[I still feel that a survey and the hope that a customer contacts the organisation if more than the usual is wrong as the only means of quality control would be a very poor means of quality control. I am not saying that is the only means of quality control, I am just saying in my mind, that is a poor one.
I fully agree, that customer surveys have limitations. And, as a management practice, I routinely tell employees that 'hope is not a strategy'. But, apparently, the consumer survey approach does work for many (many, many) organizations, across multiple industries, and the available data in the QA/QC literature, at least that I am aware of, suggests that the results of customer surveys are not infrequently used to improve organizational delivery of a product, and facilitate changes in employee behavior and performance, organizational structure, and corporate business practices, etc. Imperfect as it may be, the system appears to have utility, and genuine appeal to businesses.
But, putting that discussion aside, could you recommend a specific QA/QC approach, that you believe scuba training agencies should routinely employ, that would be objective, informative, efficient, appealing to consumers, and cost-effective? I would be very interested in what options might be pursued.
[As a customer, I tend to vote with my feet and try to find a better provider / store / / restaurant / shop / instructor, ... rather then trying to fix the one with the issue... In aggregate it's a means of quality control as well and maybe less aggravating to all involved.
Unfortunately, it also really does little if anything for quality control. Taking the discussion outside the scuba industry: I have seen this over too many years in medicine, where some patients will go from one practitioner, to another, to another, and to yet another, because they don't like 'something' or are not getting 'something', but they NEVER tell the practitioners what they don't like, or want but are not getting. So, the practitioner never knows a) what s/he could have done differently to meet the needs of that patient who is lost to follow-up, and just disappears, and more important , b) what s/he could do differently to meet the needs of future patients. That kind of walking with your feet is not an effective approach to improving quality, or changing behavior, it is a prescription for chaos and waste, as multiple practitioners attempt to meet a patient's un-articulated needs, without information from the patient or previous providers, and needlessly 're-invent the wheel', and waste time and resources in the process. Those same patients then complain about the health care system failing them, but they have never, ever articulated what they actually need / want to any provider or facility. Fortunately, and unfortunately, that is changing. Patients have substantially less opportunity to choose their providers now, IF they are to take advantage of their insurance coverage. And, part of the reason is the increasing cost of health care delivery resulting in no small part from the chaos and cost-inefficiency of patients 'voting with their feet', instead of 'communicating with their mouth'.
You are free to do what you want . I hope others will help make scuba training better for all of us - students and instructors alike - by helping agencies identify problems in delivery which can be addressed.
