1 / 8

General Courts in Finland Supreme Court Five Appeal Courts 1) Rovaniemi, 2) Vaasa,

Improving Court Performance and Client Satisfaction A Finnish Example: The Rovaniemi Model for Quality Assessment System. Norhern Finlands Quality Project and Rovaniemi Court of Appeal’s Model for Quality Assessment System. General Courts in Finland Supreme Court Five Appeal Courts

barant
Télécharger la présentation

General Courts in Finland Supreme Court Five Appeal Courts 1) Rovaniemi, 2) Vaasa,

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. Improving Court Performance and Client Satisfaction A Finnish Example: The Rovaniemi Model for Quality Assessment System

  2. NorhernFinlandsQuality Project and Rovaniemi Court of Appeal’sModel for QualityAssessment System • General Courts in Finland • Supreme Court • Five Appeal Courts • 1) Rovaniemi, • 2) Vaasa, • 3) Eastern Finland, • 4) Turku, • 5) Helsinki. • 27 District Courts • Launching of the Rovaniemi Quality Project in 1999 (regional on area 1) • Drafting of the Quality Benchmarks in 2003 – 2006 (regional on area 1) • Drafting the Rovaniemi Court of Appeals Model for the Quality Assessment System (CAF)

  3. What is the Rovaniemi Model and how it works? • a tool to assess quality of Rovaniemi Court of Appeals activities and adjudication • provides information for the Court of Appeal and its personnel on how to develop the workplace community and their own work • the system contributes to the training and developing of the human recourses of the court and points out problems in the activities of the court • based on the CAF-model (Common Assessment Framework) • the implementation of the Rovaniemi Model is done by the personnel of Rovaniemi Court of Appeal • the Rovaniemi Model works in a three-year cycle • 1. year: self-assessment survey • 2. year: customer and stakeholder survey • 3. year: expert assessment • The surveys and assessments are supplemented with information available from statistics and previous surveys

  4. Customer and StakeholderSatisfaction • Customer = a party in a process pending in the Court of Appeal • Stakeholder = authorities and private sector actors whose work is directly in contact with the Court of Appeal. Mainly Chief Judges and Heads of Departments of District Courts, attorneys, other legal councels and prosecutors • Recognisingtheimportance of opening up the dialogue outside the courts - open dialogue in the context of Quality Project / Annual Quality Conference and other forms of meetings is important to stakeholder satisfaction • The method used in Rovaniemi Model: written surveys done mainly as a web enquiry (Webropol) • The method is familiar with the customers and the stakeholders from the Quality Benchmark surveys started in 2007

  5. Experiences and Challenges on Customer and StakeholderSurveys • Customer and Stakeholder Surveys done in 2015 and 2018: • Customer survey had approx. 10 questions relating to customer service, customer satisfaction and customer-oriented court activities • Stakeholder survey had approx. 24 questions relating to courts communication and cooperation with stakeholders, people-oriented court activities, and the courts performance results • The answer rate in 2015 in customer survey was approx. 10 % and in stakeholder survey approx. 20 % • The answer rate in 2018 in customer survey was approx. 10 % and in stakeholder survey approx. 40 % • The legal councels involvement in delivering the customer survey resulted to wider coverage of the parties in the surveys, but the answer rate stayed the same • Adjusting the timing of the survey and cover letter from the President of the Court of Appeal to stakeholders improved the answer rates of the stakeholder surveys

  6. Processing thesatisfactionresults • Material can be substantial and it needs to be pre-processed before it can be properly discussed by a larger audience • the Quality Working Group of the Appeal Court analyzes the results and makes observations based on comparison with the Courts own survey and surveys from previous years • Initial improvement plan is drafted by the Group and it is discussed with the management group and personnel of the Court of Appeal • Engagin the whole personnel of is important for the realisation of the imptovement plans • The improvement plans need to be practical

  7. Next steps? • The Rovaniemi Modelhasnowbeen in function for onefullthree-yearcycle (2014 – 2016) and is in themiddle of itssecondcycle (2017 - 2019) • OverallexperiencefromtheAssessment System is positive • As the idea of the Model is continuous development of the Appeal Courts overall performance, it is only natural that the System itself keeps developing on the way • Rovaniemi Court of Appeal will be drafting a written report on the first finished cycle of the Assessment System during 2018-2019, and it will also include information about adjustments planned and done to the System

  8. More information? • Thereport on the Rovaniemi Model for Assessment System canbefound in englishfromtheCourtswebsite: https://oikeus.fi/hovioikeudet/rovaniemenhovioikeus/fi/index/laatuhankkeet-qualityproject_0/sisainenlaatu-caf2013.html • Orbycontacting me: kaisa.teivaanmaki@oikeus.fi

More Related