MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1544654722 · doi:10.18438/b86g73

Improving Customer Satisfaction: Changes as a Result of Customer Value Discovery

2008· article· en· W1544654722 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCustomer satisfactionCustomer advocacyCustomer retentionMarketingVoice of the customerCustomer valueValue (mathematics)BusinessCustomer intelligenceBalanced scorecardPsychological interventionKnowledge managementService qualityComputer scienceService (business)Psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To identify how interventions, as a result of Customer Value Discovery research, increased student satisfaction in an academic library. The process created a positive environment for ongoing innovation amongst staff to deliver added value to customers.
 Methods: “Customer Discovery Workshops” were undertaken with academic staff and undergraduate on-campus students to provide managers and library staff with information on what services and resources were of value to customers, and what irritated them about existing services and resources. The impact of interventions was assessed two years after the research by using a university student satisfaction survey and an independent national student satisfaction survey.
 Results: The findings resulted in significant changes to the way forward-facing customer services were delivered. A number of value adding services were introduced for the customer. Overall customer satisfaction was improved.
 Conclusions: The customer value discovery research has created a culture of innovation and continuous improvement. The Balanced Scorecard framework was introduced to help track activity and performance against the objectives identified in the customer value research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.332
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it