARTER 3 results overview

CSISG 2015 Q3 Results Overview 69.4 Tourism 70.8 Hotels* 74.3 Marina Bay Sands* 73.1 Shangri-La* 72.6 The Ritz-Carlton* 72.0 Resorts World Sentosa 72.0 Mandarin Orchard 71.3 Swissotel the Stamford 70.3 Grand Hyatt 69.7 Other hotels 70.3 Attractions* 72.1 S.E.A. Aquarium* 71.6 Sentosa 71.6 Singapore Zoo 71.4 River Safari 71.0 Universal Studios 70.7 Night Safari 70.7 Jurong Bird Park 69.9 Adventure Cove 68.7 Other attractions 66.4 Travel & Tour Services 67.1 Food & Beverage 69.4 Fast Food Restaurants* 72.2 McDonalds* 67.6 Burger King 67.5 KFC 64.3 Other fast food restaurants 69.0 Bars & Pubs* 68.1 Cafes & Snack Bars 70.1 Starbucks 68.4 Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf 67.7 Other cafes and snack bars 66.5 Food Courts 69.0 NTUC Foodfare* 67.7 Food Republic 67.0 Koufu 65.9 Kopitiam 66.2 Other food courts 66.2 Restaurants 70.0 Sushi Tei* 69.0 RE&S* 68.7 Crystal Jade* 68.6 Sakae Holdings* 68.0 Minor Food Group 65.7 Other restaurants 7

CSISG 2015 Q3 RESULTS Tourism

CSISG Tourism Sector Trends 78 80 Hotels 70 60 2007 2015 Attractions 70 69.4 Tourism 70.8 Hotels* 74.3 Marina Bay Sands* 73.1 Shangri-La* 72.6 The Ritz-Carlton* 72.0 Resorts World Sentosa 72.0 Mandarin Orchard 71.3 Swissotel the Stamford 70.3 Grand Hyatt 69.7 Other hotels Travel & Tour Services Tourism Sector 70.3 Attractions* 72.1 S.E.A. Aquarium* 71.6 Sentosa 71.6 Singapore Zoo 71.4 River Safari 71.0 Universal Studios 70.7 Night Safari 70.7 Jurong Bird Park 69.9 Adventure Cove 68.7 Other attractions 66.4 Travel & Tour Services 9

CSISG 2015 Q3 Tourism Attractions Sub-sector Locals who visited attractions in the past three months were asked if they used a corporate pass or enjoyed discounted rates Used corporate pass or enjoyed discounted rate? 79.4% No Yes 20.6% CSISG 68.1 68.2 10

CSISG 2015 Q3 Tourism Attractions Sub-sector Impact Analysis Impact on Satisfaction 5.0 Expectations Quality Value 2.5 0.0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Perceived Value continues to be a relatively poor driver of satisfaction. Consequently, discounts played a nominal role in moving Attractions CSISG performance. 11

CSISG 2015 Q3 Tourism Attractions sub-sector Perceived Overall Quality has the highest impact on satisfaction and loyalty. Specifically, the quality of the product, e.g., the attraction itself and its facilities, has the highest impact on satisfaction. Also, there is little difference in satisfaction between customers who paid full price and those who did not. Coupled with the finding that perceived value is the weakest of the three drivers in moving satisfaction, companies should not expect to delight customers solely on price promotions. Instead companies should work on raising perceptions of quality. 12

CSISG 2015 Q3 Tourism Attractions sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Clarity of information displayed 7.7 Clarity of directions 7.7 Friendliness & courtesy of staff 7.7 Staff knowledge 7.8 Ease of getting a ticket 7.6 Ease of getting to the attraction 7.4 Amenities 7.7 Wayfinding 7.8 Cleanliness 8.3 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Clarity of information displayed 7.5 Ease of getting a ticket 7.4 Friendliness & courtesy of staff 8.0 Clarity of directions 7.8 Staff knowledge 7.9 Wayfinding 7.8 Amenities 7.7 Cleanliness 7.6 Ease of getting to the attraction 7.1 13

CSISG 2015 Q3 Tourism Hotel sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Check-in process 7.8 Amenities 7.6 Ease of making reservations 7.7 Hotel staff courtesy 7.8 Check-out process 7.8 Helpfulness of staff 7.6 Ease of getting to hotel 7.9 Clarity of directions in hotel 7.8 Cleanliness 7.7 Quality of F&B 7.8 Bill 8.3 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Clarity of directions in hotel 8.0 Hotel staff courtesy 7.8 Cleanliness 7.9 Check-in process 7.5 Amenities 7.8 Helpfulness of staff 7.8 Ease of getting to hotel 7.5 Bill 7.8 Quality of F&B 7.5 Ease of making reservations 7.4 Check-out process 7.7 14

CSISG 2015 Q3 RESULTS Food & Beverage

CSISG F&B Sector Trends 75 Fast Food 65 55 2007 2015 Cafes & Snack Bars 78 Bars & Pubs 70 Food Courts 67.1 Food & Beverage 69.4 Fast Food Restaurants* 72.2 McDonalds* 67.6 Burger King 67.5 KFC 64.3 Other fast food restaurants 69.0 Bars & Pubs* 68.1 Cafes & Snack Bars 70.1 Starbucks 68.4 Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf 67.7 Other cafes and snack bars 69.4 Tourism Restaurants 70.8 Hotels* 74.3 Marina Bay Sands* 73.1 Shangri-La* 72.6 The Ritz-Carlton* 72.0 Resorts World Sentosa 72.0 Mandarin Orchard 71.3 Swissotel the Stamford 70.3 Grand Hyatt 2015 Q3 SCORES FOOD & BEVERAGE AND TOURISM Food & Beverage Sector 67.1 Food & Beverage 69.4 Fast Food Restaurants* 72.2 McDonalds* 67.6 Burger King 67.5 KFC 64.3 Other fast food restaurants 69.0 Bars & Pubs* 66.5 Food Courts 69.0 NTUC Foodfare* 67.7 Food Republic 67.0 Koufu 65.9 Kopitiam 66.2 Other food courts 66.2 Restaurants 70.0 Sushi Tei* 69.0 RE&S* 68.7 Crystal Jade* 68.6 Sakae Holdings* 68.0 Minor Food Group 65.7 Other restaurants 16

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Restaurants sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to those with reservations) Average Rating (1 10) Quality of food 7.7 Waiting time to be seated 7.9 Time taken to receive menu 7.7 Order process 7.8 Cleanliness 7.7 Ease of reservation 7.6 Staff responsiveness 7.7 Time taken to receive food 7.7 Bill timeliness and accuracy 7.9 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to those without reservations) Average Rating (1 10) Waiting time to be seated 6.8 Time taken to receive food 6.9 Order process 7.0 Time taken to receive menu 7.0 Staff responsiveness 6.8 Quality of food 6.8 Cleanliness 7.1 Bill timeliness and accuracy 7.7 17

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Restaurants sub-sector Touchpoint analysis revealed that for customers who did not make reservations, attributes that were important to them were primarily time-related, e.g., waiting time and time taken to receive food were the most important to them. For those who made reservations, attributes about the core service of the restaurant, i.e., quality of food, was the most important driver of overall quality. 18

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Fast Food sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Staff courtesy 7.2 Quality of food 7.3 Ease of finding seat 7.3 Queue time 7.5 Order process 7.3 Cleanliness 7.6 Accuracy of change 7.5 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Cleanliness 7.6 Ease of finding seat 7.3 Order process 7.7 Accuracy of change 7.6 Staff courtesy 7.7 Quality of food 7.5 Queue time 7.5 19

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Food Courts sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Staff courtesy 7.0 Ease of finding seat 7.1 Order taking 7.2 Queue 7.3 Quality of food 7.1 Accuracy of change 7.3 Cleanliness 7.3 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Ease of finding seat 7.5 Staff courtesy 7.9 Accuracy of change 7.8 Quality of food 7.8 Queue 7.6 Order taking 7.8 Cleanliness 7.7 20

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Bars & Pubs sub-sector Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Staff courtesy 7.1 Order process 7.2 Ease of finding seat 7.3 Queue time 7.4 Cleanliness 7.3 Accuracy of change 7.4 Quality of food 7.2 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Ease of finding seat 7.7 Accuracy of change 7.8 Order process 7.8 Cleanliness 7.8 Queue 7.9 Staff courtesy 8.0 Quality of food 7.6 21

CSISG 2015 Q3 Food & Beverage Cafes & Snack Bars Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Locals) Average Rating (1 10) Staff courtesy 7.4 Ease of finding seat 7.5 Order taking 7.5 Quality of food 7.5 Cleanliness 7.6 Queue 7.5 Accuracy of change 7.5 Touchpoints (Ordered by decreasing importance to Tourists) Average Rating (1 10) Accuracy of change 7.8 Cleanliness 7.7 Queue 7.9 Staff courtesy 7.9 Ease of finding seat 7.6 Quality of food 7.7 Order taking 7.8 22

CSISG 2015 Q3 RESULTS overall findings

CSISG 2015 Q3 Social Media Use 100% Did not access social media Accessed social media 75% 50% 25% 0% F&B Tourism Expectations 73.1 Expectations 77.7 Expectations 74.6 Expectations 75.6

CSISG 2015 Q3 Social Media Use Respondents who used social media prior to their experience with an F&B outlet or a tourist attraction had significantly higher expectations as compared to those who did not access social media to preview the establishment in question. While the proportion of customers preluding their visit with social media reviews is still small, businesses cognisant of its effects and potential to shape expectations (and the eventual consumption experience) can use social media to their advantage. Observations of CSISG data show that customers with high satisfaction tend to have high expectations as well.

CSISG 2015 Q3 Overall Complaint Behaviour Complained to the company? Yes 3.3% Complained to the family/friends? No 96.7% Complained to the family/friends? Yes No Yes No 44.7% 55.3% 4.4% 95.7% Likelihood of repurchase 3.6 7.6 4.0 7.7 Likelihood to recommend 3.7 7.6 3.7 7.7 26

CSISG 2015 Q3 Complaint Behaviour Regardless of whether a customer complained to the company or not, if the grievance was communicated to family/friends, this corresponded with low customer satisfaction. Conversely, respondents who did not complain to their friends and families have high customer satisfaction. i.e., Customers who complained to family and friends are less satisfied, less likely to repurchase, and less likely to recommend the product and service. 27

CSISG 2015 Q3 Complaint Behaviour Companies should develop processes to suss out customers complaints outside of traditional feedback channels. Customers are more likely to complain to family/friends than the company. Thus, actively soliciting feedback/complaints can serve as an intervention to poor satisfaction scores. The caveat here is all complaints must be adequately resolved for this to be a viable strategy. Enable this change by doing two things for your frontline staff: 1. Remove number of complaints as a negative KPI for frontline staff. 2. Replace this negative KPI with a positive KPI of how well they handle complaints. 28

CSISG 2015 Q3 In Summary F&B sector improved year-on-year but Tourism sector did not register a significant change. Customers who used social media for a preview prior to their actual F&B/Tourism experience have higher Expectations levels; use it to your advantage. Proactively seek out disgruntled customers and resolve their grievances; it can improve satisfaction significantly. 29

More information The CSISG 2015 Q3 Executive Summary is available on the ISES homepage at ises.smu.edu.sg If you are from a CSISG-measured company, email ise@smu.edu.sg with your professional contact information for your complimentary company-specific CSISG score card The ISES Membership Programme provides a comprehensive CSISG benchmarking report for your company along with a host of associated benefits. Apply at ises.smu.edu.sg 30