Connecting Customer & Employee Survey Results to District-wide Engagement Plans Discussing Public Engagement Meeting|February 7, 2019 Kayla Dean, Market.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Survey of Stakeholders Survey Participants 113 participants in 2010 versus 112 in 2006.
Advertisements

Customer Loyalty Programs – Increasing Customer Loyalty throughout the customer base! Suhail Khan – Director of WW Customer Loyalty Program – FileNet Corporation.
TNS Proprietary: © Linking Employee Compensation to Survey Metrics High-Level Considerations and Best Practices January, 2006.
1 Example Bank Customer Survey Results Net Promoter Score.
© 2011 University of Texas System/Texas Education Agency Progress Monitoring Campus RTI Implementation: The RTI – Data Management Tool (RTI-DMT) Pamela.
Employee engagement Guide Global Human Resources June 2014.
Customer Loyalty Programs – Increasing Customer Loyalty throughout the customer base! Paul Knott– Customer Services Director EMEA Response Center Paul.
Employee NPS Leanne Taylor.
West Richland City Council Update February 2016.
Standards of Achievement for Professional Advancement District 2 Career Ladder Training April 29, 2016 Ronda Alexander & Michael Clawson.
The Federal Telework Program U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
1 EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Budget Software Selection Charles Turner Director of Finance November 9, 2015.
Banking & Finance market Briefing notes and sales support for news media sales teams.
© FSAI FSAI Advice-Line Evaluation Survey of Advice-line and Query Users and Mystery Shopper Measurement Evaluation carried out by by Insight Statistical.
Main Page.
Capital Community College 2014 Graduate Survey
Key Performance Indicators - June 2017
Monitoring the refreshed MTA brand Benchmark survey
Loyalty and CRM.

Call Center to Contact Center
Executive Director Update
Imani Wimberly Hall Director Texas Christian University
School leadership models: Current Landscape 45_84 95_84 51_84 School leadership models: Current Landscape Common practice Incremental leadership.
PIHRA News for Districts
Consumer Satisfaction Research
Today’s Agenda The importance of a conversation
^ Career Education Know Before You Go More
DJ Hendricks, Ed.D. Job Accommodation Network
Module 10: Customer Satisfaction
Research question Absenteeism from duty stations remains rife among public servants in Uganda. Ministry of Public Service introduced standing orders in.
Meeting Planners Association
Student Success Metrics
Strategies to increase referral patients
Who We Have Spoken To In May
T.G.I. Friday's Report September 2017
Who We Have Spoken To In November
District Leadership Team
EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT SURVEY RESULTS
Parent & Staff Survey Results
Q3 Academic Year (January – March 2018)
EVC Accreditation Update Fall 2017 PDD Thursday, 3/31/17
Introduction to the HEART Framework
Cornwall Sports Partnership CSPNetwork Partner Satisfaction
Employee Engagement 2018 Example of analysis report
Employee satisfaction survey 2018
Timeline for STAAR EOC Standard Setting Process
Deloitte Consulting LLP SCOOPS Session
Partnership Performance Monitoring
Title IX Training Rollout SoE
HUNTERSVILLE FAMILY FITNESS & AQUATICS Where greatness grows.
HFFA Membership Study Results Wave 2
Challenger Middle School SAC / PTO Meeting
A New Approach: Making 2019 A Muscle Walk Knockout
Anatomy of the Campaign for SDSU.
Departure View Glossary
Topic Leader Training 2012.
Public Engagement & Constituent Services
Working SMART How Leaders can Align Attendance with School Goals, Structures and Functions Welcome - Introductions Name of the session – We all know that.
NPS Customer Satisfaction Survey
Region 8 Meeting Harvey Solomon, MD
Executive Director Update
MnDOT Public Engagement Awards
Woodland Public Schools Parent Survey Results
We Asked Ourselves Three Questions
Patient Satisfaction 2018 Survey Results.
Net Promoter Score Template
College Community School District Ten-Year Strategic Plan
Student Affairs Office
Presentation transcript:

Connecting Customer & Employee Survey Results to District-wide Engagement Plans Discussing Public Engagement Meeting|February 7, 2019 Kayla Dean, Market Research Coordinator Public Engagement & Constituent Services Office 4/6/2019

Customers’ Perceived Level of Engagement with MnDOT & Satisfaction with Level of Engagement (0-10 scale) The most common perceived engagement level among customers and partners is COLLABORATE (28%) This was based on their most recent substantive project/interaction with the District/Office from which they received the survey Engagement matters! Customers’ average satisfaction increases as the level of engagement increases on the IAP2 Spectrum. (7.7 to 9.2 We can’t say that our customers are not satisfied with being informed; but we can say they are more satisfied when they are in the collaborate and empower level of engagement. Overall, nearly half (46%) of MnDOT’s customers are completely satisfied with their current level of engagement with MnDOT (rating 9-10), and close to 80% are in the top-4 box of satisfaction (rating 7-10). 4/6/2019

Comparison: Customer and Employee Trust and Customer-Centered Measures Customer Questions: How customer-centered would you say this MnDOT District is about a year ago, and then TODAY? How trustworthy would you say this MnDOT District/Office is? Employee Questions: How customer-centered would you say the MnDOT District/Office you work in was before WIG 2.0 efforts were underway, and then TODAY? To what degree do you trust your MnDOT District/Office to do what’s best to meet the various needs of the clients/customers/partners it serves, overall? (think of internal and external customer/partners) 4/6/2019

Comparison: Net Promoter Score (NPS) Customer Employee NPS = 33 NPS = 15 --Overall measure based upon “likelihood to recommend” question --Question is asked using a 0 to 10 scale where 0= Not at all likely and 10= extremely likely --NPS is calculated by subtracting the percentage of detractors (rating 0-6) from the percentage of promoters (rating 9-10). --NPS is expressed as a number ranging from -100 to 100, not as a percentage. --In general, a positive NPS is considered reasonable and the larger the number the better. --Extra considerations need to be taken into account when applying the NPS to the public sector. For example, the general public typically are not in situations where they would recommend a state agency to others – especially when alternative are not available. --However, partners and customers can rate their likelihood to recommend the agency as an organization to work with and employees can recommend the agency as a place to work. How likely would you be to recommend MnDOT (as an organization to work with as a partner/customer) to a colleague? How likely would you be to recommend MnDOT to a friend or relative for employment? 4/6/2019

Communication about Results NoteMailer/Newsline with links to agency-level reports were sent in November – December 2018 (posted on Market Research iHUB) District/Office-level reports were emailed to District/Office leadership January 7-8, 2019 Email included: Customer and employee reports – specific to District/Office Spreadsheet of all open-ended responses (both surveys) Updated customer/partner contact list Reviewed agency-level results with SLT in November; reviewed next steps with Sue Mulvihill and Jody Martinson; Vid Con meeting Jan. 25; SLT Jan. 29

Next Steps PECS Market Research staff schedule follow- up meetings with District/Office leadership to review results and identify goals/strategies to implement Use results to inform goals/strategies in District Engagement Plans (due by end of FY19) Agency-level customer survey results –> KPIs for SOP Presented results at D7 DMT meeting last week; follow-up meeting with D7 leadership schl’d in Feb. and employee days in April Scheduled to present at D1 D&I Committee meeting Feb. 25 Will present to Metro DMT (district management team) in March Reach out to us if you have any standing management/employee meetings that you’d like us to attend PEOPLE – D3 Example of District Engagement Plan 4/6/2019

Thank You! 4/6/2019