1 / 8

NIIF-Hungarnet

NIIF-Hungarnet. Assessing the Service Portfolio and Evaluating User Experiences/Demands by Dedicated Static On-Line Surveys at NIIFI Lajos Balint lajos.balint@niif.hu NIIFI TF-MSP meeting Zagreb, 09-10.05.2012. Dilemmas and options.

josieluna
Download Presentation

NIIF-Hungarnet

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. NIIF-Hungarnet Assessing the Service Portfolio and Evaluating User Experiences/Demands by Dedicated Static On-Line Surveys at NIIFI Lajos Balint lajos.balint@niif.hu NIIFI TF-MSP meeting Zagreb, 09-10.05.2012

  2. Dilemmas and options • The need of surveys (assessment and/or evaluation) • The way of surveying (motivation and methodology) • Living with and without surveys (NREN vs. users) The big questions: • What? (coverage, complexity, extent) • Why? (direct, indirect, and final objectives; external/internal) • When? (before-during-after preparing/executing activities) • Who? (who talks to whom, what expertise/responsibility level) • How? (traditional/online and static/dynamic/interactive)

  3. Some crucial details • Level of granularity (high-low: topics/users) • Width of coverage (wide-narrow) • Technique (traditional-online) • Adaptivity (static-dynamic-interactive) • Complexity (coverage vs. expertise) • Output (availaility, accessibility) • Frequency (single – repeating – periodical)

  4. Recent NIIF/Hungarnet surveys (NIIFI) Background: • ISO 9000 relations (external) • NDP project relations (external + internal) • Internal intentions (internal) Execution: • Wide vs. narrow topical coverage (overall – VoIP) • High vs. low granularity (3000 – 30 invitees) • Single vs. periodical surveying (2010 – 2005+2n) • Static/dynamic on-line non-expert/expert responses • Internal exploitation, on-demand external access

  5. Survey I – 2010-2011 • Wide SP coverage – discovering demands (RN [IP, λ], HPC, storage, cloud, VC, VoIP) • Single execution (2010: NDP, ~2005: ISO) • 2700 invited respondents (Y/N + annotation) (institutes, departments, research groups …) • 90 incoming responses, mostly moderate value (applicable evaluation well supported) • Started in 2010, concluded in 2011 • External motivation (meeting internal interest) (request by funding organisation)

  6. Survey II – 2005,2007,2009,2011 • Narrow coverage – discovering directions (VoIP only, extended to collab.in 2009 by VC) • Periodic execution (commensurable results  fine tuning possible) • 20-30 invited respondents (institutes, sometimes departments) • 80-100 % incoming high value responses (expert, responsible respondents) • Motivated by internal interest (+ high respondent willingness)

  7. Survey II – additional info • Evaluation (VoIP experiences): (net: size, call types in/out, technology, additional operator, cost, …) (use: , quality, support, invoicing, errors/failures, repair cycles, …) • Development needs (VoIP demands) (improve support; improve invoicing; involve more institutes; provide directory; apply selective promotion – user by user; introduce novel/additional technologies; …)

  8. Experiences - corollaries • Result depends on motivation-devotion (both sides) • Improper objective or preparation prohibits success • Experts need demanding surveys, unlike non-experts • Even very low (3%) response level can be usable • Complex surveys mustn’t be frequently repeated • Repeated surveys should be commensurable • Interactive on-line surveys should have multilevel memory • Allocate time-energy-cost also to due post-processing • Resource demand: prepare + n * complete + nk* evaluate • Consider overall cost/benefit Surveys sometimes can save but always do cost money!

More Related