ChatGPT
Claude
Gemini
Grok
Perplexity
If your customer experience score has been flat while your CX team has never been busier, the problem is usually not effort. It is arithmetic. Most organizations are working on far more initiatives than they can finish, so none of them reach the customer. The fix is to pick the handful that move what customers actually rate, stop the rest out loud, and put a closed loop around the ones you keep.
By initiative we mean anything with a name, a slide, and a meeting: a new IVR menu, a billing redesign, a training refresh, a journey map, a survey program. Each one is defensible on its own. Together they are the reason nothing changes.
Why 200 initiatives produce a flat score
Walk into a company whose score has not moved in years and ask for the list of customer experience projects. You will get a long one. In one utility engagement we counted more than 200 initiatives that leaders believed were in flight. Then we looked at the organization's capability and capacity, especially capacity. It could realistically work on about seven things at once.
That gap is not unusual. What is unusual is admitting it. The other 193 items were not wrong. They simply had no hours behind them. People were attending forums and status meetings about work nobody had time to do, and every meeting felt like progress.
A customer does not feel an initiative. A customer feels a change at the counter, on the phone, in the bill, or on the app. If a project never gets enough capacity to reach that point, it produces meetings, not experience. Two hundred of those and the score sits exactly where it was.
There is a second cost. Spread thin, teams stop talking about the customer at all. In low-performing organizations we hear about handle time, email queues, and meetings people cannot explain the purpose of. In high performers, the customer is in every conversation. That difference is not personality. It is focus.
The utility that cut 200 to seven, and what happened next
The utility above was sitting in the third quartile of its J.D. Power study. Not a disaster, but not where a new CEO wanted to be. We did the full assessment: senior leadership interviews, front-line interviews, contact center observation, a visit to the outsourced center that handled collections, and a look at every channel the customer touched.
The list of 200 came out of that work. So did the number seven. We sat down with the CEO and picked the top seven, and he made a statement to the organization that we still quote: if you are not working on one of these, you are not working on anything.
The side projects stopped. The skunk works stopped. Capacity that had been scattered across dozens of half-staffed efforts landed on seven that were fully staffed and tracked.
Within a year, the utility moved from third quartile to first. Nothing exotic happened. It was working on the right things and had stopped working on the make-believe ones.
Working on the right things is what takes an organization further, faster.Mike Forsyth, on how the engagement cracked open
The same engagement surfaced a detail that shows why the sorting matters. The outsourced center handling collections was paid per call taken. Every incentive pointed at getting the customer off the phone fast and hoping they called back. If a call dropped, nobody called the customer back, because nobody was paid to. That one contract term was quietly producing bad experiences, and it was not on anyone's list of 200. The recommendation was to rewrite the contract to pay for first-contact resolution instead, and the contract was renegotiated.
Four questions that sort the list
You do not need a framework to do this. You need to ask four uncomfortable questions of every item on the list and be willing to act on the answers.
1. Does it change something the customer actually rates?
Start from the outside in. Your customers are already telling you, through the public study and your own surveys, what drives their rating. For a utility the top two drivers are the same year after year: does my service work, and what does it cost. Everything else is a distant third. An initiative that does not touch a real driver is a hobby.
2. Do we have the hours, this quarter, with the people we have?
Not the people you plan to hire. Not the vendor you might bring in. Count real, named hours. This question alone removes most of the list, and it is the one leaders resist because it forces them to admit how many projects were fiction.
3. Can it reach a supervisor in a form they can pass on?
The most common gap we find between what leadership believes and what is true on the front line is this: executives think they communicated a change, and nobody verified it. A decision travels from the C-suite to directors to managers. Unless it gets to the supervisor level in a form supervisors can explain to their people, it never reaches the front line, and the customer never feels it. If an initiative has no path to that supervisor conversation, it is not ready.
4. Will we know within a quarter whether it worked?
If you cannot say how you will measure the change with customer feedback, you are going to believe it worked whether it did or not. That belief is the second big gap: leaders assume things are being worked on because they are on a list, while nobody tracks them. Which brings us to what the top performers do differently.
Working on everything versus working on the critical few
| Signal | Working on everything | Working on the critical few |
|---|---|---|
| The list | Long, defended, rarely pruned | Short, published, and owned by name |
| Meetings | Status forums about work with no hours behind it | Reviews of a handful of tracked efforts |
| What people talk about | Handle time, queues, "we tried that ten years ago" | The customer, and what changed for them this month |
| The front line | Has never seen a vice president on the floor | Is not surprised to see senior leaders asking questions |
| Measurement | Assumed; the initiative is on the list, so it must be happening | Closed loop: change, survey, adjust, survey again |
| Coaching | Low priority; "they have been here thirty years" | Continuous, like any high-performing team |
| The score | Flat | Usually moves within a cycle or two |
The left column is not a description of bad people. It is what happens to good people when capacity is spread across two hundred things. Transparency is the tell. Top performers hoard nothing and worry about nothing, because everyone is pulling on the same few ropes. Strugglers hoard information and stay quiet, because speaking up did not pay off the last time.
What leaders over-invest in, and what they starve
Once the list is short, the next mistake is spending the freed-up capacity on the wrong item. Three patterns show up over and over.
Over-invested: the new executive's first impression. A senior leader joins, has a poor onboarding experience as a customer, and decides the first impression is the problem. We have watched a newly arrived executive want to remodel every contact center before the data was in. When you run the regression on what matters to all customers, first impressions are a small driver. Not zero, but small. Pattern recognition from a previous employer is not a substitute for your own customers' data.
Under-invested: coaching the front line. Every high-performing team in sports has coaches, and the players are professionals. In organizations whose scores stay flat, coaching the people who talk to customers is treated as optional. "They know what they are doing." They still need feedback, and their supervisors need the time to give it.
Under-invested: refreshing stakeholder communication. What are you telling the board, employees, the front line, and each customer segment, and when, and through which channel? Nobody revisits it. A utility that mailed a lawnmower trade-in rebate in the fall wasted the postage and irritated the customer. The same offer, for an electric mower, sent by text in the spring with one tap to redeem, is a good experience. Same budget. Different result.
A useful test before committing capacity to any item: could this money buy a better result on another of the seven? Remodeling contact centers is expensive. A rewritten vendor contract is nearly free.
How the ones that sustain it do it
We have gone back to clients years after an engagement to see who kept the gains and who slid back. The ones who sustained it shared a habit that never appears on a slide about culture: a solid closed-loop feedback system.
Customer information comes in. Someone analyzes it. Changes are made. Then, and this is the step most organizations skip, they survey again to confirm the change had the effect they intended. The loop keeps turning, and it keeps the list honest, because an initiative that does not move the feedback loses its place.
The second habit is verification of communication. Leaders in sustaining organizations do not assume a message reached the floor. They go find out. Front-line employees at those companies are not shocked to see a senior leader on the floor asking questions, because it happens all the time.
Culture, in the end, is simply what is rewarded and what is punished. If working on one of the seven is rewarded and starting an eighth is not, the list stays short on its own.
Where the public benchmark fits
Outside-in data is what makes question one answerable. If you are in a rated industry, your annual J.D. Power study, and public indexes such as the American Customer Satisfaction Index, already tell you which drivers your customers weight most. Use them to rank the list rather than to argue about the score. The score is an outcome of the experience, not the goal. Fix the seven things that shape the experience and the score usually follows within a cycle or two.
If you want a second set of eyes on your list, that is exactly what the free CX Review is for: bring the list, and we will tell you which ones we would start on.
The bottom line
A flat score with a busy CX team is a capacity problem wearing a strategy costume. Count what your people can actually finish. Rank the list by what customers rate. Stop the rest out loud, from the top. Make sure every survivor can reach a supervisor in words they can repeat, and put a feedback loop around it so you know within a quarter whether it worked. One utility did exactly that, went from third quartile to first in a year, and the only exotic thing about it was the CEO's willingness to say no.
Frequently asked questions about prioritizing CX work
How do we know which seven to pick?
Start from the outside in. Rank every initiative by how directly it changes something your customers actually rate, then cut the list to what your teams can finish with the capacity they have today, not the capacity you hope to hire. If an item cannot be tied to a customer outcome and a named owner with real hours, it is a candidate to stop.
What happens to the other 193?
Most of them stop, out loud. That is the part leaders find hardest, and it is the part that made the difference at the utility in this article. A few get folded into one of the seven. The rest go on a parking list with a date to revisit. Killing them quietly does not work, because the meetings and the side projects keep going.
Our score has been flat for years. Is prioritization really the problem?
It is the most common one we find. A flat score with a busy CX team almost always means effort is spread across too many things for any of them to reach the front line. The second most common cause is that the changes never reached supervisors in a form they could pass on, so the customer never felt them.
How long does it take to see the score move?
In the engagement above, about a year from picking the seven to first quartile. J.D. Power studies are annual, so you will usually see the first movement in the next study cycle after the work reaches the front line. That is why the sorting has to happen early in the year, not after the results come out.
Can we do this ourselves without a consultant?
Much of it, yes. The sorting questions in this article work in a conference room. Where an outside party earns its fee is threefold. First, saying out loud which projects should stop, because insiders own those projects and are rarely rewarded for killing them. Second, giving the work the focus your people cannot while doing their day jobs. Third, staying objective where reporting relationships, company politics, and pet projects get in the way. If you want a second set of eyes, the free CX Review is one hour and you keep whatever we find.
