1 / 82

Customer Satisfaction Survey September 2012

Customer Satisfaction Survey September 2012. Prepared for: Land Registry Prepared by: Ipsos MORI October 2012. Contents. Key Findings Land Registry’s Key Measures (KPI) NPS Touchpoint ratings Searches & Official Copies Submitting Registrations Information & Guidance

leiko
Télécharger la présentation

Customer Satisfaction Survey September 2012

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. Customer Satisfaction Survey • September 2012 • Prepared for: Land Registry • Prepared by: Ipsos MORI • October 2012

  2. Contents • Key Findings • Land Registry’s Key Measures(KPI) • NPS • Touchpoint ratings • Searches & Official Copies • Submitting Registrations • Information & Guidance • Touchpoints - Key Driver Analysis • Brand Values • Comms • Land Registry Offices • Areas of Improvement • Conclusions and Recommendations

  3. Research Objectives • To measure satisfaction with Land Registry service and provide performance indicator data • To understand the factors that impact positively and negatively on the customer experience and satisfaction • To understand the key drivers of satisfaction/ key areas of importance to customers • To identify key areas for improvement • To identify trends over time

  4. Methodology • *Sample based on “key holders”, including multiple key holders for individual companies but only where the sample gives different contact names • *Random selection from customers using service in past 6 months Figure with asign is significantly higher than the figure with a signat the 95% confidence level

  5. Key Findings

  6. Land Registry continues to hold strong customer relationships • Continued strong scores for satisfaction and NPS show that Land Registry is performing well in the eyes of its customers. Moreover, stronger affinity with Land Registry’s brand values links to higher satisfaction and NPS scores. • Customers aware that they have dedicated teams are more satisfied, more likely to recommend and more aligned with LR’s core brand values; as are those with more frequent contact. • In general, Land Registry performs well in values relating to service quality and accuracy but less well on ‘softer’ values relating to a more personal, customer-centric approach. Most important brand value is that Land Registry provides a reliable and consistent service. • Together these findings show that Land Registry should continue to pursue a customer-led service strategy.

  7. Land Registry continues to hold strong customer relationships • Again, speed of service remains highly regarded as is the consistency of service and the accuracy and quality of information. Customers rely on LR to provide the correct information first time around and scores suggest that LR is consistently meeting this need • Areas for improvement include: • Knowledge and competence of staff and LRs ability to put things right for searches and official copies • Speed of service for registrations and new titles is also a key area for improvement which lags behind the overall rating for speed of service, and • Value for money when submitting registrations which is low in comparison to other service scores

  8. Headline Findings • Customers continue to perceive Land Registry as performing well, although the KPIs have dipped slightly this wave but the yearly trend shows steady improvement. All key measures are rated positively: • Satisfaction with the overall service stands at 96%, exactly on the KPI target of 96%. This is slightly down from the previous wave, but year on year the score is stable at 97%. • Net Promoter Score is 50%, again slipping slightly from last wave, but well above the target of 40% and is higher year on year. • Brand value ratings are very positive for aspects concerning service quality and accuracy. The three values receiving the highest scores are: • I trust Land Registry to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the registers (93%) • Land Registry demonstrates the level of knowledge and expertise expected by its customers (92%) • Land Registry provides a reliable and consistent service (92%) • Customers with a dedicated team are significantly more likely to respond positively to LR’s brand values; and on core values, closer affinity to the values links to higher NPS and higher Overall Satisfaction. • Among customers who rate the overall service as either excellent or very good, the top three aspects of service that impress them are: • Speed and efficiency (30%) • Website/online services (16%) • Helpfulness (12%)

  9. Land Registry’s Key MeasuresKPI

  10. Overall service scores are slightly lower this wave, with T3B score now at 96%, down from 98% in June.However, the T3B score remains steady year on year, with those saying ‘excellent’ up slightly to 42% 97% 97% Sept ’12 T3B 96% YTD 2012-2013 YTD 2011-2012 Data excludes Don’t Know responses Q9.Thinking about your experience of dealing with Land Registry over the past 6 months, how would you rate the “overall service” provided? Would you say it was ….? Base: All respondents , excluding don’t knows (299); YTD, excluding don’t knows (604)

  11. Customers with a dedicated service team remain significantly more likely to rate LR’s overall service as ‘excellent’ 95% 98% Sept ’12 T3B 96% No dedicated customer team Dedicated customer team Data excludes Don’t Know responses Q9.Thinking about your experience of dealing with Land Registry over the past 6 months, how would you rate the “overall service” provided? Would you say it was ….? Base: All respondents, excluding don’t knows (299); with a customer team (138); without a customer team (99)

  12. For customers rating Land Registry’s service ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ overall, the speed and efficiency of service continues to impress the most. Although, not significant compared to last wave, proportionately more customers are impressed with the speed, website and helpfulness of staff Aspects of services Land Registry has impressed on • Top 3 aspects YTD • Speed/efficiency 27% • Website 14% • Helpful 10% Only responses mentioned by 4% or more customers shown on chart Q10 What single aspect of Land Registry’s service has impressed you the most over the last 6 months or what have they done particularly well? Base: All who have an excellent or very good experience of working with the LR (248)

  13. A word from the customers about the single aspect of service that has impressed them most over the last 6 months… “I like the way you can speak to an individual more than once, when you write to them you get a letter from an individual who you can write to if you need more help” “Everyone is helpful and willing to spend time with you on a problem” “Just the website layout, the system very rarely goes wrong and is easy to use” “I think it's how straight forward and simple it is. It's a very easy system” “The dedicated customer team are nearly always available to answer queries, and if not, they get back to one quickly” “They're always very prompt and answer my queries. The turn around for a query is very quick, which is useful when you have other people chasing you around for information” “I think what's impressed me most is the fact that they take enquires seriously and they try to assist you” “Basically the fact that their website is regularly updated and is a good site” “The computerised system is something that they have done particularly well and has impressed me the most” “What I would expect the service to be like. I am pleased with the way they are continuing to update business e-services” “They are helpful over the phone and very patient. It's a quick service and it is rare for them to make a mistake” “If there is a problem, the staff are very helpful at explaining what we need to do, to put it right” Q10 What single aspect of Land Registry’s service has impressed you the most over the last 6 months or what have they done particularly well? Base: All who have an excellent or very good experience (248)

  14. Net Promoter Score

  15. The Net Promoter Score for September 2012 of 50% is down slightly from June, but remains well above the NPS KPI target of 40%, and higher than the 2011-12 overall score 40% NPS Target = Net Promoter Score YTD 2011-2012 Sept ‘12 YTD 2012-2013 How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? 44% 52% 50% Net Promoter Score Breakdown 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 = extremely happy to recommend 0 = extremely unhappy to recommend Data includes Don’t Know responses Q7 How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Base: All respondents (300); YTD 2011-2012 (1202), YTD 2012-2013 (606)

  16. Office admin customers remain more likely to recommend LR; whilst customers in a senior role remain less likely to do so Net Promoter Score How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Sept‘12 50% 56% 41% 36% 63% 10 = extremely happy to recommend 0 = extremely unhappy to recommend Data includes Don’t Know responses Neutral (7-8) Promoter (9-10) Detractor (0-6) Q7 How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Base: All respondents (300); Sols / Cons (175); Non Sols / Cons (125); Senior Role (100); Admin / Office Role (71)

  17. Those who have daily contact with Land Registry are significantly more likely to be promoters; those with less-than-weekly contact are more likely to detract Net Promoter Score How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Sept ‘12 50% 61% 47% 29% 10 = extremely happy to recommend 0 = extremely unhappy to recommend Data includes Don’t Know responses Neutral (7-8) Promoter (9-10) Detractor (0-6) Q7 How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Base: All respondents (300); Daily (147); Weekly (90); Less Often (63)

  18. Furthermore, customers aware they have a dedicated customer team are significantly more likely to recommend LR than those not aware Net Promoter Score How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Sept ‘12 50% 62% 31% 10 = extremely happy to recommend 0 = extremely unhappy to recommend Data includes Don’t Know responses Neutral (7-8) Promoter (9-10) Detractor (0-6) Q7 How happy would you be to recommend or tell others that Land Registry offers an excellent service? Base: All respondents (300); With customer team (138); without customer team (100)

  19. Speed and efficiency, general satisfaction and good customer service are the top reasons customers say they will recommend LR Reasons for recommending Land Registry Compared to June ’12 significantly fewer customers are having ‘no problems’ as a reason to recommend LR (26% in June) Only top 7 responses shown on chart Q8 Why do you say this? Base: All Promoters (174)

  20. Speed of service is important for all customers, but great customer service is the main reason why customers with a dedicated team recommend LR; and is far less likely to be mentioned by those without a dedicated team Reasons for recommending Land Registry Data includes Don’t Know responses Q8 Why do you say this? Base: All Promoters (174); With team (91); Without team (47)

  21. Customer reasons for Net Promoter Score … Passives Why do you say this....? Promoters “The turnaround time for unusual applications like 'Transfers of Part', have been slow over the past 6 months” “I think the only problem is the website is not reliable. I mostly work online and it has a habit of shutting down randomly” “It's a fundamentally good service but it's cumbersome on the website. It's also very expensive” “Very easy, everything is online. You just ask for what you want, get a PDF and off you go” “I have always found them helpful and easy to deal with” “Whenever I have spoken to anybody they have been helpful. Occasionally the site is down but that is rare and is quickly fixed” “I don't think their system is particularly user friendly for finding information where you don't have a specific address” “It's a reasonable price and it is easy to use” “I personally think they've always been very helpful and when I fill out forms they always guide me to the right form. Give guidance when necessary” “Mainly because there is no one else to recommend and the system is fairly straight forward” Detractors “I think the system is very laborious, time consuming and insufficient. It's very hard to get in contact with people” “Before all the cutbacks I would have rated them an 8/9. The service has completely changed” “Well just much more efficient than they were years ago” “All of our enquiries are dealt with online, so they are dealt with immediately, any queries that can't be resolved online are dealt with on the telephone” “Because there are some elements of the registry that are excellent and some that are not so good, and it does vary from registry to registry” “Their charges are far too high for anyone other than lawyers. I have had to go to a lot of trouble to provide identity information which they already have but insist on having it again on any transaction” Q8 Why do you say this? Base: All respondents (300); Promoters (174)

  22. Touchpoint Ratings – Searches & Official Copies – Submitting Registrations – Information & Guidance

  23. All service areas are rated well by customers. Performance on requesting information or guidance has slightly improved from 2011-2012 Overall service areas 95% 97% 94% Top 3 Box - Sept 12 YTD ‘12 – ‘13 97% 95% 96% YTD ‘11 – ‘12 97% 95% 91% Don’t knows & N/As 1% 5% N/A Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q19A_Still thinking about the service you receive when requesting searches and official copies, how would you rate Land Registry in terms of.... "The overall service“? Base: All who request searches & official copies (265) Q25_How would you rate the service you receive when submitting registrations from Land Registry in each respect? "Overall Service “ Base: All who submit registrations (194) Q32 how would you rate the information and guidance provided by Land Registry in terms of... "Overall Service"Base: All who requested info and guidance (131)

  24. For searches & official copies: putting things right, knowledge & competence, and helpfulness & courtesy are the lowest aspects of service, and have slipped year on year, although this appears to be driven by customers seeing them as not applicable rather than rating LR more poorly. Value for money garners most fair / poor ratings Searches and Official Copies 92% 97% 95% 80% 95% 95% 77% 84% 69% Top 3 Box -Sept 12 Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q19 Still thinking about requesting searches and official copies, how would you rate Land Registry in terms of.... Base: All (265), YTD 2011-2012 (1083), YTD 2012-2013 (540)

  25. When submitting registrations: the overall service continues to be rated highly, with slightly lower scores for speed, consistency, putting things right, and correct return of documents. Performance on speed has slipped year on year although this is due to customers seeing it as not applicable Submitting registrations 90% 89% 92% 88% 94% 88% 88% Top 3 Box- Sept 12 Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q25 Continuing to think about the service you receive when you submit registrations, how would you rate the service in terms of... Base: (194), YTD 2011-2012 (815), YTD 2012-2013 (396)

  26. Whilst LR is rated well for speed of service overall and for submitting registrations overall, scores are significantly lower for the requisition process and keeping you informed. All of these are also down year on year Submitting registrations 89% 94% 92% 86% 74% 76% 76% 74% Top 3 Box- Sept 12 Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q25 Continuing to think about the service you receive when you submit registrations, how would you rate the service in terms of... Base: (194) ,YTD 2011-2012 (815), YTD 2012-2013 (396)

  27. For substantive registrations, it appears that scores for overall speed of service and accuracy & quality may be slipping slightly year on year – but they remain strong Substantive registrations 93% 88% 90% 96% 93% 95% Top 3 Box It is worth noting that the scores exclude DK responses which is having an impact on reported scores. Therefore, it is important to view these findings with a degree of caution YTD 2012 - 2013 YTD 2012 - 2013 YTD 2011 - 2012 YTD 2011 - 2012 Sept ‘12 Sept ‘12 Overall accuracy & quality Overall speed of service Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Base only includes those who gave a rating at each question Q25 Continuing to think about the service you receive when you submit registrations, how would you rate the service in terms of... Overall speed of service? Base: Sept ‘12 (170), YTD 2011-2012 (766), YTD 2012-2013 (347). Overall accuracy & quality? Base: Sept (170); YTD 2011-2012 (759), YTD 2012-2013 (349)

  28. All aspects of information and guidance are rated highly, and the overall rating and ease of contacting staff have improved year on year Information & guidance 95% 92% 94% 91% 95% 92% 90% Top 3 Box Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q32 Thinking further about when you recently requested information or guidance from Land Registry on a specific issue, how would you rate the information and guidance provided by Land Registry in terms of... Base: All who requested info and guidance and liaised with staff (131); YTD 2011-2012 (605), YTD 2012-2013 (265)

  29. Whilst speed of service and accuracy for searches/official copies and requesting information or guidance remain highly rated, speed and accuracy for registrations & new titles, and to a lesser extent, for dealings & applications, appear to be declining. These should be monitored carefully 95% 90% 95% 86% 74% 89% 94% 95% Top 3 Box Accuracy & quality Speed of service Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence 2012-2013 YTD total. View YTD trend with caution Q19 (265); Q25 (194); Q32 (131); Q19 YTD 2011-2012 (1083); Q25 YTD 2011-2012 (815); Q32 YTD 2011-2012 (553) , Q19 YTD 2012-2013 (540), Q25 YTD 2012-2013 (396), Q32 YTD 2012-2013 (265)

  30. Value for money and consistency of service score less highly and seem to be slipping for submitting registrations; whereas putting things right is a weakness for searches/official copies 88% 69% 88% 95% 74% 84% Top 3 Box Consistency of service Putting things right Value for money Q19 (265); Q25 (194); Q19 YTD 2011-2012 (1083); Q25 YTD 2011-2012 (815); Q19 YTD 2012-2013 (540); Q25 YTD 2012-2013 (396)

  31. Whilst the staff dealing with the submission of registrations continue to be well rated, ratings on both helpfulness & courtesy and knowledge & competence of staff by customers requesting searches or official copies are weaker, and have decreased year on year 92% 92% 77% 80% Top 3 Box Knowledge& competence of staff Helpfulness & courtesy of staff Q19 (265); Q25 (194); Q19 YTD 2011-2012 (1083); Q25 YTD 2011-2012 (815); Q19 YTD 2012-2013 (540); Q25 YTD 2012-2013 (396)

  32. Touchpoints - Key Driver Analysis

  33. Identifying priorities for action Correlation analysishas been performed on the data to understand which individual factors are correlating most strongly with the overall service rating (KPI) Results are used to attribute a “derived importance” score to each individual factor This helps to identify the key issues, (those that can make distinction between “good” and “excellent” service) Combining this “derived importance” score with the actual performance score allows priorities to be set Action should be focused on areas of high importance and relatively low performance • Typically, the strength of correlations are interpreted as follows:  • -1.0 to -0.7 strong negative association • -0.7 to -0.3 negative association • -0.3 to +0.3 little or no association • +0.3 to +0.7 positive association • +0.7 to +1.0 strong positive association

  34. Key drivers of satisfaction • At the highest level, as in previous waves, requesting searches and official • copies and submitting registrations have the greatest impact on • satisfaction with overall service. Performance is reasonably good on these • aspects. The website is of medium level importance and lowest • performance, suggesting that this should be an area of focus. • When aspects of service are considered in more detail... • For searches and official copies: completion of searches is a key strength. • For submitting registrations, performance could be improved on the • requisition process, keeping you informed, and speed of service for first • registrations & new titles. • When looking for information and guidance: Accuracy and quality is a key • strength but clarity of explanations and ownership of issues are areas for • improvement as they are key drivers of satisfaction but are rated below • average

  35. Correlations with Overall Service Provided in Past 6 Months (Q9) Overall service Base size: 300 Service areas Correlations with “overall service” provided in past 6 months (Q9) Strongest driver of overall service is “Requesting Searches and official copies”

  36. Although all aspects of Overall Service are of similar levels of importance, requesting searches and official copies is the strongest, followed by submitting registrations. The website is less well rated, but of above average importance and should be a focus area Higher Association Lower Association Performance (Mean) Overall service Key Action Areas Communicate and Maintain Performance Derived Importance Communicate Performance Consider Performance Improvement

  37. Correlations with Overall Service Provided When Requesting Searches/ Copies [Q19(8)] Searches and Official Copies Base size :265 Correlation with “overall service” provided when requesting searches/copies(Q19(8)) Service areas Strongest driver of overall service is “Completion of searches”

  38. Higher Association Lower Association Performance (Mean) Completion of searches is a clear strength; putting things right and value for money should be considered for improvement but they are less than average in terms of importance Searches and Official Copies Communicate and Maintain Performance Key Action Areas Derived Importance Consider Performance Improvement Communicate Performance

  39. Correlations Overall Service Provided When Submit Changes To Register [Q25(13)] Submitting registrations Correlation with “overall service” provided when submit changes to register (Q25(13)) Base size : 194 Service areas Strongest driver of overall service is “Completion of registrations”

  40. Higher Association Lower Association Performance (Mean) Completion of registrations, accuracy & quality, and helpfulness, courtesy, knowledge & competence of staff are all key strengths of registration submission. Performance should be improved on the requisition process, keeping you informed, and speed of service for first registrations & new titles Submitting registrations Key Action Areas Communicate and Maintain Performance Derived Importance Communicate Performance Consider Performance Improvement

  41. Correlations Overall Service Provided When Requesting Information / Guidance [Q32(7)] Information and guidance Base size: 131 Service areas Correlations with “overall service” provided in past 6 months (Q32(7)) Strongest driver of overall service is “Accuracy and quality”

  42. Higher Association Lower Association Performance (Mean) Requesting information & guidance is a key area. Strengths are accuracy & quality, and responding to calls/correspondence. Weakness which should be addressed are clarity of explanations and information, and taking ownership to resolve issues Information and guidance Communicate and Maintain Performance Key Action Areas Derived Importance Communicate Performance Consider Performance Improvement

  43. Brand Values

  44. Brand Values – Headlines • Land Registry scores very well on several brand values including reliable and consistent service, knowledge and expertise, and maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the registers. • Performance is lower on elements relating to a customer-centric offer, and this should be the focus for improvement. • Those with a customer team tend to give higher scores for brand value statements, including those relating to a customer-centric offer; thus demonstrating the importance of this strategy. • Higher brand value scores are associated with a higher propensity to recommend and overall service satisfaction; implying that if LR can deliver on its brand values, the customer relationship will be stronger overall. • One third of customers still feel that LR can be too rigid in its processes and procedures and complicated to deal with. However, those with a customer team are less likely to see their dealings at complicated.

  45. LR is highly rated for providing a reliable and consistent service, demonstrating the level of knowledge and expertise expected, and ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the registers. Performance is lower on valuing customers, respecting their views, commitment to continuous improvements, seeking to understand and meet customer needs, and treating all customers fairly Q13 Agreement with statements... Base: All respondents (300)

  46. Customers with a dedicated team are significantly more likely to respond positively to several aspects of LR’s brand values, including seeking to understand and meet customer needs, respecting customer views, and valuing relationships - With customer team* - Without customer team * Land Registry provides a reliable and consistent service * Land Registry treats all customers fairly * Customers are clear about the service elements Land Registry provides * Land Registry demonstrates the level of knowledge and expertise expected by its customers * Land Registry products and services are easy to find and use * I trust Land Registry to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the registers * Land Registry seeks to understand its customers’ needs and strives to meet them * Land Registry respects its customers' views * Land Registry values the relationship with my organisation * Land Registry is committed to continuous improvements in quality, efficiency & effectiveness Data includes Don’t Know responses Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q13 Agreement with statements... Base: All respondents (300); With a customer team (138); without a customer team (100)

  47. Customers aware that they have a dedicated team are also less likely to believe that LR can be complicated to deal with - With customer team* - Without customer team * Land Registry’s processes and procedures are too rigid * Dealing with Land Registry can be complicated Arrows denote a score which is significantly higher or lower at 95% confidence Q13 Agreement with statements... Base: All respondents (300); With a customer team (138); without a customer team (100)

  48. Correlations with Overall Service Provided in Past 6 Months (Q9) Brand Values Base size: 300 Service areas Correlations with “overall service” provided in past 6 months (Q9) against (Q13) (*) indicates negative correlations Strongest driver of overall service is “provides reliable and consistent service ”

  49. Core strengths are reliable and consistent service, understanding and meeting customer needs, products / services easy to find and use, commitment to continuous improvement. LR values the relationship with my organisation is an area to improve. Complexity and rigidity could be addressed, but are less closely linked to overall satisfaction Higher Association Lower Association Performance (Mean) Brand Values Key Action Areas Communicate and Maintain Performance Derived Importance Communicate Performance Consider Performance Improvement N.B. Mean scores for ‘Land Registry’s processes and procedures are too rigid’ and ‘dealing with Land Registry can be complicated’ have been reversed to reflect the negative scale

  50. To improve the relationship between LR and their organisation, customers would like to see LR understand their business needs more Land Registry values the relationship with my organisation “They could explain to me how the new Land Registry system works. It is no longer clear where and who we are supposed to contact; everything gets redirected” “Better understand the difficulties that our firm faces. Early completion” “I think considering the importance of the service to the individual, I think it's that we feel like a small organisation and therefore not important to them” “They could hold regular meetings with members of the profession, as they used to do” “Improve communication-aimed at the specific office we deal with. Simplify Land Registry legislation and make it less prescriptive” “Recognise that we are solicitors when we call and not just a random person” “They could listen more, ask more questions be slightly less rigid in their responses. Understand a bit more about our procedures and what we go through and our transition process and what we go through to follow their rules” “Make life easier by shortening the forms, and saving trees. Reducing the number of forms” “Offer discounts for regular users” “Having a response electronically to something that you haven't been able to obtain, so you know the reason why” Q14 Earlier you didn’t agree with the statement that Land Registry values the relationship with my organisation.What can Land Registry do to improve the relationship between your organisation and Land Registry? Base: (54)

More Related