4,507 followers
@cdetourne Un peu difficile de développer en 280 caractères ici, mais on y consacre un chapitre entier dans le livre ! Et un des articles scientifiques auquel je faisais référence est ici (en anglais) : https://t.co/pNTRLm98Id
103 followers
@CamGreg1 @Vicki_Hunt69 @ReadingThePlay So let me get this straight..ur preferring 2 base ur damage assumptions on the outcome of a loyalty predictive tool which isnt intended provide causation links (https://t.co/4qsZxRxJjG) (give this a read, there is
300 followers
@jmspool @NNgroup @sigchi @ACMDL It hasn't been fully studied. A preliminary search on Scholar shows that some findings from the original HBR research may be invalid: https://t.co/ZpukyHlZpH What's worrisome is there hasn't been a paper in CHI proving its
4,827 followers
@jmspool Just to be clear, I think NPS is hokey bullshit (and that's what the research says too; see Keiningham et al. at https://t.co/GNh876Kt8g). I'm just pointing out that your assertion about it isn't the same as what NPS claims to do — the 1-point di