1. 2010 Division and Section Loyalty Study Executive Summary

2. Loyalty & Satisfaction Study Methodology The e-mail invitation was sent on January 6 th to 69,546 members A postcard was mailed to members requesting no e- mails from ASQ in January to 514 members Incentive provided – win one of eight $25 ASQ Bucks Three reminders were sent and the deadline for participating was extended in an effort to increase responses

3. Research Methodology - Fielding Fielding Methodology Self-administered questionnaire Web-based survey for members providing e-mail addresses U.S. mail survey for members providing only a mailing address or members who have requested not to receive e-mail communications Total Sample = 8,374 complete surveys; this is an 12.0% response rate Sample = 5,260 completed surveys for Forums or Divisions Sample = 7,581 completed surveys for Sections

4. Section Loyalty & Satisfaction Study Respondents Section Final Responses: 3,114 members completed the Section Survey only, 4,467 completed both the Section and Division/Forum Survey Note six Sections received 0 responses: 412 "New Brunswick" 413 "Newfoundland & Labrador" 624 "Southern Oregon" 1125 "Highland Rim" 1314 "Western Colorado" 1418 "Brazosport: Freeport" Division/Forum Final Responses: 793 members completed the Division Survey only, 4,467 completed both the Section and Division/Forum Survey

5. ASQ Satisfaction & Loyalty Framework Member Loyalty Member Loyalty Definition of Loyalty Index  Overall Satisfaction  Likelihood to Renew  Likelihood to Recommend  Loyal  Positive  Hesitant  At Risk Loyalty Classification of Members Products Pricing ASQ Image ASQ Image Individual Learning Individual Learning Professional Resources Professional Resources Certification Courses Conferences Membership & Costs of Products and Services Leader in the Field Business Partner Resource to Improve On the Job Performance Networking Local Chapters Forums/ Divisions Satisfaction Loyalty Components Forum/Division Experiences  Section Experiences  Transactional Touchpoints 

6. Loyalty Ratings

7. Performance Scorecard Changes (2010 vs. 2009) – Loyalty Measures Loyal + Positive65% Hesitant + At Risk35% Loyal30% Positive35% Hesitant29% At Risk6% Overall Satisfaction35% Likelihood to Renew 64% Likelihood to Recommend 47% Loyal + Positive69% Hesitant + At Risk31% Loyal28% Positive42% Hesitant24% At Risk6% Overall Satisfaction32% Likelihood to Renew 65% Likelihood to Recommend 49% 20092010Change Upward Bias Downward Bias Significantly Higher Significantly Lower No Change Downward Bias No Change Upward Bias Top Two Box Ratings

8. Performance Scorecard Changes (2010 vs. 2006) – Member Units Top Two Box Ratings FORUM/ DIVISION RATING 21% SECTION RATING 32% 2010Change Upward Bias Significantly Higher FORUM/ DIVISION RATING 19% SECTION RATING 25% 2009

9. Section - Satisfaction How do you rate your overall satisfaction with your section? –Satisfaction has increased significantly

10. Section – Satisfaction with...

11. Contact with Section

12. Division - Satisfaction How do you rate your overall satisfaction with your division/forum? –Satisfaction slightly increased from 2009 to 2010. –Bottom box satisfaction decreased by a significant amount in 2010

13. Division – Satisfaction with...

14. Contact with Division

15. Contact with ASQ Headquarters

16. Key Findings (Overall) More individuals are shifting into the “Positive” category –These individuals are collected from both the “Loyal” and “Hesitant” categories The majority (76%) of members have not been contacted by phone by ASQ Headquarters –A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact –Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often

17. Key Findings - Sections Section satisfaction was statistically significantly higher than 2009 The majority of members have not been contacted by phone by their Section –A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact –Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often Section members find most satisfaction with the networking opportunities and courses/training provided by their Section Section members feel their section leadership is not very accessible for questions, concerns, and suggestions (4.7% Top Box)

18. Section Demographics About 38% are between the ages of 46-55 Majority (53%) are Senior/Fellow members 38% have been members between 7-20 years, 22% have been members between 1-4 years The majority of members (45%) are in Manufacturing, 29% are in Services 28% are managers, 21% are engineers About 41% pay for their own membership, 54% have their membership paid for by their employer/company Approximately 75% are male

19. Key Findings - Divisions Division satisfaction continues to steadily increase, but not at a statistically significant rate –Bottom box (1-5) satisfaction decreased by a statistically significant amount The majority of members have not been contacted by phone by their Division/Forum –A little over half feel this is the right level of phone contact –Virtually no one felt they were contacted by phone too often Members find most satisfaction with the conferences supported by their Divisions/Forum (25.9%)

20. Division Demographics About 38% are between the ages of 46-55 Majority (53%) are Senior/Fellow members 37% have been members between 7-20 years, 23% have been members between 1-4 years The majority of members (40%) are in Manufacturing, 29% are in Services 29% are Managers, 19% are Engineers, 11% are Directors About 42% pay for their own membership, 53% have their membership paid for by their employer/company Approximately 75% are male

21. Questions should be directed to ASQ Market Research mrcoord@asq.org