I'm away from home today, so can't go back to the first post. Sorry for intruding, as it were.
The desired response is something that indicates degree of 'internal' customer satisfaction. You seem to _assume_ that women & men sales people will have about the same level of satisfaction, within each group. Could be, could be not, but you seem to be assuming that they are equivalent. I think the key issue is going to be the types of questions you ask, and the respondents' perceptions of the actions you (may) take as a result. They could easily try to second guess you, rate their support person highly, and then expect an extra beer from said support person in exchange for helping them keep their job. Also, what do you mean by 'customer satisfaction'? What actions were or were not done to foment this satisfaction? Can we focus on rate of reswponse on some document(s), or something semi-measurable? Finally, if a salesperson's perception of support performance is low, does this mean the support person did a poor job, or that the sales people are grumps? Once you have addressed, or dealt with, these issues, then I would ask what you might do witht he results? "so and so doesn't like me, and doesn't do any support for me" may not have a solution. (getting a new person is a non-answer,IMHO) If the problem is poor paper reswponse times, perhaps we should look into what those response times are, and how they could be reduced. That, however, will require specifics on any unhappiness. I'm sorry this isn't more concise, and I Hope this helps. Cheers, Jay > Hi Stan, > > Thank you so much for responding. > I will try to give some more details. > > I have 3 workers who serve about 50 saleswomen and salesmen in > my company. > The first worker serves all of the 50 (First section). > second and third workers serves about 25 each, same service to > different saleswomen/men (Second section)."No relationship between the > two sections." > > My intention was to check (internal) customer satisfaction. > I have distributed 50 questionnaires with 28 questions, 14 for each > section. > The saleswomen/men were asked to tell which worker (second or third) > serves them. > The questions in the two sections are much alike. They all with scaled > answers > 1 - 5. > I do not "expect men and women (or any other two groups) to have > systematically different answers." > > Hope this clarifies my first post. > > Thank you again. > Uziel > > > > > > Stan Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in > > sci.stat.edu, Uziel wrote: > > >I have about 40 returned questionnaires, which contain 28 questions, > > >divided into two sections of 14 questions each. > > >Each Question has 1 to 5 scale answers. > > >Now, my question is, besides summing up: how many picked X answer in Y > > >question, > > >What kind of analysis can I perform? Is there a Tutorial/guide I can > > >find on the web? > > > > Meaning no disrespect, I think you're putting the cart before the > > horse. You're saying, in effect, "Here's a bunch of data; how do I > > analyze them?" The answer to that depends on what you're trying to > > find, and _that_ should be your first question, before even you > > start collecting data. > > > > So what are you trying to find?> Is there supposed to be some > > relationship between the two sections? Do you expect men and women > > (or any other two groups) to have systematically different answers? > > Is this some sort of attitude survey, and you want to make > > statements about the attitudes of the population your sample came > > from? > > > > Data analysis is a toolbox. Which tool you select depends on what > > you're trying to accomplish. So tell us more about _that_ and we may > > be able to make useful suggestions. > . > . > ================================================================= > Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the > problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: > . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . > ================================================================= > -- Warner Consulting, Inc. 4444 N. Green Bay Road Racine, WI 53404-1216 Ph: (262) 634-9100 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home of the A2Q Method(tm) What do you want to improve, Today! via CoreComm Webmail. http://home.core.com . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
