--- name: nps-response-handler description: Handles an incoming NPS response by branching on the score into promoter, passive, or detractor, and drafting the right reply plus the next step: advocacy ask, learning question, or save play. Use when an NPS response arrives or the user asks to "handle this NPS", "respond to this survey score", "what do I do with this detractor", "reply to this promoter". license: MIT compatibility: Requires the NPS score/comment; connected CRM optional for history. Drafts and proposes next steps — no auto-writes. metadata: author: Builder.org version: 2.0.0 persona: Operator Owen rave: R3 A4 V3 E4 category: crm --- # NPS Response Handler ## What it does Closes the loop on an NPS response while it is still warm: classifies the score, reads the comment for what actually drove it, drafts the right reply in the right tone, and names the concrete next step with an owner. Feedback becomes advocacy or a save instead of a number in a dashboard. Drafts and proposals only; a human sends and assigns. ## When to use - "Handle this NPS response", "respond to this survey score", "what do I do with this detractor". - "Reply to this promoter", or triggered when a survey response lands. - Not for aggregate survey analysis across a quarter; this skill works one response at a time, while responding still matters. ## Inputs The score (0-10) and the comment, plus who sent it. Optional: account context (tenure, renewal date, recent tickets), which sharpens both the reply and the urgency call. ## The bar - The reply engages the comment's specifics, not the score. A detractor who wrote three sentences about onboarding gets a reply about onboarding, not a generic apology. - Every output ends in one named next step with an owner and, for detractors near renewal, a deadline. - Detractor replies promise only what is real: a specific fix, a named human, a date. An empty "we hear you and are looking into it" is worse than silence. - Promoter asks are matched to the promoter's story: the one who praised support gets the review ask; the one with impressive numbers gets the case-study ask. One ask, not a menu. ## Workflow 1. **Classify.** Promoter (9-10), passive (7-8), detractor (0-6). Then read the comment for the driver, which matters more than the number: a 9 with a complaint in the comment is a save signal wearing a good score. 2. **Pull context** where a CRM is connected: tenure, plan or deal size, renewal date, recent tickets. Renewal proximity is the urgency multiplier; a detractor 6 weeks from renewal is this week's priority, and the output says so at the top. 3. **Branch the play.** - Promoter: thank them in their own vocabulary, then one advocacy ask fitted to their story (review, referral, case study), made easy to say yes to. - Passive: thank them and ask the one specific question their comment points at: what would have made this a 9. No coupon-flavored appeasement. - Detractor: acknowledge the specific issue, say what happens next with a name and a date, and stop. No defensiveness, no explanation of why it happened, no discount reflex. 4. **Draft the reply.** Under 100 words, plain, from a human. It should read like the owner of the relationship typed it, because after one edit, they will have. 5. **Name the next step** with an owner: the review link to send, the CSM to loop in, the ticket to open, the save-play flag with the renewal date attached. Present everything for confirmation; nothing is sent, logged, or assigned automatically. ## Output ``` ## NPS response · [Name] · [score] · [promoter/passive/detractor] **Comment:** "[verbatim]" **Driver:** [what actually caused the score, from the comment] **Context:** [tenure · renewal date · recent tickets] (or "no account context available") **Urgency:** [normal, or elevated + why] **Draft reply:** [under 100 words] **Next step:** [one action · owner · date if urgent] ``` ## Worked example ``` Fictional example. Never reuse these names or numbers in real output. ## NPS response · Marcus Webb, Meridian Freight · 3 · detractor **Comment:** "The product is fine but we've asked twice about the dispatch export breaking and nobody has answered. Starting to wonder if anyone reads these." **Driver:** unanswered support requests, not the product itself. **Context:** customer 14 months · renewal June 1 · two open tickets (Feb 12, Feb 24), both on dispatch export. **Urgency:** elevated: repeated ignored contact plus a renewal inside four months. **Draft reply:** Marcus, you asked about the dispatch export twice and got silence, and that's on us, not a survey problem. I've pulled both tickets and put them with our integrations lead, Sara; you'll have a real answer from her by Thursday. I'll follow up personally on Friday either way. Thank you for saying it plainly instead of quietly leaving. **Next step:** escalate tickets 4811 and 4922 to Sara today, owner: you; personal follow-up Friday, March 6. Flag the account for a save check-in before renewal planning. ``` ## Never - Never send a templated reply that ignores the comment's specifics. - Never promise a fix, a timeline, or a person you cannot name. Real commitments only. - Never offer a discount as the reflex to a detractor; unfixed problems plus discounts equals cheaper churn. - Never stack advocacy asks on a promoter. One ask, matched to their story. - Never send, assign, or log anything without confirmation. ## Recovery - Score with no comment: reply thanking them and asking the single most useful question for that band (promoter: what should we never change; detractor: what one thing drove the score), and say the classification is score-only. - No account context available: draft from the comment alone and flag that renewal proximity is unknown, so urgency may be understated. - Comment mixes praise and a complaint: the complaint sets the play, the praise sets the tone; say which drove the classification. - Hostile or abusive comment: classify it, recommend a human-only response, and draft nothing. Some replies should not be automated even once.