QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October FACTORS AFFECTING COMPARABLE QoS PERFORMANCE REPORTING Alan Baughan Chairman ETNO QoS Working Group Cable & Wireless Communications
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October TOPICS TO BE COVERED Audience for QoS Reporting Definition Process ETNO Activities The UK CPI Reporting Model
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Audience for QoS Reporting Consumer Regulator Operators and Service Providers
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Definition Process Establish what needs to be measured Agree definition of measure for trial Establish measurement capability Test comparability
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Constructive dialogue and co-operation between its members Development of relationships with all European organisations that influence the future of European telecommunications ETNO Objectives:
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October ETNO Executive Board QoS Working Group ETSI ITU-T UK CPI Industry Forum WG
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Electronic MoneyData Protection & Fraud Control Information Security Frequency Management European Information Society Content Liability in ISITU Future Mobile ServicesNumbering Quality of ServiceResearch and Development Competitive Market IssuesICT Standardisation Strategy InternetExternal Trade Issues Asynchronous Transfer Mode ETNO Working Groups
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Establish agreed measurement principles Establish common terminology & definitions Establish comparable inter-operator parameters Investigate comparable customer satisfaction survey methods ETNO QoS Working Group Activities
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October UK CPI Industry Forum (IF) Operators Consumer Groups Regulator Development WG Maintenance WG New CPIs Changes to CPIs Maintain Definitions New Entrants Information Audit Process Review IF Contract Management Comparability Issues Publication Management
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October The UK CPIs for Business & Residential Services Service Provision - against commitment Service Restoration - against commitment Service Reliability - fault rate Complaint Handling - resolved within 20 working days Bill Accuracy - Bill Accuracy Complaints per 1000 bills
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Accuracy Audit Business Processes Extraction Methods Collation Process Audit Output Audit Report + Results Discrepancy Reports Comparability Reports Audit Opinion Forms Comparability Audit Audit Comparison across Industry Audit Process External Audit Body Comparability Audit Body
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October ETNO Identified Factors Affecting Comparable Customer Satisfaction Surveys Culturally dependent customer expectations Language differences Operational capabilities Non-standard product/service portfolios Differentiated market segmentation Financial implications and commercial sensitivities Limitations induced through competition
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Future Work of ETNO QoS Working Group To reach agreement on objective and subjective measurement sets for the following service areas: Leased Line Data Internet ISDN
QUTE’98 Workshop Heidelberg, October Benefits associated with Comparable Performance Reporting Standard indicators of common understanding Industry Benchmarks enabling competitive differentiation Informed consumer choice Basis to derive internal process measures More accurate correlation between hard & soft measures ‘Event’ driven customer satisfaction surveys support ‘Stock’ survey analysis