Apply 6-sigma methodology in measuring the competition quality of satisfaction performance—an example of ISP Industry
- 211 Downloads
At present time the ISP (Internet Service Provider) already make a great impact to the human life as well as the economic society, everything has a close relation with the internet service and due to the fast development of information technology further lower the cost of ISP and improved the service speed as well as its quality. All of this make the customer layer of ISP more popular than before and thus bring up the fierce competition in this industry. Due to the entry barrier of high investment and high technology of ISP industry it has become as a monopoly market and the monopoly market is very respect the competition and cooperation relationship with competitors. Besides, most of the relevant literature in the past is focus on the measurement and analysis of customer to the self-company and few of them mention how to include the satisfaction of competitor’s customer into measurement and analysis. As golden strategy stated in the Sun-Tze Strategic: “Know yourself and know your competitor well, winning every war.” we must consider the strength, weakness, opportunity and threat on customer satisfaction of your company and competitors. Base on the above motivation, this article will apply the DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) methodology of 6-Sigma, focus on the viewpoint of customer satisfaction of ISP industry. At first we utilize the 5 equal scale measurement define the network quality item of ISP, which provided by the self-company and competitors. And measuring the degree of “satisfaction” and “importance” of these quality items, then use the performance evaluation matrix and strength and weakness matrix to analyze the Strength, Weakness, Opportunity and Threat of self and competitors, focus on the quality items that fall out of the 2 sigma and use the strength–weakness strategic chart to establish the improvement strategy. And at last, utilize the strength–weakness matrix chart as the control tool to verify and sustain the effectiveness of the improved performance. The complete and easy measurement improvement model provided in this article can be used by the enterprise to effectively and quickly evaluating and analyzing the service quality of self and competitors. And under the reasonable cost condition with considering the competing opportunity and threat of market to effectively improving the customer service quality and promoting the overall customer satisfaction and create powerful high value-added quality competition strength.
KeywordsISP (Internet Service Provider) 6-Sigma DMAIC Performance matrix Strength–weakness matrix Strength–weakness strategic analysis table
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Shiu, B.-N.: A study of service quality and user satisfaction on the FTTB broadband access network system. Master's degree paper of Da-Yeh University (2003)Google Scholar
- Buell, V.P.: Marketing Management: A Strategic Planning Approach. McGraw-Hill book Co, NY (1984)Google Scholar
- Chen, S.C., Chen, K.S., Hsia, T.C.: Promoting customer satisfactions by applying six sigma example of automobile industry process. Qual. Manage. J. 12(4): 21–33 (2005)Google Scholar
- Chen, S.C., Chen, K.S., Tao, C.J.: Apply six-sigma methodology in constructing the measurement model for ISO-9001 implementation. Total Qual. Manage. Bus. Excell. 17(1): 131–147 (2006)Google Scholar
- DeVellis, R.F.: Scale Development Theory and Applications. SAGE, London (1991)Google Scholar
- Gay, L.R.: Educational Research Competencies for Analysis and Application. Macmillan, New York (1992)Google Scholar
- George, M.L.: Lean Six Sigma, pp. 170–177. McGraw-Hill, New York (2002)Google Scholar
- Lambert, D.M., Sharma, A.: A customer-based competitive analysis for logistics decisions. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logistics Manage. 20(1): 23 (1990)Google Scholar
- Nunnally, J.: Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. Mcgraw-Hill, New York (1978)Google Scholar
- Oliver, R.: Measurement and evaluation of satisfaction processes in retailing setting. J. Retail. 57: 25–48 (1981)Google Scholar