Is it “cheating” to label each number on the NPS scale?

Yes, it would be cheating yourself out of accurate and unbiased data. The outside world is unlikely to care, unless you’re attempting to use inflated NPS data to convince stakeholders that customer sentiment is higher than it actually is.

Where labeling the scoring would have the greatest impact in manipulating the data is in the mid-range of scoring, 5–6.

Without being aware of NPS scoring categories, most customers would consider a 5 or a 6 a “neutral” (or passive) scoring range.

By exposing the labels, these customers, who perceive themselves to be neutral, would likely switch to a 7 or an 8 when they see that those numbers fall into the passive range.

As you’re likely aware, by moving into the passive range, their scores would then be excluded from the NPS equation (% of Promoters — % of Detractors), meaning the percentage of detractors would decrease.

Side note: If you’re curious to know why passives are not part of the NPS equation, we discuss the reason here.

The fact of the matter is that these customers were originally going to give you a 5 or 6 for a reason, labeling the scores has a direct impact on influencing them otherwise.

At the end of the day, no matter how (or why) you attempt to cheat, manipulate or game the scoring, direct verbatim feedback from your customers never lies.

When you attempt to match their verbatim feedback to a manipulated score, you lose all of the predictive benefits that a properly run NPS process has to offer.

So, like I said at the start, the only one that you’re truly cheating is yourself.