1 / 113

Electralink Customer Survey Presentation 3 rd December 2007

R. Electralink Customer Survey Presentation 3 rd December 2007. Presentation Coverage. Introduction Overview Quantitative Survey Results Focus On DTS Focus On SPAA Focus On DCUSA Qualitative Research Summary & Conclusions Recommendations For 2008 Research. R. Introduction.

upton
Download Presentation

Electralink Customer Survey Presentation 3 rd December 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. R Electralink Customer Survey Presentation 3rd December 2007

  2. Presentation Coverage • Introduction • Overview • Quantitative Survey Results • Focus On DTS • Focus On SPAA • Focus On DCUSA • Qualitative Research • Summary & Conclusions • Recommendations For 2008 Research

  3. R Introduction

  4. Background • Electralink provides a range of services to companies operating in the utilities market, including the Data Transfer Service, and management of SPAA Ltd and DCUSA Ltd. • This research is concerned with surveying the opinions of users of each of these services. For 2007 the survey has been managed using Researchcraft, the first time an independent research company has undertaken the research. • Previous internally managed quantitative surveys provide comparative data from previous years. • DTS Survey - Carried out online since 1997 • SPAA Survey - Carried out via telephone since 2006 • DCUSA Survey - Introduced for the first time this year (2007) • In addition to the quantitative research a qualitative survey has been undertaken for the first time in 2007.

  5. Method Quantitative Survey A quantitative survey using a c.15 minute CATI telephone interview. What? Amongst a total of 72 named contacts at companies using Electralink services for: DTS - 41 interviews (17 Contract Managers, 24 Gateway Operations Managers) SPAA - 15 interviews DCUSA - 16 interviews Who? All interviews conducted between Monday 29th October and Friday 23rd November 2007. When?

  6. Method Qualitative Survey C.45 minute qualitative depth interview conducted at the respondent’s place of work. What? Who? A total of 12 contacts pre-recruited from the main sample list used for the quantitative study. Selected at random within 4 quotas: DTS CM’s 3 interviews DTS GOM’s 3 interviews SPAA 3 interviews DCUSA 3 interviews All were not interviewed on the quantitative survey unless they volunteered to do so (1 contact). When? All interviews conducted between Thursday 1st and Friday 16th November 2007.

  7. Achieved Sample Overall, a 67% response rate was achieved amongst unique contacts with an obtainable telephone number.

  8. R Overview

  9. Overview • Across all three samples Electralink performs consistently well, with the overwhelming majority of customers giving positive feedback. • Electralink is also rated more positively than other industry organisations. • There is a sense that, overall, Electralink has maintained or improved its service and value for money over the past year. Whilst the research has identified some areas for potential action, these are specific improvements that are suggested by only a minority of customers in each case. • Since 2006 the rating of Electralink and its provision of the DTS has maintained the high standards already set. • By contrast, there has been a general downward shift in ratings for SPAA. However, the data suggests that this is more likely to be a consequence of the change to independent interviewers than to a genuine shift in opinions, with no indication of service deterioration from our more direct questioning.

  10. R Quantitative Survey Results

  11. Important Notes On Yearly Comparisons • Comparisons with previous years should be interpreted with caution throughout: • Pre 2007 results for DTS used an online survey. Changes in scores may be partly attributed to switching to a telephone interview. • For both SPAA and DTS the questionnaire underwent a major review, resulting in: • changes to the ordering of some key ratings • changes to the wording of some key ratings • both of which may potentially have influenced the scores achieved.

  12. Summary Versus Previous Years Comparisons are made only across those ratings present in all years shown: Average No Of Ratings Year Base (Mean Score) Compared DTS Survey 2005 21 3.99 22 2006 38 4.05 22 2007 41 4.01 22 SPAA Survey 2006 15 4.54 15 2007 15 4.22 15 DCUSA Survey 2007 16 4.21 27 The above is like for like comparison on statements scored as follows: Rating Score Very Good 5 Good 4 Adequate 3 Poor 2 Very Poor 1 Those with no experience or not using services / features rated are excluded from the mean scores.

  13. How Many Have Contact With Electralink? Total DTS DTS DTS CM’s GOM’s SPAA DCUSA 1 10 6 13 20 13 2 20 24 17 13 6 3 32 29 33 13 6 4 / 5 15 18 13 7 31 6+ 24 24 25 47 44 Average No. 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.9 5.3 (41) (17) (24) (15) (16) Base: Total Sample

  14. Length Of Involvement With Electralink Total DTS DTS DTS CM’s GOM’s SPAA DCUSA Company’s Involvement 4.3 4.5 4.1 4.0 4.3 Personally Involved 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.1 2.9 (41) (17) (24) (15) (16) Average Number of Years Base: Total Sample

  15. Satisfaction With Electralink ServiceSummary DTS SPAA DCUSA Overall Rating 8.05 8.40 8.38 Overall Professionalism 7.95 8.87 8.81 Being Responsive 7.49 8.47 8.25 Being Easy To Deal With 7.63 8.53 8.50 Being Highly Efficient 7.39 8.33 8.25 Communicating Clearly 7.63 8.20 8.31 Understanding Your 6.95 7.67 7.56 Business Needs Providing Valuable 7.17 8.00 7.75 Expertise Resource Base: Total Sample (41) (15) (16) Mean Score out of 10

  16. Rating Versus Other OrganisationsSummary Overall Satisfaction Mean Score out of 10 Average (All Samples) DTS SPAA DCUSA Electralink 8.28 8.05 8.40 8.38 GEMSERV / MRASCO 7.23 7.00 7.20 7.50 Elexon 6.72 6.60 6.25 7.30 National Grid 6.53 5.67 7.42 6.50 OFGAS 6.33 7.00 6.00 6.00 OFGEM 6.11 6.00 6.08 6.25 Xoserv 5.81 5.25 6.67 5.50 Base: All Who Use Each Company (Various)

  17. R Focus On The DTS

  18. Summary - DTS Sample • Overall, perceptions of Electralink’s service are positive, especially amongst GOM’s and have maintained the strong levels seen in previous years. • Two thirds give Electralink a score of 8 or more out of 10 for overall satisfaction. This compares favourably with other industry organisations measured. • Electralink is rated most highly for its helpdesk and website features, whilst the website in general and EDS helpdesk are the areas rated least well. • The main gains this year relate to the website, with ratings of the features, reporting tools, and website in general all improving since 2006.

  19. Summary - DTS Sample (2) • Electralink’s level of service is also rated well, seen as strongest for professionalism, being easy to deal with and communicating clearly. It is less successful at understanding the business needs of customers. • CM’s appear to be the heavier users of Electralink’s services and have formed a more polarised view of the DTS service itself. Overall, GOM’s are more positive about Electralink’s service and are more likely to have perceived improvements. • Electralink is rated rather less well for value for money. However, this is an area that CM’s rated more highly than GOM’s also with a greater sense that VFM has improved in the last 12 months. • Only 1 in 2 cite areas for improvement, with most suggestions scattered and very specific. Cost reduction is the most widely mentioned, but only by 7%.

  20. Average Rating Of Main Service AreasDTS Sample No. of Mean Change Service Attributes Score Attributes Since Area Rated 2007 Compared* 2006* All Ratings 29 4.01 23 -0.02 Electralink Helpdesk 3 4.20 1 -0.18 Website Features Used 4 4.15 3 +0.27 The DTS Itself 6 4.05 6 -0.08 Electralink Reporting Tools 4 4.04 4 +0.08 Electralink Services 5 3.94 5 -0.17 EDS Helpdesk 3 3.87 3 -0.14 Electralink Website Overall 4 3.86 1 +0.10 Base: All rating each attribute * Change compared only on ratings in both 2006 and 2007

  21. How Well Understand DTS Facilities Provided Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Very Well 41 33 Quite Well 59 54 Not Very Well 0 8 Not At All Well 0 4 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24)

  22. Rating Of DTS Itself Mean Score 2006 2005 4.12 4.47 4.29 4.21 3.94 3.90 4.08 4.06 4.14 3.95 4.09 4.05 4.29 4.39 4.24 3.67 3.81 3.38 Average For DTS 4.05 4.13 4.00 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (38) (21) Quality Of Service From Gateway Connection Quality Of Info In The DT Handbook Being Able To Meet Needs Of Current Business Being Able To Cope With Needs Of Future Business DTS Overall Value For Money Provided By The DTS

  23. How Facilities Provided Compare With Others Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Much Better 29 4 Slightly Better 6 21 About The Same 59 67 Slightly / Much Worse 0 0 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24) DTS Is:

  24. How DTS Compares With Others For Value For Money Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Much Better VFM 18 0 Slightly Better VFM 6 4 About The Same 53 68 Slightly Worse VFM 12 0 Much Worse VFM 0 0 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24) DTS Is:

  25. How Well Electralink Provides Feedback On Issues Raised At The DTS User Group Involvement in DTS User Group Yes = 10% (All were CM’s) How Well Provides Feedback (No. Of Responses, Not %) Very Well 2 Quite Well 1 Not Very Well 1 Not At All Well 0 Base (4) No = 90% Base: Total DTS Sample (41)

  26. Use Of Helpdesks Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Use Electralink Helpdesk 88 63 Use EDS Helpdesk 41 63 Use Neither 12 25 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24)

  27. Frequency Of Use Of Helpdesks Electralink EDS Helpdesk Helpdesk Once A Week Or More 0 0 Once Every 2 Weeks 3 5 Once Every 3-4 Weeks 13 18 Less Than Once Every 4 Weeks 30 18 Hardly Ever 53 59 Base: All Helpdesk Users (DTS) (30) (22)

  28. Rating Of Electralink Helpdesk Mean Score 2006 2005 4.14 4.32 4.40 4.07 N/A N/A 4.38 N/A N/A Base: All Electralink Helpdesk users (DTS) (30) The Quality Of Response You Receive The Speed Of Response Overall Helpfulness

  29. Rating Of EDS Helpdesk Mean Score 2006 2005 3.81 4.10 3.79 3.95 4.03 3.68 3.85 3.91 3.63 Base: All EDS Helpdesk users (DTS) (22) The Quality Of Response You Receive The Quality Of Service Provided The Way EDS Manages Fault Situations

  30. Use Of Electralink WebsiteDTS Sample Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Use Website? Yes 46 35 54 No 54 65 46 Base: Total Sample (41) (17) (24) Frequency Of Use? Once A Week Or More 16 0 23 Once Every 2 Weeks 5 17 0 Once Every 3-4 Weeks 26 33 23 Less Than Once Every 4 Weeks 21 33 15 Hardly Ever 32 17 38 Base: All Website Users (19) (6) (13)

  31. Rating Of Electralink WebsiteDTS Sample Mean Score 2006 2005 3.83 3.73* 3.74* 3.89 N/A N/A 3.78 N/A N/A 3.94 N/A N/A Base: All Website users (19) * 2007 survey wording changed to ‘Overall Usefulness’ Overall Usefulness Ease Of Navigation Being Kept Up To Date Using Terminology That Is Easy To Understand

  32. Website Features UsedDTS Sample Rating of Feature % Used Mean Feature Score 2006 The MPAN Search Facilities 21 4.25 3.91 The Resubmission Tool Within 21 4.00 N/A The Web Tools Suite The ACMT Part Of The Web 47 4.33 4.19 Tools Suite The Web Tools User Guide & 32 4.00 3.67 Context Sensitive Help Within Web Tools Base: All Website Users (19) Features Users (Various)

  33. Rating Of Electralink Services Mean Score 2006 2005 4.03 4.23 4.22 4.05 4.28 3.95 3.93 3.95 4.05 3.53 3.89 3.95 4.17 4.18 4.14 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) Administering Change Requests Efficiently Managing Fault Situations The Quality Of Written Communications The Content & Format Of Newsletters Overall Quality Of Service Provided

  34. Rating Of Electralink Reporting Tools Rating Mean % Use Score 2006 2005 Content Of Monthly Service 32 3.92 4.07 4.17 Reports *Quality Of Electralink Billing Info 10 4.25 4.00 3.50 Content Of Daily Gateway 20 3.75 3.85 3.80 Reports The Audit Tool 29 4.25 3.93 4.50 None Used 37 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) Reporting Tool Users (Various) * Asked of CM’s Only (17)

  35. How Effective Find Notifications And Notification Period For Scheduled Service Downtime Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Very Effective 76 58 Quite Effective 24 38 Not Very Effective 0 4 Not At All Effective 0 0 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24)

  36. Satisfaction With Electralink Service 1 = Not at all satisfied 10 = Extremely Satisfied % Score 8 - 10 Mean Score CM’s GOM’s 8.05 7.59 8.38 7.95 8.06 7.88 7.49 7.24 7.67 7.63 7.41 7.79 7.39 7.41 7.38 7.63 7.59 7.67 6.95 6.76 7.08 7.17 7.06 7.25 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24) Overall Rating Overall Professionalism Being Responsive Being Easy To Deal With Being Highly Efficient Communicating Clearly Understanding Your Business Needs Providing Valuable Expertise Resource

  37. Main Reasons For Satisfaction / DissatisfactionDTS Sample Total Give Score Give Score Sample of 1 - 7 of 8 - 10 8 61 0 36 0 21 8 11 15 7 0 11 23 0 0 7 8 4 8 4 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (13) (28) NB: Mentions by 1 person (2%) not shown Service Efficient / Professional / Accurate Quick Service / Prompt Turnaround Of Problems Generally Happy With Service Customers’ Needs Are Met Good Communications / Positive Interaction Approachable / Helpful Other Miscellaneous Positive Comments Maintenance Notification Is Very Good The Service Is Expensive / Excessive Charges Responsibility Is Not Taken Centrally For Problems

  38. Improvement On Electralink Services Over Past 12 Months Total DTS DTS DTS Sample CM’s GOM’s Improved A Lot 0 0 Improved A Little 6 38 Stayed The Same 94 63 Got A Little Worse 0 0 Got A Lot Worse 0 0 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24)

  39. Main Reasons Electralink Has Improved / Stayed SameDTS Sample Total Improved A Stayed The Sample Lot / Little Same 50 32 30 26 30 19 0 6 0 6 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (10) (31) NB: Mentions by 1 person (2%) not shown Service Is Consistent / Always Good Have Not Noticed Any Changes Have Little Contact With Them / New To Post Additional Functioning / Performance Has Improved Quality Of Paperwork / Formats Has Improved

  40. Electralink Value For MoneyDTS Sample Rating For VFM Mean Score 6.24 6.65 5.96 Total DTS CM’s GOM’s Sample Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24) 1 = Poor 10 = Excellent

  41. Improvement In Value For Money Over Past 12 MonthsDTS Sample Total DTS CM’s GOM’s Sample Improved A Lot 0 4 Improved A Little 12 0 Stayed The Same 88 88 Got A Little Worse 0 0 Got A Lot Worse 0 0 Don’t Know 0 8 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) (17) (24)

  42. Satisfaction Rating Versus Other OrganisationsDTS Sample 1 = Not At All Satisfied 10 = Extremely Satisfied % Deal % Score Mean With 8 - 10 Score CM’s GOM’s Electralink 100 8.05 7.59 8.38 Elexon 61 6.60 6.73 6.50 GEMSERV / MRASCO 46 7.00 7.27 6.63 OFGEM 34 6.00 5.63 6.50 National Grid 29 5.67 5.17 6.17 OFGAS 10 7.00 6.00 7.33 Xoserv 10 5.25 6.00 4.50 None Of These 32 Base: Total DTS Sample (41) Base: All Who Deal With (Various)

  43. What Would Most Like Electralink To Improve OnDTS Sample “I cannot think of anything they could improve on. I would have to really think about it. The way I use them they have exceeded my expectations.” “They do a good job as it is.” “The service is good, but they are more expensive than their peers. I do not think that is any one person’s fault though. They charge what they have to. I would also like to say the staff are very friendly, efficient and helpful…” No Improvements Necessary / Just Stay The Same Reduce Costs / They Are Expensive Quicker Fault Resolution Base: Total DTS Sample (41) “From our experience quicker fault resolution. We don’t like to be passed on to another party when there are problems.” “I would like to know more about their reporting tools and how to influence or more cost effective pricing, with respect to the amount of data that we send through the gateway.”

  44. R Focus On SPAA

  45. Summary - SPAA Sample • Overall, ratings of Electralink’s service are positive with mean scores reaching 4 out of 5 or better for most areas rated. Most scores have shifted downwards (by 0.32 on average) since 2006, but the data suggests this is a function of the change to independent interviewers rather then a genuine fall in opinions. • Electralink is rated especially well for the helpdesk and for its overall management of SPAA with no major areas of weakness to report. • The helpdesk has been used by half of customers, typically at least once a month. Speed of service is rated particularly well. • Almost all (85%) use the SPAA website, usually weekly or more often. User account privileges, and the timeliness of papers are the strongest aspects of the website and are amongst the minority of ratings that did not fall this year. Ease of navigation is the weakest area and also the improvement most likely to be suggested.

  46. Summary - SPAA Sample (2) • Most aspects of the financial management of SPAA are rated well, particularly the monthly management accounts, year end audit and overall financial control. Filing of VAT returns was rated less well. • Customers are positive across all areas of Electralink’s management of SPAA Ltd with no obvious areas of weakness. • SPAA users are more satisfied with Electralink than the other industry organisations they use, with a slight perceived improvement over the past 12 months. Service is strongest for professionalism, being easy to deal with, being efficient and communicating clearly. As with other users it is perceived as being less good at understanding business needs. • Rating of value for money is also less strong, but again with a minority perceiving an improvement over the past 12 months.

  47. Average Rating Of Main Service AreasSPAA Sample No. of Mean Change Service Attributes Score Attributes Since Area Rated 2007 Compared* 2006* All Ratings 25 4.21 15 -0.32 Helpdesk For SPAA 3 4.45 1 -0.50 Management Of SPAA Ltd 8 4.28 7 -0.33 SPAA Website 8 4.13 4 -0.17 Financial Management Services 6 4.13 3 -0.44 Base: All rating each attribute * Change compared only on ratings in both 2006 and 2007

  48. Use Of Electralink Helpdesks For SPAA Use Helpdesks? Yes No Base: Total SPAA Sample (15) Frequency Of Use Every 2 Weeks Or More Once Every 3 - 4 Weeks Less Often Than Every 4 Weeks Hardly Ever Base: All Helpdesk Users (8)

  49. Rating Of Helpdesk for SPAA Mean Score 2006 4.25 4.75 4.38 N/A 4.71 N/A Base: All Helpdesk users (8) The Quality Of Response You Receive The Speed Of The Response Overall Helpfulness

  50. Use Of The SPAA Website Use Website? Yes No Base: Total SPAA Sample (15) Frequency Of Use Every Day 2 - 4 Days A Week Once A Week Once Every 2 - 4 Weeks Base: Website Users (13)

More Related