Method and system for evaluating quality services

• US 6,952,679 B1
• Filed: 07/26/1999
• Issued: 10/04/2005
• Est. Priority Date: 07/26/1999
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Texas Shopper Network, Inc., Texas Shoppers Network Incorporated
• Original Assignee: Texas Shopper Network, Inc.
• Inventors: Pulford, Sondra
• Primary Examiner(s): Hafiz, Tariq R.
• Assistant Examiner(s): TARAE, CATHERINE MICHELLE
• Application Number:
  US09/361,353
• Time in Patent Office: 2,262 Days
• Field of Search: 705/11, 705/10, 705/7
• US Class Current: 705/7.41
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06395 Quality analysis or management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising

Abstract

A method and system for evaluating quality service though the use of anonymous shoppers. The method and system provide executives and managers of retail operations with an essentially objective evaluation of the performance of its business operations through the use of data obtained by anonymous shoppers. The method formulates essentially objective evaluation parameters for a business operation and composes essentially objective questions based on parameters. Anonymous shoppers are trained to monitor quality service and provide essentially objective responses. Key areas of quality service are evaluated by responses to questions. Numerical ratings are assigned to the responses using a weighted point system; these ratings are combined for each key area of business operation. The resulting numerical ratings are further combined for a single overall rating. The numerical ratings are entered into a computer to generate one or more managerial reports.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating quality service comprising steps:

a. formulating essentially objective evaluation parameters for a business operation and composing essentially objective questions based on the parameters;

b. training anonymous shoppers to monitor quality service and provide essentially objective responses to questions prepared in step (a);

c. evaluating key areas of quality service by responses to questions composed according to parameters formulated in step (a) using anonymous shoppers trained to respond to questions according to step (b);

d. assigning a numerical rating using a weighted point system to responses elicited in step (c);

e. combining the numerical ratings from step (d) for each key area of business operation and further combining the resulting numerical ratings for a single overall rating of the business operation;

f. entering the numerical ratings from step (e) into a computer; and

g. using computer software to generate a managerial report from the data entered in step (f);

wherein the steps (a) to (f) are repeated after one or more time intervals, the method further comprising step (k);

executing a computer program to generate a managerial report comparing quality service of one business operation over at least two different time intervals.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the questions composed according to step (a) require a yes or no response.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein the questions are grouped according to key operation areas of the business operation.

4. The method of claim 1 further comprising the steps of:

(i) selecting key areas of the business operation evaluated according to step (c) for reevaluation after a specific time period and (j) reevaluating the selected key areas.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the numerical ratings from step (e) are entered into a computer to generate a graph comparing the operating performance of one business operation over at least two different time intervals.

6. The method of claim 1 wherein the steps (c) to (f) are repeated for one or more business operations within a chain of business operations and the resulting data entered into a computer to generate a managerial report comparing the performance of the evaluated business operations within the chain.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein the computer generated managerial report comprises a graph evaluating and comparing the operations of at least two business operations within the chain.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the evaluation parameters are formulated for grocery store operations.

10. The method of claim 9 wherein the numerical ratings from step (e) of claim 1 are entered into a computer to generate a graph comparing the operating performance of one business operation over at least two different time intervals.

9. A method for evaluating quality service comprising:

a. formulating essentially objective evaluation parameters for a business operation comprising two or more retail stores and composing essentially objective questions based on the parameters;

b. training anonymous shoppers to monitor quality service and provide essentially objective responses to questions prepared in step (a);

c. evaluating key areas of quality service by responses to questions composed according to parameters formulated in step (a) using anonymous shoppers trained to respond to questions according to step (b);

d. assigning a numerical rating using a weighted point system to responses elicited in step (c);

e. combining the numerical ratings from step (d) for each key area of business operation and further combining the resulting numerical ratings for a single overall rating of the business operation;

f. entering the numerical ratings from step (e) into a computer;

g. repeating steps (c) to (f) after one or more specific time intervals to generate at least two sets of data;

h. executing a computer program to compare the sets of data from step (g) and generate a managerial report comparing quality service of one retail store over at least two different time intervals.

11. A method for evaluating quality service comprising:

a. formulating essentially objective evaluation parameters for a specific business operation and composing essentially objective questions based on parameters;

b. training anonymous shoppers to monitor quality service and provide essentially objective responses to questions prepared in step (a);

c. evaluating key areas of quality service by responses to questions composed according to parameters formulated in step (a) using anonymous shoppers trained to respond to questions according to step (b);

d. assigning a numerical rating using a weighted point system to responses elicited in step (c);

e. combining the numerical ratings from step (d) for each key area of business operation and further combining the resulting numerical ratings for a single overall rating of the business operation;

f. entering the numerical ratings from step (e) into a computer;

g. repeating steps (c) to (f) for one or more business operations within a chain of business operations;

h. executing a computer program to generate a managerial report comparing the performance of the evaluated business operations within the chain.

12. The method of claim 11 wherein the managerial report comprises a graph evaluating and comparing the operations of at least two business operations within the chain.