......... User Satisfaction. ......... Why? User Satisfaction Surveys are conducted to ensure we receive feedback from our customers in order to gauge.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Customised training: Learner Voice and Post-16 Citizenship.
Advertisements

LASA VICTORIA Survey and Focus Groups. The Process Survey – Broad View 24 of 28 responses Overall satisfaction, 9 broad areas Included LASA VIC staff.
User surveys in policing: data collection, analysis and impact Emma Fossey, HMICS.
Halton Housing Trust Customer Scrutiny Panel An introduction to our Service Reviews.
The Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency Ltd Continuous Improvement in Residential Aged Care.
HR Manager – HR Business Partners Role Description
Working with the Teachers’ Standards in the context of ITE. Some key issues for ITE Partnerships to explore.
Case Studies – Australia Ross Attrill – International IDEA.
Project Monitoring Evaluation and Assessment
Presented by Raven Housing Trust Customer Satisfaction Research April 2013 Emma Hopkins.
Customer Service & Customer Protection in MANSELL
© Grant Thornton UK LLP. All rights reserved. Review of Sickness Absence Vale of Glamorgan Council Final Report- November 2009.
Employee Engagement.
Evaluating the Mixed Economy Model in Central Scotland Police Kenneth Scott Director, Centre for Criminal Justice and Police Studies University of the.
SE 450 Software Processes & Product Metrics Survey Use & Design.
Benchmarking as a management tool for continuous improvement in public services u Presentation to Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation u Peter.
Report to Council Staff Opinion Survey HR Director 6 March 2009.
Challenge Questions How well do we meet the need of our stakeholders?
By Saurabh Sardesai October 2014.
YJB TOOLKITS: Disproportionality YJB owner: Sue Walker Dept: Performance May (2011) Version 1.0.
Questions from a patient or carer perspective
Options for Evaluating the Performance of a Tax Administration Agency
Oxford Health Staff Wellbeing and Culture Action Plan
Equality Impact Assessment Training. History Stephen Lawrence case The Macpherson Report Police Force ‘institutionally racist’ - policies, procedures,
Good Customer Service Needs Good People Management.
Patients as Partners: at the Forefront of Service Redesign An Introduction to Patient Focus Public Involvement.
Plymouth City Council IMPROVING CUSTOMER SERVICE Barbara Culverhouse Head of Revenues and Benefits, Project Sponsor Hannah Metson Project Manager.
Version 1 | Internal Use Only© Ipsos MORI 1 Version 1| Internal Use Only Sheffield CCG CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report.
TRINITY ACADEMY Anti-Bullying Report Spring Anti-Bullying Report - Spring 2015.
Needs Analysis Session Scottish Community Development Centre November 2007.
Customer Satisfaction Research Produced for: Raven Housing Trust – November 2012 Presented by Emma Hopkins Customer Satisfaction Research Produced for:
Dear User, This presentation has been designed for you by the Hearts and Minds Support Team. It provides a template for presenting the results of the SAFE.
Impact assessment framework
Sina Keshavaarz M.D Public Health &Preventive Medicine Measuring level of performance & sustaining improvement.
INTRODUCTION RATIONALE OBJECTIVE METHODOLOGY DATA ANALYSIS RECOMMENDATION CONCLUSION.
Equality Framework for Local Government Excellent Level Criteria Overview.
Presented by Linda Martin
ArtFULL – finding and using evidence of learning Centre for Education and Industry University of Warwick.
S7: Audit Planning. Session Objectives To explain the need for planning To explain the need for planning To outline the essential elements of planning.
East Melbourne Medicare Local (EMML) GP Primary Health Networks (PHN) Survey 2015 Interim Results Apr 2015.
A COMPETENCY APPROACH TO HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
August 7, Market Participant Survey Action Plan Dale Goodman Director, Market Services.
Understanding customer expectations and perceptions
Audit Planning. Session Objectives To explain the need for planning To outline the essential elements of planning process To finalise the audit approach.
Hallgrímur Snorrason Management seminar on global assessment Session 8: Planning, programming and priority setting under budgetary restraints; human resource.
PREVENTING AND TACKLING ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR WORKSHOPS David Clarke Head, Anti-social Behaviour Unit Home Office & Louise Arnold Group Director - Community.
Somerset Primary Network Ltd The Effective Subject Leader Sarah Cook.
Healthcare Commission update Sue Fraser-Betts Senior Assessment Manager October
Copyright  2005 McGraw-Hill Australia Pty Ltd PPTs t/a Australian Human Resources Management by Jeremy Seward and Tim Dein Slides prepared by Michelle.
Alain Thomas Overview workshop Background to the Principles Definitions The National Principles for Public Engagement What.
APPRAISAL OF THE HEADTEACHER GOVERNORS’ BRIEFING.
Devon & Cornwall Constabulary Police Authority Performance Management Committee 12 June 2008 Performance Summary June 2008 Agenda Item no. 6.
CITIZEN SATISFACTION SURVEY OVERVIEW REPORT PRESENTATION TO PARLIAMENTARY PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION 09 APRIL 2003.
Public Protection Service 2008/9 Charter Mark and Electronic Data Management System (EDMS) Improve performance and efficiency together with improving customer.
Slide 1 Customer Satisfaction Monitoring Rolling data 2014/15 –Waves 1-12 (April 14-March 15)
The Risk Management Process
Kathy Corbiere Service Delivery and Performance Commission
Evaluating Engagement Judging the outcome above the noise of squeaky wheels Heather Shaw, Department of Sustainability & Environment Jessica Dart, Clear.
Overall NSW Health 2011 YourSay Survey Results YourSay - NSW Health Workplace Survey Results Presentation NSW Health Overall Presented by: Robyn Burley.
Slide 1 Customer Satisfaction Monitoring 2015 Summary (April 15-Dec 15)
Middle Managers Workshop 2: Measuring Progress. An opportunity for middle managers… Two linked workshops exploring what it means to implement the Act.
Writing and updating strategic and annual plans Richard Maggs Astana September 2014.
Development Management Customer Satisfaction Survey 2015/16 Economy, Planning and Employability Services Reported Prepared May 2016.
Hillingdon CCG CCG 360o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report.
Implementing the NHS KSF Action Planning and Surgery Session
Customer Satisfaction Research 2018 Q3 Results October 22, 2018
Survey Design & Use.
Harrow CCG CCG 360o stakeholder survey 2014 Summary report.
Customer Empowerment Working Group
NHS DUDLEY CCG Latest survey results August 2018 publication.
Presentation transcript:

User Satisfaction

Why? User Satisfaction Surveys are conducted to ensure we receive feedback from our customers in order to gauge our performance, focus our resources and achieve continuous improvement. This process is not intended as a comprehensive Quality Assurance exercise to address individual instances of dissatisfaction but is rather a health check of the overall level of service that the Force provides.

What we had Monthly paper questionnaires Response rate of approximately 40%. A comprehensive analysis of 20 months' data revealed no significant differences of interest, suggesting that continued quarterly analysis using the current format would be relatively uninformative and an inefficient use of current resources Monthly paper questionnaires Response rate of approximately 40%. A comprehensive analysis of 20 months' data revealed no significant differences of interest, suggesting that continued quarterly analysis using the current format would be relatively uninformative and an inefficient use of current resources

What we did Wide ranging review incorporated: 1. A review of existing literature regarding quality of service measurement / uses 2. A review of best practice across other forces 3. An audit of service delivery expectations / quality measurements taking place in Force 4. A review of what other organisations do in this area 5. Consultation with key stakeholders within the Force regarding what would be useful for them Wide ranging review incorporated: 1. A review of existing literature regarding quality of service measurement / uses 2. A review of best practice across other forces 3. An audit of service delivery expectations / quality measurements taking place in Force 4. A review of what other organisations do in this area 5. Consultation with key stakeholders within the Force regarding what would be useful for them

What we found Quality of Service is not merely concerned with user satisfaction although the two concepts are closely linked. An opinion regarding Quality of Service can be formed without having experienced the service first hand; in contrast, experience is a prerequisite to forming a satisfaction judgement. Service delivery is not a one-off event but rather the combination of often multiple interactions or experiences between front-line staff and the public. The major determinants of public satisfaction often have little to do with the outcome of the incident and more to do with how officers conduct themselves in public encounters. Service users are generally satisfied when their perceptions of the service they have received matches their expectations Quality of Service is not merely concerned with user satisfaction although the two concepts are closely linked. An opinion regarding Quality of Service can be formed without having experienced the service first hand; in contrast, experience is a prerequisite to forming a satisfaction judgement. Service delivery is not a one-off event but rather the combination of often multiple interactions or experiences between front-line staff and the public. The major determinants of public satisfaction often have little to do with the outcome of the incident and more to do with how officers conduct themselves in public encounters. Service users are generally satisfied when their perceptions of the service they have received matches their expectations

The current process Clear focus specifically on User Satisfaction Using the boundaries of the SPPF SPI methodology FSC conduct telephone interviews Sample stratified to divisional level on an annual basis based on contact levels 200 completed surveys per month Response rate = 92.9% Clear focus specifically on User Satisfaction Using the boundaries of the SPPF SPI methodology FSC conduct telephone interviews Sample stratified to divisional level on an annual basis based on contact levels 200 completed surveys per month Response rate = 92.9%

Internal Process Response rates are higher therefore do not need to over sample to get back minimum numbers Faster turnaround which enables a rolling programme of surveys throughout the year with results available in a timely fashion Results tend to be more representative of the population as there is less “self selection” from respondents Telephone surveys using appropriate technology mean that respondents are only asked relevant questions reducing the need for long questionnaires to ensure all aspects of interest are tapped into The approach can be more sensitive to the victim, seen as a positive approach by the police and more flexible in its delivery

What we ask 1.Service Attributes - 'what' the service delivers (outcome) and 'how' the service is delivered (process). 2.Performance assessments i.e. satisfaction, reassurance, opinion change Reason for contact Initial Contact Staff actions Initial action/ response Officer/ staff attendance Follow up Whole experience

Analysis High level descriptives – frequencies/ percentages Differences by populations e.g. time, Division, method of contact, reason for contact, how dealt with, demographics Significance testing Drivers of satisfaction Qualitative analysis of respondents comments

Satisfaction

Satisfaction 90.9% of respondents were satisfied with their Initial Police Contact; 3.8% were dissatisfied 93.2% of respondents were satisfied with the way they were treated by staff at initial contact; 2.2% were dissatisfied 84.3% of respondents were satisfied with the actions taken by Grampian Police to resolve their enquiry; 7.9% were dissatisfied 91.8% of respondents were satisfied with the way they were treated by the Police Officers who attended; 3.6% were dissatisfied 84.3% of respondents were satisfied with the overall way Grampian Police dealt with the matter; 7.9% were dissatisfied

Drivers of Satisfaction What are the top 10 influencing factors affecting respondents ratings for: What was your level of satisfaction with the overall way Grampian Police dealt with the matter?

Drivers of Satisfaction 1.PO - Appear knowledgeable about how to deal with your enquiry? 2.FP - Make an effort to understand the nature of your enquiry? 3.FP - Listen to what you had to say? 4.FP - Appear to take the matter seriously? 5.PO - Appear to take the matter seriously? 6.FP - Appear interested in what you had to say? 7.FP - Communicate clearly? 8.PO - Make an effort to understand the nature of your enquiry? 9.PO - Appear to know what they were doing? 10.PO - Treat you politely?

In their own words Over 800 positive comments; 200 ‘buts’; 1000 negatives Lack of follow up (over 25%) No Police officer attendance/ involvement (15%) Time delays (10%) Apparent lack of action (10%) Unsatisfactory resolution (10%) Lack of information on action (10%) Initial contact (5%) Insufficient inquiry (5%) Officer/ staff behaviour (5%) Other (5%)

Reporting structure Tiered approach to the reporting of the findings is being adopted: Quarterly - top-level satisfaction results, that inform the SPI, are to be reported to FEB on a Forcewide level to give an overview of progress to date. 6 monthly - key driver analysis will be undertaken to measure the impact of underlying factors of satisfaction. Annually - in depth analysis will break the information down further to explore variations by division and will involve far greater comparison between questions. This will allow for longer term service delivery planning to take place. Tiered approach to the reporting of the findings is being adopted: Quarterly - top-level satisfaction results, that inform the SPI, are to be reported to FEB on a Forcewide level to give an overview of progress to date. 6 monthly - key driver analysis will be undertaken to measure the impact of underlying factors of satisfaction. Annually - in depth analysis will break the information down further to explore variations by division and will involve far greater comparison between questions. This will allow for longer term service delivery planning to take place.

What are we doing? How can we begin to manage and not just measure: 1.Feedback to complainers policy 2.Expanded Service Charter 3.Publicise the results – Force Conference 4.Inform the training review 5.Feed into the Force tasking process 6.Inform the public

Where do we go from here The fundamental issue in service quality measurement is not how good or poor is the service, but how it could be better In order to make effective use of the information gained through satisfaction measurement there needs to be a link between public responses and decision making processes We need to communicate to the public what we have done (or not) as a result of what they tell us Service Quality Management Not Just Measurement Consider the needs for wider engagement The fundamental issue in service quality measurement is not how good or poor is the service, but how it could be better In order to make effective use of the information gained through satisfaction measurement there needs to be a link between public responses and decision making processes We need to communicate to the public what we have done (or not) as a result of what they tell us Service Quality Management Not Just Measurement Consider the needs for wider engagement