Transcript University Center Rochester Customer Service Audit

RCTC
Customer Service Study
- Summary Presentation -
Presented by:
SNG Research Corporation
Mayo High School
April 28, 2010
1
RCTC
Customer Service Study



Administered by SNG Research Corporation
Reporting period: February 10, 2010 - April 16, 2010
40 contact scenarios were developed (32 high school
students and 8 non-traditional students)
• 19 web-based/email
• 10 telephone
•
5 walk-in
•
1 write-in
•
5 direct applications
All 40 inquiry attempts were made.
Direct applications are handled differently than other types of inquiries; thus, 35 inquiry attempts had
the potential to make it into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM.
2
Of the 35 attempted inquiries, 12 (34%)
were either unable to submit an inquiry or
never received follow-up communication
after their inquiry...
3

3 (8%) were unable to submit an inquiry...
•
1 was unable to make a phone inquiry because she only
reached voicemail and didn’t feel comfortable leaving a
message
•
1 was unable to make a walk-in inquiry because she didn’t
have an appointment
•
1 was unable to make a walk-in inquiry because the office
was closed that day for staff development
* In 2008/2009, 7 of 27 (26%) were unable to submit an inquiry
* In 2006/2007, 5 of 45 (11%) were unable to submit an inquiry
4

9 (26%) never received follow-up communication after
their inquiry...
•
3 who inquired by email to a faculty/staff member never
received a reply
•
5 who inquired by phone and talked with someone never
received any follow-up communication via traditional mail or
email (2 were asked for contact information, 3 were not)
•
1 who inquired by phone and left a message never received a
return call
* In 2008/2009, 3 of 27 (11%) never received follow-up communication
* In 2006/2007, 15 of 45 (33%) never received follow-up communication
5
Of the 35 attempted inquiries, 23 (66%)
were able to submit an inquiry
and received a response...
6
14 (40%) received a response but did not get entered
into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM...

*
*
•
9 who inquired by email to a faculty/staff member received an
email response
-7 received a response directing them to the RCTC web site
-1 received a response inviting the student to come for a visit
-1 received a response saying the inquiry was forwarded to
another faculty/staff member (there was no further response)
•
1 who inquired using the “Visit Us” link was able to tour campus
•
1 who inquired by phone received a Career Resource Guide for
Rochester Public Schools and a program information sheet
•
3 who made a walk-in inquiry were able to speak to someone at
that time
In 2008/2009, 8 of 27 (30%) received a response but did not get entered into the
Recruitment Plus Database
In 2006/2007, 21 of 45 (47%) received a response but did not get entered into the
Recruitment Plus Database
7

*
*
9 (26%) were entered into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM...
•
6 who inquired using the “Request Program Information” link
on the web site received communication
-4 received communication by email
-2 received communication by email and by traditional mail
•
2 who inquired by phone and talked with someone received
communication by email and by traditional mail
•
1 who mailed a business-reply postcard received
communication by email and by traditional mail
In 2008/2009, 9 of 27 (33%) were entered into the Recruitment Plus Database
In 2006/2007, 4 of 45 (9%) were entered into the Recruitment Plus Database
8

All 9 customers who made it into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM
received multiple theme-based communications...
•
Based on the ability to track communications sent by the CRM
using the communications log, the system is working properly
♦
♦
•
The communications are being sent based on the defined thematic
pattern
If a person does not view emailed communication within 3 days of
receipt, the communication is being sent by traditional mail
Although the CRM is working properly, some students underreported what communications they received
♦
♦
A limit of qualitative studies
Some students do not regularly use email as a form of communication
* In 2008/2009, all 9 customers who made it into the Recruitment Plus
Database received more than one communication
* In 2006/2007, all 4 customers who made it into the Recruitment Plus
Database received more than one communication
9
Web/Email Inquiries

19 inquiries attempted

Fairly positive about design and information included in www.rctc.edu web
site and specific program areas of the web site (ratings average between
good and very good)

Several had difficulty or expressed frustrations about making a web-based
or email inquiry

3 customers emailed faculty members but did not receive any response

9 customers emailed faculty members and received an email response,
most often directing them to the applicable area of RCTC’s web site

1 customer used the “Visit Us” link and attended a campus visit
•
•

He said it was easy to schedule visit, get to college, park, and figure out where to go
Rated the visit as ‘good’ overall
6 customers used the “Request Program Information” link
•
All 6 were set up with a VIP account
•
•
All 6 felt the VIP info was customized to them and they would look at it more than once
All 6 were entered into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM
10
Telephone Inquiries

10 inquiries attempted

4 were able to talk to the correct person the first time they called
•
2 did not receive any follow-up communication after the phone conversation
• 2 were set up with a VIP account and were entered into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM

1 was able to talk to the correct person the second time she called
•

This customer did not receive any follow-up communication after the phone
conversation
3 were able to talk to the correct person the third time they called
• 2 did not receive any follow-up communication after the phone conversation
• 1 received packet in the mail (Career Course Resource Guide and program sheet)

2 were unable to talk to the correct person
• 1 reached voicemail twice but chose not to leave a message either time
• 1 reached voicemail once and left a message but did not receive a response
11
Walk-In Inquiries

5 inquiries attempted

All 5 thought it was easy to get to the college and to park

4 of 5 thought it was easy to figure out where to inquire

All 5 said final contact spoke to them in a caring, friendly manner and 4 of 5 said this
person was dressed professionally

Signage ratings – 3 good, 1 very good, 1 excellent

Cleanliness ratings – 3 very good, 2 excellent

Overall atmosphere ratings – 1 good, 4 very good

No one was offered a tour of the school that day or at another time

2 were unable to complete their inquiry
•
•

3 were able to complete their inquiries
•
•

1 because she didn’t have an appointment; she did not rate how the entire inquiry was handled
1 because the office was closed for staff development; she gave a ‘fair’ rating to how the entire
inquiry was handled
All 3 were asked about their academic interests and given some program information
2 gave a ‘very good’ rating and 1 gave a ‘fair’ rating to how the entire inquiry was handled
No one received any follow-up communication after the initial inquiry
12
Write-In Inquiry

1 inquiry attempted
•
A business-reply postcard mailed to RCTC

She thought it was ‘very easy’ to write-in an inquiry

She was entered into Connect/Hobsons’ CRM
•

In the communication she received, her last name was spelled incorrectly. It was
discovered that an error was made when her name was entered from the businessreply card.
She also applied online (using the incorrect spelling of her last name)
after the initial inquiry but did not pay the application fee
•
She received two emails from Admissions in response to her application
•
•
•
1 (with the incorrect spelling of her last name) said her application had been received and
would be processed after the fee was paid
1 (with the correct spelling of her last name) said her PSEO online application had been
submitted and additional forms are necessary
She continued to receive communication from the CRM after applying
•
A problem was identified with the data upload to the CRM (the correct admission status was
not showing up) and this problem is now being fixed
13
Direct Applications

5 direct applications were submitted to RCTC with no previous inquiry
•
•
2 customers applied by traditional mail
3 customers applied online

All 5 thought it was quite easy to fill out the application

3 were told not to include the $20 application fee (1 mail, 2 online)
•
•

2 were told to include the $20 application fee (1 mail, 1 online)
•

The customer who applied by traditional mail received a memo saying his application had been
received and would be processed after the fee was paid; his application was also returned with
various markings and several areas were highlighted indicating that ‘no fee’ had been received
The customers who applied online received an email saying the application had been received
and would be processed after the fee was paid, followed by a letter in the mail listing ways to pay
the fee
Both received an acceptance letter
In addition, 2 web/email customers and 1 write-in customer submitted
applications as part of their inquiry
•
•
•
1 of the web/email customers applied online, paid the fee, and received an acceptance letter
1 of the web/email customers applied online, did not pay the fee, and received communication
that the application had been received and would be processed after the fee was paid
The write-in customer was discussed on the previous slide
14
Overall impression of RCTC

“Now that the project is complete, what is your overall
impression of RCTC?”
RATING
PORTION OF
RESPONDENTS
Excellent (5)
Very Good (4)
Good (3)
Fair (2)
Poor (1)
5
4
17
13
1
(12.5%)
(10.0%)
(42.5%)
(32.5%)
( 2.5%)
Average rating (5-point scale) = 2.98
*
*
In 2008/2009, the average rating was 3.58
In 2006/2007, the average rating was 2.92
15
Some Areas To Focus On

Ease and convenience of inquiring
•
•
•

Responsiveness
•
•

All prospective customers who inquire to RCTC should receive timely follow-up.
All communication with prospective customers should be polite, friendly, personable.
Content
•
•

It needs to be as easy as possible to find specific information on the web site, such as
email addresses for staff/faculty members, links to further info, who to contact about a
program, etc. In addition, it’s important that all web site links are in working order.
The hours in which a live person is available to take calls should meet the needs of
prospective customers.
It’s important for staff to accommodate all walk-ins – ask the prospective customer if
there are questions that can be answered or information that can be provided.
Attention to detail is essential when sending follow-up communication.
If a student requests information about a program, they should receive that information
along with the other general information about RCTC.
Use the resources available for Connect/Hobsons’ CRM
•
If a faculty/staff member communicates with a prospective customer – by email, on the
phone, or in person – that is the perfect opportunity to use the tool available to collect
contact information to be entered into the CRM.
16