At the WCCF conference this week there was quite a lot of talk about the advantages and disadvantages of various ways of measuring the customer experience, which I'll probably post more about next week.
One of the things that struck me about what some organisations are doing, particularly with NPS, is that the focus is incredibly strong on getting very frequent data at the lowest possible level (even down to individual call centre agents).
This kind of granularity can be a very powerful tool for change, as it gives people a sense of ownership and accountability for the score, and of course could be used with any metric—there's nothing special about NPS in that regard.
The flipside is that NPS, or to be fair any survey that you can realistically run at these frequencies and volumes, tends to give you very shallow data. You get a score, and perhaps a verbatim comment, but no quantitative insight or specific qualitative information into the reasons behind it.
The choice here, it seems to me, is whether you should go for deep or broad understanding of the customer experience. For many organisations the ideal answer will be a combination of both, with some sort of automated (web, email or IVR) option to take the “pulse” of the organisation at a granular level combined with a detailed telephone interview survey backed by thorough analysis and insight.