Concept of internationalization

(3) And finally, Uber's international expansion strategy has been publicly documented through stages of both heavy globalization and heavy localization, making it an ideal candidate for analysis on the global-local spectrum.

With an eye to the correlations between glocalization and tourism, we have confined our analysis of Uber's customer experience to the segment of the American population who has traveled with Uber abroad. Not only has this segment proven to be key in the initial launch of Uber in foreign markets, but it has the added benefit of coming from a market heavily influenced by the theories of experience economy and in which customer experience is being constantly re-defined across industries to drive loyalty and increased profit.

In the following pages, we will offer an analysis of what it is that defines Uber's present-day customer experience strategy, the company's use of glocalization in that strategy, and the impact of that glocalization on the perceptions of American consumers living in or travelling through an international market.

Throughout our study, we operated from the hypothesis that glocalization actually enhances the customer experience of the American consumer of Uber abroad. That hypothesis was tested against three main data points: 1) in-depth interviews with two Uber employees involved in international market launches 2) a survey pool of eighty-five Americans between the ages of eighteen and forty who have used Uber while living or traveling abroad in the last twelve months, and 3) a literature review of approximately forty online and print sources.

Each Uber employee surveyed was employed in a management capacity by Uber as a part of an international launch team. One participated in the 2013 launch of Uber in Singapore as a part of the Marketing Team. The other participated in the 2015 launch in Nairobi, Kenya as a member of the Uber PRO Team. They were interviewed over Skype using a long-form questionnaire template. Their names remain anonymous. Much of the data collected in this phase was used as foundational research from which to build the rider survey and to understand some of the factor differences between developed and developing countries.

The eighty-five Americans surveyed were screened from a pool of one hundred and sixty-five total respondents based on two main criteria: their use of Uber abroad in the last twelve months and their American nationality. Age was not screened for. Respondents answered an online survey of twenty-five questions, distributed across social media platforms (i.e. Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat) as well as by email. This pool of respondents is then linked directly or indirectly to the researcher's own network and initial respondent bias must be taken into account.

The literature review was completed across a total of approximately forty online and print sources in an attempt to collect additional information around how American tourists prefer to travel, the benefits and risks of glocalization versus globalization or localization, and how to measure the American customer experience.

The data was then synthesized and analyzed in relation to the hypothesis across four core elements based on the Forrester measurement model: 1) customer experience perceptions, 2) customer satisfaction, 3) customer sentiment, and 4) net promoter score.

These elements were broken down as follows:

Customer experience perception was measured against survey responses to the questions “How would you rate the customer experience that Uber provides its riders in America?” and “How would you rate the customer experience that Uber provides its riders abroad?” These questions were answered on a 5-point scale from “Poor” to “Excellent” and the final data analyzed across “negative (1-2),” “positive (4-5),” and “neutral (3)” responses. The customer experience was broken down further through an analysis of the factors that riders believed affected their experience while using Uber abroad. The factors are listed in the example survey (see Exhibit #3), and respondents were asked to check all that applied.

Customer satisfaction was measured against survey responses to the questions “How satisfied have you been with your experience of Uber in America?” and “How satisfied were you with your experience of Uber abroad?” Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction levels on a 5-point scale from “Not at all satisfied” to “Very satisfied,” and the final data analyzed across “negative (1-2),” “positive (4-5),” and “neutral (3)” responses.

Customer sentiment of the experience with Uber abroad was captured through a write-in survey response asking respondents to describe the emotion they would associate with the use of the platform abroad. Responses were then categorized into “positive,” “negative,” or “neutral” based upon the researcher's own comprehension and understanding of the response. It should be noted that Americans tend to be more hyperbolic in their responses, and sentiment expression is extremely biased to personal interpretation. A list of words collected through the survey responses is provided in Exhibit 6 for further consideration and development.

For each of the above three elements, a final respondent score was achieved by subtracting the number of negative respondents from the number of positive respondents (excluding neutral respondents) and coming to a single number against which to compare and contrast. An example of this calculation is shown below:

Net promoter score (hereafter referred to as NPS) was the final element contributing to the overall analysis, and was measured using standard NPS guidelines. The NPS questions posed to survey respondents were “How likely are you to recommend Uber to a friend, colleague, or acquaintance for use in the United States?” and “How likely are you to recommend Uber to a friend, colleague, or acquaintance for use abroad?” Each question was measured against a 10-point scale ranging from “Extremely unlikely” to “Extremely likely.” Respondents with a score of 9 or 10 were considered “promoters,” while those with a score of 7 or 8 were considered “passive” and those with a score a of 6 or below were considered “detractors.” Final NPS scores were achieved by subtracting the percentage of detractors from the percentage of passives.

Each element respondent score was considered individually, and then an average “Total Customer Experience” score was found by adding each of the element numbers within a customer journey (defined below) together and then dividing by four to find a true average. An example of this calculation can be found below:

We also incorporated one final element into the survey to better understand the effect of the rider's experience with Uber abroad on future actions (similar to NPS). By asking the question “Did your experience with Uber abroad affect your willingness to use Uber upon returning to the states?” and then asking respondents to qualify whether that willingness increased or decreased, we hoped to understand whether there would be a difference between a customer's willingness to promote to others and their own beliefs or actions.

As noted above, these elements of the Total Customer Experience were considered across five different customer journeys (or paths of experience): 1) Americans who had used Uber abroad only in developed countries, 2) Americans who had used Uber abroad only in developing countries, 3) Americans who had used Uber abroad in both developed and developing countries, 4) An average of all Americans who had used Uber abroad, and 5) An average of all Americans who had used Uber in the USA.

“Developed” and “developing” countries were defined in accordance with the 14^th International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry. A list of all respondent countries and their categorization as “developed” or “developing” can be found in Exhibit 7.

The final analysis of the data collected was completed by comparing the score for each element within and across each of the five customer journeys. We then did a comparison of the Average Total CX score across the journeys to come to a final conclusion.

In the following pages, we will offer these findings as the beginnings of a much larger discussion around the role of glocalization in the perception of international service companies' customer experience. We will also present recommendations for future avenues of research in the field, and an in-depth analysis of the weaknesses and opportunities in our own methods.



The American Tourist

Key to our research in understanding the effects of glocalizaton on the customer experience abroad was to first understand the preferences and habits of the international American tourist.

According to figures released by the US State Department in 2017, only 37% of Americans hold a valid passport. And of that 37%, the majority of Americans limit their international travel to such locales as Canada, Mexico, and the UK. It is a statistic often correlated with what experts believe is an embedded fear of traveling and the unknown in American society, enabled by a culture that refuses to emphasize knowledge of the world at large, and that values money over leisure time.

Unsurprisingly, then, of those Americans who do find themselves abroad, the majority tend to prefer the traditionally famous sites and historical landmarks. Researchers describe American travelers as “list-tickers,” people who arrive in a new city or country with a list of things to see and do, and an urgent need to check off everything on that list. They will stay just long enough to take the requisite pictures and see the requisite sites, but do not venture far off the beaten path.

As they strive to complete their lists, however, Americans do tend to be seen as respectful, and as a people who are there to learn from and engage with the places and cultures around them. They will (cautiously) try local offerings - though nothing too “oddball” - and often cite safety, space, and hygiene as being their top concerns.

Many travel industry experts believe that catering to the American abroad is about finding a way for tourists to experience the local culture while retaining westernized amenities, and, to this end, glocalization is likely to play a critical role in how Americans perceive and experience service companies abroad.



Uber: A Brief Background

A US-based company, developed by two American tourists searching for a better taxi experience, Uber was - at its core- a solution for enabling the American traveler.

In fact, it was while co-founders Travis Kalanick and Garrett Camp were wandering through the snowy streets of Paris that the idea of Uber was first conceived. And though it found its roots in San Francisco, CA, Uber went on to disrupt the entirety of the world's ride-hailing economy over the course of a decade.

What started with three cars on the streets of New York City in early 2010 has since grown to a service available in over 65 countries and over 633 cities worldwide. It is currently valued at over $50 billion dollars, and has helped to define the foundations of today's “Sharing Economy.”

But the path to success has not been a smooth one. Built on a model of “it's easier to ask for forgiveness than it is to get permission,” Uber has attained most of its growth - both domestically and internationally - through an aggressive market entry strategy. In fact, Uber has become infamous for its ability to first launch, and then obtain the necessary permissions to operate in a new geography - a strategy that has led to intense legal battles and days-long protests by native cab drivers in various markets.

Its legal battles for expansion, however, are not the only road bumps Uber has faced on the way to the top.

In recent years, Uber has struggled to reverse its public relations persona after sustained bouts of negative press and viral customer complaints. And though it is not unique to the service industry in its occasional misstep, Uber's business model means that the company is uniquely susceptible to the effects of even the most minor of PR blunders.

While studies show that it takes only twelve positive experiences to make up for any one unresolved negative experience, the degree of separation between Uber and its riders means that the company never has the chance to interact directly with its consumers. The driver becomes the face of the company, and Uber the facilitator. Trust lost is rarely re-established, and Uber has found itself unable to recover consumer feelings of loyalty and commitment through PR alone.

And so, while customer experience - and perception of that experience - lie at the heart of Uber's service model, the company has struggled to maintain control of that perception. It has become the biggest challenge that Uber has faced in its home market of the United States, and has come to play an increasingly integral role in how Uber has developed its glocalized international expansion strategy. Just how well that glocalization strategy is working to boost perceptions of customer experience at home and abroad, however, is explored in the analysis below.

Uber's Methods of Glocalization

As Uber has extended its unique service model to international markets, it has faced a process of continuous redefinition of its glocalization strategy. Over the years since its 2009 Paris launch, Uber has shown a prominent shift from a minimally glocalized service offering abroad, to an offering that is becoming more heavily localized in the context of the global.

The following two case studies will explore the glocalization journeys of Uber's international expansion into two divergent markets at two different points in time: Singapore in January of 2013 and Nairobi in June of 2015. Based heavily on the personal experiences and recollections of Uber employees involved in these launches, we will compare and contrast the ways in which Uber glocalized in each locale (one developed and one developing), its emphasis on the customer experience at market launch, and the ways in which the company looked to measure perceptions of that experience abroad.

i. A Case Study of Markets

1. Singapore

In January 2013, just before the company's push towards a more localized international offering, Uber launched its services in Singapore, a westernized and highly developed island city-state off the coast of Malaysia.

Targeted for its +2,000 miles of roadway, +25,000 cabs, and its highly regulated native taxi industry, Singapore was a prime market for Uber's early stages of global expansion. Not only were its citizens traditionally open to innovation and technological experimentation, but the base cab fare in the area - while low-- left room for Uber to leverage its core value proposition of even lower prices plus high convenience. The business case for Singapore was only further enhanced by the country's predictably unpredictable weather and pronounced driver exhaustion.

When M--- (name redacted) joined the Uber Singapore City Team as a Marketing Manager in 2013, the company was still in the early stages of market launch. The team's focus was on driving revenue growth and market penetration as quickly as possible, and M--was hired specifically to focus on creating, measuring, and monitoring the rider experience.

From Uber's perspective, the rider experience would be measured using data tied specifically to product adoption and usage rates. And one of the most important metrics, M--explained, was the market's “completed-to-request rate.” Considered a key indicator of customer experience, this metric told Uber management three things: 1) How often rides were being requested; 2) How often those rides were being cancelled (by riders or drivers); and, 3) How often riders were arriving at their final destination. By finding ways to ensure a high completed-to-request ratio, Uber could ensure that its main value proposition was being fulfilled: Happy riders leveraging a convenient service to get from Point A to Point B.

The easiest part of the launch, according to M---, was that value proposition. “You didn't need to shove it down people's throats,” he explained. “We were offering convenience and affordability on top of something already valuable” - a flexible, on-demand ride-sharing option. The westernized culture and the inherent comfort with technology also meant that Uber had to do little localization to the actual platform outside of language translation and offering a local currency option.

The key to driving adoption of Uber in Singapore came down to the localization of marketing campaigns and early adopter discounting initiatives. One of the most uniquely Singaporean marketing campaigns was around the Uber Chinese New Year Activity. Hoping to incorporate elements of the local culture into their service model, Uber provided Singaporean customers with the ability to order the performance of a traditional Lion Dance for just $158 on-demand. The company also coordinated one of the highest-altitude lion dances ever-performed to take place in one of Singapore's 1-Altitude buildings. These methods and marketing campaigns successfully combined a bottom-up approach at the local level with the company-wide focus on cost leadership to increase market share and boost revenue to the tune of a successful Singapore launch.

Alongside these planned and management-directed glocalization strategies, however, one of the most significant impacts of the Singaporean culture on the Uber platform manifested itself organically, and has since had a powerful impact on the specifically non-local customer experience.

A key component of the Uber offering is a rider's ability to rate a driver on a five-star scale. This rating is then used to determine the quality of service a driver is providing, and can - if the score reaches a low enough point - result in the termination of an Uber driver from the platform.

In the United States - and many of the other Western markets into which Uber had already launched by 2013 - consumers have been known for their tendency towards hyperbole. Americans, especially, are known to give generous ratings, no matter what the quality of service. In Singapore, however, ratings are significantly more conservative. While in the United States a 4.6 star rating can often be cause for a driver's dismissal, the average driver rating in Singapore hovers around a 4.3.

This difference in rating standards, according to M---, can often be one of the greatest causes of confusion or concern for foreigners. Arriving in Singapore, Americans are met with the familiarity of the application and functionality, but are immediately forced to re-evaluate the inherent home-market bias against rating norms. This nuance to the platform can often lead to a poor customer experience and a much higher cancellation rate by potential riders.

Outside of this minority segment, however, Uber seems to have hit its stride in Singapore. A prime market for Uber's international expansion strategy in 2013, the technologically literate population in conjunction with a high smartphone saturation rate and heavily credit-card based payment infrastructure, meant Uber's product offering could remain highly globalized with minor local adjustments. Now, after just five years in the market, Uber Singapore has reached over 1 million active riders (20% of Singapore's population), and continues to capture market share from the competition as shown by the below graph provided in the Singapore Business Review around the declining number daily trips for taxi drivers in the market, figure 5:

(Figure 5, Declining daily trips for taxi drivers)



“We have fundamentally changed the way people get around with the kind of smart innovation that moves Singapore forward,” commented Warren Sing, Uber Singapore's General Manager. “Riders are now accustomed to enjoying safe, reliable, affordable rides at the touch of a button.”

In order to adapt to and succeed in highly westernized markets, then, it seems likely that Uber need not localize the technical aspects of the platform heavily. If the Singapore example can be extrapolated across other developed markets, localization will be most likely be apparent in marketing and sales campaign strategies rather than in actual backend changes to the platform. With minimal changes to the platform itself, however, there is the potential for organically manifested aspects of localization to impact the experience of the American traveler abroad - a potential that we will explore further in our analysis of customer survey results.

2. Nairobi, Kenya

A few years after the successful Singapore launch, and in the midst of transitioning to a more glocalized expansion strategy, Uber officially launched in the Kenyan capital of Nairobi in June of 2015.

Relying on a bold proclamation that it be considered a “technology company” instead of a public service provider, Uber skirted local regulations and taxations to enter the market at significantly lower cost than local taxi providers. This strategy launched a sea of protests against the company, spearheaded by the United Kenya Taxi Organization (UKTO). “Our…issue,” claimed Mwangi Mubea, an UKTO spokesman, “is the strategy used by [Uber] management to attract customers, which is driving us [local taxis] out of business.”

It was a strategy, however, that was protected and sanctioned by the Kenyan government. “We are in a liberalized environment,” argued James Macharia, Minister of Transport and Infrastructure, “and those who offer competitive services must be protected. Uber operators and their clients will be protected.”

And so, despite the initial swell of controversy, Uber Kenya has been allowed to grow its place in the market, and its popularity alongside it. A popularity so great, in fact, that experts now believe that Uber has grown to vastly exceed the local Nairobi taxi market.

In order to reach its current level of success, however, the Uber Nairobi Launch Team had to focus its strategy from the very beginning on the localization of a number of key factors that were specific to the needs of the Kenyan market. Unlike in Singapore, where few adjustments were needed to the native technology, such aspects of service as alternative (non-credit card) payment platforms, background check processes, land area mapping, local address systems, and marketing campaigns had to be fully revised and restructured around the local needs in Nairobi.

Payment processing, in particular, was a massive localization hurdle that had to be resolved before Uber could prove its value.

“Uber scaled up on the principle of `magically seamless payment options,'” commented K- (name redacted), a member of the Uber PRO Team who helped to spearhead the Nairobi launch. This functionality, however, “doesn't transfer to emerging markets, where there are cultural security concerns, low credit card penetration, and banks flagging international transactions as fraud.”

From the moment the launch team reached Nairobi, they realized that having the ability to localize cash payment options would be critical to attaining market penetration.

Luckily for Uber, Kenya had a pre-existing, and widely utilized digital payment infrastructure in place. Powered by Safaricom, a local telecom business, M-pesa was Kenya's low-tech answer to America's Venmo, allowing for immediate bank transfers equivalent to cash.

The catch, however, was in the fact that the Uber platform did not yet support cash payments. And while Uber Launch Teams had gained increasing levels of autonomy over localization initiatives in new markets, that autonomy did not yet extend to large development projects to the backend technology.

For months, the Nairobi Launch Team was forced to lobby Uber's US Headquarters to make the mission-critical product change, until they were finally, unwillingly, rewarded with the chance to build, test, and pilot a cash payment option for the Kenyan market. The final product, though not perfect, and while still lacking a direct integration with the M-pesa payment platform, now accounts for a substantial portion of local trips in Nairobi and has been leveraged in other emerging markets, including India.

This need for cash payment, however, and the reliance of the local market on more cash-friendly processes has had a direct effect on the customer experience of foreign travelers new to the specificities of the Kenyan market.

Because, while both forms of payment (card and cash) are accepted on the Uber platform, drivers will sometimes cancel on, or refuse to accept riders using credit card as their preferred payment option. The issue lies with the driver's payout frequency from Uber. Whereas cash payments ensure same-day income and gas money, credit card payments are only transferred to the driver on a weekly basis. For the driver, then, one lost credit card opportunity is well worth the chance of pocketing a same-day income from other riders paying in cash. But for foreigners with a preference for credit card, this particularity of the Kenyan market can negatively affect the customer experience as acceptance rates for their rides fall significantly.

The impact of this trend has been carefully monitored by the Uber Kenya Team as they look to understand local customer experience metrics. As in Singapore, the team tracks and monitors experiences through the same standards of completed-to-request ratios, driver ratings, ride acceptance rates, and ride cancellation rates. But with foreign riders heavily in the minority (less than 10%), revenue growth and product adoption are highly reliant upon Uber's ability to localize and cater to the native Kenyan community, and little can or will be don't to resolve the payment preference concerns.

Uber Kenya has made tremendous strides in adapting to the local market. It remains to be seen, however, whether the company will be forced to localize even further in order to remain competitive. In recent years, Taxify (Uber's main competitor in the Kenyan market) has positioned itself as a more “local” - and thus more attractive - competitor, despite being based in Estonia. By incorporating such features as a full backend integration with M-pesa, and slashing driver service fees, thereby putting more money in the driver's pocket, Taxify has convinced the local population that it prioritizes their needs above the bottom line, and will be a true partner in the economy as compared to other “global” companies - like Uber.

ii. Other Methods of Glocalization

The differences described above between a developed market launch (Singapore) and a developing market launch (Nairobi) in terms of the technical needs of platform localization have been substantiated across several other examples of Uber's glocalization to different markets.

While most of the developed markets have continued to require minimal localization to drive product adoption, the developing countries have proven time and time again to need a more concentrated localization effort from the market-specific launch team. In China, Uber was pressured to launch an integration with Ali-Pay (the main payment platform in the area) and to offer Shanghai riders the use of Uberchopper (an on-demand helicopter offering). In New Delhi, India, Uber launched UberAuto to drive usage of the platform into the hands of customers relying on rickshaw for transportation. And a visual of the different interface changes made to various developing markets - including India, Russia, and Turkey - can be found in Exhibit 2.

These differences between localization needs in developed and developing markets, then, must be considered as we move to understand the impact of Uber's glocalization strategy abroad on American perceptions of Uber's customer experience.

iii. Measuring the Customer Experience

In the following section, we will discuss our application of the Forrester Model of Customer Experience measurement to the study of the Uber customer experience abroad, and will define the components of our research across the three initial steps of the process.

a. CX Measurement - The Forrester Model

1) Choose the Customer Segment -

Though it is not an incredibly large segment of the population, the American consumer abroad holds a unique position in our study of service company glocalization. America is at the center of a rapidly expanding Experience Economy that is defining the standards of customer experience as a key business strategy both at home and abroad. In addition, given Uber's heavy penetration of and longevity within the American market, Americans should have a more thorough understanding of Uber's original value proposition at home and be better able to compare it to the experience of that value abroad.

Significantly, too, Americans are also often among the first adopters of Uber's services in a foreign city. Their familiarity with the functionality at home makes them key to the foundation of initial revenue streams, and also to the creation of an organic marketing source. And, finally, the segment of Americans who travel abroad and use Uber is limited enough to allow trends to emerge at a significantly lower survey participation rate than would otherwise be possible.

2) Select which experiences to measure -

In the development of the Forrester “Seven Steps to Successful Customer Experience Measurement Programs,” Maxie Schmidt-Subramanian offers three levels of the business-consumer interaction at which the experience occurs: 1) The Relationship, 2) The Customer Journey, and 3) Discrete Interactions.

In our research, we have sought to measure the customer experience, in a limited capacity, at all three levels. We seek, first and foremost, to understand the overall relationship between Uber and the American consumer.

We then hope to compare the experiences of the consumer across two different customer journeys: Uber in the United States and Uber abroad. We will then take this a step further by looking at the distinctions between customer journeys through the lens of foreign developed markets and foreign developing markets. *

And, finally, we will look to broaden the understanding of the experiences across customer journeys by offering anecdotal evidence of discrete memories within each of the customer journeys abroad.

3) Pick CX Metrics for Each Experience -

a. Relationship - In order to measure the overall relationship between Uber and the American consumer, we will be using a combination of perception and outcome metrics. Perception will be measured through questions around the customer experience provided by Uber and the rider's satisfaction with Uber in the USA (questions as outlined in the research methodology section of this paper). Outcome metrics will focus on Reicheld's Net Promoter Score (a way of measuring satisfaction through a rider's likelihood to recommend the use of Uber to others).

b. Customer Journey - There are four distinct customer journeys measured by our study: The American use of Uber at home, the American use of Uber abroad, and two subsets of the American use of Uber abroad - the American use of Uber abroad in developing countries and the American use of Uber abroad in developed countries. To measure the customer experience across and in relation to these journeys, we have chosen to focus on a combination of Descriptive, Perception, and Outcome metrics.

Descriptive metrics will focus on emotional sentiment - self-reported by the riders in reference to their experience of Uber abroad.

Perception metrics will include specific attributes of the customer experience (what factors played a role in the overall customer experience as perceived by the rider), customer satisfaction questions (how satisfied were you with the experience Uber provided you along each journey), and customer experience questions (how would you rate - or perceive - the customer experience as provided by Uber along each journey).

Outcome metrics will take the form of Net Promoter Scores, rider willingness to use Uber abroad again, and the rider's change in perception of Uber in the United States after experiencing Uber abroad.

c. Discrete Interactions - The metrics, here, will be entirely descriptive, and will be reported in the form of quotes and stories as captured through a combination of surveys and interviews throughout the study.

Results

A. The American Relationship with Uber

The first step to understanding the data was to understand the overall relationship between Uber and the American consumer. Before turning to the data, then, we took a comprehensive look at media sentiment and the overall reputation of Uber in the American news. The goal was to compare the qualitative data with the results of our survey and establish a reliable baseline moving forward.

In recent months, Uber's reputation in the American market has been fueled by protests, media frenzy, scandals, and lawsuits. After the loss of 20,000 riders during the #deleteuber movement, and a pointed blog post by former Uber employee, Susan Fowler, that described a company rampant with sexual harassment and corporate wrong-doings, co-founder Travis Kalanick stepped down as CEO in June of 2017.

The valuation of Uber fell dramatically as three major investors publicly announced their concerns about the company in early January 2018. Most notably, Fidelity - one of Uber's largest shareholders - announced that its own assessment of the shares purchased in 2014 had dropped from a net worth of $228 million to just over $180 million, a loss of 21%.

And a search of recent Uber news (April 28, 2018) pulls back the headlines, “Uber's U-Turn: How the new CEO is cleaning house after scandals and lawsuits,” “Uber to end Providence airport pick-ups in dispute over fee,” and “Uber slammed by angry restaurant owners in Australia as they lose money.”

This sentiment was reflected heavily in the responses submitted within our survey. Comments of “Don't use Uber!” populated “other” sections across various survey questions, and potential respondents quickly asserted, “I haven't used Uber abroad…I don't even use it here. LYFT all the way!”

Even for those who use Uber, the likelihood of riders to recommend the service to their friends, family, or acquaintances is relatively low. While the technology industry, as a whole, - and of which Uber is a part - has an average Net Promoter Score of +58 (meaning that 58% of consumers would actively recommend the service/product to people around them), Uber's NPS within our respondent pool currently hovers around a +24. This is down from the last reported NPS by NPS Benchmarks of +38 in 2015.

Interestingly, however, 72% of respondents did report overall satisfaction with Uber's services in the United States, and 66% reported an overall positive customer experience with the company at home. And while these numbers offer a positive spin on the American perception of Uber, two considerations must be taken into account.

First and foremost, the respondents of our study were self-selecting. They were generally those who have chosen to continue using Uber despite its recent fall in reputation, and are thus more likely to use it at home and abroad. This observation would lend an aspect of artificial inflation to the response numbers.

Additionally, as per the research conducted by Anne-Will Harzing in 2006, Americans have been shown to have a higher “preference for extreme responses than European Americans, particularly towards the positive end of the response scale.” So while a 72% satisfaction rate may appear, on the surface, to represent a positive perception of the Uber relationship, it must be seen through a critical lens and further research conducted.

The tables below offer a visual breakdown of the responses collected around Americans' relationship with Uber at home in terms of customer satisfaction, customer experience, and Net Promoter Score (NPS). This information is based off of the opinions of eighty-five American survey respondents between the ages of 18-40 as provided in table 1:

Table # 1, Customer Satisfaction with Uber in the USA

Customer Satisfaction	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Not Satisfied	4	7%
Neutral	12	21%
Satisfied	42	72%

Table # 2, Customer Experience Perceptions of Uber in the USA

Customer Experience	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Poor	6	10%
Neutral	14	24%
Good	38	66%

Table # 3, Net Promoter Score, Uber in the USA

Net Promoter Score	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Detractors (1-6)	14	24%
Passives (7 or 8)	16	28%
Promoters (9 or 10)	28	48%
	Final NPS (Promoter-Detractor)	24

Based off of these numbers, we can reach a final score for average Total Customer Experience of riders in the USA:

(Scorecsatusa 65 + Scorecxusa 56 + Scorenpsusa 24)/3 = 48.33

This, then, will be considered the base Total Customer Experience Score for American perceptions of Uber's customer experience in the home market. All other customer journeys will be discussed in direct relation to this score.

B. The American Experience with Uber Abroad

After thus establishing the baseline relationship between Americans and Uber in the US market, we sought to compare these findings with the “glocalized” customer journey: that of the American traveler using Uber abroad.

To better understand the customer experience within this journey, we first compared the same three metrics as established in the home relationship: Customer Satisfaction, Customer Experience, and Net Promoter Score.

Across all three categories, the results were marginally - though consistently, higher. Customer Satisfaction rose from 65 at home to 78 abroad. Customer Experience was 69 as compared to 56. And NPS rose from +24 to a +35 - significantly closer to the industry average and Uber's 2015 benchmark before the scandals erupted in the American news.

The tables below offer a visual breakdown of the responses collected around Americans' relationship with Uber abroad in terms of customer satisfaction, customer experience, and Net Promoter Score (NPS):

Table # 4, Customer Satisfaction with Uber Abroad

Customer Satisfaction	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Not Satisfied	2	2%
Neutral	15	18%
Satisfied	68	80%

Table # 5, Customer Experience Perceptions of Uber Abroad

Customer Experience	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Poor	4	5%
Neutral	18	21%
Good	63	74%

Table # 6, Net Promoter Score, Uber Abroad

Net Promoter Score	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Detractors (1-6)	17	20%
Passives (7 or 8)	21	25%
Promoters (9 or 10)	47	55%
	Final NPS (Promoter-Detractor)	35

Total Customer Experience for a generalized perception of Uber's customer experience abroad =

(Scorecsatabroad 78 + Scorecxabroad 69 + Scorenpsabroad 35)/3 = 60.66

This Total Customer Experience Score is 20% higher than the score provided by the same pool of respondents for Uber in the home market.

Also of note in the analysis of the customer journey abroad was the experience sentiment reported by American riders. When asked to describe their emotions in relation to the memories of using Uber while travelling, 77% of respondents expressed positive sentiment (using words such as “happy,” “appreciative” and “satisified”), 12% remained neutral (using words such as “fine,” “neutral,” and “indifferent”), and only 11% reported any negative memories of the experience (with words such as “frustrated,” “disappointed” and “stressed”).

These findings seem to correspond directly with the research compiled around American travel preferences. Despite the often rocky relationship with Uber in the USA, when Americans travel abroad, they are looking for ways to experience the local culture while still retaining westernized amenities. In this context, Uber's services generate feelings of appreciation and happiness as travelers seek the most convenient, safest and most familiar way to get from point a to point b in a foreign country. These feelings are then only compiled by the fact that they are able to use Uber abroad without exchanging currency or dealing with local payment preferences as Uber links directly to their home credit card.

Outside of these generalization, and in order to zero in further still on what, specifically, American travelers were expecting from Uber's services abroad, we turn to the survey responses around the question “What factors do you believe affect your experience while using Uber abroad?” The factors provided in the survey list (Table of Factors presented in Exhibit 5) were a compilation of value propositions put forward by Uber's marketing team, customer reviews of Uber online, and the research completed around American tourism preferences. We also allowed respondents to write in their own factors in the event that something was not captured in the list provided, but only one person of the total eighty-five chose to exercise this ability.

In response to what factors affected their experience of Uber abroad, 87% of respondents offered Convenience of Service as a key factor in their choice, followed by 81% citing availability, and 66% pointing to both the importance of pricing and ease of use.

Again, these answers fall closely in line with the expectations set forth by our initial research, as American tourists are “list-tickers,” looking for the fastest, safest and most convenient way to see the sites of a given destination. Pricing was not a factor we had considered as being particularly critical in our initial scoping of the research, particularly as Uber has a reputation for charging higher rates than local transport options. Upon further analysis, however, it appears that pricing is closely related to the same “comfort and convenience” value propositions of convenience of service, availability, and ease of use. When traveling abroad, Uber riders did not have to worry about negotiating rates with local taxi drivers or making sure they were not being taken in circuitous routes around unfamiliar cities for additional fare. There was a safety to knowing how much would be charged and security in understanding what was expected in terms of tip and fare.

Overall, Uber's American-based value propositions seemed to carry through the platform across rider experiences in various foreign markets. Riders seemed happy with and comforted by the familiarity of the platform and service, and even those riders who had concerns about Uber's customer experience at home seemed to find value and an enhanced customer experience in Uber's services abroad.

C. An Analysis of Customer Journeys

The American experience abroad, however, cannot be measured without taking into account the multitude of cities, markets, and cultures across which Uber has expanded over the years. In our survey alone, we received feedback around 53 unique foreign markets. And as emphasized in the case studies of Uber Nairobi and Uber Singapore, the positioning of the technology in the local market, and the receptiveness of the local culture to Uber's services can drastically affect the levels of glocalization required in developing versus developed countries.

Working from the assumption that Uber in developing countries would be more glocalized than Uber in developed countries, we chose to segment our data one step further. We hoped to understand whether the American experience of Uber abroad would be affected by where that experience occurred: a developed country, or a developing country.* To that end, we looked at a combination of Customer Satisfaction, Customer Experience Perception, Emotional Sentiment, Net Promoter Score, and descriptive anecdotes to better understand the differences or variations across riders who had used Uber only in developed countries, riders who had used Uber only in developing countries, and riders who had used Uber in both developed and developing countries. We then compared these results across the three customer journeys, and then against both the averages for the Uber customer experience abroad and the Uber customer experience at home.

The results we found offered an even deeper level of insight into the effects of Uber's glocalization strategy on perceptions of the American customer experience abroad.

Developed Countries

Looking, first, to the developed countries, we found a customer satisfaction score of 70, a number significantly below what had been reported for the average Uber customer satisfaction level abroad. Customer experience was relatively consistent (68 in developed countries versus 69 average), but Net Promoter Score dropped from an average of +35 to +30. Interestingly, however, the emotional sentiment was reported as significantly higher than average at 71 versus 62. 75% of riders believed they would use Uber abroad again if given the opportunity.

hese numbers are consistent with the insight gleaned from the Singapore case study around Americans' use of Uber in westernized markets. Where as satisfaction is consistent with the average satisfaction rate of all riders abroad, it stands to reason that the customer experience might not be as high if the experience feels markedly similar to the experience provided in the USA. Additionally, organic social localization factors (such as the rating discrepancy between the USA and Singapore) can make an experience that should be simple and familiar and add a layer of unexpected uncertainty to the platform. This same logic would also account for the drop in NPS from the average to those riders who had only used Uber in developed countries.

Despite these elemental differences, however, the Total Customer Experience Score for developed countries was not significantly far off of the average:

(Scorecsatdeveloped 78 + Scorecxdeveloped 69 + Scorenpsdeveloped 35 + Scoresentimentdeveloped 71)/4 = 59.75

The tables below offer a visual breakdown of the responses collected around Americans' experience of Uber in developed markets:

Table # 7, Customer Satisfaction with Uber in Developed Countries

Customer Satisfaction	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Not Satisfied	1	3%
Neutral	10	25%
Satisfied	29	73%

Table # 8, Customer Experience Perceptions of Uber in Developed Countries

Customer Experience	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Poor	2	5%
Neutral	9	23%
Good	29	73%

Table # 9, Customer Sentiment of Uber in Developed Countries

Customer Sentiment	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Negative	3	9%
Neutral	4	11%
Positive	28	80%

Table # 10, Net Promoter Score, Uber in Developed Countries

Net Promoter Score	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Detractors (1-6)	9	23%
Passives (7 or 8)	10	25%
Promoters (9 or 10)	21	53%
	Final NPS (Promoter-Detractor)	30

Developing Countries

We then sought to define these same metrics across Americans who had used Uber in developing countries. Though a smaller pool of respondents (19 versus the 40 for developed), the results were suggestive of a more positive customer experience in developing countries than in developed countries, with the significant exception of Net Promoter Score.

While the customer satisfaction score hovered at an 89 for riders in developing countries, and customer experience perceptions were reported back at 79, the net promoter score of these riders was only a +16 - meaning that while 42% of Americans travelling in developing countries would actively recommend the use of Uber's services, 26% would actively try to dissuade their friends, colleagues, or acquaintances. Perhaps even more intriguing is the fact that positive emotional sentiment for these same respondents was reported at 82.

Overall, the Total Customer Experience Score was still significantly higher for riders who had only used Uber in developing countries than for those who had only used Uber in developed countries:

(Scorecsatdeveloped 89 + Scorecxdeveloped 79 + Scorenpsdeveloped 16 + Scoresentimentdeveloped 82)/4 = 66.5

These numbers would suggest that the high levels of localization needed in developing countries (and as explored in the Nairobi case study) are impactful enough to turn a significant number of riders into detractors when it comes to recommending use of the service to a friend. This suggests an overall dissatisfaction with the service, due, perhaps to the comparison with local taxi offerings (11 of the 19 riders had used local taxi services and found it to be comparable) or an incomplete localization attempt that makes the service significantly more difficult to use in the foreign market. In the moment of truth, however, when travelling through developing countries, riders still perceived Uber as being able to provide a strong customer experience overall by offering a familiar, convenient, and easy-to-use platform in a less familiar setting.

The tables below offer a visual breakdown of the responses collected around Americans' experience of Uber in developing markets:

Table # 11, Customer Satisfaction with Uber in Developing Countries

Customer Satisfaction	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Not Satisfied	0	0%
Neutral	2	11%
Satisfied	17	89%

Table # 12, Customer Experience Perceptions of Uber in Developing Countries

Customer Experience	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Poor	0	0%
Neutral	4	21%
Good	15	79%

Table # 13, Customer Sentiment of Uber in Developing Countries

Customer Sentiment	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Negative	1	6%
Neutral	1	6%
Positive	14	88%

Table # 14, Net Promoter Score, Uber in Developing Countries

Net Promoter Score	Number of Respondents	% of Respondents
Detractors (1-6)	5	26%
Passives (7 or 8)	6	32%
Promoters (9 or 10)	8	42%
	Final NPS (Promoter-Detractor)	16

Americans traveling abroad in developing countries, it appears, enjoyed the experience, were satisfied with the service, but would not recommend it to anyone else.

Developed & Developing Countries

The last segment, then, left to explore was the group of Americans who had traveled to and used Uber in both developed and developing countries. Given that these riders had experienced both sides of the Uber abroad experience, we believed that the scores from these riders would fall within the range set between the developed and developing markets.

In holding with this, and in comparison to the responses from riders who had used Uber in only developing or only developed markets, the customer satisfaction score for this segment (81) fell at an almost exact midpoint between the other two segments (89 and 70 respectively). The customer experience perception score of 65, however, was well below that of developing countries and slightly below that of developed countries. Emotional sentiment also fell significantly below the other two segments at a 50 (compared to 71 and 82). But NPS was significantly higher at +57. In fact, 69% of these riders would actively promote Uber's services abroad, and only 12% would actively try to dissuade someone from using them.