Feedback, or how we set up feedback

    imageSo, you have a ready site - both technically and ideologically. The content is fully thought out and ready to use. Implemented search mechanisms, built competent linking of pages. The work of the call center has been established. An influx of constant traffic is provided: SEO optimization, contextual advertising, PR (how all this is done can be found here ). The daily number of visitors is more than 5,000. One question remains: how to translate this traffic into circulation - in this case, an appointment with the doctors?

    DocDoc is a startup-search service for doctors that has been conquering the Runet since the beginning of 2012. The chip design is that it helps each patient to find the right doctor himself - any specialty, near any metro station, in any price range (read about it more ). But what can make a person from all these doctors choose a specialist? The answer to this question will be dedicated to this post.

    Paradoxes of the search for doctors


    It turned out that the vast majority of patients in choosing a doctor are interested in three things: geographical location, rating and price (in that order). There are still a small number of people who are concerned about the scientific degree and experience of a specialist, but there will be no more than 10% of them. Education, courses, seminars - for a person all this is of secondary importance. Statistics show: in 9 out of 10 cases out of two doctors, ceteris paribus, a person chooses the one that is reviewed. We want our portal to be not only convenient, but also useful for the user. Therefore, without thinking twice, we set a goal: to set up a system for receiving feedback from patients.

    For each doctor - by recall


    It is solved: it is necessary to publish responses about work of doctors. There are many ways to get feedback, consider all possible:
    1. Allow everyone to share their impressions of visiting a doctor and leave feedback directly on the site. Immediately the problem: how do you know that the review is not "fake"? Many clinics sin by this business, thus advertising their doctors. And even a negative review can be fictitious - in order to lower the position of competitors.
    2. To remind registered patients of the need to leave a review - via email newsletters or SMS alerts. The topic is good: reviews will be lively, original and self-bearing. However, how to motivate patients to leave feedback? There are options, there is no single solution.
    3. Call each patient and ask to answer a few questions about the past appointment. So, as the classics said, we’ll kill everyone with two birds with one stone: we will find out who exactly “reached” the doors of the clinic, and in addition we will receive an impartial review of the doctor visited. On this option, and stopped.


    First difficulties


    The first thing to decide: what does a person need to know about a doctor from a review? And accordingly, from what questions do we need to form a telephone profile? Questions should be few, they should be short, concise and understandable. After painful intellectual experiments, long negotiations and cups of strong coffee, we came to the conclusion that we all are interested in 3 things: the general opinion of the patient about the doctor, the attentiveness of the doctor, as well as the adequacy of the cost of his admission. We accept answers in points - from 1 to 5, so as not to confuse anyone. You can’t describe the doctor’s numbers alone, therefore they also decided that patients should be asked to leave a few words about the appointment, if they so wish: thanks, complaints, wishes. If a person is dissatisfied with something, we ask for clarification.

    Two weeks after the launch of the collection campaign, we found out a bunch of interesting things: people are not as talkative as we expected (well, or we would like). A third of patients immediately refuse to talk with unknown people whom they did not even ask them to call. A good quarter of those who continue the conversation do not remember the names of the doctor they were received 3-5 days ago. And another part does not even remember whether the reception itself took place)) Here it is, the rhythm of life in a big city.

    imageBut this doesn’t scare us: we selected the right wording of the questions, optimized the general text of the conversation, searched for a long time, but still found a competent girl to collect feedback, and our feedback system finally worked out in full force.

    We also maintained a system of self-introduction of reviews on the site. If the message was left by a patient who made an appointment with the doctor using our service, the system finds his phone number in the customer database. Thus, we understand that this person was really at the reception, and his recall can be trusted. Otherwise, the recall does not cause serious attention, and we do not publish it.

    From rampant


    First, we wanted to upload all the reviews in a row to the site - they are all real, and we have nothing to hide. But as soon as we listened to the first 20-30 records of patient surveys, our opinion changed dramatically. So, we bring to your attention real reviews (literally reproduced from the recording of a telephone conversation):

    In some cases, the claim to the doctor is completely unclear: “ It’s difficult to call this a clinic at all, it’s not even a private psychiatrist’s office! It’s just a room for 2 meters, a table on which there is one sheet and a pen, and that's all, nothing else, no computer, nothing. This is a filkin letter, it’s just money thrown away. This doctor really needs help, he really has the appearance of a mentally retarded person with real mental problems . ”

    It happens that the patient has his own view on how the treatment should have been: “The service was disgusting. The doctor may be competent, but they began to demand an examination from me. I was diagnosed with SARS, after which the doctor offered an examination, fluorography, a general blood test, etc. And I had to sign a paper stating that the doctor was not responsible for anything . ”

    Often people are unhappy with invoicing at the clinic visited: " I was deceived for money at this clinic, instead of one price it turned out to be completely different ... Now I’m thinking of recovering and unscrewing everyone’s head there ."

    But sometimes a person quite reasonably explains to us that the doctor he visited is an unremarkable template boor: "When I come to the doctor’s consultation, I don’t need to hear my knees or detailed explanations of the translation of all its parts in Latin. It is important for me that they write out the correct recipe and say what pictures to take. When I asked if I should have an X-ray, the doctor replied: "At your discretion." Maybe I didn’t find a common language with the doctor, but it seemed strange to me. ”

    Or: “The doctor is rude, perhaps professionally she is also a great specialist, I couldn’t understand this ... She accepted me, and it all started when she took out a calculator and began to count money ...     ”.

    Judge not lest ye be judged?


    They doubted for a long time, but nevertheless decided: we publish a negative associated with the impolite, inattentive and taciturn doctor. Even if the doctor cannot make a diagnosis at the first appointment, he must BROWSE this to the patient, and not leave him alone with his thoughts. We do not upload reviews that relate to the clinic and its pricing policy, so far we are only collecting it. As for the correctness of the prescribed treatment, the matter is too slippery. Therefore, we do not publish the first review of this nature, and starting from the second, we send a request for comments on the situation to the clinic. There have already been cases of reprisals from the clinics that work with us in relation to negligent doctors - up to and including dismissal.

    Reviews should influence the rating.


    The ratio of positive and negative reviews at the moment is 5 to 1. But we almost immediately began to notice one thing: negative reviews most often do not come one at a time, but are added to the system. Some doctors receive 2, 3 or more negative reviews in a row. There is no doubt - something needs to be done with such “specialists”. We developed a special system that lowers the doctor’s rating after a certain number of negative reviews. For balance, the opposite mechanism was introduced: increasing the rating of those doctors who were most liked by patients. Thus, the doctor’s rating now consists of two parts: formal indicators of the doctor’s professionalism, as well as feedback on his work. So we began to “grope” the good and bad doctors.

    Food for thought


    Difficulty - doctors who have received many more positive reviews in comparison with their colleagues attract patients, as a result they gain even more reviews than they attract even more patients. 20% of doctors account for about 70% of patients. DocDoc has its own stars - and this is wonderful, because we are confident in these specialists and can always advise them. We are also convinced that the majority of other doctors for the most part are no worse - but much fewer people are written to them because of the relatively small number of reviews. We love to cope with difficulties ( find out what it is about ). At the moment, we are actively looking for a way out: how to draw attention to these specialists and at the same time reduce the queues for leading doctors? Maybe you can tell us?
    Tags:

    Also popular now: