December 2000
Volume 3 • Number 1

Contents

Feedback

The best source of feedback from our readers is the online survey posted with each issue of the journal. The response rate is approaching 2 percent of our subscribers, but we do not know how truly representative that sample is.... It just might be the most satisfied 2 percent or the least satisfied 2 percent of our readers.

Here are some highlights of the latest responses:

Respondents most agreed with the statements, “I prefer articles that I can apply immediately to my job,” and “I keep all of my issues of SQP for future reference.”

Respondents mentioned “theme issues” as an additional feature they would find the most added value in.

Sixty percent of respondents said they look at additional information posted online.

Most of the respondents indicated they read all four issues of SQP annually.

Approximately two-thirds of respondents indicated they pass along the journal to at least one to three other individuals.

The most frequent reason mentioned by respondents as an influence to subscribing to SQP is that it is an ASQ publication.

Many comments were quite complimentary:

“I was very impressed with the first one and have not lost the feeling.”

“SQP helps keep me current and helps educate me on new areas.”

“I enjoy the journal and read it cover to cover. This type of information sharing is key to improving the practice of an industry that is just maturing.”

“It may take me several months (or even years) to completely read through each issue of SQP. I initially scan through when the journal arrives, and may read one or more articles that have immediate interest for me. More often than not, I will return to an issue as new needs arise. In other words, I use SQP as a desktop reference and tend to concentrate on the practical rather than the theoretical articles.”

Sometimes we have been surprised by the nature of your compliments:

“I like the professional cover. I hate to think how much wasted time, money, and effort get put into other covers that are just plain stupid at times.”

We pride ourselves on the practicality of the material published, but clearly we need to do better for some of our readers:

“I would really appreciate more ‘how to’ articles, for example, case studies and explanation of theoretical issues from the practicing professional’s point of view.”

“I am a developer, and seldom see features that directly apply to my job. I would like to see more general topics that would apply to my job on a day-to-day basis.”

“Material is either too technical or focused on aspects that don’t relate to everyday practitioner activities.”

There have been plenty of suggestions, both general (“I do not want to see articles focused on a specific industry. Software, and software development, is cross-industry.”) and specific...quite a list of topics you want to see treated in future issues.

Please add your voice by responding to our online survey. The feedback area is accessible directly from the table of contents page of the current issue. It offers a chance to rate the articles and departments of that issue as well as to comment on the journal in general. We look forward to hearing from you.