RR

Electralink CustomerSurvey

SPAA Executive Committee

Presentation

28th January 2009

R

Research Method

Quantitative Qualitative

Combined Approach

CATI Telephone Interviews:

34 SPAA

45 Minute Face-to-face Depth Interviews:

3 SPAA

R

SPAA - Key Headlines

• In all areas the high standards already reached by Electralink have been consolidated further. In particular, the quality of service and people drive this. In turn, maintaining continuity is of concern to customers.

• There is a sense that Electralink is improving with no feedback indicating a significant deterioration in service levels and only limited suggestions for improvement.

• There are strong scores generally over the past 12 months, particularly in the area of Finance & Auditing services (amongst Board Members).

• There has been a clear decrease in service ratings for all organisations (although less so Electralink). This is most likely to be a function of the wider coverage of customers in this year’s survey.

• Although Electralink is still seen as providing an efficient, fast and professional service, understanding of the needs of SPAA is still perceived to be less strong.

• The main improvements suggested for SPAA relate to the website and to keeping people better informed.

• The office move is well received, serving to re-enforce perceived value for money.

QualitativeQuantitative +

R

Overall Impressions & Observations

• Core roles are seen as secretarial and administrative, change management and administration, and looking after the website - All done well, little that could be improved.

• The quality of the people is key to this - very approachable, helpful and knowledgeable, open and appropriately friendly and proactive.

• Helpdesks – generally very good

– Many don’t recognise the idea of a helpdesk – deal with their contacts

– Email best for concise enquiries, telephone otherwise (for immediate response/ acknowledgement)

• Mainly seen as at least as good as, and sometimes better than similar industry organisations.

Qualitative

R

Electralink is generally felt to be at least as good as, and in most cases better than, other industry bodies – but hard to compare

“They compare very favourably to xxxx - xxxx are a bit top heavy, a huge business. xxxx could probably benefit from some process re-engineering and could streamline things .”

“could think of couple of things xxxx could lean from Electralink! … Electralink has a better website.”

“xxxx – is not user friendly. … Don’t keep email circulation lists as up to date.”

Qualitative

R

Rating Versus Other OrganisationsSummary

SPAAMean ChangeScore vs 2007

Electralink 8.12 -0.28

GEMSERV / MRASCO 6.67 -0.53

Elexon 6.13 -0.12

National Grid 6.38 -1.04

*JOINT GAS OFFICE 6.95 +0.95

OFGEM 5.35 -0.73

Xoserv 5.52 -1.15

Base: All Who Use Each Company (Various) * Asked of OFGAS in 2007

Overall SatisfactionMean Score out of 10

Quantitative

R

Electralink’s Key Strengths

• Open and co-operative attitude, working in support of the industry, in partnership with it (very approachable, helpful and knowledgeable).

• Very good communication and administration skills. Helpful, efficient and timely communication in support of:

– Meetings & events, including user groups, board meetings, expert groups etc.

• Very few weaknesses identified, often relatively minor or transient issues.

“Very independent, give lots of helpful advice on how various clauses & processes work .. very helpful in an explanatory way … the ways in which the constitution works.”

“There’re lots of emails … But it’s relevant stuff. You can’t complain don’t know what’s going on. … I want it … I’m a fan of being told things, and deciding if I need to know. .”

Qualitative

R

Satisfaction With Electralink ServiceSummary

SPAAMean ChangeScore vs 2007

Overall Rating 8.12 -0.28

Overall Professionalism 8.53 -0.34

Being Responsive 8.15 -0.32

Being Easy To Deal With 8.53 0

Being Highly Efficient 8.09 -0.24

Communicating Clearly 8.06 -0.14

*Understanding Your/ The

Business Needs Of… 7.74 +0.07

Base: Total Sample (34)

*Wording changed slightly in 2008

Mean Score out of 10

Quantitative

R

Main Reasons For Satisfaction / DissatisfactionSPAA Sample

Total Give Score Give ScoreSample of 1 - 7 of 8 - 10

11 48

22 36

0 28

0 12

0 8

11 4

11 4

11 4

22 16

Base: Total SPAA Sample (34) (9) (25)NB: Mentions by 1 person (3%) not shown

38

32

21

9

6

6

6

6

18

Service Efficient / Professional / Accurate

Good Administration

Good Communication / Positive Interaction

Quick Service / Prompt Turnaround Of Problems

Generally Happy With Service

Approachable / Helpful

Website Could Be Improved

Don’t Know

Knowledgeable

Quantitative

R

Summary Versus Previous Years

Comparisons are made only across those ratings present in all years shown:

Average No Of Ratings Year Base (Mean Score) Compared

SPAA Survey 2006 15 4.56 122007 15 4.27 122008 34 4.29 12

The above is like for like comparison on statements scored as follows:

Rating Score

Very Good 5Good 4Adequate 3Poor 2Very Poor 1

Those with no experience or not using services / features rated are excluded from the mean scores.

Quantitative

R

Average Rating Of Main Service AreasSPAA Sample

No. of Mean ChangeService Attributes Score Attributes Since

Area Rated 2008 Compared* 2007*

All Ratings 31 4.24 22 +0.02

Finance & Auditing 7 4.52 5 +0.38

Management Of SPAA Ltd 10 4.26 7 -0.02

Helpdesk For SPAA 5 4.25 3 -0.16

SPAA Website 9 4.01 7 -0.11

Base: All rating each attribute* Change compared only on ratings in both 2007 and 2008

Quantitative

R

Up Down

*How well Electralink manage the The quality of SPAA meetingyear end audit process and AGM +0.64 agendas and minutes provided -0.50

*How well Electralink support the Overall helpfulness (of the SPAAFinance & Audit Committee +0.57 helpdesk) -0.46

*The quality of the monthly ^Ease of use (of the SPAA website) -0.25management accounts +0.42

The handling of the company The management of user accesssecretarial matters +0.32 privileges (on the SPAA website) -0.24

Electralink’s efficiency in operating the annual voting system +0.26

^Wording changed from ‘Ease of navigation’*Caution: Low Base Size, Active SPAA Board members only (9)NB: All other changes were less than +/- 0.20

SPAA - Key Service Changes Since 2007

Change in mean score since 2007

Quantitative

R

Electralink is a very lean organisation with good knowledge of the industry concentrated into very few people

Tight staffing suggests value for money. But also makes some ask questions – is there a backup plan? Some (not widespread) awareness that this has been discussed & a plan may have been put in place?

“If they lost an expert. .. I wonder if they’ve got a business continuity programme? I would expect they’ve got something in there.”

“Elizabeth – she amazes me, she gets everything out on time, she’s at all the meetings, … etc.”

“Elizabeth is so good at keeping me up to date.”

Qualitative

R

SPAA: Perceived Improvement Over Past 12 Months

Improved Got Worse(A little/ A lot) (A little/ A lot)

Electralink Service

Value For Money

Main reason given for perceived improvement in Electralink Service:

Service is consistent/ Always good 75%

Base: All saying services improved (4)

Quantitative

R

Website Feedback

• Had some early teething problems but seen as OK now. Suggested improvements are limited.

• Used to view documents - agendas, minutes, change proposals, details of meetings

• Contact lists – handy to have a list of SPAA contacts.

• The structure and content of the website could be improved. Make the first page more ‘Janet & John’.

• Login and security password system a bit strange

• Some said the website was OK…

• …but others found it more of a struggle, especially when they were new to it….

“I wonder if it’s user friendly – I know my way around it, there is a school of thought – it’s slightly strange in the way you navigate around it. I’m used to it, so I rarely have any problems finding things.“

“The website is a useful resource … takes a little while to pick up … but better then some others!“

“its like a lot of websites, there’s a technique to getting round them. I wouldn’t criticise it – it’s there , it just takes a while to find it.“

“the various meeting groups .. they have previous & future meetings… a bit confusing … click on the sub menus & then it provides a long list of all the meetings by group … If you look at Joint Office for instance, they have sub menus of just the specific groups and everything’s under there – more direct, easier to find.“

Qualitative

R

SPAA – Suggested Improvements

➨ More (frequent?) inductions

– For users

– And directors

➨ Would be helpful to have more background info on e.g. change packs as they come out – for people less familiar / less experienced in SPAA with SPAA / experience of the industry.

➨ Possible expansion of SPAA’s remit:

➨ Could Electralink be at other industry forums on behalf of SPAA?

➨ SPAA could improve on taking account of the impacts on other organisations of changes in SPAA – noting how the interaction works, or maybe doesn’t work

“Describing how the systems, processes, constitutions, groups work. Bit about the history, how it evolved, changed etc.“

“I would have valued an induction as a director of SPAA – they could have done more, and can still do more.“

“There are plans afoot to expand what’s in SPAA – scoping a new info system, that the transporters may or may not be involved in. Could be useful, if there’s positive benefit.“

QualitativeQuantitative +

R

Overall Conclusions

• High existing standards maintained or improved.

• Core to this is efficient, responsive service epitomised by Helpdesks and general communication and management.

• Limited yet specific suggestions for improvement.

• The wider challenge:

➨Maintaining continuity of expertise at an individual level whilst still being seen to be proactive and moving the service forwards.

QualitativeQuantitative +

RR

Electralink CustomerSurvey

SPAA Executive Committee

Presentation

28th January 2009