Abstract:
A capability assessment system provides a tailored evaluation with clear distinction between progressive companies and companies that offer more basic services. The system scores and rates the company across multiple categories according to a which capabilities are applicable to the company, and which of the applicable capabilities the company actually utilized. The system applies a unique rating and point mapping approach to the capabilities utilized by the company. The point mapping approach is configured to facilitate clear delineation between average and above average companies, as well as an identification of which capabilities, if utilized, can put a company ahead of its competition. This information assists a company in efficiently prioritizing and identifying which improvements to its rendered services will have the greater overall impact, benefiting both the customer and the company itself, and allowing the company to effectively recognize, meet, and exceeding customer expectations.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
       [0001]    1. Technical Field 
         [0002]    This application relates to comparative analysis. In particular, this application relates to rating services and capabilities delivered by a company to its customers. 
         [0003]    2. Related Art 
         [0004]    The growing global economy has contributed to increased competition in almost every aspect of the marketplace. With the rise in competition, companies seek increasingly reliable and informative comparisons with its competitors in order to differentiate themselves from the competition and attract business. However, providing such comparisons is a difficult endeavor. 
         [0005]    Within and across industries, companies offer a multitude of services and capabilities to their customers. Simple consideration of which company offers more or less services and capabilities may not provide a company with enough useful information to determine where it can improve, or where it stands out above the competition. Furthermore, some services may be of greater value to the customer than others, and many other intricate evaluation details, such as how to score capabilities, influence how to provide a meaningful comparison. 
         [0006]    Therefore, a need exists to address the problems noted above and others previously experienced. 
       SUMMARY 
       [0007]    A capability assessment system provides a company-tailored evaluation with clear distinction between progressive companies and companies that offer only basic services. The system applies a flexible and effective rating and point mapping approach to a list of capabilities that may or may not be utilized by the company. The point mapping approach may include a non-linear scoring sequence and an adaptable score tuning gap within the scoring sequence. The adaptable score tuning gap may facilitate clear delineation between the average and above average companies, as well as which capabilities, if utilized, can put a company ahead of the competition. 
         [0008]    Based on the rating and point mapping approach, a company is scored according to which capabilities are applicable to the company, and which of the applicable capabilities it actually utilized. With the final score(s), a company can efficiently prioritize and identify which improvements to its rendered services will have the greater overall impact, benefiting both customer and the company itself. 
         [0009]    The system effectively provides objective, consistent, and detailed scoring and information about a company&#39;s practices. In addition, the system provides a clear distinction between progressive companies and companies that offer only basic services, and identifies which services set the progressive companies above the competition and/or which services a company may utilize to catch up to or surpass its competition. Accordingly, the system allows the company to effectively recognize, meet, and exceeding customer expectations. 
         [0010]    Other systems, methods, features and advantages will be, or will become, apparent to one with skill in the art upon examination of the following figures and detailed description. All such additional systems, methods, features and advantages are included within this description, are within the scope of the invention, and are protected by the following claims. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         [0011]    The system may be better understood with reference to the following drawings and description. The elements in the figures are not necessarily to scale, emphasis instead being placed upon illustrating the principles of the type model. In the figures, like-referenced numerals designate corresponding features throughout the different views. 
           [0012]      FIG. 1  shows a portion of a master capability table. 
           [0013]      FIG. 2  shows a portion of an assessment template. 
           [0014]      FIG. 3  shows a non-linear point mapping. 
           [0015]      FIG. 4  shows a flow diagram for client capability table generating logic. 
           [0016]      FIG. 5  shows a client capability table. 
           [0017]      FIG. 6  shows a flow diagram for score determining logic. 
           [0018]      FIG. 7  shows a client rating scale. 
           [0019]      FIG. 8  shows a capability assessment system. 
           [0020]      FIG. 9  shows a final assessment report. 
           [0021]      FIG. 10  shows an exemplary client comparison report. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
       [0022]      FIG. 1  shows a portion of a master capability table  100  (“table  100 ”). The master capability table  100  includes touchpoints  102 , channels  104 , and capabilities  106 . The master capability table  100  may also include a rating  108  associated with each capability  106 . 
         [0023]    A touchpoint refers to a category of service that may be rendered by a client. For example, the table  100  identifies seven touchpoints (services), including 1) Discover Service, 2) Sign-Up for Service, 3) Activate Service, 4) Use Service, 5) Pay for Service, 6) Resolve Issue, and 7) Terminate Service. 
         [0024]    The “Discover Service” touchpoint relates to services that aid customers in learning about services and products offered by the client. The “Sign-Up for Service” touchpoint relates to ordering desired products and services by the customer. The “Activate Service” touchpoint relates to the installation and/or activation of products and services for the customer. The “Use Service” touchpoint relates to the customer&#39;s interaction with the purchased products and services. The “Pay for Service” touchpoint relates to billing and receipt of payment for services rendered. The “Resolve Issue” touchpoint relates to addressing and resolving product and service issues that may arise. The “Terminate Service” touchpoint relates to the deactivation of services and/or termination of a client/customer relationship. 
         [0025]    A channel  104  may refer to the interaction between the client and its customers. The table  100  includes the channels of Assisted, Self-Service, or Face to Face. An Assisted channel may include remote modes of communication that involve more direct client/customer interaction, such as calls center or other. The Self-Service channel may relate to, for example, online, IVR, mobile, or other remote modes of communication that may or may not involve direct or real-time client/customer interaction. The “Face to Face” channel may involve face to face client/customer interaction, such as due to a customer visit to a store/branch or a field service visit. 
         [0026]    A capability  106  refers to a service that may be provided by the client to the customer. For example, the capabilities may refer to the client&#39;s agents and whether different agents handle different products  110  or whether the agents are able to walk the customer through the available products  112 . Each capability may be assigned to or otherwise correspond to an appropriate touchpoint and channel. The capability may correspond to a touchpoint according to the characteristics of the capability in relation to the characteristics of the touchpoints and channels. For example, the capability  114 , which refers to whether the client provides different phone numbers for different products, relates to customer call-in events. Accordingly, the capability may correspond to the “Assisted” channel and “Sign-up for Service” touchpoint. 
         [0027]    Additional, fewer, or different touchpoints, channels, and capabilities may be defined. For example, Tables 1 and 2 below each show portions of exemplary master capability lists that include different sets of capabilities, channels, and touchpoints. The types and/or descriptions of the capabilities, channels, and touchpoints may be tailored to the application in which the comparative landscape tool is used. Table 1 is a portion of a master capability list that may be used in a comparative landscape tool that assesses the overall customer experience provided by the client. Table 2 is a portion of a master capability list that may be used in a comparative landscape tool that assesses the customer service and support provided by the client. 
         [0028]    The table  100  also associates a rating  108  with each capability  106 . The table  100  uses a four-leveled rating system including, in order from lowest rating to highest rating, Basic, Parity, Competitive, and Differentiated. The ratings  108  may refer to the importance or value of a capability. A Basic rating may correspond to, for example, a rudimentary level of service rendered by a company. A Parity rating may correspond to an average service rendered by a company. A Competitive rating may correspond to an above average service rendered by a company. A Differentiated rating may correspond to a service that stands out within, or sets apart the company from, the industry. Accordingly, a differentiated capability may be scored higher than a basic capability. The capability assessment system described below may determine which capabilities apply to an industry, determine which of those applicable capabilities are utilized by a particular company within that industry, and then score the company based on the rating  108  associated with each applicable capability. 
         [0029]      FIG. 2  shows a portion of an assessment table  200 . The assessment table includes a list of capabilities  202 , along with the touchpoints  204  and channels  206  associated with each capability  202 . The “Applicable” column  208  identifies which capabilities  202  are applicable to the client or the client&#39;s industry. An identifier, such as a ‘Y’ for ‘Yes’ or ‘N’ for ‘No’, may be applied to each row in the “Applicable” column  208  to identify whether the corresponding capability  202  is applicable. 
         [0030]    The configuration of the “Applicable” column  208  to a client may be industry or client specific. An assessor may configure the “Applicable” column on a client-by-client basis. As an alternative, an assessor may determine default sets of capabilities that are applicable to different specific industries, where the “Applicable” column  208  may be substantially similar for each client within a specific industry. In this example, an assessor may, as part of a preprocessing step, identify which capabilities apply to each industry. When a specific client is identified with an industry, the set of default capabilities for that industry may be applied to the “Applicable” column  208  for that client. 
         [0031]    The “Utilized” column  210  identifies which capabilities are actually performed by the specific client with capability implementation specifiers. An assessor determines which capabilities are utilized and applies the appropriate identifiers in the “Utilized” column  210 . A capability identified by, for example, a ‘No’ in the “Applicable” column  208  is a capability that is not applicable to that client. In some applications, whether an inapplicable capability is utilized by the client may not be relevant. Accordingly, for each capability identified as not being applicable to the client, the assessment table  200  may be configured to grey out, lock, hide, or otherwise prevent alteration to a row corresponding to an inapplicable capability. The assessment table  200  may be implemented in a spreadsheet, such as Excel®, in a programmable database, or other programmable system. 
         [0032]    The “Verified” column  212  may identify which capabilities should be subject to further verification. For example, if it is not clear whether a capability is utilized by the client, the assessor may “check” or otherwise mark the “Verified” column&#39;s row that corresponds to that capability. The mark may indicate that further verification or investigation of the client and/or that capability should be conducted. 
         [0033]      FIG. 3  shows a point mapping  300 . The point mapping  300  includes four capability rating levels: Basic  302 , Parity  304 , Competitive  306 , and Differentiated  308 . The point mapping associates a capability level score with each capability rating level. The point mapping  300  in  FIG. 3  is a non-linear point mapping characterized with a non-linear progression of scores between capability rating levels. The scores shown in  FIG. 3  progress between ratings as follows: 1, 2, 4, 5. Rather than increasing linearly from every rating to the next, the point mapping  300  includes the non-linear jump from 2 to 4 between adjacent ratings Parity and Competitive. A tuning gap  310  of one point is present between Basic and Parity level, a tuning gap  312  of two points is present between Parity and Competitive level, and a tuning gap  314  of one point is present between Competitive and Differentiated level. Each tuning gap  310 - 314  may be independently adjusted to tailor the point mapping  300  for application to any particular industry or application. The tuning gaps are not limited to integers. 
         [0034]    Other point mapping approaches may be used and adapted to specific applications. The non-linear progression of scores from Basic to Differentiated may be configured or customized to any application to give helpful and meaningful results. For example, a non-linear progression of capability scores may weight or further set apart certain capability rating levels. As noted above, the non-linear progression of scores may be adapted by modifying the tuning gaps  310 - 314 . The adaptable score tuning gaps facilitate differentiation of companies that utilize Competitive or Differentiated capabilities to set themselves apart from those that utilize Basic or Parity capabilities. The capability level score may be configured for different applications, different industries, or according to other factors. 
         [0035]      FIG. 4  shows a flow diagram  400  for client capability table generating logic. The client capability table generating logic obtains a client assessment report ( 402 ). The client assessment report may be generated by an assessor that determines whether capabilities that are applicable to the client, or to the client&#39;s industry, are implemented by that client. Alternatively, the client may submit answers to queries manually or automatically, such as through a web portal into the system, that define the client assessment report. The client assessment report may include capability implementation identifiers, such as a “Yes” or “No”, that identifies whether an applicable capability is implemented or utilized by the client. The capability assessment report may be input in a spreadsheet, such as an Excel® spreadsheet or Lotus® spreadsheet. The client capability table generating logic described below may store the client assessment report in a memory. 
         [0036]    The client capability table generating logic may determine an applicable to point mapping for the client assessment report ( 404 ). The applicable point mapping, such as the point mapping  300  shown in  FIG. 3 , may include a capability rating level and capability level scores associated with each capability rating level. The applicable point mapping may be determined on a client by client, or industry by industry basis, and/or based on other factors. For example, the same, or a substantially similar, point mapping may apply to clients within a certain industry. The client capability table generating logic may identify the relevant industry associated with a particular client. The assessor that generates the client assessment report may alternatively identify the relevant industry. 
         [0037]    The client capability table generating logic may build a client capability table ( 406 ). The client capability table may include capability implementation specifiers, capability IDs for the capability implementation specifiers, and point assignments retrieved from the applicable point mapping for the capability IDs. The capability implementation specifiers may be numerical or other values that specifiers whether a capability is utilized by the client. The capability IDs may be unique IDs associated with each of the capabilities. The unique IDs may include a numerical, alphanumeric, or other format. The point assignments may include the capability level scores identified in the applicable point mapping. 
         [0038]      FIG. 5  shows a client capability table  500 . The client capability table  500  includes capability implementation specifiers  502 , capability IDs  504  for the capability implementation specifiers  502 , and point assignments  506  retrieved from the applicable point mapping for the capability IDs. In  FIG. 5 , the capability implementation specifiers  502  associate a ‘1’ for capabilities that are utilized by the client and a ‘0’ for capabilities that are not utilized by the client. The point assignments  506  shown in  FIG. 5  correspond to the point mapping shown in  FIG. 3  in which a capability level score of 1, 2, 4, and 5 correspond to the capability rating levels  508  of Basic, Parity, Competitive, and Differentiated, respectively. 
         [0039]    The client capability table  500  may also include the capability rating levels  508  associated with each capability, as well as a touchpoint identifier  510  and a channel identifier  512  associated with each capability. The touchpoint identifiers  510  and channel identifiers  512  may include an identification of the touchpoint and channel, respectively, associated with each capability. The touchpoint identifiers  510  and channel identifiers  512  are identified with text in the client capability table  500 . The client capability table  500  may alternatively include other identifiers, such as unique numerical IDs associated with each touchpoint and channel. 
         [0040]      FIG. 6  shows a flow diagram  600  for score determining logic. The score determining logic may determine a total applicable capability metric ( 602 ). The total applicable capability metric may include the total number of applicable capabilities across an identified capability group. The identified capability group may include all touchpoints, a single touchpoint, a single channel, a combination of touchpoints or channels, a specific channel within a touchpoint, and/or other groupings of applicable capabilities. For example, the client capability table  500  may correspond to an identified capability group including capabilities within the “Discover Service” touchpoint and “Assisted” channel. Accordingly, the score determining logic may determine that the total applicable capability metric corresponding the client capability table  500  is ten (10), which equals the total number of applicable capabilities with the identified capability group (i.e., with the “Discover Service” touchpoint and “Assisted” channel).  FIG. 6  is further discussed with reference to the client capability table  500 . However, the client capability table  500  is an example only and may vary according to the client, industry, application, identified capability group, and/or other factors. 
         [0041]    The score determining logic selects an applicable capability from the identified capability group ( 604 ). The applicable capability may be selected from a client capability table  500  generated by client capability table generating logic. The selected applicable capability may be identified according to the capability identifier  504 . 
         [0042]    The score determining logic looks up a capability level score associated with the selected applicable capability ( 606 ). The score determining logic may look up the capability level score from the client capability table. For example, if the selected applicable capability corresponds to the capability identifier  243  in  FIG. 5 , the scored determining logic may look up or otherwise retrieve the corresponding capability level score of 1.000. The score determining logic determines whether the selected applicable capability is utilized by the client ( 608 ). The score determining logic may look up the capability implementation specifier  502  from the client capability table  500  that corresponds to the selected applicable capability. The looked up capability implementation specifier  502  indicates whether the corresponding applicable capability is utilized by the client. For example, if the selected applicable capability corresponds to the capability identifier  243 , the score determining logic may retrieve the corresponding capability implementation specifier as a ‘1’, indicating that the selected applicable capability is utilized by the client. 
         [0043]    If the selected applicable capability is not utilized by the client, the score determining logic determines whether there are more applicable capabilities from the identified capability group to be examined ( 610 ). If the selected applicable capability is utilized by the client, the score determining logic adds the capability level score (obtained at block  606 ) to a running total of a total assessment score ( 612 ). The total assessment score may represent a running total of the summed capability level scores associated with each applicable capability that is utilized by the client. According to block  608 , a capability level score associated with a non-utilized capability may not be added to the total assessment score. 
         [0044]    The score determining logic determines whether there are more applicable capabilities from the identified capability group to be examined ( 610 ). If there are more applicable capabilities to be examined, the score determining logic selects a next applicable capability ( 614 ) and repeats the instructions of blocks  606 - 612 . According to blocks  606 - 612 , the score determining logic adds the capability level score associated with each utilized capability to the running total of the total assessment score ( 612 ). The client capability table  500  indicates that six (6) out of the ten (10) applicable capabilities are utilized. The score determining logic adds the capability level scores  506  associated with the utilized capabilities to the total assessment score. 
         [0045]    With respect to the client capability table  500 , the score determining logic will generate a total assessment score of fifteen (15). The capabilities  512 - 522  correspond to utilized capabilities. In particular, two capabilities  512  and  514  have a capability level score of ‘1’; two capabilities  516  and  518  have a capability level score of ‘2’; on capability  520  has a capability level score of ‘4’; and one capability  522  has a capability level score of ‘5’. Accordingly, the total assessment score may be determined as 2×1+2×2+1×4+1×5=15. 
         [0046]    If there are no remaining applicable capabilities to be examined, the score determining logic generates a final assessment score ( 616 ). The final assessment score may be a numerical score that provides a useful client rating across the identified capability group. The final assessment score may be obtained based on the total assessment score by the total applicable capability metric. For example, the score determining logic may generate the final assessment score by dividing the total assessment score by the total applicable capability metric. With respect to the client capability table  500 , the final assessment score may be 1.5, which equals the total assessment score (15) divided by the total applicable capability metric (10). 
         [0047]    The score determining logic may determine a final assessment rating ( 618 ). Based on the final assessment score, the score determining logic may assign the final assessment rating to the client. The score determining logic may compare the final assessment score with a client rating scale to determine the final assessment rating. The client rating scale may include a numerical range associated with each possible rating (e.g., Basic, Parity, Competitive, and Differentiated). The score determining logic may assign the final assessment rating according which numerical range the final assessment score falls within. For example, client rating scale may associate a final assessment score of between 0-1.8 to a Basic rating. In this example, the score determining logic would determine a final assessment rating of “Basic” based on the final assessment score of 1.5. 
         [0048]    The final assessment rating may correspond to the identified capability group. If the identified capability group includes capabilities across all touchpoints, the final assessment rating will apply to the client&#39;s rating across all touchpoints. Similarly, if the identified capability group includes capabilities across a specific channel, the final assessment rating will apply to the client&#39;s rating across that channel. The identified capability group corresponding to the client capability table  500  shown in  FIG. 5  included capabilities within the “Discover Service” touchpoint and “Assisted” channel. Accordingly, the final assessment score of 1.5 and final assessment rating of “Basic” correspond to the client&#39;s capabilities within the “Discover Service” touchpoint and “Assisted” channel. A client may be interested in ratings across multiple capability groups. The score determining logic may determine, according to the flow diagram  600 , final assessment scores and ratings for multiple client capability groups. 
         [0049]      FIG. 7  shows a client rating scale  700 . The client rating scale  700  includes numerical ranges associated with a final assessment rating. Score to determining logic may compare a final assessment score to the numerical ranges to obtain a final assessment rating for the client. For example, the numerical ranges may be different for different industries, or based on other relevant factors. In addition, the value of certain capabilities may evolve over time. For example, a capability that was once valued highly with a “Differentiated” rating, may have decreased in importance some number of years later. As capabilities evolve, the corresponding capability level score, as well as the numerical ranges of the client rating scale may change accordingly. 
         [0050]      FIG. 8  shows a capability assessment system (“system”)  800 . The system  800  includes a processor  802 , a memory  804 , and assessment database  806 . The memory  804  holds client capability table generating logic  808  and score determining logic  810  that assist in evaluating the services and capabilities delivered by the client to its customers. 
         [0051]    The assessment database  806  holds one or more master capability structures  812 . A master capability structure includes a comprehensive list of the capabilities that may apply to a particular industry or client. As discussed below, the client capability table generating logic  808  may use a master capability structure to generate a client capability table. The assessment database  806  may hold multiple master capability structures  812  for different service delivery applications. For example, Tables 1 and 2 show two exemplary master capability lists. Table 1 shows a master capability list for a “Customer Experience” service delivery application. Table 2 shows a master capability list for a “Customer Service &amp; Support” service delivery application. Each master capability list may include a description of the capability, an identification of the touchpoint and channel associated with each capability, and the rating associated with each capability. 
         [0052]    The assessment database  806  may also hold industry specific master capability structures  814  and client specific master capability structures  822 . The industry specific master capability structures  814  may include, by way of example, an automotive industry master capability structure  816 , an aviation industry master capability structure  818 , a clothing industry master capability structure  820 , and other master capability structures adapted to other specific industries. The client specific master capability structures  822  may include master capability structures  824 - 828  for client X, client Y, client Z, or for other specific clients. 
         [0053]    The system  100 , or an assessor using the system  100 , may determine which capabilities of the master capability structure  814  are applicable to a specific industry or client. Accordingly, the industry specific master capability structures  814  may include capabilities that are applicable to that specific industry. The client specific master capability structures  822  may include those capabilities from the master capability structure  812  that are applicable to the specific client. A capability may be applicable to a specific industry or client if they are relevant to the client or industry. For example, the master capability structure  812  may include capabilities that are relevant to the aviation industry, but that are not relevant to the clothing industry, and visa versa. Determining which capabilities are applicable to specific industries or clients avoids penalizing a client for not utilizing a capability that is not relevant to its business. 
         [0054]    The assessment database  806  may hold one or more point mappings  830  and one or more client rating scales  832 . The point mapping  830  provides the capability level score associated with each capability rating level.  FIG. 3  shows an exemplary point mapping  300 . The point mapping  830  may include integer, decimal, or other numerical scores associated with each capability. The client rating scale  832  includes numerical ranges associated with each capability rating level.  FIG. 7  shows an exemplary client rating scale  700 . The assessment database  806  may include multiple industry and/or client specific point mappings  834 . 
         [0055]    The client capability table generating logic  808  may include instructions that cause the processor  802  to obtain a client assessment report as detailed above with respect to  FIG. 4 . The memory  804  may store the obtained client assessment report  834 .  FIG. 1  shows an exemplary client assessment report. The client assessment report  834  may be generated or completed by an assessor. The assessor determines whether capabilities applicable to the client are utilized by that client. 
         [0056]    The client assessment report  834  may include capability implementation identifiers  836  and capability applicability identifiers  838 . The client assessment report  834  may also include capability identifiers  840 , touchpoint identifiers  842 , and channel identifiers  844 . The capability implementation identifiers  836  identify which capabilities are utilized by the client. The capability applicability identifiers  838  identify which capabilities are applicable to the client. The capability identifiers  840  may include a name and/or description of each capability. The touchpoint and channel identifiers  842  and  844  may include a name and/or description of each touchpoint and/or channel, respectively, associated with each capability. 
         [0057]    The client capability table generating logic  808  determines an applicable point mapping  846  for the client assessment report  834  as detailed above with respect to  FIG. 4 . The client capability table generating logic  808  may select and retrieve the applicable point mapping  846  from among the point mappings  830  stored in the assessment database  806 . As indicated above, the point mapping  830  may include industry and/or client specific point mappings. Based on an identification of the client or the client&#39;s industry, the client capability table generating logic  808  may identify and retrieve from the assessment database  806  the applicable point mapping  846 . The applicable point mapping  846 , such as the point mapping  300  shown in  FIG. 3 , may include capability rating levels and capability level scores associated with each capability rating level. The memory  804  may store the applicable point mapping  846 . 
         [0058]    When an assessor completes the client assessment report  834 , the assessor may load the assessment report to the assessment database  806 , a sharepoint site, or other location. The client capability table generating logic  808  may move the assessment report  834  to the memory  804  and generate a client capability table  848 . If the client assessment report  834  is an Excel® file, for example, the client capability table generating logic  808  may initiate a Microsoft ETL package to load the client assessment report  834  into the memory  804  and execute a store procedure to validate the data and build the client capability table  848  for the specific client assessment. The memory  804  may store the client capability table  848 . The store procedure may be a part of the client capability table generating logic  808 , or a separate SQL program residing in the memory  804 . The store procedure may call another store procedure that triggers the score determining logic  810 . 
         [0059]    The client capability table  848  includes capability implementation specifiers  850 , capability IDs  852  for the capability implementation specifiers  850 , and point assignments  854  retrieved from the applicable point mapping  846  for the capability IDs  852 . The client capability table  848  may also include capability rating levels  856  associated with each capability. An exemplary client capability table  848  is discussed in more detail above and shown in  FIG. 5 . 
         [0060]    The score determining logic  810  determines a total applicable capability metric  858  as detailed above with respect to  FIG. 6 . The total applicable capability metric  858  metric may include the total number of applicable capabilities across an identified capability group  860 . The identified capability group  860  may include all touchpoints, a single touchpoint, a single channel, a combination of touchpoints or channels, a specific channel within a touchpoint, and/or other groupings of applicable capabilities. The memory  804  may store the total applicable capability metric  858  and the identified capability group  860 . 
         [0061]    The memory  804  may store a total assessment score  862 , a final assessment score  864 , and a final assessment rating  866 . The score determining logic  810  may look up the point assignment  854  associated with each utilized capability. The score determining logic  810  may use the capability implementation specifiers  850  to identify which of the applicable capabilities are utilized by the client. The total assessment score  862  may equal the sum of the point assignments  854  associated with each utilized capability. The score determining logic  810  determines the final assessment score  868  based on the total applicable capability metric  858  and the final assessment score  864 . For example, the final assessment score  864  may equal the total assessment score  862  divided by the total applicable capability metric  858 . 
         [0062]    Based on the final assessment score  864 , the score determining logic  810  may determine the final assessment rating  866 . The score determining logic  810  may compare the final assessment score  864  with an applicable client rating scale  868  to determine the final assessment rating  866 . The applicable client rating scale  868  may include a numerical range associated with each possible rating (e.g., Basic, Parity, Competitive, and Differentiated). The score determining logic  810  may assign the final assessment rating  866  according which numerical range the final assessment score  864  falls within. The score determining logic  810  may select and retrieve the applicable client rating scale  868  from among the client rating scales  832  stored in the assessment database  806 . As indicated above, the client rating scale may include industry and/or client specific client rating scales. Based on an indication of the client or the client&#39;s industry, the score determining logic  810  may identify and retrieve from the assessment database  806  the applicable client rating scale  868 . Based on the applicable client rating scale  868  and the final assessment score  864 , the score determining logic determines the final assessment rating  866 . 
         [0063]    The system  800  may determine a final assessment score  864  and/or final assessment rating  866  across multiple identified capability groups. For example, the system  800  may determine final assessment scores  864  and ratings  866  for each is individual touchpoint or channel. The system  800  may additionally or alternatively store the final assessment scores  864  and ratings  866  in a client score repository  870  in the assessment database  806 . The client score repository  870  may include the final assessment scores  864  and ratings  866  for multiple clients that have used the system  800 . 
         [0064]    The memory  804  may include report generating logic  872 . The report generating logic  872  may generate and display a variety of final assessment reports  874  for the client based on the final assessment score  866  and the final assessment rating  868 .  FIGS. 9-12  show exemplary final assessment reports  874  that may be generated by the report generating logic  872 . The memory  804  may store the final assessment reports  874 . The system  800  may interact with the client and/or assessor using a display  876 . 
         [0065]    The final assessment reports  874  may include a comparison of the client&#39;s final assessment scores  864  and ratings  866  to the final assessment scores and ratings stored in the client score repository  870  for other clients that have used the system  800 . The comparison assists the client in comparing its practices to the practices of other companies to determine where it distinguishes itself from, or lags behind, its competition. 
         [0066]    Exemplary aspects, features, and components of the system are described above. However, the system may be implemented in many different ways. For example, although some features are shown stored in computer-readable memories (e.g., as logic implemented as computer-executable instructions or as data structures in memory), all or part of the system and its logic and data structures may be stored on, distributed across, or read from other machine-readable media. The media may include hard disks, floppy disks, CD-ROMs, a signal, such as a signal received from a network or received over multiple packets communicated across the network. 
         [0067]    The system may be implemented with additional, different, or fewer components. As one example, a processor may be implemented as a microprocessor, a microcontroller, a DSP, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), discrete logic, or a combination of other types of circuits or logic. As another example, memories may be DRAM, SRAM, Flash or any other type of memory. The processing capability of the system may be distributed among multiple components, such as among multiple processors and memories, optionally including multiple distributed processing systems. Parameters, databases, and other data structures may be separately stored and managed, may be incorporated into a single memory or database, may be logically and physically organized in many different ways, and may implemented with different types of data structures such as linked lists, hash tables, or implicit storage mechanisms. Logic, such as programs or circuitry, may be combined or split among multiple programs, distributed across several memories and processors, and may be implemented in a library, such as a shared library (e.g., a dynamic link library (DLL)). The DLL, for example, may store code that prepares intermediate mappings or implements a search on the mappings. As another example, the DLL may itself provide all or some of the functionality of the system, tool, or both. 
         [0068]      FIGS. 9-10  show final assessment reports that may be generated by the report generating logic. In particular,  FIG. 9  shows an exemplary client capability summary  900  (“summary  900 ”). The summary  900  shows the number of applicable capabilities  902 , utilized capabilities  904 , and “not utilized” capabilities  906  for each touchpoint  908 , as well as overall data  910  across all touchpoints. The summary  900  also shows a final assessment score  912  for each touchpoint, including an overall score. As discussed above with respect to  FIG. 8 , a capability assessment system may use the final assessment scores  912  to determine a final assessment rating for each touchpoint and/or across all touchpoints. A similar report may be generated to show final assessment scores for each channel. 
         [0069]      FIG. 10  shows an exemplary client comparison report  1000  (“report  1000 ”). The report  1000  ranks several clients for which final assessment scores and ratings have been determined into quartiles. The report  1000  may be configured to rank the clients into more or less than four groups. Reports similar to the report  1000  may be generated for each touchpoint and/or channel. For example, a client comparison report for the touchpoint “Sign-up for Service” may be generated that ranks the clients based on their respective scores for the “Sign-up for Service” touchpoint. Such reports effectively inform each client where they differentiate themselves from, or lag behind, other like companies, allowing companies to more precisely prioritize and identify which improvements to its rendered services will have the greater overall impact. Reports may also be generated that compare the several clients on a capability by capability basis, or that chart or graph each client&#39;s scores in relation to each other. 
         [0070]    The companies with which a client may be compared in the report  1000 , or other like reports, may be determined on an outside-view or inside-view basis. With the outside-view approach, companies may be grouped based on the customer&#39;s perspective. With the inside-view approach, companies may be grouped based on the client perspective, such as through comparison with their peers within the same industry. In the outside-view approach, the client may be compared to companies in other industries as well. 
         [0071]    For example, a cable company may be compared to other cable companies under the inside-view approach. In the outside-view approach, the cable company may be compared to, in addition to other cable companies, service providers that service the same or substantially similar customer base and offers similar types of services, such as telephone service providers, internet providers, utilities companies, electronics merchandise providers, and/or other service providers selected based on the described outside-view approach. The outside-view approach may assist a client to be better in tune with customer expectations and learn successful techniques from other companies it may not typically identify with. In addition, conducting the assessment from the customer&#39;s perspective (the outside-view approach) may allow the client to effectively differentiate itself from peers and be better in tune with customer expectations and learn successful techniques from other companies it may not typically identify with. 
         [0072]    Tables 1 and 2 below show portions of exemplary master capability lists. Table 1 is a portion of a master capability list that may be used in a comparative landscape tool that assesses the overall customer experience provided by the client. Table 2 is a portion of a master capability list that may be used in a comparative landscape tool that assesses the customer service and support provided by the client. The master capability list may be dynamic lists. The ratings may be updated or modified. Capabilities, channels, and/or touchpoints may be added, modified, or removed. These and/or other changes may be a result of industry changes or trends, client/industry preferences, system updates, or other influences. 
         [0000]    
       
         
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 1 
               
               
                   
               
               
                 Touchpoint 
                 Rating 
                 Channel 
                 Capability 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 1. Discover 
                 Basic 
                 Assisted 
                 agents: different agents handle different products 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                   
                 (e.g.: cable, home phone, wireless) 
               
               
                 2. Sign-Up for 
                 Basic 
                 Assisted 
                 phone numbers: different for different products 
               
               
                 Service 
               
               
                 6. Resolve 
                 Parity 
                 Assisted 
                 IVR: voice recognition capability 
               
               
                 Issues 
               
               
                 1. Discover 
                 Parity 
                 Assisted 
                 IVR: friendly voice 
               
               
                 Service 
               
               
                 3. Activate 
                 Differentiated 
                 Assisted 
                 agents: friendly, helpful, accommodating &amp; 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                   
                 understands the customer. Demonstrate 7 customer 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 experience dimensions: acknowledgment, efficiency, 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 knowledgeable, control, choice, commitment, &amp; 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 consistency. 
               
               
                 4. Use 
                 Differentiated 
                 Assisted 
                 agents: friendly, helpful, accommodating &amp; 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                   
                 understands the customer. Demonstrate 7 customer 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 experience dimensions: acknowledgment, efficiency, 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 knowledgeable, control, choice, commitment, &amp; 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 consistency. 
               
               
                 2. Sign-Up for 
                 Parity 
                 Face to 
                 Allow customers to sign-up: via authorized dealers 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                 Face 
                 (products/services dependent) 
               
               
                 3. Activate 
                 Parity 
                 Face to 
                 field reps: set-up fee is not charged for technician 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                 Face 
                 visits 
               
               
                 4. Use 
                 Parity 
                 Face to 
                 industry-specific: tree trimming crews trim trees 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                 Face 
                 away from power lines 
               
               
                 5. Pay For 
                 Basic 
                 Assisted 
                 agents: different products (e.g.: cable, home phone, 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                   
                 wireless) are handled by different agents 
               
               
                 5. Pay For 
                 Competitive 
                 Self- 
                 payment (channel): at stores using automated 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                 Service 
                 payment kiosks (or similar machines) 
               
               
                 6. Resolve 
                 Differentiated 
                 Face to 
                 service appointment window: 2-2.5 hrs 
               
               
                 Issues 
                   
                 Face 
               
               
                 7. Terminate 
                 Basic 
                 Assisted 
                 cancellations: require live agents 
               
               
                 Service 
               
               
                 7. Terminate 
                 Basic 
                 Face to 
                 cancellations: For security reasons customers are 
               
               
                 Service 
                   
                 Face 
                 required to call in order to cancel their account. 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 Accounts will be closed shortly after customers&#39; 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 requests. 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0000]    
       
         
               
               
               
               
             
           
               
                 TABLE 2 
               
               
                   
               
               
                 Touchpoint 
                 Rating 
                 Channel 
                 Capability 
               
               
                   
               
             
             
               
                 service strategy: 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Limited or no access to customer data 
               
               
                 Customer Segmentation 
                   
                 office 
                 for conducting segmentation analysis 
               
               
                 Analysis 
               
               
                 service strategy: Industry 
                 Parity 
                 back- 
                 Analysis results not well integrated with 
               
               
                 Trends &amp; Competitor 
                   
                 office 
                 overall service business planning 
               
               
                 Analysis 
               
               
                 service strategy: 
                 Differentiated 
                 back- 
                 Explicit statement of strategy to offer or 
               
               
                 Professional Services 
                   
                 office 
                 not offer services beyond the product 
               
               
                 Strategy 
                   
                   
                 platforms sold by the company. 
               
               
                 service offering 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Manufacturing targeted at minimizing 
               
               
                 development: Warranty 
                   
                 office 
                 unit production cost with no view on 
               
               
                 Design &amp; Integration 
                   
                   
                 total cost of ownership. 
               
               
                 services marketing: 
                 Parity 
                 back- 
                 Marketing objectives and strategies are 
               
               
                 Marketing Objectives &amp; 
                   
                 office 
                 not aligned with overall service business 
               
               
                 Strategy 
                   
                   
                 plan. 
               
               
                 services marketing: 
                 Differentiated 
                 assisted &amp; 
                 Online and offline marketing efforts are 
               
               
                 Marketing Objectives &amp; 
                   
                 face-to- 
                 integrated. 
               
               
                 Strategy 
                   
                 face 
               
               
                 services marketing: 
                 Differentiated 
                 back- 
                 The measurement system balances 
               
               
                 Service Portfolio Analysis 
                   
                 office 
                 short-term objectives with long-term 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 goals, financial metrics with nonfinancial 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 metrics, and external performance 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 (customer satisfaction) with internal 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 business process performance. 
               
               
                 service selling: Customer 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Inconsistent contract creation and 
               
               
                 Contract Negotiation &amp; 
                   
                 office 
                 management process 
               
               
                 Creation 
               
               
                 services selling: Customer 
                 Parity 
                 assisted &amp; 
                 Paper forms are used for contracts 
               
               
                 Contract Negotiation &amp; 
                   
                 face-to- 
               
               
                 Creation 
                   
                 face 
               
               
                 services selling: Customer 
                 Parity 
                 self- 
                 Remote users can not edit contracts data 
               
               
                 Contract Negotiation &amp; 
                   
                 service 
                 bases 
               
               
                 Creation 
               
               
                 services selling: Sales 
                 Basic 
                 assisted &amp; 
                 Little to no channel sales support. 
               
               
                 Execution 
                   
                 face-to- 
               
               
                   
                   
                 face 
               
               
                 services event management: 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Processed manually through company 
               
               
                 Email 
                   
                 office 
                 email system (Outlook, etc.); no email 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 management system in place. 
               
               
                 service event management: 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Dispatching, route determination, and 
               
               
                 Scheduling &amp; Dispatch 
                   
                 office 
                 service area rules either do not exist or 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 are informal. 
               
               
                 service event management: 
                 Basic 
                 self- 
                 Internet interactions are limited to 
               
               
                 Web/esupport 
                   
                 service 
                 electronic service sales literature (e.g. 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 service contact information, service 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 locations, hours of operation, etc.) 
               
               
                 installation, maintenance &amp; 
                 Basic 
                 assisted &amp; 
                 Majority of repairs are carried out 
               
               
                 repair: field repair 
                   
                 face-to- 
                 without any pre-diagnosis. 
               
               
                   
                   
                 face 
               
               
                 installation, maintenance &amp; 
                 Basic 
                 assisted &amp; 
                 Adjustments and rework % is high. 
               
               
                 repair: installation 
                   
                 face-to- 
               
               
                 management 
                   
                 face 
               
               
                 installation, maintenance &amp; 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 OEM supplied embedded technology is 
               
               
                 repair: predictive 
                   
                 office 
                 not fully leveraged. 
               
               
                 maintenance 
               
               
                 service parts &amp; logistics 
                 Differentiated 
                 back- 
                 Automatic notification of excess/obsolete 
               
               
                 management: inventory 
                   
                 office 
                 inventory. 
               
               
                 replenishment 
               
               
                 service parts &amp; logistics 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Does not address reverse 
               
               
                 management: returns 
                   
                 office 
                 logistics/returns. 
               
               
                 professional services: prof 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Hardware leads the sale. 
               
               
                 svc sales &amp; delivery 
                   
                 office 
               
               
                 partner relationship 
                 Parity 
                 back- 
                 Data shared between organizations is 
               
               
                 management: partner 
                   
                 office 
                 not automated. 
               
               
                 relationship mgt 
               
               
                 customer account 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 All validations are performed manually; 
               
               
                 management: contract 
                   
                 office 
                 reviewers ensure that rules and 
               
               
                 management 
                   
                   
                 standards have been followed by the 
               
               
                   
                   
                   
                 preparers. 
               
               
                 customer account 
                 Parity 
                 back- 
                 Billing does not promote a steady 
               
               
                 management: customer 
                   
                 office 
                 revenue stream 
               
               
                 billing 
               
               
                 product lifecycle 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Defects are not tracked 
               
               
                 management: defect 
                   
                 office 
               
               
                 tracking 
               
               
                 human performance/ 
                 Basic 
                 back- 
                 Compensation system is not tied to 
               
               
                 knowledge management: 
                   
                 office 
                 performance. 
               
               
                 career path/ 
               
               
                 compensation 
               
               
                 human performance/ 
                 Parity 
                 back- 
                 A myriad of inconsistent performance 
               
               
                 knowledge management: 
                   
                 office 
                 metrics analyzed infrequently. 
               
               
                 performance management 
               
               
                 human performance/ 
                 Competitive 
                 back- 
                 Formal training curriculums and 
               
               
                 knowledge management: 
                   
                 office 
                 programs are provided, utilized, and 
               
               
                 training management 
                   
                   
                 tracked for compliance. 
               
               
                   
               
             
          
         
       
     
         [0073]    While various embodiments of the invention have been described, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that many more embodiments and implementations are possible within the scope of the invention. Accordingly, the invention is not to be restricted except in light of the attached claims and their equivalents.