1 / 16

2011 ACSI Survey Summary HDF/HDF-EOS Workshop

2011 ACSI Survey Summary HDF/HDF-EOS Workshop. Riverdale, MD April 18, 2012. Project Background Measurement timetable. Project Background Data collection. Those who answered for more than one data center: Two: 103 Three: 14 Four: 2. Respondents 3,996 responses were received

tad-pena
Download Presentation

2011 ACSI Survey Summary HDF/HDF-EOS Workshop

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. 2011 ACSI Survey Summary HDF/HDF-EOS Workshop Riverdale, MD April 18, 2012

  2. Project BackgroundMeasurement timetable

  3. Project BackgroundData collection Those who answered for more than one data center: Two: 103 Three: 14 Four: 2 Respondents • 3,996 responses were received • 3,996 responses were used for modeling E-mail addresses from lists associated with some of the data centers were included to reach the large number of users who may have accessed data via anonymous ftp.

  4. NASA EOSDIS Benchmarks Strong performance continues … ACSI (Overall) Q2 2011 76 65 Federal Government (Overall) 2010 NASA EOSDIS - Aggregate 2011 77 News & Information Sites 75 (Public Sector) 2011 30 40 50 60 70 80 ACSI (Overall) is updated on a quarterly basis, with specific industries/sectors measured annually. Federal Government (Overall) is updated on an annual basis and data collection is done in Q3. Quarterly scores are based on a calendar timeframe: Q1- Jan through March; Q2 – April through June; Q3 – July through Sept.; Q4 – Oct. through Dec.

  5. NASA EOSDISCustomer satisfaction remains steady N=1016 N=1263 N=2857 N=2291 N=2601 N=3842 N=4390 N=3996 2006 2010 2011 2004 2005 2007 2008 2009 ACSI 75 78 74 75 77 77 77 77 (+/-) 0.9 (+/-) 0.7 (+/-) 0.5 (+/-) 0.6 (+/-) 0.5 (+/-) 0.4 (+/-) 0.4 (+/-) 0.4 Overall satisfaction How satisfied are you with the data products and services provided by [DAAC]? 79 82 78 80 81 81 81 81 Expectations To what extent have data products and services provided by [DAAC] fallen short of or exceeded expectations? 74 74 73 71 73 73 74 73 Ideal How close does [DAAC] come to the ideal organization? 71 76 72 73 75 75 75 75

  6. 86 Customer Support 1.7 76 Product Documentation 0.9 77 Product Selection and Order 1.1 75 Product Search 0.9 78 Product Quality 0.4 81 Delivery 0.4 NASA EOSDIS ModelProduct Search/Selection/Documentation most critical 87 Recommend 77 Customer Satisfaction Index 3.8 89 Future Use 3.2 Sample Size: 3996 Scores The performance of each component on a 0 to 100 scale. Component scores are made up of the weighted average of the corresponding survey questions. Impacts The change in target variable that results from a five point change in a component score. For example, a 5-point gain in Product Search would yield a 0.9-point improvement in Satisfaction.

  7. User background and interests questions 2011 EOSDIS Survey Overview Have you searched, ordered, downloaded data? no Did you look for or get documentation? Have you reported a problem? no no • Delivery • questions • Documentation • questions • Search questions Did not search • Rate problem resolution • Rate delivery • Rate documentation • Rate search • Did you get help 1st time? • Format • questions Have you requested assistance from customer services? Did not order no • Order questions • ACSI standard 3 questions • Rate format • Rate order • Customer Service • questions • ACSI outcomes 2 questions • Usage • questions • Rate customer service Thank you! • Blue boxes designate general survey areas • White boxes indicate rating questions • Embedded skips are shown with arrows

  8. User background and interests questions 2011 EOSDIS Survey Overview 3996 Have you searched, ordered, downloaded data? no Did you look for or get documentation? Have you reported a problem? no 3673 no 2954 • Delivery • questions • Documentation • questions • Search questions Did not search • Rate problem resolution • Rate delivery • Rate documentation • Rate search • Did you get help 1st time? • Format • questions Have you requested assistance from customer services? Did not order no • Order questions • ACSI standard 3 questions • Rate format • Rate order • Customer Service • questions • ACSI outcomes 2 questions • Usage • questions • Rate customer service Thank you! • Blue boxes designate general survey areas • White boxes indicate rating questions • Embedded skips are shown with arrows

  9. NASA EOSDIS 2008 – 2011 Scores hold steady; no change more than one point 77 Customer Satisfaction Index 77 (+/-) 0.4 77 77 86 86 (+/-) 0.9 Customer Support 85 84 81 80 Delivery (+/-) 0.5 81 81 78 77 (+/-) 0.6 Product Quality 77 74 77 Product Selection and Order 77 (+/-) 0.5 76 77 76 76 Product Documentation (+/-) 0.5 77 75 75 76 Product Search (+/-) 0.5 75 75 2011 2010 2009 2008 =Significant Difference vs. 2010

  10. Product QualityOne-point gain from last year 78 77 Product Quality 77 74 78 77 Ease of using the data product in the delivered format 77 74 2011 2010 2009 2008 =Significant Difference vs. 2010 Impact=0.4

  11. Product QualityPreferences somewhat in line with what provided GeoTIFF is most preferred format, while HDF-EOS/HDF is format in which products were provided the most. Only 8% of products provided in GIS although nearly one-quarter prefer that format. In 2010, 57% said products were provided in HDF-EOS and HDF and 42% said they were their preferred method. ~Multiple responses allowed

  12. HDF-EOS/HDF FormatTools used when data was provided in HDF format Many of the respondents (687) selected ‘Other’ and listed alternate tool names or described custom approaches. Of these respondents 69 selected 'other‘ exclusively. ~Multiple responses allowed 2011 EOSDIS Survey Flow Overview - CLB

  13. Experience with HDF Mostly high ratings but some “Ease of Use” problems Over 60% of the respondents rated all three areas as 8, 9 or 10.. 2011 EOSDIS Survey Flow Overview - CLB

  14. HDF User CommentsComments are both positive and negative • Survey respondents provided ~ 90 comments about their experience with HDF format, for example pertaining to • Search method “I found all of the HDF-4 files I needed easily, and in small sizes too which was a plus.” • Order processing “A mosaicking option for all data sets would be nice” • Preferences “Please no more HDF4 with irritating custom extensions” • What they are not finding “I need data in ASCII format . . . data from HDF is complicated” • Looking for documentation “Format Conversion (HDF to netcdf).” • Over half were voluntary comments or suggestions “ . . . size and complexity (HDF-format) of the data files . . . can be ameliorated with web services . . . “ • Verbatim comments are available for analysis 2011 EOSDIS Survey Flow Overview - CLB

  15. Summary • Satisfaction with NASA EOSDIS has held at 77 for four years. NASA continues to meet data users needs. • HDF-EOS/HDF is a well supported format • Not all users are comfortable or satisfied with HDF • Comments received provide insight into users effective use and/or problems • Verbatim comments are supplied in separate word documents.

  16. Comments • Verbatim comments are supplied in separate word documents. • In what format(s) were your data products provided to you? (select any that apply) • Other (please specify and/or comment) • Did you use software tool(s) to work with the data (e.g., format conversion, analysis, visualization, etc.?) • Yes (Please specify which tool or tools you used to work with the data.) • No, I couldn’t find what I needed (please specify what you were looking for) • No, I couldn’t understand how to use it (please specify what you were trying to use) • Do you have any additional comments or suggestion about possible improvements to data products, services, tools, documentation, or the websites that you would like to share? Are you finding what you need on our websites? (please comment)

More Related