TABLE OF CONTENTS There has been much debate about whether respondents should be anonymous or named in customer satisfaction surveys. Before suggesting an approach, we will review both sides of the confidentiality debate.
In the market research industry, respondent anonymity has traditionally been the norm on the assumption that confidentiality is more likely to elicit an impartial response from interviewees. This is based on evidence showing that respondents' answers can differ significantly when they are interviewed by people whom they know. If you are likely to have a continuing relationship with someone in the future, you may not want to offend them and you may want to protect a future negotiating stance. For example, if a salesman personally conducts a customer satisfaction interview with his customers, are they likely to give honest answers to questions about the performance of the salesman or about their satisfaction with current price levels? Even if the salesman does not personally conduct the interview (or if a self-completion questionnaire is used), the respondent's answers may still be influenced if he knows that they will be attributed to him and the salesman will see them.
Confidentiality is also supported if you think about the distinctive role of customer research compared with other customer management initiatives. Research should focus on the 'big picture' rather than on individual customers. It is normally undertaken with a sample of customers rather than a census but is intended to accurately represent the entire customer base. Its value...
