Defining “Experience” – Part 2

In the previous post, I discussed the dictionary definition of the word “experience” and offered my own definitions for the phrases “customer experience” and “good customer experience.”  Now, let’s talk about a much more important and practically relevant definition of customer experience – the operational definition.  That is, how are we going to measure experience?  We need an operational definition here because “experience” is not a physical object or property that can be perceived and measured directly.  Unlike temperature, which we can perceive directly through our senses and have devices for measuring directly (thermometers), “experience” is a concept, a construct, or more simply put, an idea.  As such, we need to all agree on valid and reliable ways of measuring it.

Before we get to that point, however, we need to address another fundamental question – when it comes to “experience”, are we talking about a single property, aspect, dimension?  I submit that we are indeed not!

Customer experience is a complex, multidimensional concept and anyone who says the opposite runs into the possibility of sounding like one of the cast of characters of the Blind Men and the Elephant fable:

The gist of the story is the following.  A group of blind dudes were tasked with describing what an elephant is.  Each man touched only one part of the elephant.  Then they reported to the group their definition of what an elephant is …

After each one presented his vase as to what an elephant is, there was no agreement:

- For the one who felt the trunk, an elephant was a snake

- For the one that felt the tusk – a spear

- …. a fan

- … a wall

- … a tree

- … rope

Needless to say, they were all confused and not too productive …  We do not really want to be in the same position when it comes to defining “customer experience.”  If one person defines experience as the intent to recommend a product or service (Net Promoter Score), another defines it as usability or ease of use, another as “perceived value”, etc. things can get messy pretty quickly.  The results will be an uninformed approach to measuring this key business metric, lack of reliable and valid data, and ultimately lack of the desired business results.

Now that we have established that “customer experience” is a multidimensional construct, what are the dimensions.  Do we just pick some out of this air?  Nope – here we are lucky to have a well-researched, validate and widely accepted model from Psychology – Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs:

Following Maslow’s model, I am offering this visualization of the structure of customer experience:

If we make the analogy between a product or service and a person (in Maslow’s model), we can see how the model is applicable to the topic at hand.  If a product/service does not satisfy a customer need, it will not survive long in the marketplace – just like a human’s chance of survival are limited if her most basic physiological needs of food, water, sleep, etc. are not met.  In the marketplace, big companies with deep pockets can keep a useless product on life support through expensive marketing means for quite a while, but this is mere survival and not thriving.

If the product/service addresses a customer need, the next question is: What is the experience like?  Does it just meet expectations by working as promised and being easy and intuitive to use?  If yes, this corresponds to the middle three layers of Maslow’s hierarchy.  Through longer-terms use, if the need is persistent and the product performance is acceptable, a usage habit can develop which can increase the product’s Lifetime Customer Value.  That is, people will purchase it year over year or will keep subscribing to the service.

And finally, if the product or service goes above and beyond customers’ expectations, it will generate strong positive emotions resulting in loyalty and positive word-of-mouth.  An experience like that results in customers spontaneously saying “Wow that was so good!”  The next day, around the water cooler, they will recommend the product to their friends and colleagues.

All of the above are, of course, hypotheses based on research from the field of Psychology and years of practical industry experience.  These hypotheses need to be tested, both with the rigor of academia, and the pragmatism of the business world.

About these ads
Tagged , ,

2 thoughts on “Defining “Experience” – Part 2

  1. Al says:

    similar concepts in my talk from SXSW last year http://lanyrd.com/2012/sxsw-interactive/sphct/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 366 other followers

%d bloggers like this: