Calculating and Leveraging Customer Effort Score (CES)

Understanding Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) is essential for businesses aiming to identify and retain high-value customers who contribute the most to long-term growth. By predicting the revenue a customer might generate over their relationship with a brand, companies can prioritize resources and strategies toward nurturing these valuable connections. But CLV only tells part of the story. Today, customers expect not only great products but also seamless interactions. This is where the Customer Effort Score (CES) comes into play—a metric that captures how easy or difficult customers find their experience with your brand. Reducing this effort is crucial: research consistently shows that minimizing customer effort can increase satisfaction, loyalty, and, consequently, CLV.

In this article, we’ll dive into the practical power of CES for any customer-centric business. From calculating CES to interpreting the insights it provides, you’ll see how this metric can help your business reduce friction, enhance customer satisfaction, and improve CLV outcomes. Whether through minor adjustments in customer support or significant improvements in service delivery, using CES effectively could be the key to transforming customer interactions into lasting relationships.

What is the Customer Effort Score (CES)?

The Customer Effort Score (CES) is a key metric that measures the ease or difficulty customers experience when interacting with a business. Typically gathered through post-interaction surveys, CES asks customers to rate how easy or hard it was to complete a task, such as resolving an issue, purchasing a product, or receiving support. This score provides insight into how much “effort” customers feel they must put forth. The premise is simple: lower effort generally leads to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty, as customers are more likely to return to companies where interactions feel smooth and uncomplicated, in accordance with research from Sriram (2018).

CES has a significant impact on customer retention and is increasingly recognized as a strong predictor of Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). By identifying areas of high effort, companies can reduce friction points in the customer journey, leading to better retention rates and long-term profitability. Studies have shown that CES serves as a reliable indicator of loyalty, especially in interactions that are prone to friction, such as technical support or issue resolution (Ardelet & Benavent, 2022). The CES metric complements CLV by highlighting where efforts to simplify customer experiences can directly enhance lifetime value. In line with Quach et al.(2019), in high-contact industries, for instance, a high CES score often correlates with dissatisfaction and potential customer churn, making it crucial for firms to monitor and minimize customer effort across interactions.

Calculating Customer Effort Score (CES)

To measure the Customer Effort Score (CES), businesses typically use a straightforward post-interaction survey that asks customers to rate the ease of their experience. A common approach is to pose a question such as, “How easy was it to resolve your issue today?” on a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 represents “Very Difficult” and 7 signifies “Very Easy.” This scale captures the degree of effort customers feel they had to put forth, allowing companies to quickly assess the friction levels in customer interactions. Alternatively, companies may use a 5-point scale, though the 1-7 scale often provides a more nuanced view of customer sentiment.

CES Effort Components:

For a more comprehensive CES measure, businesses can consider evaluating different types of customer effort:

1. Cognitive Effort: Refers to the mental energy required by the customer to navigate or understand an interaction. High cognitive effort often indicates unclear instructions or complex processes, which can lead to frustration.
2. Time Effort: Measures the amount of time a customer spends to complete a task. Long wait times or extended resolution periods are typical causes of high time effort, often linked to lower customer satisfaction.
3. Emotional Effort: Encompasses the psychological strain customers may feel during an interaction. Emotional effort can result from stressful interactions, such as dealing with multiple support agents, experiencing unhelpful service, or managing complex issues (Sriram, 2018)  .

By addressing these three effort components, companies can gain a clearer understanding of where improvements are needed to reduce friction and streamline the customer experience.

CES Scoring Example:

To calculate CES, take the average score from customer responses. For instance, suppose a business collects CES responses from five customers, who rate their experiences as follows: 6, 7, 5, 6, and 4. The calculation would be:

In this example, a CES of 5.6 indicates that most customers found their experience relatively easy. Lower scores would signal areas where effort-reduction strategies are needed, while a score consistently trending higher signifies that the business is meeting or exceeding customer expectations in terms of ease of interaction.

CES Surveys Examples for Inspiration

SaaS (Software as a Service) CES Survey Examples

• Onboarding:
  • “How easy was it to set up and start using our software?”
  • “How simple was it to connect/integrate our software with your existing tools?”
• Customer Support:
  • “How easy was it to get the support you needed to resolve your issue?”
  • “How effortless was it to find answers to your questions in our help center?”
• Feature Usage:
  • “How easy was it to understand and use this new feature?”
  • “How simple was it to complete [specific task] using our software?”
• Billing and Account Management:
  • “How easy was it to update your account or payment information?”
  • “How simple was it to understand your billing statement?”

Medical Services CES Survey Examples

• Appointment Scheduling:
  • “How easy was it to schedule your appointment with us?”
  • “How simple was it to change or cancel your appointment?”
• In-Person Visit:
  • “How easy was it to navigate our facility and find where you needed to go?”
  • “How simple was it to understand the instructions given by our staff?”
• Virtual/Telemedicine Consultation:
  • “How easy was it to connect to your telemedicine appointment?”
  • “How simple was it to communicate with your provider during the virtual visit?”
• Prescription and Follow-Up:
  • “How easy was it to understand and fill your prescription?”
  • “How simple was it to schedule and prepare for follow-up tests or consultations?”

Hospitality

• Booking Process:
  • “How easy was it to book your stay with us?”
  • “How simple was it to make changes to your reservation?”
• Check-In and Check-Out:
  • “How easy was the check-in/check-out process during your stay?”
  • “How simple was it to find your room and navigate our facilities?”
• Room Service and Amenities:
  • “How easy was it to order room service or request amenities?”
  • “How simple was it to use amenities (like Wi-Fi, gym, pool) during your stay?”
• Customer Support (Concierge/Front Desk):
  • "How easy was it to get assistance from our front desk or concierge?”
  • “How simple was it to receive information about local attractions and activities?”

Educational Services

• Enrollment and Registration:
  • “How easy was it to enroll/register for your classes/program?”
  • “How simple was it to find information about tuition fees and payment options?”
• Online Learning Platform:
  • “How easy was it to access and navigate our online learning platform?”
  • “How simple was it to find course materials and resources?”
• Classroom Experience (Virtual/In-Person):
  • “How easy was it to participate in class activities?”
  • “How simple was it to communicate with your instructor?”
• Student Support Services:
  • “How easy was it to access support services (e.g., tutoring, counseling)?”
  • “How simple was it to get answers to your questions from student services?”

Interpreting CES Results

A “good” Customer Effort Score (CES) can vary significantly depending on the industry and the specific customer interactions being measured. For most industries, a lower CES is preferable, as it indicates that customers find it relatively easy to engage with the business. However, what constitutes a “good” CES score differs across sectors. For instance, in the SaaS industry, a lower CES for onboarding or support interactions might indicate a successful experience, as ease of use and quick support are highly valued. In contrast, in hospitality or high-touch medical services, some customers might appreciate a slightly higher CES if it means receiving personalized, attentive service, especially during complex or important interactions (Ardelet & Benavent, 2022) . Companies should use CES benchmarks specific to their industry to set realistic targets and make accurate comparisons.

Actionable Insights

High CES values often indicate friction points where customers encounter difficulties, such as confusing navigation, long wait times, or complex processes. Identifying these high-effort areas allows companies to target specific interactions for improvement, which can directly enhance customer satisfaction and loyalty. For example, if customers report high CES scores when trying to schedule appointments in a medical setting, this might signal an opportunity to streamline the scheduling system. Similarly, in SaaS, high CES scores for a new feature could suggest the need for clearer instructions or an improved user interface. By reducing effort in these areas, businesses can create a smoother experience that not only increases customer satisfaction but also contributes to a higher Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) by encouraging repeat usage and reducing churn (Sriram, 2018).

Correlating Low-Effort with High-Value Customers

Combining Customer Effort Score (CES) data with Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) offers a powerful way to identify and prioritize high-value customers who also experience low friction in their interactions. Customers with low CES and high CLV are typically those who are easy to retain and more likely to make repeat purchases, upgrades, or referrals. By focusing on this segment, companies can nurture relationships that are both profitable and easy to manage. For instance, in a SaaS context, if high-CLV customers consistently rate their support interactions as low-effort, it may be beneficial to emulate these low-effort characteristics in other touchpoints to enhance overall customer satisfaction and retention rates (Ardelet & Benavent, 2022) .

Predictive Power

CES data can be instrumental in refining CLV models by pinpointing areas of friction in the customer journey that, if addressed, could increase future value. For example, companies can observe how high-effort touchpoints, like technical support or billing, affect long-term customer value. If customers who report high CES scores during billing inquiries tend to have a lower CLV, this suggests a direct link between effort and retention. By addressing these high-effort areas, businesses can enhance the overall customer experience, making it easier for customers to continue their relationship and thereby potentially increasing CLV. In the medical sector, for instance, simplifying appointment scheduling for regular patients might encourage more frequent visits and increase their long-term value to the organization (Sriram, 2018)  .

Real-World Example

Imagine an energy company that tracks both CES and CLV to improve customer experiences in the high-tech energy sector. Through CES feedback, the company discovers that customers are consistently reporting high effort when trying to access their accounts online. Many find it difficult to retrieve billing information and adjust their usage plans. Recognizing the impact of this friction on customer satisfaction and retention, the company decides to overhaul its online portal, simplifying navigation and making it easier for users to manage their accounts. As a result, customers experience reduced effort, reflected in a lower CES. Over time, the company sees an increase in CLV, as customers who now find it easy to manage their accounts are less likely to switch providers and more likely to explore additional services offered by the company. By proactively addressing CES feedback, the energy company successfully boosts both customer satisfaction and lifetime value, illustrating the strategic advantage of combining these metrics to guide improvement efforts.

Umplementing CES Feedback Loops

To effectively monitor Customer Effort Score (CES) across customer interactions, companies can embed CES surveys directly into existing touchpoints. For example:

• Mobile Apps: Integrate a CES question following specific user actions, like onboarding or completing a support ticket, to gauge the ease of those experiences.
• Checkout Pages: After a customer completes a purchase, present a quick CES survey to assess the simplicity of the buying process. This feedback can be invaluable for e-commerce and SaaS platforms where ease of purchase is crucial.
• Customer Support: After a support session, whether through chat, email, or phone, send an automated CES survey to understand the level of effort required to resolve the issue. This data can help identify friction points and improve future support interactions.

Optimizing for Long-Term Growth:

Consistently monitoring CES over time allows companies to identify and address high-effort interactions that may deter customer loyalty. By working to reduce effort at key touchpoints, companies can foster more positive experiences that lead to increased customer retention, satisfaction, and ultimately, Customer Lifetime Value (CLV). As CES decreases across touchpoints, customers are more likely to stay engaged with the brand, leading to a virtuous cycle where low-effort interactions drive loyalty, which in turn boosts CLV. Establishing CES as a long-term metric can help track the effectiveness of changes and highlight areas needing continuous improvement to ensure sustained growth.

Adapting CES for Different Touchpoints

CES is highly adaptable and can be applied to various interaction points across digital and in-person services, each yielding unique insights. For instance, a SaaS company can use CES in-app to measure ease of onboarding and feature usage, while a retail business might implement CES at physical checkout points to understand how easy it is for customers to complete their purchases. For industries like hospitality and healthcare, CES can be used post-service to assess ease of booking, receiving care, or checking out. Adapting CES to the specific needs of each touchpoint enables a more tailored understanding of customer effort and allows for targeted improvements where they will make the most impact.

The Customer Effort Score (CES) is a powerful metric that, when used alongside Customer Lifetime Value (CLV), provides critical insights into customer satisfaction and profitability. By measuring the ease of customer interactions, CES helps businesses identify and reduce friction points that could otherwise impact loyalty and revenue. Lowering CES across touchpoints not only enhances the customer experience but also contributes to long-term growth by encouraging customer retention and maximizing CLV.

To realize the full potential of CES, businesses should begin incorporating it into their feedback loops across key touchpoints. By measuring CES consistently and examining its impact on CLV, companies can develop a strategy focused on minimizing customer effort and fostering loyal, high-value customer relationships. Lowering customer effort can be a powerful driver of long-term business growth, making CES a crucial metric for organizations aiming to deliver smoother, more satisfying customer experiences.

References

1. Ardelet, C., & Benavent, C. (2022). Does making less effort entail satisfaction? A large empirical study on client relationship services. International Journal of Market Research, 65(1), 83-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853221113953

2. Quach, S., Hewege, C. R., & Thaichon, P. (2019). How much effort is enough? Unlocking customer fanaticism in services industries. Marketing Intelligence & Planning. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-06-2018-0226

3. Sriram, S. (2018). Key components of a good customer effort score. Journal of Business Research, 95, 116–126.

4. Zahari, A. R., Esa, E., Asshidin, N. H. N., Surbaini, K. N., & Abdullah, A. E. (2023). Mobile touchpoint and customer effort: A case of a leading energy firm in Malaysia. Business and Economics Journal, 8(SI15), 73-79. https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v8iSI15.5076

5. Dixon, M., Freeman, K., & Toman, N. (2010). Stop delighting your customers. Harvard Business Review, 88(7/8), 116–122.

6. Morales, A. C. (2005). Giving firms an “E” for effort: Consumer responses to high-effort firms. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 806-812. https://doi.org/10.1086/426615