We believe that the future of service organizations will be more customer centric. Most service providers have the ambition to become truly customer centric, but day-to-day reality shows that fulfilling this ambition may not be as straightforward as expected. We notice a gap between ambition and current reality. A lot of research has been done on customer experience, but not on organization’s readiness to deliver the customer experience to customers. To move from promise to delivery, being ready as an organization may be crucial. Customer centricity starts with truly understanding what your customers really want. This implies for us, too. Vlerick Business School and MCH Consultancy have co-created a research to understand the perceptions of decision makers and senior managers on the current state of customer centricity among service providers in the Netherlands. During May and June 2014 we have conducted an online survey with over 150 respondents in the Netherlands. The results of this survey give valuable insights in the changes required towards being customer centric as an organization. This quantitative research is the first step on our journey to understand what it takes to become a true customer centric service provider that consistently delivers its customer experience.

1. ORGANIZATION’S READINESS TO DELIVER ON
CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE
Richard Cramer
Björn Bierhaalder
Deva Rangarajan

2. © Vlerick Business School
CONTENTS
2
1. Background of the survey
2. Survey results
• Perceived Importance vs. Perceived Performance
• Perceptions of C-level vs. Perceptions of Managers
• Perceptions of B2B vs. Perceptions of B2B + B2C
• Small & Midsized companies vs. Larger Privately Owned Companies &
Stock Listed Corporations
3. Next steps

3. BACKGROUND

4. © Vlerick Business School
INTRODUCTION
4
We believe that the future of service organizations will be more customer centric. Most service
providers have the ambition to become truly customer centric, but day-to-day reality shows that
fulfilling this ambition may not be as straightforward as expected. We notice a gap between
ambition and current reality.
A lot of research has been done on customer experience, but not on organization’s readiness to
deliver the customer experience to customers. To move from promise to delivery, being ready as an
organization may be crucial.
Customer centricity starts with truly understanding what your customers really want. This implies
for us, too. Vlerick Business School and MCH Consultancy have co-created a research to understand
the perceptions of decision makers and senior managers on the current state of customer centricity
among service providers in the Netherlands.
During May and June 2014 we have conducted an online survey with over 150 respondents in the
Netherlands. The results of this survey give valuable insights in the changes required towards being
customer centric as an organization. This quantitative research is the first step on our journey to
understand what it takes to become a true customer centric service provider that consistently
delivers its customer experience.
Richard Cramer
Björn Bierhaalder
Deva Rangarajan

5. © Vlerick Business School
BACKGROUND OF THE RESPONDENTS FROM
INDUSTRY AND TYPE OF ORGANIZATION
5
38,00%
25,00%
4,00%
29,00%
SME
Larger privately owned
Privately owned
Stock-market listed
corporation
3,30% 5,30%
7,90% 1,30%
21,70%
4,60%
20,40%
14,50%
10,60%
Consumer goods
Industry and manufacturing
ICT-Telecom
Medical and pharmaceutical
Services
Banking
Insurance
Financial services
Other
During May and June 2014 we
have conducted an online survey
with over 150 respondents in the
Netherlands.
Top industries among respondents
are ‘Services’, ‘Insurance’ and
‘Financial Services’. Almost 40%
of the respondents work in the
financial industries (Banking,
Insurance, Financial Services).
54% of the respondents work for
a large privately owned or stock
listed corporation. Largest group
of respondents works for an SME.

6. IMPORTANCE
PERFORMANCE
PERCEIVED
VERSUS
PERCEIVED

7. © Vlerick Business School
OVERVIEW OF SCORES FROM SURVEY
7
0
1
2
3
4
5
Importance of statement Performance on statement
3,97
3,22
Variance Importance
Importance
5
4
3
2
1
Survey results show a negative correlation
between perceived importance and the variance of
all statements.
It may be a conclusion that there is a common
understanding among respondents of what is
most important for customer centric organizations.
Also, when scores on perceived importance
decrease, differences in perceptions increase.
Survey results show that the average
perceived importance has higher scores than
perceived performance among respondents.
It may be a conclusion that on average
respondents rate their organizations as less
customer centric than they would like their
organizations to be.
Variance on scores for ImportanceAverage scores on 5-point scale

8. © Vlerick Business School
BIGGEST GAPS BETWEEN IMPORTANCE AND
PERFORMANCE ON CUSTOMER RELATED STATEMENTS
8
Statements with the biggest gaps between
perceived importance and perceived
performance:
1. We have a good CRM tool to help our
customer facing employees be more
productive
2. We have a clear understanding of the latent
needs of our customers
3. We use the findings of the customer
satisfaction results to better manage the
relationship with our third-party installers/
value-added resellers
4. We have a clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategy for our markets
5. Cross departmental task forces are used
frequently to discuss customer issues and
solutions
0 0,5 1 1,5
Gap
Gap

9. © Vlerick Business School
GENERAL FINDINGS BASED ON 2 DIMENSIONS
9
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties
• Align internal business processes to meet customer
needs
• Share customer related issues/ information with
colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss customer
issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs customers
want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings between
different departments to discuss customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer responsibility
and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across functionalities/
departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance

10. © Vlerick Business School
GENERAL FINDINGS BASED ON 2 DIMENSIONS
10
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties across
• Align internal business processes to meet customer
needs
• Share customer related issues/ information with
colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss customer
issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs customers
want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings between
different departments to discuss customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer responsibility
and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across functionalities/
departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance
Key finding 2
Internal collaboration on client issues is being
perceived as important and the general
perception of performance is high
Key finding 1
Customer insights and knowledge about
customers seems to be less than respondents
would like it to be
Key finding 4
Formal procedures to organize customer
centricity are perceived as less important,
but general perception of current
performance is good
Key finding 3
Being organized around customer centric
structures and processes is perceived as low
importance and low performance

11. © Vlerick Business School
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our
organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer
segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties across
• Align internal business processes to meet
customer needs
• Share customer related issues/ information
with colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss
customer issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs
customers want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings
between different departments to discuss
customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer
centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer
responsibility and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across
functionalities/departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational
capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance
Key finding 2
Internal collaboration on client issues is
being perceived as important and the
general perception of performance is high
Key finding 1
Customer insights and knowledge about
customers seems to be less than
respondents would like it to be
Key finding 4
Formal procedures to organize customer
centricity are perceived as less important,
but general perception of current
performance is good
Key finding 3
Being organized around customer centric
structures and processes is perceived as
low importance and low performance
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our
organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer
segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties across
• Align internal business processes to meet
customer needs
• Share customer related issues/ information
with colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss
customer issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs
customers want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings
between different departments to discuss
customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer
centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer
responsibility and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across
functionalities/departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational
capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance
Key finding 2
Internal collaboration on client issues is
being perceived as important and the
general perception of performance is high
Key finding 1
Customer insights and knowledge about
customers seems to be less than
respondents would like it to be
Key finding 4
Formal procedures to organize customer
centricity are perceived as less important,
but general perception of current
performance is good
Key finding 3
Being organized around customer centric
structures and processes is perceived as
low importance and low performance
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our
organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer
segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties across
• Align internal business processes to meet
customer needs
• Share customer related issues/ information
with colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss
customer issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs
customers want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings
between different departments to discuss
customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer
centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer
responsibility and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across
functionalities/departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational
capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance
Key finding 2
Internal collaboration on client issues is
being perceived as important and the
general perception of performance is high
Key finding 1
Customer insights and knowledge about
customers seems to be less than
respondents would like it to be
Key finding 4
Formal procedures to organize customer
centricity are perceived as less important,
but general perception of current
performance is good
Key finding 3
Being organized around customer centric
structures and processes is perceived as
low importance and low performance
• Understand latent needs of customers
• Use customer insights to improve our
organization
• Have a good CRM tool
• Use the customer satisfaction results to better
manage relationship with third-party installers
• Have value propositions for every customer
segment
• Be encouraged to create social ties across
• Align internal business processes to meet
customer needs
• Share customer related issues/ information
with colleagues from other departments
• Cross departmental task forces to discuss
customer issues and solutions
• Work together with partners to ensure superior
customer value creation
• Work together with personnel from other
departments to solve customer issues
• Have adequate knowledge about the jobs
customers want to get done
• Constantly measuring customer satisfaction
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings
between different departments to discuss
customer issues
• Have clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategies
• Efficiency relates directly to being customer
centric
• Having common customer related KPIs shared
between internal departments
• Organization design based on customer teams
• Clear distinction between customer
responsibility and process responsibility
• Active rotation of personnel across
functionalities/departments
• Frequent, formal collaborative meetings with
partners to support customer value creation
• Focus on well defined customer segments with
specific customer needs
• Customer contact at all levels of our organization
• Staff members selected for relational
capabilities
High importance
Low importance
Lowperformance
Highperformance
Key finding 2
Internal collaboration on client issues is
being perceived as important and the
general perception of performance is high
Key finding 1
Customer insights and knowledge about
customers seems to be less than
respondents would like it to be
Key finding 4
Formal procedures to organize customer
centricity are perceived as less important,
but general perception of current
performance is good
Key finding 3
Being organized around customer centric
structures and processes is perceived as
low importance and low performance
DISCUSSION BASED ON GENERAL FINDINGS
11
Key Finding 1 vs. Key Finding 2
Internal collaboration about client issues is important and seems to go well.
Knowledge about customers might not be as adequate as wanted.
To what extend are collaborations really helpful to get a better understanding of
the customer?
Key Finding 2 vs. Key Finding 4
Internal collaboration about client issues is important and seems to go well.
Formal procedures are in place, although not perceived as important.
To what extend are formal procedures really helpful to deliver the customer
experience?
Key Finding 2 vs. Key Finding 3
Internal collaboration about client issues is important and seems to go well.
Customer centric structures and processes are perceived less important and not
well executed.
To what extend do customer centric processes and structures help to become a
customer centric organization?
Key Finding 2 vs. Key Finding 3 & 4
Internal collaboration about client issues is important and seems to go well.
Customer centric structures, processes and formal procedures are perceived less
important.
To what extend is being a customer centric organization the result of defining the
formal organization?

12. C-LEVEL
MANAGERS
VERSUS
PERCEPTIONS OF
PERCEPTIONS OF

13. © Vlerick Business School
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND PERCEPTIONS
BETWEEN C-LEVEL AND MANAGEMENT
13
Chief Executive Officer Business Unit Manager
Main area of concern Understand customers Improve collaboration
Management style Formal structures Hands on mentality
Average on importance 3.68 4.06
Average on performance 3.06 3.34
• The survey results show a difference in responses from participants at C-level and participants
at management levels. On average, respondents at C-level gave lower scores for both
‘Importance’ and ‘Performance’ than managers.
• The difference in perceptions about what is important with regards to customer centricity
(0.38) is bigger than the difference in perceptions about current performance in delivering the
customers experience (0.28).
• Both groups score lower on ‘performance’ than on ‘importance’. To what extend do CEOs and
managers have a shared perception that what is needed is not fully aligned with actual
performance?
• The gap between ‘Importance’ and ‘Performance’ is bigger for managers (0.72) than for C-
level (0.62). To what extend do managers perceive a bigger gap between what is needed and
what is actually done?

14. © Vlerick Business School
THE BIGGEST GAPS BETWEEN PERCEIVED
IMPORTANCE AND PERFORMANCE
IMPORTANCE
1. We have a good CRM tool to help our
customer facing employees be more
productive
2. There is a willingness amongst the
personnel to share customer related
issues/ information with their colleagues
from other departments/business units
3. There is customer contact at all levels
of our organization
4. Cross departmental task forces are
used frequently to discuss customer
issues and solutions
5. There is a willingness to work together
with partners (suppliers, intermediary,
broker, branch office, even customers) to
ensure superior customer value creation
PERFORMANCE
1. We constantly measure the level of
customer satisfaction with our product/
service offerings
2. We have a good CRM tool to help our
customer facing employees be more
productive
3. We use the findings of the customer
satisfaction results to better manage
the relationship with our third-party
installers/value-added resellers
4. There is customer contact at all levels
of our organization
5. Our organization design is based on
customer teams
14
Statements with the biggest gap between perceptions of managers and CEOs, where
managers gave higher scores than CEO’s

15. B2B
B2B+B2C
VERSUS
COMPANIES

16. © Vlerick Business School
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND PERCEPTIONS
BETWEEN B2B AND B2B+B2C
16
B2B B2B+B2C Difference
Importance 3.77 4.13 -0.36
Performance 3.19 3.29 -0.1
Difference 0.58 0.84
• The survey results show a difference in responses from participants from B2B vs. B2B+B2C
organizations. On average, respondents from B2B organizations gave lower scores for both
‘Importance’ and ‘Performance’ than respondents from B2B+B2C organizations. To what
extend is customer centricity more relevant in a consumer oriented environment?
• The difference in perceptions about what is important with regard to customer centricity
(0.36) is bigger than the difference in perceptions about current performance in delivering the
customers experience (0.1).
• Perceptions on performance seem to be more consistent than perceptions on importance. A
possible explanation is the more objective measurement of performance.

17. © Vlerick Business School
0,51
0,56
0,57
0,61
0,66
0,68
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8
well-defined customer segments
Well-defined go-to-market strategies
Measuring the level of customer
satisfaction
Cross-departmental task forces
CRM
Efficiency in our organization relates to
customer centricity
Average size of the gap on a 5 point scale
BIGGEST GAPS IN PERCEPTION OF WHAT IS
IMPORTANT BETWEEN B2B AND B2B+B2C
1. Efficiency in our organization relates directly
to being more customer centric
2. We have a good CRM tool to help our
customer facing employees be more
productive
3. Cross departmental task forces are used
frequently to discuss customer issues and
solutions
4. We constantly measure the level of
customer satisfaction with our product/
service offerings
5. We have a clear, well defined Go-to-Market
strategies for our
6. We focus on well-defined customer segments
with specific customer needs
17

18. SME
LPOC & SLC
VERSUS
(LARGER PRIVATELY
OWNED COMPANIES)
(STOCK LISTED
CORPORATIONS)

19. © Vlerick Business School
DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES AND PERCEPTIONS FOR
DIFFERENT TYPES OF ORGANIZATIONS
19
SME Large Privately Owned Stock Listed
Importance 3.87 4.16 4.00
Performance 3.14 3.20 3.34
Difference 0.73 0.96 0.66
• The survey results show a difference in responses from participants from SME, Large Privately
Owned and Stock Listed organizations. On average, respondents from SME organizations
gave lower scores for both ‘Importance’ and ‘Performance’ than respondents from
Large Privately Owned and Stock Listed organizations. Possible explanation: the need for
formal customer centric policies increases when companies are larger?
• Respondents from Stock Listed organizations perceive their performance on delivering
customer experience higher than respondents from other organizations. To what extend are
stock listed organizations better able to deliver customer experience?
• The gap between perceived importance and perceived performance is smaller for
Stock Listed organizations than for other organizations. To what extend are stock listed
organizations better able to close the gap between knowing what needs to be done and
execution?

20. NEXT STEPS

21. © Vlerick Business School
BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF ORGANIZATION
READINESS FOR CUSTOMER CENTRICITY
21
This quantitative research is the first step on our journey to understand what it takes to become
a true customer centric service provider that consistently delivers its customer experience.
Based on our findings as presented in this report, we have identified subjects for further
research. Also we have identified subjects that are interesting for further explanation and
discussion with participants of this survey.
For this purpose we are organizing two meetings, in which we will have in depth discussions on
the findings of this report. The meetings will be held on
• September 18th, 2014 from 16:00h until 18:00h
• October 23rd, 2014 from 16:00h until 18:00h
Location for both events is Postillion Hotel Dordrecht, Rijksstraatweg 30 in Dordrecht. If
you like to participate, please inform us. Your attendance is much appreciated!
Thank you!
Björn Bierhaalder (bjorn.bierhaalder@mch-consultancy.nl)
Richard Cramer (richard.cramer@mch-consultancy.nl)
Deva Rangarajan (deva.rangarajan@vlerick.com)

22. THANK YOU!
richard.cramer@mch-consultancy.nl
bjorn.bierhaalder@mch-consultancy.nl
deva.rangarajan@vlerick.com