COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT 1. Quality of the relationship with the client when making the first commercial contact.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

2. Relevance and quality of the commercial offers.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

3. Accuracy, nature and basis of replies relative to the client's expectations.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

4. Price compared to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

5. Response time.
4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

6. Interlocutors'availability.
4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

7.1 Positioning relative to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

7.2 Knowledge of other Segula Group deals in the aeronautical area.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

LOGISTICS DEPARTMENT 8. Compliance with the contractual period.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

9. Compliance with customer requirements specified in the order.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

10. Responsiveness / adaptation following an urgent customer need

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

11. Interlocutors'availability.
4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

12. Positioning relative to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

MANUFACTURING 13. Technical proposal and client support to solutions

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

14. Customer and its technical requirements knowledge

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

15. Compliance with manufacturing deadlines

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

16. Frequency of visits of the entity' representatives

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

17. Positioning relative to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

QUALITY - SYSTEM 16. The obtained certifications correspond to customer expectations

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

17. Control of the Quality system.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

18. Quality System level compared to the competition

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

19. Updating of the quality assurance plan

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

20. Positioning relative to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

QUALITY - PRODUCT 21 Product qulaity

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

22. Compliance with contractual requirements (ISP, certificates of compliance, specific

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

23. Existence and effectiveness of the control of the service

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

24. Responsiveness and actions implemented following the events of non-quality

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

25. Response time to events of non-quality

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

26. Client process qualification (obtained and updated)

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

27. Positioning relative to the competition.

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

BILLING 28. Accuracy and clarity of the invoices

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

29. Response time in the accounting reasons

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

30. Quality of relationships with the customer during the billing

4 : Very good 3 : Good 2 : Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

FINAL GRADE (TOTAL /20) COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS

CLIENT : NAME : FUNCTION :

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Site SEGULA : Oras Mioveni cartier Clucereasa jud. Arges ROMANIA Correspondant : GRADES

COMMERCIAL DEPARTMENT with the client when making the first commercial contact.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

e commercial offers.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

of replies relative to the client's expectations.

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

petition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

Fair

1 : Poor

0 : Very bad

Fair

1 : Poor

0 : Very bad

competition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

a Group deals in the aeronautical area.

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

LOGISTICS DEPARTMENT ctual period.

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

requirements specified in the order.

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

on following an urgent customer need

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

Fair

1 : Poor

0 : Very bad

competition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

MANUFACTURING ent support to solutions

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

l requirements knowledge
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

turing deadlines
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

entity' representatives
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

competition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

QUALITY - SYSTEM s correspond to customer expectations

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

em.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

pared to the competition

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

surance plan
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

competition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

QUALITY - PRODUCT
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

ual requirements (ISP, certificates of compliance, specific

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

ss of the control of the service

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

ns implemented following the events of non-quality

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

of non-quality
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

n (obtained and updated)

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

competition.
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

BILLING
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

e invoices

unting reasons
Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

th the customer during the billing

Fair 1 : Poor 0 : Very bad

FINAL GRADE (TOTAL /20)

#DIV/0!

COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS

DATE : VISA :

FOR 01-PS02-01
Indice de rvision : 04

Page 1 sur 1

CLIENT'S OBSERVATIONS