1 / 48

Holistic Response Management at Statistics Canada

Holistic Response Management at Statistics Canada. ICES III, Session 51, Montreal, June, 2007 J. Sear and L. Vinette, Statistics Canada. A vision on how to strategically manage large and small business response. Holistic Response Management Strategy Set the stage (Janet Sear),

aurek
Download Presentation

Holistic Response Management at Statistics Canada

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. Holistic Response Management at Statistics Canada ICES III, Session 51, Montreal, June, 2007 J. Sear and L. Vinette, Statistics Canada A vision on how to strategically manage large and small business response

  2. Holistic Response Management Strategy Set the stage (Janet Sear), Coherence (Lucie Vinette) Enterprise Portfolio Management Program (Wilf Bozzato) Strategic Response Program (Janet Hughes) Outline …

  3. Where did the strategy come from? Came about as part of our ongoing commitment to: • Ensure the collection of relevant, high quality, coherent and timely data • Make the most efficient use of resources • Minimize respondent burden • Utilize knowledge we had gathered over the years from our dealings with respondents ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  4. How our respondents felt!

  5. That large, complex respondents want a more co-ordinated, integrated and unduplicated approach to data collection. A Holistic Approach! An Enterprise-centric Approach! What have we learnt over the years? ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  6. What did we decide to do? • Classify our respondents into types • Came up with four • Called them “Tiers” ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  7. The Tiers • Tier I: the largest, most important businesses in Canada (EPMP). • Tier II: businesses that are smaller than Tier I but still very important for developing accurate measures of the activity of individual industries (Central collection area and SRP). • Tier III: medium-sized businesses (Survey and Tax). • Tier IV: the smallest businesses (Tax only). ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  8. How did we decide who was Tier I? • Done through consultation with subject matter areas, the BR and the SNA. • Looked at factors such as: • Was it a priority for • SNA? • our enterprise-based survey program? • our main annual survey program (UES)? • Other areas (e.g. Balance of Payments, CAPEX) • Was it a complex enterprise structure wise • Was there a coherence concern? • For now, targeting around 360 enterprises ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  9. A Bit of History! • Previously Two Distinct and Separate Programs residing in two different divisions • The Large Business Profiling Program in our Business Register • The Key Provider Manager Program (KPMP) in our annual survey program area (ESD) ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  10. This meant … • There were two distinct sections worked independently in: • Setting goals and objectives and priorities • Planning and coordinating work and trips • Measuring performance • Conflicts arose due to incompatibility between the BR statistical model and the respondent’s ability to report • Duplication in terms of: • KPM re-confirming profiles in order to negotiate reporting arrangements • Visits • Having a Profiler and a KPM was at times confusing and burdensome for some enterprises ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  11. So what did we do? • Amalgamated the two programs under common management • Kept it corporate in scope • Called it the Enterprise Portfolio Management Program (EPMP) ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  12. The EPMP • We have Enterprise Portfolio Managers (11) with a Frame Support Unit • Each of the 360 Tier I enterprises is assigned to one of these 11 EPM’s. • They talk to their enterprises! • They visit them! • They establish and maintain relationships with them! ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  13. Benefits of the Program … • A Holistic view of Statistics Canada’s survey requirements • Better relationships with our respondents • Better communication internally: SMA’s, BR, SNA, Central collection area • Better knowledge of industry (e.g. better understanding of auto industry, oil and gas, telecommunications … ) • Better quality data, better profiles, coherent data! ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  14. Coherent Data! Lucie Vinette, Statistics Canada

  15. Coherence

  16. Basic Operating Structure

  17. Basic Operating Structure Establishment surveys

  18. Basic Operating Structure Transactions between establishments $20B - $6B = $14B

  19. Challenges • Definition of an establishment • Complexity of enterprises’ corporate and operating structures • Globalization • Accounting standard changes • Design of collection process & surveys ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  20. Benefits • Quality assurance of profile and data collected • Consistent and coherent industry data • Conceptual expertise on overall collection strategy • Positive impact on respondent relationship ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  21. Our direction … From: Profile Collection Coherence analysis To: Coherent profile Coherent collection Confirmation of coherence ICES III, Contributed Topic, Session 51, Montreal, Janet Sear and Lucie Vinette, STC

  22. Holistic Response Management Enterprise Portfolio Management Program ICES III, Session 51, Montreal, June, 2007 W. Bozzato, Statistics Canada A Day in the Life Of …

  23. A Day In The Life of an Enterprise Portfolio Manager (EPM) • Durable relationships • Serve as a window for our internal and external clients • Internal: Supply valuable corporate knowledge • External: Help contacts navigate the myriad of data demands

  24. EPM Deliverables

  25. Scenario 1 • New company to the program • Respondent annoyed at numerous calls • Surveys: • Balance of Payments, • Annual and Monthly Surveys of Manufacturing, • Annual Wholesale Survey, • Head Office Survey, • Capital Expenditure Survey, • Quarterly Financial Survey, • and others

  26. Enterprise Portfolio Manager Information System • Collection management tool • Management reports • Communications vehicle • Internal with subject matter divisions and in-house central collection area • Repository for trip reports

  27. Collection Procedures • EPM’s manage collection • More directly involved in some surveys • Ultimately responsible for ensuring timely high quality responses from our enterprises • We are currently responsible for managing the collect of 360 enterprises • Translates to 1,286 collection entities

  28. Scenario 1 continued • Stream of paper from various government departments • Supervisor has downloaded completion of survey forms • Many are late • Other priorities • Frustration

  29. Scenario 1 Resolution • Help prioritize survey requirements • Alternative forms of providing information • Principle stats (Key Variables) • Provide reasonable extension • Arrange for an inventory of surveys to help organize her reporting

  30. Scenario 2 • Message from a subject matter area regarding a change in the NAICS • Research • Internal signals • Effect on Survey Universe File • Resolution

  31. Scenario 3 • Reliable and trusted contact • Review presentation • Conceptual issues • Large versus small • Internal company reporting

  32. Other items on the agenda • Bi-weekly meeting with subject matter area (SMA) • Review reports • Document from Coherence Unit • Sum of the parts versus the whole • Eliminations • Edit Failures

  33. Other items on the agenda • Planning a personal visit • Divisional co-ordinators • Outstanding issues and recent contacts • Reporting history • Support Staff • Survey inventory • Documents relating to company structure (Org charts, WEB site, Internet, BE, Topics, etc

  34. Success • Increased intervention on behalf of SMA’s • Increased intervention on behalf of respondents • Amalgamation of the two programs • Increase in portfolio from under to 200 to 360 enterprises • Marketing Division Survey over 80% approval • One contact requested EPM treatment • Improved response rate

  35. Holistic Response ManagementStrategic Response Program ICES III, Session 51, Montreal, June, 2007 J. Hughes, Statistics Canada Targeting critical business non-response in Tier II

  36. Strategic Response Program Scope • Tier II companies with significant response issues in our annual business survey program (UES)

  37. Strategic Response Program Goals • Measurable results (deliver the data!) • Mend relationships – turn important long-term refusals into good, consistent reporters • Research underlying issues; identify opportunities for process improvement

  38. Strategic Response Program Approach • Solicit nominations from survey managers • Research company and response history • Pull all annual surveys from regular collection • Send letter – ‘We’d like to help…’

  39. Strategic Response Program Approach • Call company to ascertain their reporting concerns • Address issues & negotiate acceptable reporting arrangements – “quid pro quo” • Communicate & document arrangement with the company and survey areas

  40. Strategic Response Program On-going • 2nd year respondent stays in SRP- stabilize • Thereafter, annually assess & return low risk maintenance cases to mainstream collection • Once returned, SRP’s role becomes reactive Troubleshoot, rather than actively manage

  41. SRPnon-responseescalation Tier II non-response universe nominations for upcoming survey cycle SRP Takes ownership Engage respondent Address issues Deliver data Further Escalation unable to resolve End of YR 2 High risk Low risk Assess Risk Reverts to regular collection stream SRP maintains responsibility Annually

  42. Strategic Response Program And our respondents said...

  43. Strategic Response Program ‘ We understand that you need our data and that we have responsibilities... get your act together... make it simple, we will begin reporting.’ ‘ We are swamped with (your) demands... multiple calls from different people, everyone says (their survey) is a priority.’ ‘ I don’t know which survey is most important, and I don’t have time to figure it out. ... clearly articulate what you want.’

  44. Strategic Response Program What we learned • Not problem companies – the problem is our approach • They were frustrated by our lack of co-ordination in the collection process

  45. Strategic Response Program We concluded… • Respondents didn’t have insurmountable issues providing the survey data; their problems were rooted in our “stove-pipe” approach to collection • The SRP approach works

  46. Strategic Response Program Our Results • RY2004all 55 nominations 100% resolved • RY2005108 new nominations almost 300 units under SRP 93% resolvedand counting • RY2006 Now over 500 units in SRP Results on track with previous year

  47. Strategic Response Program Why does our approach work? • Mandate to address issues at corporate level and staff with the knowledge to back it up • Co-ordinate and prioritize collection • Address cross-cutting issues • Troubleshoot problems frustrating respondents before they escalate into across the board refusal

  48. Strategic Response Program On going Response Mgmt for Tier II • Continue to address back log of non-response • Shift to more proactive model – earlier intervention • Support move to enterprise centric collection model

More Related