CIPC’s Q3 Performance

1. CIPC’s Q3 Performance • Astrid Ludin, • 24 March 2015

2. Introduction • 2014 was a year of great change in CIPC: • Renovation of office environment, involving new ICT infrastructure, computer upgrades, moving of staff and delays in processing; • Introduction of paperless back office, scanning and e-mail indexing system with electronic repository; • Launch of 2 new service centres and JSE office; • Launch of new website in September 2014, with new processes and initial teething problems relating to the database; • Labour unrest, resulting in processing delays Impacted on Q3 results Customer and Stakeholder survey beginning of Q4

3. Summary of operating results

4. Performance Analysis

5. Performance Analysis

6. Key findings of customer and stakeholder survey • 900 customers and 46 stakeholders were interviewed • Interviews conducted during a low point, following Q3 performance and changes introduced; • The CIPC received an overall satisfaction rating of 6.30 out of 10; • Stakeholders are less satisfied with the CIPC (4.70) compared to customers (6.38). • Service Excellence and Communication received the lowest satisfaction ratings among both customers and stakeholders

7. Overall Rating of CIPC by Attribute Dimensions – Stakeholders vs. Customers As seen in the table below, stakeholders tend to be less satisfied with the CIPC across all attribute dimensions, as compared to customers. Service Excellence and Communication received the lowest satisfaction ratings among both customers and stakeholders:

8. Expectations ModelBenchmarking Summary – CIPC Overall, Customers and Stakeholders CIPC Overall – Both customers and stakeholders (n=946) Customers (n=900) Stakeholders (n=46) Ideal service = 8.74 Ideal service = 8.78 Ideal service = 7.83 -2.40 -2.44 Minimum accepted service = 6.11 Minimum accepted service = 6.10 CIPC = 6.38 CIPC = 6.30 +0.27 +0.20 -3.13 Minimum accepted service = 5.93 -1.24 CIPC = 4.70 2 3 8 4 5 9 2 2 3 3 8 8 4 4 5 5 9 9 1 6 7 1 1 6 6 7 7 10 10 10 Denotes that the value is significantly lower than the ideal level of service expected. Denotes that the value is significantly lower than minimum accepted level. Denotes that the value is significantly higher than minimum accepted level.

9. Engagement with the CIPC Overall, the most preferred medium of communicating with the CIPC is via email (43%), followed by the transactional website (24%). Interestingly, although almost half of the respondents have used the CIPC’s query resolution system, only 1% mentioned that this is their preferred point of contact with the CIPC.

10. Engagement with the CIPC The table below provides a detailed look at engagement with the CIPC by demographic segments. Across all segments, Email and the Transactional Website are the most commonly used Mediums of Communication.

11. Preferred Engagement Method to be Considered in Future Email and the Transactional Website were the most preferred communication medium across all demographic segments. The Query Resolution System is the least preferred engagement method.

12. CIPC’s Mediums of Communication Attributes: Rating by Segment Front End Website The Front End Website received similar average rating scores across all demographic segments, as shown in the table below. Notably, stakeholders tended to rate all statements slightly lower than customers – particularly the time efficiency of the front end website:

13. CIPC’s Mediums of Communication: Rating Transactional Website The Transactional Website received similar average rating scores across all demographic segments. Notably, stakeholders tended to rate all statements slightly lower than customers – particularly the reliability and effectiveness of the transactional website, which got a score of just 4.80 from stakeholders as compared to the customer rating of 7.22:

14. CIPC’s Mediums of Communication: Rating Self-Service Terminals The table below provides a detailed look at respondents’ ratings of the CIPC’s self-service terminals by demographic segments. Across all segments, the Self-Service Terminals received similar ratings. Once again, stakeholders tended to give lower rating scores on self-service terminals:

15. CIPC’s Mediums of Communication: Rating Call Share Number The table below provides a detailed look at respondents’ ratings of the CIPC’s call share number by demographic segments. Across all segments, the call share number received similar ratings. Once again, stakeholders tended to give lower rating scores on the call share number. Most notably, stakeholders scored the effectiveness and reliability as well as the time-efficiency of the call share number just 1.94 out of 10:

16. CIPC’s Mediums of Communication: Rating FNB The table below provides a detailed overview of respondents’ ratings of interactions with FNB by demographic segments. Stakeholder ratings on interactions with FNB were lower than customer ratings (particularly ratings on reliability and effectiveness as well as time efficiency):

17. CIPC’ Service Excellence Attributes: Rating by Segment On all service excellence attributes, stakeholders gave the CIPC a lower score compared to customer ratings.

18. Impact Grid Analysis (CIPC’ Service Excellence) Urgent Improvement Leverage • The CIPC consistently provides quality service • Your queries and requests are handled to your satisfaction • You rarely experience service-related problems with the CIPC • The staff understand and are responsive to your needs • The CIPC meets all of your transactional and information needs and expectations 6.40 0.1 Long-Term Improvement Maintain DERIVED IMPORTANCE • The CIPC is accessible to all South Africans through the website, email, call share number etc. • The staff are professional • The staff are not corrupt • The staff are knowledgeable and competent • The staff are polite and respectful • The CIPC treats all its customers/clients equally • The staff are helpful and provide the necessary assistance and support • You are provided with customised and personalised services • The CIPC is customer-focused • All of the CIPC’s different branches / functions provide an equal service in terms of quality • The staff make you feel important and valued • The CIPC manages and resolves disputes effectively R-Square = 83%

19. CIPC’s Systems and Processes Attributes: Rating by Segment On all attributes, stakeholders gave the CIPC a lower score compared to customer ratings, as shown in the detailed table below:

20. Key Drivers of CIPC’s Systems and Processes From the total 11 attributes measured, the following 6 attributes were the key drivers for CIPC’s Systems and Processes (n=946) The table above illustrates the top six key drivers of overall satisfaction with the CIPC’s systems and processes. Together, the six key drivers provide a very good prediction of the overall satisfaction with the CIPC’s systems and processes (84%).

21. Conclusions • Communication is an area requiring urgent improvement. The three most urgent improvement areas in terms of the CIPC’s communication were identified as: • Communicating information about the CIPC’s news, campaigns and events • Making it easy to get in touch with the CIPC • Improving the CIPC’s response rate to queries and requests logged on to the query resolution system • Service Excellence is another area requiring urgent improvement. The three most urgent improvement areas in terms of the CIPC’s service excellence were identified as: • For the CIPC to consistently provide quality service • For the CIPC to handle client queries and requests to their satisfaction • For the CIPC to decrease the number of service-related problems experienced by clients. The CIPC is performing well on all of the other key attribute dimensions which were measured (i.e. systems and processes, reputation, leadership and vision as well as the CIPC’s mediums of communication). Since these attributes are also important to clients, they are leverage attributes, and need to be maintained in order to ensure that they do not become urgent improvement areas in the future. Notably, stakeholders rated statements on all of the attributes lower than customers did, highlighting the fact that they are less satisfied with the CIPC across all dimensions measured.

22. Conclusions • Q3 performance was affected by a number of factors, mostly stemming from changes in the organisation; • System issues have been largely addressed; • Performance has improved in Q4; • The hard work has been done, now the organisation must be fine-tuned and we need to build on the foundation that has been laid