CSISG 2016 Q4 [FINAL] - ise.smu.edu.sg · 71.7 NTUC Fairprice 71.1 Giant 67.6 Other supermarkets...

INSTITUTE OF

SERVICE EXCELLENCESINGAPORE MANAGEMENT UNIVERSITY

ISE INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2016 Full Year & Q4 RESULTS Announcement

INSTITUTE OF


CSISG 2016 Q4 RESULTS

Healthcare And Finance & Insurance

INSTITUTE OF


CSISG Methodology

4

Customer Satisfaction

CSISG (Scale of 0-100)

1. Overall Satisfaction 2. Ability to Meet Expectations

3. Similarity to Ideal

How Much Did Companies Satisfy Their Customers?The CSISG Score

5

Qn. Overall Satisfaction Qn. Ability to Meet Expectations Qn. Similarity to Ideal

General CSISG Structural Model

Qn. Repurchase Intention Qn. Price Tolerance

Qn. Complaint Behaviour

Customer Expectations

(Expected Quality Before Recent Experience)

Perceived Overall Quality

Perceived Value

Customer Satisfaction

(CSISG)

Customer Complaints

Customer Loyalty

Qn. Price / Quality Qn. Quality / Price

Qn. Expected Overall Quality Qn. Expected Customisation Qn. Expected Reliability

Qn. Perceived Overall Quality Qn. Perceived Customisation Qn. Perceived Reliability

→ Denotes positive relationship between the drivers → Denotes inverse relationship between the drivers

General CSISG Fieldwork MethodologySingapore 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.

Departing tourists are interviewed at Changi Airport.

(Applicable to Private Hospitals Sub-sector only)

Typically 100-200 respondents per company would have answered the CSISG questionnaire.

Each respondent answers up to 21 CSISG questions and about 24 touchpoint questions about the company/brand they had recent experiences with. Each respondent evaluates only 1 company/brand.

6

7

Overview of Score Calculation

Company Score

Sub-Sector Score

National ScoreSector Score

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.

Local & Tourist Weights

Company Weights

Revenue / GDP Contribution Weights

• 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.

1 2 3 4

Revenue Share Study / DOS GDP Data

INSTITUTE OF


CSISG 2016 Key Facts

Calendar year 1st quarter Info-communications Retail

2nd quarter Private Education Public Education Air Transport Land Transport Logistics

3rd quarter F&B Tourism

4th quarter Finance & Insurance Healthcare

Sectors Measured in the CSISG

9

Total Questionnaires Completed 40,809

Face-to-Face 28,823

Online survey 3,984

Tourists 8,002

Distinct entities measured 1,245

Entities with published scores 196

CSISG 2016 Full Year Quick Facts

Note: Online survey for Private Education and ITE sector

10

11

Sectors Covered Healthcare Finance & Insurance

Survey Period Oct 2016 to Jan 2017

Total Questionnaires Completed 9,402

Face-to-Face 9,042

Tourists 360

Distinct entities measured 85

Entities with published scores 48

CSISG 2016 Q4 Quick Facts

INSTITUTE OF


CSISG 2016 RESULTS

13

75.7 Public Education 77.1 Universities* 80.5 SMU*77.6 NUS 76.0 NTU74.2 SUTD73.0 SIT 72.5 ITE 71.5 Polytechnics 76.0 Singapore* 75.0 Temasek* 72.2 Ngee Ann 67.8 Republic 65.8 Nanyang

75.5 Air Transport 81.4 Airport* 81.4 Changi Airport 73.5 Airlines 76.7 Singapore Airlines* 75.1 Garuda Indonesia* 74.1 Emirates 73.3 Cathay Pacific 71.9 Qantas 71.7 Silkair 70.8 Other airlines 69.5 Budget Airlines 70.3 Jetstar Asia 69.9 AirAsia 68.6 Tigerair 68.2 Scoot 70.9 Other budget airlines

71.7 Retail

73.1 Motor Vehicles*

72.3 Jewellery

71.9 Fashion Apparels74.8 Bossini74.5 Uniqlo74.0 Hang Ten73.1 G200072.5 H&M71.5 Giordano71.2 Mango70.5 Topshop69.9 Cotton On69.6 Zara71.4 Other fashion apparels

71.5 Furniture & Electronics73.0 Challenger72.4 Gain City72.1 Courts71.8 Harvey Norman67.9 IKEA72.5 Other furniture & electronics

71.5 Petrol Service Stations72.4 Esso71.6 SPC71.5 Shell69.1 Caltex

71.5 Supermarkets72.5 Cold Storage71.9 Sheng Siong71.7 NTUC Fairprice71.1 Giant67.6 Other supermarkets

71.1 e-Commerce73.2 Zalora*72.0 Taobao/Tmall72.0 Groupon71.9 Lazada71.6 Ebay 71.1 Deals.com/Ensogo70.6 Carousell70.3 Qoo10 69.3 Amazon

70.2 Department Stores73.2 DFS*71.7 Takashimaya71.5 John Little71.2 Robinsons71.0 Isetan70.8 BHG69.1 Metro68.6 Tangs67.5 Other departmental stores

71.2 Logistics 72.4 Courier Services 73.6 FedEx 72.7 Speedpost 72.0 DHL 71.3 UPS 68.9 Other courier services 67.9 Postal Services 67.9 Singapore Post

72.4 Finance & Insurance

72.9 Banks 73.1 DBS72.9 OCBC72.5 Maybank72.5 Citibank71.9 Standard Chartered71.7 UOB71.3 HSBC70.8 Other banks 71.8 Motor & Other Personal Insurance 72.6 AXA72.3 NTUC Income72.2 AIG71.2 Other motor & personal insurers

71.6 Life Insurance 73.2 Great Eastern72.8 AIA71.3 NTUC Income71.1 Prudential69.1 Aviva70.2 Other life insurers

70.8 Health and Medical Insurance 71.4 NTUC Income70.7 Prudential70.5 AIA70.1 Great Eastern71.3 Other health & medical insurers

70.7 Credit Cards 72.1 Citibank72.1 American Express70.9 DBS70.7 Maybank70.7 UOB70.4 HSBC70.0 OCBC69.0 Other credit cards

2016 National Score

71.8How Well Did Companies Satisfy Their Customers?

71.1 Tourism

72.8 Attractions*74.3 Sentosa73.3 Singapore Zoo73.1 Universal Studios72.8 S.E.A. Aquarium72.6 Jurong Bird Park72.3 River Safari72.2 Night Safari72.1 Gardens By The Bay71.2 MBS Skypark71.1 Adventure Cove70.1 Singapore Discovery Centre70.5 Other attractions

72.5 Hotels*Luxury & Upscale Hotels

77.2 Marina Bay Sands*75.6 Shangri-La*74.9 The Ritz-Carlton*73.9 Marina Mandarin73.9 Pan Pacific Singapore73.6 Swissotel the Stamford73.3 Mandarin Orchard73.0 Grand Hyatt

Economy Hotels

67.8 Hotel 8166.8 Fragrance Hotel

72.5 Other hotels

68.7 Travel & Tour Services

67.7 Online Travel Agencies

1

QUALIFIER FOR RESPONDENT (1) Recently Interacted with Companies/

Brands (Past 3/6/12 months) (2) Each Respondent Evaluates

Satisfaction with 1 to 2 Companies/Brands from different Sectors

14

2016 National Score

71.8How Well Did Companies Satisfy Their Customers?

71.0 Healthcare

73.2 Private Hospitals*74.3 Mount Alvernia74.2 Parkway East73.6 Gleneagles73.5 Raffles73.1 Mount Elizabeth Orchard72.7 Mount Elizabeth Novena71.2 Thomson Medical

70.3 Polyclinics 70.4 SingHealth70.3 NHG 70.0 Restructured Hospitals 71.2 KK Women’s & Children’s70.9 Khoo Teck Puat70.9 Changi General70.1 Ng Teng Fong69.9 Tan Tock Seng69.8 National University68.5 Alexandra67.3 Singapore General

69.8 Restaurants71.7 Fish & Co 71.4 Boon Tong Kee 71.3 Din Tai Fung 71.2 Sushi Tei71.1 Tung Lok Signatures70.9 Crystal Jade Kitchen 70.8 Dian Xiao Er 70.6 Pizza Hut 70.4 Thai Express 70.2 Swensen’s 70.1 Manhattan Fish Market 70.1 Jack’s Place 70.1 Astons70.0 Nando’s70.0 Ajisen Ramen 69.8 Sakae Sushi 69.7 Crystal Jade La Mian Xiao Long Bao 69.6 Seoul Garden 69.3 Xin Wang Hong Kong Cafe 68.3 Imperial Treasure Noodle & Congee 68.0 Other restaurants 69.2 Food Courts70.6 Food Republic70.5 Food Junction70.0 NTUC Foodfare68.7 Kopitiam67.9 Koufu66.4 Other food courts

68.5 Info-Communications 69.6 Wireless@SG 69.2 Mobile Telecom 72.0 Singtel* 67.5 StarHub 65.0 M1 67.0 Broadband 67.5 M167.0 StarHub66.9 Singtel 66.6 PayTV 67.7 StarHub 65.8 Singtel

66.8 Land Transport

70.0 Taxi Services* 72.2 Premier* 71.9 Transcab 70.1 SMRT 69.3 ComfortDelGro 68.5 Prime

70.1 Food & Beverage

72.7 Bars & Pubs*

70.7 Fast Food Restaurants72.3 McDonalds71.0 Burger King70.4 KFC69.5 Mos Burger68.8 Subway67.9 Other fast food restaurants

70.7 Cafes & Snack Bars72.7 Starbucks72.2 Delifrance70.2 Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf70.1 Ya Kun69.6 Toast Box68.6 Other cafes and snack bars

All scores displayed are accurate to one-decimal place. Entities are presented in decreasing levels of satisfaction.

* Companies indicated with an asterisk(*) are companies that have performed significantly above their sub-sector average.

* Sub-sectors indicated with an asterisk(*) are sub-sectors that have performed significantly above their sector average.

The sparklines indicate the satisfaction score of their respective sectors, sub-sectors and companies over the past few years.

statistically significant increase in customer satisfaction from 2015 to 2016

statistically significant decrease in customer satisfaction from 2015 to 2016

no significant year-on-year change in customer satisfaction score

This above chart summarises the results of the CSISG 2016 satisfaction scores at the national, sector, sub-sector and company levels.

CSISG scores are generated based on the econometric modelling of survey data collected from end-users after the consumption of products and services. Company scores (in black) are weighted based on a separate incidence study. This incidence study helps determine each company’s sample profile and the local-tourist weights. Sub-sector scores (in blue) are derived as a weighted average of company scores, in proportion to the local and tourist incidence interactions with the constituent companies. Sector scores (in gold) are derived by aggregating the sub-sector scores proportionately to each sub-sector’s revenue contributions.

Finally, the national index of 71.8 represents a weighted average, by each sector’s contribution to GDP, of the 11 sector scores.

There are new sub-categories created under the Hotel Sub-sector; namly Luxury & Upscale Hotels, Mid-Tier Hotels, and Economy Hotels. However, there are no Mid-Tier Hotel measured in 2016 due to low incidence.

68.8 Transport Booking App* 69.7 Uber 69.0 Grab 68.0 ComfortDelGro 67.2 Other transport booking app 66.4 Mass Rapid Transit System 66.5 SBS Transit 66.3 SMRT 62.7 Public Buses 64.4 SMRT 61.9 SBS Transit 65.0 Private Education 65.0 Private Education Institutions

2

QUALIFIER FOR RESPONDENT (1) Recently Interacted with Companies/

Brands (Past 3/6/12 months) (2) Each Respondent Evaluates

Satisfaction with 1 to 2 Companies/Brands from different Sectors

15

CSISG 2016 Q4 Sub-sectors

Healthcare Sector

• Restructured Hospitals

• Private Hospitals

• Polyclinics

Finance & Insurance Sector

• Banks

• Credit Cards

• Life Insurance

• Health & Medical Insurance

• Motor & Personal Insurance

NEW

INSTITUTE OF


Healthcare Sector Results

60

68

76Private Hospitals

2007 2016

70

78

Healthcare Sector

60

68

76Restructured Hospitals

2007 2016

Healthcare Sector CSISG

60

68

76Polyclinics

2007 2016

Note: Respondents must have sought medical consultation at the institution in the last 6 months

◼

17

▼Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2016 and 2015 scores at 90% confidence ◼No statistically significant change between the 2016 and 2015 scores at 90% confidence

18

Satisfaction Up - Driven by Movements in Quality & Value

Customer Expectations (Expected Quality

Before Recent Experience)

Perceived Quality

(After Recent Experience)

Perceived Value CSISG

Private Hospitals 75.0 73.8 74.6 73.2

Polyclinics 70.0 73.6 73.5 70.3

Restructured Hospitals 71.3 71.4 71.6 70.0

▼Statistically significant year-on-year increase/drop at 90% confidence ◼No statistically significant year-on-year change at 90% confidence


Perceived Quality


Complaints

Customer Loyalty

SGH 66.7

KKH 70.6

CGH 70.5

TTSH 68.8

NUH 68.4

KTPH 69.7

NTFH 69.0

67.3 SGH

71.2 KKH

70.9 CGH

69.9 TTSH

69.8 NUH

70.9 KTPH

70.1 NTFH

68.5 AH

CSISG

2015

CSISG

2016

19

Restructured Hospitals

2007 201660

68

76Restructured Hospitals

70.0

70

78

Healthcare Sector

Added in 2016: Alexandra Hospital (Sengkang Health)

No Significant Changes in Satisfaction


Raffles Hospital 72.2

Mount Alvernia Hospital 72.6

Thomson Medical Centre 71.7

Mount Elizabeth Orchard 72.5

Parkway East Hospital 71.7 Gleneagles Hospital 71.5

Mount Elizabeth Novena 71.0

73.5 Raffles Hospital

74.3 Mount Alvernia Hospital

71.2 Thomson Medical Centre

73.1 Mount Elizabeth Orchard

74.2 Parkway East Hospital 73.6 Gleneagles Hospital

72.7 Mount Elizabeth Novena

CSISG2015

CSISG2016

Healthcare Sector

20

Private Hospitals

2007 201660

68

76 Private Hospitals 73.2Satisfaction Levels Undifferentiated


NHG Polyclinics 69.6 SingHealth Polyclinics 69.8

70.3 NHG Polyclinics

70.4 SingHealth Polyclinics

CSISG

2015

CSISG

2016Healthcare Sector

21

Polyclinics

2007 201658

67

76 Polyclinics

70.3 ◼

No Significant Changes in Satisfaction


Ease of making appointment

Registration process

Waiting time (before undergoing medical test or seeing a doctor)

Waiting experience

Clarity of direction signs

Ease of getting around

Amenities within hospital

Explanation of diagnosis / condition

Treatment administered or suggested

Collection of medication

Clarity of medication instructions

Payment process

6 7 8

Private HospitalsRestructured Hospitals

Customer Journey for Hospitals

22




Waiting experience








Payment process

6 7 8


Satisfaction with Restructured Hospitals Generally Lower Across the Customer Journey

Attributes where Private Hospitals performed significantly better than Restructured Hospitals 23

Satisfaction Significantly Worse Than Other Attributes

6 7 8


Waiting Time Lowest Rated Attribute for Hospitals




Waiting experience








Payment process

24

Satisfaction Significantly Worse Than Other Attributes

Ease of making an appointment

Efficiency of registration process


Waiting experience



Amenities within polyclinic

Cleanliness of polyclinic




Payment process

6 7 8

Polyclinics

Similarly, Waiting Time Lowest Rated Attribute for Polyclinics

25

Private Hospitals Have The Shortest Perceived Waiting TimeP

erce

ntag

e of

Res

pond

ents

0%

35%

70%

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

Percentage of Respondents in each Wait Category

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

Restructured Hospitals Perceived Median Waiting Time:

30 Mins

Private Hospitals Perceived Median Waiting Time:

20 Mins

Polyclinics Perceived Median Waiting Time:

40 Mins

26

Higher Perceived Wait Time Associated With Lower SatisfactionP

erce

ntag

e of

Res

pond

ents

0%

35%

70%

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

Percentage of Respondents in each Wait CategoryCSISG of Respondent in each Wait Category

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

CS

ISG

50

65

80

20 mins& below

21~40mins

41 mins& above

Restructured Hospitals Perceived Median Waiting Time:

30 Mins

Private Hospitals Perceived Median Waiting Time:

20 Mins

Polyclinics Perceived Median Waiting Time:

40 Mins

27

28

Key Differentiators of Perceived Quality

Restructured Hospitals Private Hospitals Polyclinics

Top 5 Attributes with Significant Impact on Quality

Waiting experience Waiting experience Waiting experience

Registration process Registration process Efficiency of registration process

Clarity of direction signs Waiting time Amenities within polyclinic

Amenities within hospital Payment process Clarity of medication instructions


Treatment administered or suggested Waiting time

29

Waiting Experience A Larger Differentiator of Perceived Quality than Waiting Time

Restructured Hospitals Private Hospitals Polyclinics


Waiting experience Waiting experience Waiting experience

Registration process Registration process Efficiency of registration process

Clarity of direction signs Waiting time Amenities within polyclinic

Amenities within hospital Payment process Clarity of medication instructions

Explanation of diagnosis/ condition

Treatment administered or suggested Waiting time

INSTITUTE OF


Finance & Insurance Sector Results

60

70

80Banks

2007 2016

70

78Finance & Insurance Sector

Finance & Insurance Sector CSISG Trends

31

60

70

80 Credit Cards

2007 2016

60

70

80Life Insurance

2007 201660

70

80Motor and Other Personal Insurance

2007 2016

60

70

80 Health and Medical Insurance

2007 2016

◼

◼

◼

▼Statistically significant increase/drop between the 2016 and 2015 scores at 90% confidence ◼No statistically significant change between the 2016 and 2015 scores at 90% confidence

32

Fall in Expected Quality Offset by Rise in Perceived Quality Across Finance & Insurance Sector


(Expected Quality Before Recent Experience)

Perceived Quality



Banks 73.0 ▼ 75.4 73.8 72.9

Motor and Other Personal Insurance 71.2 ▼ 74.3 72.9 71.8

Life Insurance 72.3 ▼ 73.0 72.6 71.6

Health and Medical Insurance 71.4 ▼ 73.9 73.1 70.8

Credit Cards (New Sub-sector) 72.1 72.2 72.5 70.7



Perceived Quality


Complaints

Customer Loyalty

33

…However Certain Sectors Saw a Drop in Customer Loyalty

Customer Expectations (Expected Quality

Before Recent Experience)

Perceived Quality



Customer Loyalty

Banks 73.0 ▼ 75.4 73.8 72.9 70.3 ▼

Motor and Other Personal Insurance 71.2 ▼ 74.3 72.9 71.8 69.5 ▼

Life Insurance 72.3 ▼ 73.0 72.6 71.6 70.5

Health and Medical Insurance 71.4 ▼ 73.9 73.1 70.8 71.0

Credit Cards (New Sub-sector) 72.1 72.2 72.5 70.7 71.2


Lower Loyalty Scores Despite Upticks in

Satisfaction


Perceived Quality


Complaints

Customer Loyalty

INSTITUTE OF


Finance Sector Results

DBS 71.6

UOB 70.8

OCBC 71.6

Citibank 70.6

HSBC 69.7

Standard Chartered 71.3

Maybank 71.9

Other banks 70.1

73.1 DBS

71.7 UOB

72.9 OCBC

72.5 Citibank

71.3 HSBC

71.9 Standard Chartered

72.5 Maybank

70.8 Other banks

CSISG2015

CSISG2016


35

Banks (Main CASA Account)

2007 201660

70

80 Banks72.9

E.g. of Other Banks Include CIMB, Bank Of China, ANZ

Satisfaction Levels Undifferentiated

Provides efficient service

Makes the effort to understand your needs

Feeling assured that things will be taken care of

Proactively helps you when needed

Feels comfortable and safe

Performs services right the very first time

Gives you individual attention

Has your best interest at heart

Has a good reputation

Provides prompt service

Products appeal to you

Fulfills its promise at the promised time

Has Products and services available when you want

Brand image complements your personalityProducts and services are presented

in a way that is clear and easy to understandRange of products meet your needs

Satisfaction Rating (Scale of 1 to 10)

7.0 7.5 8.0

Banks Satisfaction Ratings

Increasing Impact

on Banks’ Quality

Score

Limited Impact on

Banks’ Quality

Score

Average 2016 Rating

Generally Service

Attributes Key To Raising Perceived Quality

36

Deeper Relation With Bank Associated With Higher Loyalty and Advocacy

Like

lihoo

d To

Rec

omm

end

(1 t

o 1

0 R

atin

g)

6

7

8

Loya

lty

Sco

re

60

70

80

1(CASA Only)

2 3 or More

Loyalty Score Average Likelihood To Recommend

Number of Products With Their Bank37

CS

ISG

Sco

re (

0 t

o 1

00

)

60

65

70

75

Citibank AmericanExpress

DBS/POSB

Maybank UOB HSBC OCBC Others

69.070.070.470.770.770.9

72.172.1

38

60

70

80Credit Cards

2007 2016

(Includes Standard

Chartered, CIMB, ANZ)

Credit Cards (Most Recently Used Card)Satisfaction Generally Similar Across Issuers

70.7

Generally Product Related

Attributes Key To Raising Perceived Quality

Merchant tie-ups that meet my needs

Ease of reward redemption

Flexibility of policies such as waiver of charges

Card benefits such as cashbacks,reward points, privileges

Brand image complements your personality


Card benefits are presented in a waythat is clear and easy to understand

Feels comfortable and safe when using the card

Ease of accessing card balance and transaction information


7.0 7.5 8.0

Credit Cards Satisfaction Ratings

Increasing Impact on Credit Cards’ Quality Score

Limited Impact on Credit Cards’ Quality Score

Average 2016 Rating

39

40

Similar Attributes Differentiating Perceived Quality and Loyalty

Top 3 Attributes with Impact on Quality

Merchant tie-ups that meet your needs


Flexibility of policies

Top 3 Attributes with Impact on Loyalty

Merchant tie-ups that meet my needs

Card benefits


Satisfaction with Credit Cards Touch-points

Sat

isfa

ctio

n R

atin

g (1

to

10

)

7

7.5

8

8.5

Per

cent

age

of R

espo

nden

ts I

nter

acte

d

0%

10%

20%

30%

Contact Centre Mobile App Internet Banking Branch

Percentage of Respondents InteractedAverage Satisfaction Rating

41

Sat

isfa

ctio

n R

atin

g (1

to

10

)

7

7.5

8

8.5

Per

cent

age

of R

espo

nden

ts I

nter

acte

d

0%

10%

20%

30%



Satisfaction with Contact Centre Significantly Worse Than Other Touch-points

Satisfaction Significantly Worse Than Other Touch-

points

42

Sat

isfa

ctio

n R

atin

g (1

to

10

)

7

7.5

8

8.5

Per

cent

age

of R

espo

nden

ts I

nter

acte

d

0%

10%

20%

30%



Satisfaction with Contact Centre Significantly Worse Than Other Touch-points

Satisfaction Significantly Worse Than Other Touch-

points

Selected Verbatim Of Respondents Who Rated Their Contact Centre Below 3 Points

Contact centre staff are not knowledgeable enough to answer my questions

Contact centre staff sounded impatient when talking to me

Contact centre waiting time is too long

The response time for my queries from their call centre staff is too slow

Had to wait very long with their contact centre before I can speak to a staff

I think there are too many instructions on their call centre menu

The customer service person is rude, once I asked for waiver of fees, they gave me attitude

I've been a customer with them for so long but they won't give me the annual fee waiver

43

44

Beyond Product Features, Service Elements is a Differentiator

Interacted with Touch-Points Last 3 Months (39.2% of Respondents)*

No Interaction with Touch-Points (60.8% of Respondents)


Card benefits (Such as cashback, reward points, privileges)

Flexibility of policies such as waiver of charges

Merchant tie-ups that meet my needs Merchant tie-ups that meet my needs

Provides efficient service Ease of reward redemption

Flexibility of policies such as waiver of charges Brand image complements your personality

Fulfills its promise at the promised time Card benefits (Such as cashback, reward points, privileges)

*Note: Interaction refers to interaction with Contact Centre, Branch, Mobile App or Internet Banking for credit card purposes in the last 3 months.

INSTITUTE OF


Insurance Sector Results

Prudential 69.7

AIA 71.5

Great Eastern 72.1

NTUC Income 70.5

Manulife 69.4 Other Life 69.5

71.1 Prudential

72.8 AIA

73.2 Great Eastern

71.3 NTUC Income

69.1 Aviva

70.2 Other Life

CSISG

2015

CSISG

2016Finance & Insurance Sector

46

Life Insurance

2007 201660

70

80 Life Insurance

71.6 ◼

New company measured in 2016: Aviva

E.g. of Other Life Insurance includes Manulife, AXA, Tokio Marine

Note: Respondents must interacted with at least one of insurer’s touch-points in the past 12 month

No Significant Movement in Satisfaction

Service Attributes Key

To Raising Perceived Quality

Makes the effort to understand your need









Products and services available when you want it



Feels comfortable and safeProducts and services are presented in a way

that is clear and easy to understandRange of products meet your needs



7.0 7.4 7.8

Life Insurance Satisfaction Ratings

Increasing Impact on Life Insurance’s Quality Score

Limited Impact on Life Insurance’s Quality Score

Average 2016 Rating

47

AIA 69.7 Great Eastern 69.4

NTUC Income 70.2 Prudential 70.0

Other Health & Medical 70.6 70.5 AIA 70.1 Great Eastern

71.4 NTUC Income

70.7 Prudential

71.3 Other Health & Medical

CSISG2015

CSISG2016 Finance & Insurance Sector

48

Health & Medical Insurance

2007 201660

70

80 Health & Medical Insurance

70.8 ◼

E.g. of Other Health & Medical Insurance includes Aviva, Manulife, AXA

Satisfaction Levels Remain Undifferentiated










Fulfills its promise at the promised timeProducts and services are presented in a way

that is clear and easy to understandRange of products meet your needs







7.0 7.4 7.8

Health & Medical Insurance Satisfaction Ratings

Increasing Impact on Health & Medical Insurance’s Quality Score

Limited Impact on Health & Medical Insurance’s Quality Score

Average 2016 Rating

49



AIG 71.0 NTUC Income 71.1

AXA 71.2

Other Motor & Personal 70.3

72.2 AIG 72.3 NTUC Income

72.6 AXA

71.2 Other Motor & Personal

CSISG

2015

CSISG

2016


50

Motor & Other Personal Insurance

2007 201660

70

80 Motor & Other Personal Insurance

71.8 ◼

E.g. of Other Motor & Personal Insurance Includes MSIG, Tokio Marine, Aviva

Satisfaction Levels Remain Undifferentiated


51










Range of products meet your needs




Brand image complements your personalityProducts and services are presented in a way

that is clear and easy to understandProducts appeal to you


7.0 7.4 7.8

Motor & Other Personal Insurance Satisfaction Ratings

Increasing Impact on Motor & Other Personal Insurance’s Quality Score

Limited Impact on Motor & Other Personal Insurance’s Quality Score

Average 2016 Rating



52

Impact of Attributes on Quality and Loyalty

Banks Life Insurance Health and Medical Insurance

Motor and Other Personal Insurance


Provides efficient service Makes the effort to understand your need

Provides prompt service Makes the effort to understand your need



Provides efficient service Provides efficient service

Feeling assured that things will be taken care

of




Top 3 Attributes with Significant Impact on Loyalty

Fulfil its promises at the promised time





Provides efficient serviceMakes you feel assured that things will be taken

care of

Provides efficient service Provides efficient service Proactively helps you when needed


53

Responsiveness and Empathy Qualities Key Differentiator of Quality & Loyalty

Banks Life Insurance Health and Medical Insurance

Motor and Other Personal Insurance


Provides efficient service Makes the effort to understand your need




Provides efficient service Provides efficient service

Feeling assured that things will be taken care

of




Top 3 Attributes with Significant Impact on Loyalty

Fulfil its promises at the promised time





Provides efficient serviceFeeling assured that

things will be taken care of

Provides efficient service Provides efficient service Proactively helps you when needed


ResponsivenessLegend: Empathy Reliability Assurance

54

• Rise in national CSISG score with most sectors seeing upticks in satisfaction levels.

• Specifically for Q4, Healthcare and Finance & Insurance saw significant increases.

• Healthcare - Look beyond merely improving productivity and operational metrics like waiting time; consider the patient journey and experience.

• Finance & Insurance - Service a key differentiator in for satisfaction and loyalty.

Summary

INSTITUTE OF


ISE INDUSTRY FORUM CSISG 2016 Full Year & Q4 RESULTS Announcement

CSISG 2016 Q4 [FINAL] - ise.smu.edu.sg · 71.7 NTUC Fairprice 71.1 Giant 67.6 Other supermarkets...

Documents

Transcript of CSISG 2016 Q4 [FINAL] - ise.smu.edu.sg · 71.7 NTUC Fairprice 71.1 Giant 67.6 Other supermarkets...