قائمة التحقق الخاصة بخطة الإجراءات التصحيحية لتجربة العملاء

1. Is each CX corrective action item clearly linked to a specific finding — NPS/CSI low score, complaint trend, mystery shop result, VoC feedback, or journey mapping gap?;

2. Is a customer impact statement included for each action item, describing how the gap currently affects the customer experience in concrete terms?;

3. Are recurring CX gaps (same issue appearing across multiple audit cycles or customer feedback periods) flagged as systemic, triggering a higher-priority response than one-off findings?;

4. Are action items prioritised by customer impact — with high-frequency or high-severity experience failures addressed before lower-impact items?;

5. Is a root cause statement documented for each action item, distinguishing whether the gap is driven by process, training, system, behaviour, or environment?;

6. Is a named individual (not a department) assigned as responsible for each action item, with that individual's manager copied as the escalation owner?;

7. Does the corrective action directly address the root cause — not only the symptom — with a specific change to process, training content, or system configuration proposed?;

8. Has the responsible person acknowledged the action, understood what is required of them, and confirmed the proposed corrective measure before the due date is set?;

9. Is the type of evidence required to close each action item defined upfront and proportionate to the change required — e.g., updated SOP, training attendance record, revised script, before/after NPS score?;

10. Is submitted evidence reviewed by the CX Manager or Dealer Principal before the action is accepted as closed, rather than self-certified by the responsible person?;