2010 Division and Section Loyalty Study

Executive Summary

Loyalty & Satisfaction Study Methodology

• The e-mail invitation was sent on January 6th to 69,546 members

• A postcard was mailed to members requesting no e-mails from ASQ in January to 514 members

• Incentive provided – win one of eight $25 ASQ Bucks

• Three reminders were sent and the deadline for participating was extended in an effort to increase responses

Research Methodology - Fielding

Fielding Methodology• Self-administered questionnaire

• Web-based survey for members providing e-mail addresses

• U.S. mail survey for members providing only a mailing address or members who have requested not to receive e-mail communications

• Total Sample = 8,374 complete surveys; this is an 12.0% response rate

• Sample = 5,260 completed surveys for Forums or Divisions• Sample = 7,581 completed surveys for Sections

Section Loyalty & Satisfaction Study Respondents

• Section Final Responses:• 3,114 members completed the Section Survey only, 4,467

completed both the Section and Division/Forum Survey• Note six Sections received 0 responses:

• 412 "New Brunswick" • 413 "Newfoundland & Labrador" • 624 "Southern Oregon" • 1125 "Highland Rim" • 1314 "Western Colorado" • 1418 "Brazosport: Freeport"

• Division/Forum Final Responses:• 793 members completed the Division Survey only, 4,467

completed both the Section and Division/Forum Survey

ASQ Satisfaction & Loyalty Framework

MemberLoyalty

MemberLoyalty

Definition of Loyalty Index

Overall Satisfaction Likelihood to Renew Likelihood to

Recommend

Loyal Positive

Hesitant At Risk

Loyalty Classificationof Members

ProductsProducts PricingPricing ASQImageASQ

ImageIndividualLearning

IndividualLearning

ProfessionalResources

ProfessionalResources

CertificationCoursesConferences

Membership & Costs of Products and Services

Leader in the Field

Business Partner

Resource to Improve On the Job Performance

NetworkingLocal

ChaptersForums/

Divisions

Sati

sfacti

on

Loyalty Components

Forum/DivisionExperiences

SectionExperiences TransactionalTouchpoints

Loyalty Ratings

Performance Scorecard Changes (2010 vs. 2009) – Loyalty Measures

Loyal + Positive

65%

Hesitant + At Risk

35%

Loyal30%

Positive35%

Hesitant29%

At Risk 6%Overall Satisfaction

35%

Likelihood to Renew

64%

Likelihood to Recommend

47%

Loyal + Positive

69%

Hesitant + At Risk

31%

Loyal28%

Positive42%

Hesitant24%

At Risk 6%Overall Satisfaction

32%

Likelihood to Renew

65%

Likelihood to Recommend

49%

20092010 ChangeUpward Bias

Downward Bias

Downward Bias

Significantly Higher

Significantly Lower

No Change

Downward Bias

No Change

Upward Bias

Top Two Box Ratings

Top Two Box Ratings

Performance Scorecard Changes (2010 vs. 2006) – Member Units

Top Two Box Ratings

FORUM/DIVISION RATING

21%

SECTION RATING

32%

2010 Change

Upward Bias

Significantly Higher

FORUM/DIVISION RATING

19%

SECTION RATING

25%

2009

Section - Satisfaction

• How do you rate your overall satisfaction with your section?– Satisfaction has increased significantly

Section – Satisfaction with...

Contact with Section

Division - Satisfaction

• How do you rate your overall satisfaction with your division/forum?

– Satisfaction slightly increased from 2009 to 2010. – Bottom box satisfaction decreased by a significant amount in

2010

Division – Satisfaction with...

Contact with Division

Contact with ASQ Headquarters

Key Findings (Overall)

• More individuals are shifting into the “Positive” category– These individuals are collected from both the “Loyal”

and “Hesitant” categories

• The majority (76%) of members have not been contacted by phone by ASQ Headquarters– A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact– Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often

Key Findings - Sections

• Section satisfaction was statistically significantly higher than 2009

• The majority of members have not been contacted by phone by their Section– A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact– Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often

• Section members find most satisfaction with the networking opportunities and courses/training provided by their Section

• Section members feel their section leadership is not very accessible for questions, concerns, and suggestions (4.7% Top Box)

Section Demographics

• About 38% are between the ages of 46-55• Majority (53%) are Senior/Fellow members• 38% have been members between 7-20 years, 22%

have been members between 1-4 years• The majority of members (45%) are in Manufacturing,

29% are in Services• 28% are managers, 21% are engineers• About 41% pay for their own membership, 54% have

their membership paid for by their employer/company• Approximately 75% are male

Key Findings - Divisions

• Division satisfaction continues to steadily increase, but not at a statistically significant rate– Bottom box (1-5) satisfaction decreased by a statistically

significant amount

• The majority of members have not been contacted by phone by their Division/Forum– A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact– Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often

• Members find most satisfaction with the conferences supported by their Divisions/Forum (25.9%)

Division Demographics

• About 38% are between the ages of 46-55• Majority (53%) are Senior/Fellow members• 37% have been members between 7-20 years, 23%

have been members between 1-4 years• The majority of members (40%) are in Manufacturing,

29% are in Services• 29% are Managers, 19% are Engineers, 11% are

Directors• About 42% pay for their own membership, 53% have

their membership paid for by their employer/company• Approximately 75% are male

Questions should be directed to ASQ Market Research

mrcoord@asq.org