1 / 130

Customer Satisfaction Study Wave II

Draft #1. Southeastern Institute of Research. Customer Satisfaction Study Wave II. April 2008. Part of Pulsar Advertising Contract Team. Objectives & Methodology. Objectives.

leontyne-durand
Download Presentation

Customer Satisfaction Study Wave II

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. Draft #1 Southeastern Institute of Research Customer Satisfaction StudyWave II April 2008 Part of Pulsar Advertising Contract Team

  2. Objectives & Methodology

  3. Objectives • This research is designed to track and monitor the perceptions and responses of Virginia residents in regard to VDOT. • Specific objectives include: • Monitor residents’ expectations and perceptions of VDOT on critical issues across all areas of Virginia • Provide guidance for VDOT’s outreach communications program across the state • Monitor perceptions of VDOT across the state • Monitor changes in perceptions over time • Provide data on resident satisfaction with VDOT that is reported regularly in the VDOT Dashboard

  4. Methodology • Random telephone survey conducted across Virginia • Designed to track key measures of contact, familiarity, satisfaction, and trust of VDOT • Survey includes “diagnostic” questions to understand the nature of the contact • Interviews conducted with 1,800 residents of the Commonwealth • Sample of 200 in each of VDOT’s nine Districts • Wave II Interviews were conducted January/February 2008 • Wave I interviews were conducted in May 2007 – one year after the previous wave of the Omnibus • The next wave of this research is scheduled to be conducted in June

  5. Methodology • By design, each of VDOT’s nine Districts is equally represented in the sample. In terms of population, this causes some Districts to be over-represented and some to be under-represented. This means that the sample is not representative of Virginia’s population distribution. To correct for this inaccuracy, the data have been weighted. • Weighting is a standard statistical procedure that allows for the correction of distributions in the sample drawn to approximate those of the population from which it is drawn. • In this report, weighted data are used for the “total” sample. When results are reported for each District, unweighted data are utilized. • The weighting rationale is outlined on the following slide.

  6. Methodology Weighting Rational for 2007 and 2008 Samples Note: In order to make appropriate comparisons with 2006 data, the “total” sample reported for 2006 has also been weighted.

  7. Methodology • For some measures in this study, comparable data are available from 2006. In those instances, the results from the three waves of data are compared statistically to determine if there is statistical evidence that there is a difference over the three years – and, thus, that the difference is not due to chance. • A red asterisk (*) is used to indicate that the difference between 2008 and 2007 is statistically significant. • A red carrot (^) is used to indicate that the difference between 2007 and 2006 is statistically significant. • All significance testing is conducted using a 95% level of confidence.

  8. Detailed Findings

  9. Detailed FindingsOutline of Presentation • Monitoring VDOT Performance • Satisfaction with VDOT: Overall Measures of Performance • Satisfaction with VDOT: Functional Areas • Contact with VDOT • 511 Virginia

  10. Monitoring VDOT Performance

  11. Monitoring VDOT’s Progress Awareness (Contact with VDOT) In previous waves of the Omnibus study, the research measured growth of awareness, familiarity, favorability, and trust of VDOT. The 2007 and 2008 studies – reported in this document – continue to monitor VDOT’s performance on these key measures. Familiarity Favorability (Satisfaction) Trust

  12. Even Though a Slight Drop in the Level of Contact Is Reported in this Wave, Most Residents of Virginia Report that They Have Had Some Form of Contact with VDOT Over the Past Year ^ * Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level ^ 2007 differs significantly from 2006 at a 95% confidence level Q15: Tell me, in which of the following ways have you come into contact with VDOT during the past year?

  13. About Half of the Residents of Virginia Are Familiar with VDOT and the Work It Does Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. 18% are not familiar with VDOT and its work. About half (47%) say that they are familiar with VDOT. Q5: Overall, how familiar would you say you are with VDOT and the work it does?

  14. Familiarity with VDOT Has Remained Stable over the Past Few Years Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. 47% in 2006 46% in 2007 47% in 2008 Q5: Overall, how familiar would you say you are with VDOT and the work it does?

  15. The Highest Level of Familiarity Is Posted for Bristol, at 58%; The Lowest Level Is Reported at 41% in Fredericksburg 58% 54% 48% 47% 46% 46% 44% 43% 41% Q5: Overall, how familiar would you say you are with VDOT and the work it does?

  16. Familiarity Has Not Changed Significantly Across Any of the Districts Although familiarity may be increasing in Bristol and decreasing in Lynchburg. NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their familiarity a “4” or a “5.” Q5: Overall, how familiar would you say you are with VDOT and the work it does?

  17. Nearly Half of Virginians Are Satisfied with VDOT 44% Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. Q6: Thinking about VDOT overall, how satisfied are you with VDOT overall?

  18. After Improving from 2006 to 2007, Satisfaction with VDOT Has RemainedSteady Over the Past Year 39% in 2006 vs. 47% in 2007 – a statistically significant increase. Satisfaction remained constant from 2007 to 2008. Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. Q6: Thinking about VDOT overall, how satisfied are you with VDOT overall?

  19. Satisfaction Runs from a High of 66% in Lynchburg to a Low of 33% in Hampton Roads 66% 59% 59% 54% 54% 48% 47% 39% 33% Q6: Thinking about VDOT overall, how satisfied are you with VDOT overall?

  20. Satisfaction with VDOT Has Increased Significantly in Fredericksburg; It Has Decreased Significantly in Staunton NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their overall satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” ^ * * ^ ^ * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level ^ 2007 differs significantly from 2006 at a 95% confidence level Q6: Thinking about VDOT overall, how satisfied are you with VDOT overall?

  21. 45% of Virginians Say That They Trust VDOT to Do the “Right Thing” for the People of Virginia 45% Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. Q5a: To what extent do you trust VDOT to do the right thing for the people of Virginia in regard to managing the state’s road and highway system?

  22. Following an Increase in 2007, Trust in VDOT Has Remained Stable over the Past Year Trust increased from 37% in 2006 to 44% in 2007 – a statistically significant increase. Trust remained constant from 2007 to 2008. Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. Q5a: To what extent do you trust VDOT to do the right thing for the people of Virginia in regard to managing the state’s road and highway system?

  23. Satisfaction Plays an Important Role in the Development of Trust “Satisfied” rated their overall satisfaction with VDOT “4” or “5” on a 1-5 scale. “Not Satisfied” rated it “1,” “2,” or “3.” 83% of those who are satisfied with VDOT overall also trust VDOT. In contrast, only 14% of those who are not satisfied trust VDOT. 83% This is consistent with 2007 when 80% of those satisfied also trusted VDOT vs. only 13% of those not satisfied. 14% Q5a: To what extent do you trust VDOT to do the right thing for the people of Virginia in regard to managing the state’s road and highway system?

  24. Trust Is Highest in Lynchburg (64%) and Lowest in Hampton Roads (34%) 64% 54% 53% 51% 51% 48% 44% 42% 34% Q5a: To what extent do you trust VDOT to do the right thing for the people of Virginia in regard to managing the state’s road and highway system?

  25. No Significant Improvements in Trust Are Posted for Any of the Districts over the Past Year NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their trust a “4” or a “5.” ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 2007 differs significantly from 2006 at a 95% confidence level Q5a: To what extent do you trust VDOT to do the right thing for the people of Virginia in regard to managing the state’s road and highway system?

  26. Monitoring VDOT’s Progress Awareness (Contact with VDOT) 90%* Familiarity 47% * Indicates a statistically significant decrease since 2007, at a 95% confidence level Favorability (Satisfaction) 44% Trust 45%

  27. Conclusion & Implication Conclusion: While a decrease in contact with VDOT is posted in this wave of research, overall contact with VDOT remains high. About 9 out of 10 Virginia residents have had some form of contact with VDOT over the past year. Levels of familiarity, satisfaction and trust have not changed significantly this wave – although a few significant changes are posted for certain individual Districts. Implication: Through its far-reaching presence, VDOT continues to have considerable potential to influence perceptions of the organization. Continue to work to grow satisfaction and trust by taking advantage of every form of contact between VDOT and Virginia residents. Since overall levels of satisfaction and trust have not been declining in recent waves of the study, take advantage of this “positive” environment to grow overall imagery of VDOT.

  28. Satisfaction with VDOT: Overall Measures of Performance

  29. VDOT’s Most Favorable Satisfaction Ratings – Tier 1 – Tend to be for Physical and Material Components of the Roadways Rather than for Planning and Management 67% Tier 1: Highest satifactaionratings 60% Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. 59% 58% 50% 46% Tier 2: Moderate satisfaction ratings 45% 45% 41% 32% Tier 3: Lowest satisfaction ratings 27% 26% 26% Q4: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to:

  30. Satisfaction with Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Has Increased Significantly Since Last Year Tier 1: Highest satifactaionratings Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. * NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level Q4: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to:

  31. Satisfaction Levels of These Tier 2 Attributes Have Not Changed Since the Last Wave Tier 2: Moderate satisfaction ratings Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” NA NA Q4: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to:

  32. No Significant Changes Are Posted for Tier 3 Attributes Tier 3: Lowest satisfaction ratings Data weighted to be representative of Virginia population. NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” Q4: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to:

  33. Rest Areas and Welcome CentersRest Areas and Welcome Centers Earn Higher Levels of Satisfaction in Bristol, Lynchburg, Fredericksburg, Hampton Roads and Richmond 75% 74% 72% 71% 70% 63% 63% 62% 62% Q4h: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the rest areas and welcome centers along the roads and highways in Virginia?

  34. Rest Areas and Welcome CentersImprovement for the Statewide Rating of Rest Areas and Welcome Centers Is Driven by Significant Improvements among Residents in Fredericksburg and Hampton Roads NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” * * * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level Q4h: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the rest areas and welcome centers along the roads and highways in Virginia?

  35. Cleanliness of the Highways and RoadwaysResidents of Salem Post the Highest Levels of Satisfaction with Cleanliness of Highways and Roadways, Followed Closely by Staunton and Northern Virginia 67% 64% 64% 60% 58% 58% 57% 54% 52% Q4j: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to overall cleanliness of highways and roadways in Virginia?

  36. Cleanliness of the Highways and RoadwaysSatisfaction with Rest Areas Has Decreased in Staunton over the Past Year NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” There is a slight, but not significant, increase in Fredericksburg. * * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level Q4j: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to overall cleanliness of highways and roadways in Virginia?

  37. Signs and Pavement MarkingsResidents of Staunton, Lynchburg, and Salem Are Most Satisfied with Signs and Pavement Markings; Residents of Hampton Roads Are Least Satisfied 73% 71% 70% 68% 67% 64% 59% 54% 49% Q4l: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the signs and pavement markings on Virginia’s roads and highways?

  38. Signs and Pavement MarkingsSatisfaction with Signs and Pavement Markings Has Remained Stable Over the Past Year in All Districts NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” Q4l: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the signs and pavement markings on Virginia’s roads and highways?

  39. Roadside AppearanceResidents of Staunton and Salem Tend to Be Most Satisfied with Roadside Appearance 68% 65% 60% 59% 58% 58% 57% 57% 52% Q4k: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the appearance of the roadside along roads and highways in Virginia?

  40. Roadside AppearanceSatisfaction with Roadside Appearance Has Remained Stable Over the Past Year in All Districts NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” Q4k: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the appearance of the roadside along roads and highways in Virginia?

  41. Safety of the Roads and HighwaysResidents of Lynchburg and Bristol Post the Most Favorable Satisfaction Scores for Safety 63% 61% 55% 55% 54% 53% 51% 45% 44% Q4m: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the safety of Virginia’s roads and highways?

  42. Safety of the Roads and HighwaysSatisfaction with Road and Highway Safety Has Decreased in Staunton and Northern Virginia and Increased in Fredericksburg NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” * * * * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level Q4m: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to the safety of Virginia’s roads and highways?

  43. Communications The Highest Levels of Satisfaction with Communications Are Posted for Lynchburg and Salem; The Lowest Are Hampton Roads and Culpeper 57% 54% 51% 49% 47% 46% 45% 41% 40% Q4f: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to communicating to you, that is – keeping you informed about transportation changes that impact you?

  44. CommunicationsSatisfaction with VDOT CommunicationsHas Not Changed Significantly in Any of The Districts Since Last Year NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” But, notice that satisfaction in Northern Virginia has bounced back this wave after a slight drop last wave. ^ ^ 2007 differs significantly from 2006 at a 95% confidence level Q4f: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to: Communicating to you, that is – keeping you informed about transportation changes that impact you?

  45. Traffic Management and Incident ResponseVDOT’s Highest Level of Satisfaction with Traffic Management and Incident Response Is Posted for Salem; The Lowest Level Is in Northern Virginia 64% 59% 57% 54% 48% 46% 44% 39% 32% Q4c: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to traffic management and incident response, including such things as signal timing, placement of road signs and clearing accidents and roadway obstructions?

  46. Traffic Management and Incident ResponseThere Have Been No Significant Changes in any Districts over the Past Couple of Years in Regard toSatisfaction with Incident Response NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” There has been a slight, but not significant, drop in satisfaction in Bristol since the last wave of research. Hampton Roads has increased slightly, but not significantly. Q4c: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to: Traffic management and incident response, including such things as signal timing, placement of road signs and clearing accidents and roadway obstructions?

  47. Quality of the RideThe Highest Levels of Satisfaction with Quality of the Ride Are Posted for Salem and Lynchburg; The Lowest Is in Hampton Roads 64% 64% 60% 58% 57% 43% 42% 41% 32% Q4g: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to overall quality of the ride experienced on the roads and highways of Virginia?

  48. Quality of the RideLevels of Satisfaction with Quality of the Ride on Virginia Highways and Roads Is Comparable to Last Year In All Districts NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” Q4g: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to overall quality of the ride experienced on the roads and highways of Virginia?

  49. Maintenance and Construction of BridgesThe Highest Level of Satisfaction with Bridges Is Reported for Lynchburg, In Contrast to Hampton Roads which Has the Lowest Satisfaction Level 55% 49% 47% 46% 46% 43% 40% 39% 31% Q4i: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to maintenance and construction of bridges in Virginia?

  50. Maintenance and Construction of BridgesSatisfaction with Bridge Maintenance and Construction Has Decreased in Several Districts, Although It Has Increased in Fredericksburg NOTE: Percentages indicate those rating their satisfaction a “4” or a “5.” Note the decreases in Staunton and Salem are statistically significant; and, the increase in Fredericksburg is statistically significant. * * * * 2008 differs significantly from 2007 at a 95% confidence level Q4i: How satisfied are you with VDOT in regard to maintenance and construction of bridges in Virginia?

More Related