1 / 26

ER- 0484/1/00

ER- 0484/1/00. OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007 February 2008. OBJECTIVES.

jadyn
Download Presentation

ER- 0484/1/00

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. ER- 0484/1/00 OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007 February 2008

  2. OBJECTIVES • For the third consecutive year, the OFFICE FOR HARMONIZATION IN THE INTERNAL MARKET (OHIM) has commissioned GfK to conduct a satisfaction survey of its users, the design and measurement system for which were established in 2005 and whose main objective is to measure the level of satisfaction among users regarding the various services the OHIM provides. • MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY … OBJECTIVES 1 2 4 3 MEASURE THE LEVEL OF PERCEIVED QUALITY of the services that the OHIM offers its users. MEASURE AND RANK THE CONTRIBUTION of each aspect in overall user satisfaction. ESTABLISH OBJECTIVES AND PRIORITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT EVALUATE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ACTIONS that are undertaken

  3. Undeliverable mail 3.821 TARGET GROUP AND FINAL SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION AGENTS 26.561 PROPRIETORS (*) 19.098 13.171 9.239 RESPONDENTS RESPONSE RATE: 8,0% of net mailing addresses 9.859 1.227 13.390 709 518 E-MAIL TOTAL OHIM Users (in the last year) (*) INCLUDING EMPLOYEES (“type 5 “ agents)

  4. User-Satisfaction -Index (USI) RESULTS

  5. USI USI USI USI USI USI 68,3 63,5 62,5 69,9 68,6 70,9 USI USI USI USI USI USI 64,7 57,3 59,0 59,5 59,7 55,0 RESULTSUser-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006 / 2007 2005 2006 2007 USI AGENT USI AGENT USI AGENT 67,0 66,2 70,0 -0,8 +3,8 USI PROPRIETOR USI PROPRIETOR USI PROPRIETOR 68,5 61,9 62,8 +0,9 +5,7

  6. RESULTSLEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATION PROPRIETORS AGENTS 2005 2005 Every user satisfied 2006 2006 2007 2007 55% (minimum) + 9 + 4 + 15 + 8 + 9 69% + 17 68% 68% 67% 65% 58% 67% 65% 62% 59% 59% 58% 57% 57% 53% 58% 57% 50% 49% 53% 41% 41% CORE BUSINESS IMAGE INFORMATION CORE BUSINESS IMAGE INFORMATION No users satisfied TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

  7. RESULTSIdentification of Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGE AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2007 2006 2006 2005 2005 2007 STRATEGIC WEAKNESSES STRATEGIC STRENGTHS STRATEGIC STRENGTHS STRATEGIC WEAKNESSES + + quality of service quality of service professionalism conscientiousness professionalism + - - + INFLUENCE INFLUENCE 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% prestige modernity conscientiousness transparency modernity swiftness prestige swiftness - - transparency SATISFACTION WEAKNESSES STRENGTHS SATISFACTION WEAKNESSES STRENGTHS TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

  8. Over the last year, in which of the following areas have you personally had contact with the OHIM? PROPRIETORS AGENTS 93% 79% Application for a CTM 94% 80% 91% 82% Application for an international trade mark designating the EC 2005 2005 27% 14% 35% 2006 15% 2006 37% 13% 2007 2007 Application for an international trade mark based on a CTM 24% 9% 31% 10% 12% 32% 70% 32% Opposition 72% 25% 64% 25% 20% 5% CTM invalidity request 21% 4% 21% 3% 52% 29% Application RCD 53% 31% 49% 26% 4% 1% RCD invalidity request 3% 1% 1% 5% 31% 10% CTM appeal 29% 8% 27% 6% 2% 1% RCD appeal 2% 0% 2% 1% 56% 68% Register 68% 60% 51% 61%

  9. RESULTSLEVEL2: CORE BUSINESS PROPRIETORS AGENTS 2005 2005 Every user satisfied 2006 2006 2007 2007 55% (minimum) + 10 + 5 + 11 + 15 + 9 77% 72% 71% 68% 68% 63% 70% 67% 67% 60% 60% 60% 60% 59% 57% 53% 52% 51% 50% 46% 45% 44% 39% 37% (*) CTM RCD REGISTER APPEAL CTM RCD APPEAL REGISTER No :657 No :344 No :193 No :431 No :443 No :133 No :266 No users satisfied (*) No :33 TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

  10. RESULTS: CTM AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2005 2005 Every user satisfied 2006 2006 2007 2007 55% (minimum) + 13 + 12 71% + 23 + 19 + 13 64% 60% 59% 56% 61% 58% 57% 55% 52% 50% 43% 40% 39% 38% (*) 31% 28% 26% CTM APPLICATIONS OPPOSITIONS CTM INVALIDITY CTM APPLICATIONS OPPOSITIONS CTM INVALIDITY (No: 657) (No: 451) (No: 147) (No: 447) (No: 131) No users satisfied (*) No : 14 TOTAL AGENTS (No: 657) PROPRIETORS (No: 447)

  11. SUMMARY: CTM APPLICATIONS PROPRIETORS AGENTS How important is it to you… IMPORTANT (7-10) … that the OHIM sets time standards for the examination, publication and registration of CTMs? 85% 80% … that the OHIM sets quality standards for the classification of CTM applications and the absolute grounds examination? 79% 71% SATISFIED (7-10) POSITIVE CHANGE For CTMs, the OHIM is currently finalizing the examination of more than two-thirds (70%) of applications where no objections are raised within 8 weeks. 75% 19% 77% 38% 48% 15% 57% 34% More than three-quarters (77%) of CTMs are being published within 31 weeks of receipt. For over 60% of CTM applications where no opposition has been filed, publication takes place within 13 months of receipt. 13% 30% 40% 50% 61% 13% 66% 18% More than 90% of decisions comply with OHIM’s defined quality standards. 62% 11% 68% 16% Almost all OHIM decisions on absolute grounds (98%) comply with the pre-set quality standards.

  12. SUMMARY: CTM OPPOSITION PROPRIETORS AGENTS How important is it to you… IMPORTANT (7-10) … that the OHIM sets time standards for the admissibility phase of proceedings and for the notification of the decisions? 80% 80% …For CTM oppositions, that OHIM sets quality standards for its decisions? 83% 76% SATISFIED (7-10) POSITIVE CHANGE For more than two-thirds of opposition files, the admissibility phase is finalised within 2 months of receiving the opposition 63% 24% 68% 13% For around one-third of opposition files, the decision is notified within 4 months of finalising the adversarial part of the proceedings. 52% 11% 50% 17% Well over 80% of opposition decisions comply with the OHIM’s quality standards 60% 10% 58% 14%

  13. RESULTS: RCD AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2005 2005 Every user satisfied 2006 2006 2007 55% (minimum) 2007 + 14 + 10 100% 84% 77% No minimum sample 71% 70% 67% 67% 67% 67% 62% 52% 44% (*) RCD APPLICATIONS (No:133) RCD INVALIDITY (No:2)* RCD APPLICATIONS (No: 344) RCD INVALIDITY (No:35)* No users satisfied

  14. SUMMARY: RCD PROPRIETORS AGENTS How important is it to you… IMPORTANT (7-10) … that the OHIM sets time standards for acknowledgement of receipt and publication of RCDs? 81% 74% … that the OHIM sets quality standards for the registration of RCD applications? 77% 85% SATISFIED (7-10) POSITIVE CHANGE For more than two-thirds of design applications, acknowledgement of receipt is sent within 5 days of receiving the application 82% 76% 27% 15% 71% 14% 83% 31% For more than eight out of ten design applications, registration of the RCD is published within 8 weeks 12% 21% 74% 76% Over 90% of RCD publications comply with the OHIM quality standards.

  15. RESULTSIdentification of needs for action: REGISTER AGENTS PROPRIETORS 2006 2006 Every user satisfied 2007 2007 55% (minimum) + 12 + 8 + 17 + 8 + 12 + 16 71% 71% 71% 70% 63% 61% 63% 62% 59% 54% 51% 45% Swiftness Accuracy Quality Swiftness Accuracy Quality No users satisfied AGENTS (No: 431) PROPRIETORS (No: 266)

  16. SUMMARY: REGISTER PROPRIETORS AGENTS IMPORTANT (7-10) How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards to register recordals or to produce documents requested? 84% 79% SATISFIED (7-10) POSITIVE CHANGE More than 90% of CTM and RCD certified copies and certificates are issued within 14 days of receiving the request 66% 13% 65% 27% More than 90% of CTM and RCD transfers are recorded within 14 days of the request 77% 34% 63% 13%

  17. How would you describe this objective? Are you satisfied with the performance? TOO AMBITIOUS 5% 7% AGENTS: 59% PROPIETORS60% SATISFIED (7-10) ADEQUATE 89% 88% 23% 20% AGENTS POOR 5% 6% PROPRIETORS 17% AGENTS (No:709) PROPRIETORS (No:518) 17% 16% Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past year? 13% 12% 11% 10% 10% 10% 8% 19% 27% 6% BETTER 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% NO CHANGE 80% 67% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (0) = “not satisfied” ------------ (10 )= “very satisfied” 2% WORSE 6% AGENTS (No:709) PROPRIETORS (No:518) RESULTSINFORMATION & COMMUNICATION Regarding answering time to both phone calls and emails, the OHIM’s objective is to answer most phone calls (currently 90%) to its general number within 20 seconds and most e-mails (currently 90%) to its general mailbox within two days.

  18. SUMMARY: E – BUSINESS AGENTS SATISFIED (%) % USE(REGULARLY+ SOMETIMES SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM SPEED OF THE SYSTEM RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM 63% 93% 76 ( 2) 64 ( 12) 66 ( 9) 73 ( 9) CTM-ONLINE 64 (=) 58 ( 10) 59 ( 4) 67 ( 3) 59% RCD-ONLINE 59 ( 5) 51 ( 11) 53 (=) 70 (=) 74% E-FILING CTM 57 (=) 47 ( 10) 52 (=) 65 (=) 42% E-FILING RCD 60 ( 2) 49 ( 18) 55 ( 9) 67 (=) 37% MYPAGE 64 53 61 70 31% E-OPPOSITION

  19. SUMMARY: E – BUSINESS PROPIETORS SATISFIED (%) % USE(REGULARLY+ SOMETIMES) SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM SPEED OF THE SYSTEM RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM 67% 65 (=) 63 ( 5) 64 ( 3) 68 ( 3) CTM-ONLINE 26% 62 ( 2) 62 (=) 64 ( 3) 65 ( 2) RCD-ONLINE 60% 60 ( 3) 59 ( 3) 58 ( 2) 68 (=) E-FILING CTM 26% 61 ( 3) 56 (=) 56 ( 3) 69 ( 2) E-FILING RCD 24% 54( 10) 55( 8) 54( 12) 61( 15) MYPAGE 14% 67 58 57 76 E-OPPOSITION

  20. RESULTS: e-business In March 2007, the OHIM launched Online Access to Files to facilitate users’ access to all available (non-confidential) information on CTM files. Have you used the service? AGENTS PROPRIETORS If yes, did you find it useful? VERY USEFUL (7-10) PROPIETORS:79% 40% AGENTS: 87% 32% 18% 18% 17% 16% 13% 13% 8% 6% 6% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% DONT KNOW (0) “not useful” ------- “very useful” (10)

  21. 26% PROPIETORS:68% AGENTS: 65% Are you satisfied with the reply you received? 23% SATISFIED (7-10) 20% 19% 16% 13% AGENTS 10% 10% PROPRIETORS 9% 8% 7% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% DONT KNOW (0) “not satisfied” ------- “very satisfied” (10 ) RESULTS: e-business In November 2006, the OHIM launched an e-business hotline. The objective is for 90% of phone calls to be answered within 20 seconds. Have you ever used the service? How would you describe this objective? TOO AMBITIOUS TOO AMBITIOUS 9% 8% ADEQUATE ADEQUATE 89% 89% POOR POOR 2% 3% AGENTS PROPRIETORS

  22. RESULTS: e-business Since the end of 2006, the OHIM has organised regular training sessions for paralegals on search tools and e-filing that have been publicised on the OHIM website and in Alicante News. Are you aware of these sessions? AGENTS PROPRIETORS NO 76% NO 90% YES, BUT NO PARTICIPATED 18% YES, AND PARTICIPATED 6% YES, AND PARTICIPATED 2% YES, BUT NO PARTICIPATED 8% If participated, what was the level of satisfaction with the training received? PROPIETORS:73% AGENTS: 69% 28% 27% 27% 26% SATISFIED (7-10) 18% 15% 9% 9% 9% 8% 8% 8% 5% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% DONT KNOW (0) “not satisfied” ------- “very satisfied” (10)

  23. CONCLUSIONS

  24. RESULTSPERCEIVED EVOLUTION OF THE OHIM Generally speaking, do you feel that the OHIM has performed better than, the same as or worse than last year? 2007 2006 Don’t know Don’t know 18% 17% Worse The same Worse The same 4% 36% 7% 41% AGENTS Better Better 35% 43% TOTAL AGENTS (No: 520) TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709) 2007 2006 Worse Don’t know PROPRIETORS 1% Don’t know Worse 41% 50% 3% Better 24% Better The same The same 16% 31% 34% TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 436) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

  25. CONCLUSIONS: IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEEDS FOR ACTION As a summary of everything presented here, main conclusions drawn from the research are: • A significant increase in the overall satisfaction of both types of users (agents and proprietors) • A decrease in the distance between the Propietors’ evaluacions and the Agents’ evaluations. • Number of complaints has decreased whilethe efficiency of resolving them has increased. • Significant improvements in satisfaction in all the areas of the core business (with the exception of the area of Appeals), in both groups of users. • Improvement in the more negative perception of last year: accessibility of Office employees. • A general decrease in the satisfaction with e-business tools, even more in Agents andremarkably regarding the system speed. • An overall perception of improvement in the functioning of the OHIM compared to one year ago.

  26. Responsable del Proyecto e Informe en GfK Emer Ad-Hoc Research: Ángeles Bacete; e-mail: angeles.bacete@gfk-emer.com

More Related