Evaluating Store Customer Experience

The overall average score is 72.9%, which sets a reasonable baseline across stores in Malaysia. George Town (Penang) and Melaka stand out clearly, both averaging 88.7%, with all stores in these locations performing consistently well. These two locations show what strong execution looks like and can be used as internal benchmarks for other regions.

Most other locations sit around the acceptable range. Petaling Jaya (75.5%) and Ipoh (70.7%) are broadly stable, while Kuala Lumpur (69.6%) and Other Locations (70.0%) fall slightly below the overall average. The bigger concern is inconsistency, especially within the "Other Locations" group, where store scores range from 93.3% down to 32.0%, suggesting uneven standards rather than a single shared issue. Kota Bharu, represented by a single store scoring 50.7%, is clearly underperforming and requires attention.

In practical terms, stores scoring above 80% are performing well and can serve as examples, 70-80% should be monitored, 60-70% need coaching, and anything below 60% signals the need for urgent action.

Only 4 stores (9% of the network) qualify as true statistical outliers, with performance gaps greater than 15 percentage points below their regional averages. The most severe case scores 32.0%, sitting 38 points below its regional benchmark. Several other stores fall below benchmark but remain within normal variation, suggesting performance drift rather than a complete breakdown.

At the other end, strong performers such as Suria KLCC (94.7%), Pavilion Kuala Lumpur (93.3%), and Mid Valley Megamall (93.3%) show that high-quality execution is achievable under current systems. Overall, 65% of stores perform within plus or minus 10% of their regional average, confirming that the network is largely stable and that poor performance is concentrated in a small number of locations rather than being widespread.

This means the issue is not one of scale, but of focus. A small set of stores requires immediate management attention, while most of the network is operating within acceptable limits and does not require heavy intervention.

Statistical testing shows no meaningful geographic clustering of underperformance (p-value 0.807). In simple terms, weak performance is not driven by region or regional leadership. Even in areas with higher underperformance rates, such as Kuala Lumpur (20.0%) and Other Locations (20.8%), underperforming stores are spread out rather than concentrated in one place.

There is, however, one clear pattern that cuts across locations. Greeting and engagement is weak in 34.9% of stores, affecting 15 locations across five regions. This points to a company-wide behaviour issue, not a problem tied to any single city or region. Other weak stages, such as booking, promotion explanation, and product selection, appear inconsistently and vary from store to store.

The implication is straightforward. Most issues should be handled through targeted, store-level action, while greeting behaviour should be addressed through a single, company-wide improvement effort rather than regional fixes.

Three stages account for around 20% of the total performance gap, making them the most important areas to focus on. The largest driver is Product Selection, which contributes 11.0% of the gap and affects 30% of stores, with an average shortfall of nearly 25 points. This points to weaknesses in consultative selling, such as clearly explaining options, linking products to customer needs, and avoiding overly aggressive upselling.

The second driver is Promotion Explanation, responsible for 4.1% of the gap. While fewer stores are affected (19%), this stage carries the highest weight in the scoring model, so mistakes here have a disproportionate impact on overall performance. The third driver is Booking, which contributes 5.0% of the gap and is mainly driven by process issues rather than staff behaviour.

Focusing improvement efforts on these three stages will deliver the fastest and most measurable results. Other stages contribute far less to underperformance and should be treated as lower priority once these key areas are addressed.

Across the network, behavioural issues (28%) are more common than process issues (16%). This difference is even clearer among the most critical stores, where 75% of severe underperformance is driven by behaviour. Common problems include weak customer engagement, poor explanation of promotions, and rushed consultations. Process issues exist, but they play a smaller role and are usually easier to fix.

Behavioural problems take longer to address because they involve changing habits and skills. They typically require coaching, role-play, and follow-up mystery shopping over 6-8 weeks. Process issues, such as booking procedures or compliance steps, can usually be resolved within 1-2 weeks through clearer guidelines and stronger accountability.

This distinction is important because it shows where effort should be focused. For critical and "needs attention" stores, most resources should go into behavioural coaching, with quick process fixes used to support and reinforce those improvements.

The highest return comes from fixing the most severe outliers first, while clearly separating quick wins from longer-term work. Four stores require immediate action, including one scoring 32.0% due to promotion failures and another at 38.7% linked to booking and greeting issues. These stores should be prioritised in the first two weeks, with close oversight from regional management.

Beyond these urgent cases, a small number of low-effort, high-impact improvements can be addressed quickly through focused training. A few high-effort, high-impact cases also exist and should be planned carefully, as they require more time and support. Importantly, no high-effort, low-impact actions were identified, which means management effort is unlikely to be wasted if priorities are followed.

In summary, the data supports a targeted approach: stabilise the most critical stores immediately, roll out a company-wide improvement in greeting behaviour, and address remaining gaps through focused, store-level coaching rather than broad regional programmes.