III. Results

This section outlines TFIX’s one-month pilot implementation, measuring its effectiveness in meeting the project’s core objectives. The improvement of client satisfaction by 25% was evaluated through post-service survey ratings. The reduction of unreliable repair timelines by at least 25% was assessed through system-generated job duration data. Lastly, the enhancement of access to detailed repair procedures by 25% was measured based on user engagement with the platform’s progress tracker. The findings demonstrate TFIX’s contribution to better service transparency, efficient scheduling, and overall customer experience in the appliance repair industry.

General Objective: Enhance client satisfaction with the repair process by 25% within one month.

Variable	Min	Median	Mean	Max	Remarks
How would you rate the clarity of the information provided about the repair process?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied
How satisfied are you with the responses to your inquiries regarding the repair?	3	4	3.6	4	Satisfied
How effective they are in providing updates and addressing your concerns?	3	4	3.6	4	Satisfied
How would you rate the level of detail provided about the repair procedures?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied
How transparent is the information regarding the parts used and the associated costs?	3	4	3.6	4	Satisfied
How clear is the explanation of the cause of the issue with your appliance?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied
How would you rate the timeliness of updates about the repair status?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied
How satisfied are you with the progress tracking provided?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied
How effectively they inform you about changes in the repair schedule or status?	3	4	3.8	4	Satisfied

Table 1: Satisfaction Survey Data

Table 1 presents the results of the satisfaction survey conducted after each completed repair service. The responses cover several aspects of the client experience, including clarity of information, responsiveness to inquiries, update effectiveness, repair detail transparency, and timeliness of communication. Across all items, the median rating was 4, indicating that most customers were satisfied with the service provided. The average scores ranged from 3.6 to 3.8, showing consistently high satisfaction levels. These results directly support the general objective of enhancing client satisfaction by 25%, as users reported positively on the quality of communication, detailed repair information, and service responsiveness.

Specific Objective 1: Reduce unreliable timelines by at least 25% through the implementation of a timeline system for expected start and completion dates of repairs.

Customer	Start Date	Finish Date	Duration (Days)	Delays (Days)
1	12/18/2024	12/19/2024	1 Day	0 Day
2	12/21/2024	12/22/2024	1 Day	0 Day
3	12/28/2024	12/29/2024	1 Day	0 Day
4	01/10/2025	01/11/2025	1 Day	0 Day
5	01/17/2025	1/18/2025	1 Day	0 Day

Table 2: Timeline Reduction Data

Table 2 displays the timeline records of five repair jobs, including the scheduled start and finish dates, actual duration, and any delays. All repairs were completed within the expected one-day time-frame, with zero recorded delays for each job. This consistency in meeting the planned schedule reflects the effectiveness of the timeline system implemented in the platform. The absence of delays supports the objective, confirming that the platform successfully reduced unreliable timelines by providing clear start and completion dates, allowing to assign jobs efficiently and manage technician availability.

Specific Objective 2: Increase the accessibility of detailed repair procedures by 25% within one month.

Customer	Start Date	Finish Date	Duration (Days)	Viewed
1	12/18/2024	12/19/2024	1 Day	5 times
2	12/21/2024	12/22/2024	1 Day	6 times
3	12/28/2024	12/29/2024	1 Day	5 times
4	01/10/2025	01/11/2025	1 Day	5 times
5	01/17/2025	1/18/2025	1 Day	7 times

Table 3: Timeline System Performance

Table 3 presents data on customer interaction with the repair progress tracker, showing the number of times each customer viewed the detailed repair procedure during the service duration. Each job was completed within one day, and the “Viewed” count ranged from 5 to 7 times per customer. This repeated access indicates strong customer engagement with the progress interface. The high number of views demonstrates that clients actively used the system to check updates and understand the repair process, supporting the objective of increasing accessibility to detailed repair procedures.