1. By ERIN Research CITIZENS FIRST 5 Regional and federal results 2008

2. 2 Table of contents 1 History of Citizens First 2 Objectives 3Highlights 4 Method and sample 5 Service quality ratings are improving 6For routine services, citizens say… 7 Channels and access 8 Other learnings 9New insights into the roots of confidence 10 The forward path

3. Objectives

4. 4 The 7 main objectives of CF5 1Assess government performance in providing services 2Determine the factors that drive customer satisfaction 3Identify priority areas for improvement 4Monitor progress against key performance indicators 5 Understand privacy and security priorities of citizens 6 Focus on the experiences of persons with disabilities 7Provide more insight into factors that contribute to confidence in government and in the public service

5. A brief history of Citizens First

6. 6 CF5 is the latest in a series of world class initiatives. The pan-Canadian research equips service managers with client-centred results In 1998, a group of federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal service providers came together to forge a citizen-centred approach to improving public services The objective was to gain empirical evidence that would guide improvements in service delivery Canadians had their say in a survey, telling governments their thoughts about the delivery of public services, their expectations, and their priorities for improvement The 1998 survey formed the baseline against which progress has been measured through 4 subsequent studies

7. 7 A brief history of Citizens First In 2004 and 2007, Taking Care of Business provided a parallel perspective on business customers The original CF, together with the Common Measurements Tool (CMT), garnered national and international acclaim with a Gold Award (IPAC) and a Silver Award (CAPAM) for Innovation in Management In 2003, the innovative Institute for Citizen-Centred Service (ICCS) took over the CF venture In 2008, 18 federal, provincial, territorial, municipal, and regional partners participated in CF5 Canada has the most advanced program of this nature in the world Canada is regarded as a leader and model in citizen- centred research

8. 8 What leaders say… The Citizens First series, together with related series, Taking Care of Business, has established the gold-standard for research on public sector service delivery, not only in Canada, but around the world. The ICCS methodology and approach have equipped public sector managers with the tools they need to identify action priorities for service improvement in the public sector. Ralph Heintzman, Adjunct Research Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa, Canada, 2008 ” “

9. 9 What leaders say… Our connection with the Institute for Citizen-Centred Service has allowed us to adapt Canada's world-leading, all-of-government approach to driving performance improvements in the New Zealand context. Using the Citizens First intellectual property we have determined the New Zealand drivers of satisfaction with service quality and have carried out our first public survey, Kiwis Count. Helene Quilter, Deputy Commissioner, State Services Commission, New Zealand, 2008 ” “

10. 10 Sponsors of CF5, 2008 Principal Sponsors Canada Revenue Agency Government of British Columbia Government of Ontario Service Canada Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Enhanced Sponsor Region of Peel Core Sponsors Canada Post City of Calgary City of Toronto City of Vancouver Government of Alberta Government of Manitoba Government of Nova Scotia Government of Quebec Government of Yukon Veterans Affairs Canada Western Economic Diversification, Government of Canada York Region

11. Highlights

12. 12 1 - Service Quality ratings rise over 10 years 26 federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal services have been tracked in all 5 CF surveys. The average score for these services has risen from 64 in 1998 to 72 in 2008 - an 8-point increase 70 services have been tracked in at least two surveys: 37 show an upward trend, 31 show no statistically significant change, and 2 have declined. Of those that did not change, 15 have appeared in just the last two Citizens First studies, therefore, the time frame is relatively short

13. 13 2 - Five drivers are the key to customer satisfaction Five drivers account for customer satisfaction across the full range of government services:  Timeliness: the single most important driver across all services and all governments  Staff: Customers appreciate knowledgeable staff who treat them fairly, “go the extra mile", and make that extra effort  Positive outcome: “I got what I needed”  Ease of access  Citizens’ recent experiences with public services

14. 14 3 - For routine services, citizens say… Citizens’ number one priority is timeliness – in government offices, on the telephone, in electronic communications, and through the mail In most of these areas, citizens’ expectations have remained stable over the past 10 years, for example: 2 people is the maximum number that most citizens want to deal with, either in a government office or on the telephone, 5-9 minutes is the maximum length tolerated of any queue, and same day response to voicemail or email if message is left at 10:00 AM One area has shown a steady and dramatic shift over time: citizens now want much faster turnaround in mail services – their expectation is just one to two weeks to receive a reply after mailing a request

15. 15 4 - Multi-channel use is on the rise An important source of information in each Citizens First study is a recent experience with government service that respondents describe in detail Over time, access patterns have changed: Nationally, in 2008: 59% of respondents used more than one channel to address their needs This is a significant jump from the 50% who reported using multiple channels in CF3, 2002

16. 16 5 - The Internet has “come of age” The initial CF study (1998) had no questions about Internet use – government services online were barely visible Today, Internet use is practically on a par with visits to government offices and telephone use 47% of citizens used the Internet during their “recent experience" Perhaps surprisingly, the Internet is not displacing traditional channels. Citizens use the Internet as a complement to, rather than as a replacement for, other channels

17. 17 6 - The people’s channel remains the phone The people’s channel, the telephone, remains the most commonly used channel in government services In terms of satisfaction, government offices and the Internet rate high, while the phone continues to rate considerably lower Citizens have more access problems on the phone than in any other channel Busy lines, difficulty finding the right number, trouble with automated phone systems, difficulty understanding the person at the other end, and waiting on hold all contribute to frustration Solving phone problems is essential because these problems manifest themselves in lower overall ratings

18. 18 7 - Persons with disabilities need more positive outcomes 7% of CF5 respondents reported they have a disability. People with disabilities rate the broad spectrum of government services lower than do persons without disabilities by an average of 2 to 5 points out of 100 A major reason is that persons with disabilities get a “positive outcome” less often, i.e. they do not get what they need As outcome is one of the key drivers of citizens’ satisfaction, this represents a significant concern

19. 19 8 - Privacy and security for online services Governments need to balance privacy and security with ease of access Concerns about Internet security and identity theft have become more prevalent in recent years CF5 asked two questions of respondents to gauge the degree of comfort that citizens have with this trade-off and to determine where they feel the balance between security and ease of access should rest A majority of Canadians are regular Internet users, and this group largely supports a single online ID for a) federal government services and b) services of all orders of government

20. 20 9 - Insights into the roots of confidence in government Confidence in government has roots both in good service and in confidence in the public service Confidence in the public service, in turn, rests on competent management and the perception that the public service is fair, honest, and in touch with the needs of their community

21. Method and sample

22. 22 Method CF5 is a national survey of citizens in every Canadian province and territory The results presented in the report are all based on the weighted sample in which the number of respondents aligns with the actual population of the jurisdiction CF5 was designed to enable comparison service quality scores with the four previous iterations of Citizens First CF1 and 2 were conducted entirely by mail In CF3, one-sixth of the responses were obtained from an online panel and the intent was to increase the proposition of online respondents over time In CF5, the online panel contributed fifty percent of respondents (CF4 did not report any online data)

23. 23 Sample Mail sample In field, October 2007 to January 2008 National: 3,727 completes, a response rate of 13% Online panel sample In field, October to November 2007 National: 3,040 completes, a response rate of 13% Regional composition West30% Ontario39% Quebec23% Atlantic7% Territories0.3%

24. Service quality ratings are improving

25. 25 The long-term trend in client satisfaction The long-term trend has been upward for the majority of services tracked over 10 years, in 5 studies, since 1998 86 services were measured in CF5 and about one-third of these have appeared in each study since 1998 The average rating for the services common to all 5 studies has increased to a statistically significant degree. The change from 2005 to 2008 is not statistically significant.

26. 26 Major municipal services

27. 27 Municipal, provincial and territorial services (1)

28. 28 Municipal, provincial and territorial services (2)

29. 29 Municipal, provincial and territorial services (3)

30. 30 Federal services (1)

31. 31 Federal services (2)

32. 32 Federal services (3)

33. 33 Regional scores: Current federal services (1)

34. 34 Regional scores: Current federal services (2)

35. 35 Regional scores: Current federal services (3)

36. For routine services, citizens say…

37. 37 For routine services, citizens say…

38. 38 Service standards: Trends over time

39. 39 Service standards: Trends over time

40. 40 Service standards: Trends over time

41. 41 Service standards: Trends over time

42. 42 Service standards: Trends over time

43. 43 Service standards: Trends over time

44. 44 Service standards: Trends over time

45. 45 Service standards: Trends over time

46. 46 Service standards: Regional results

47. 47 Service standards: Regional results

48. 48 Service standards: Regional results

49. 49 Service standards: Regional results

50. 50 Service standards: Regional results

51. 51 Service standards: Regional results

52. 52 Service standards: Regional results

53. 53 Service standards: Regional results

54. Channels and access

55. 55 Recent experiences were analyzed to understand channel use, access, and satisfaction Respondents chose one recent experience with any order of government (i.e. federal, provincial, territorial, regional, municipal) services and answered a series of more than 50 questions about it The next table illustrates the 36 services that respondents most frequently chose as their recent experience. The services listed here account for about two-thirds of the total number of “recent experiences” In all, the 6,700 respondents described more than 100 different services The recent experience data are broadly representative of citizens’ day-to-day contact with government services

56. 56 Citizens described these major recent services * Indicates jurisdiction’s services

57. 57 Which governments did you deal with?

58. 58 Reason for seeking the service Results include services delivered by all orders of government. Percentages add to more than 100 as some respondents indicated more than one reason

59. Reasons for seeking the recent service 59 Percentages add to more than 100 as respondents could choose more than one reason for seeking the service

60. 60 Service quality: up close and recent Results include services delivered by all orders of government..

61. 61 Multi-channel use on the rise An important source of information in each Citizens First study is a recent experience with government service that respondents describe in detail. Over time, access patterns have changed: In 2008: 59% of respondents used more than one channel to address their needs. This is a significant jump from the 50% who reported using multiple channels in CF3, 2002

62. 62 Multi-channel use Results include services delivered by all orders of government. The number of channels used does not differ significantly across regions.

63. Number of channels used in the recent experience 63 65% of those who described a federal service used more than one channel, compared to 56% of those who described other services

64. 64 Channel use Results include services delivered by all orders of government. Percentages add to more than 100 as respondents used more than 1 channel

65. 65 Channel use for federal and other services Results include services delivered by all orders of government. Percentages add to more than 100 as respondents used more than 1 channel

66. 66 Switching behaviour Results are for federal services only

67. 67 Satisfaction with channels Results are for federal services only

68. 68 The people’s channel remains the phone The people’s channel, the telephone, remains the most commonly used channel in government services Government offices and the Internet rate high, while the phone continues to rate considerably lower Citizens have more access problems on the phone than in any other channel Busy lines, difficulty finding the right number, trouble with automated phone systems, difficulty understanding the person at the other end, and waiting on hold all contribute to frustration Solving phone problems is essential because these problems manifest themselves in lower overall ratings

69. 69 Impact of access problems (1) Results are for federal services only

70. 70 Impact of access problems (2) Results are for federal services only

71. 71 Number of access problems impact satisfaction CF5 results are for federal services only; TCOB results are all orders of government

72. 72 Access problems underlie the ease-of-access rating Results are for federal services only

73. 73 Access problems in different channels Results are for all orders of government

74. Drivers of satisfaction by channel

75. 75 Drivers for mail, email and fax Results are for all orders of government

76. 76 Drivers for online services Results are for all orders of government

77. 77 Drivers for services that involve staff Results are for all orders of government

78. 78 Impact of each driver on overall satisfaction Results are for all orders of government

79. 79 Current performance on drivers Results are for federal services only

80. 80 Illustration of drivers in 5 specific service situations Results are selected from several orders of government

81. Other learnings

82. 82 7% of all CF5 respondents reported disabilities Persons with disabilities: Are more negative on most of the attitudes toward government by 4 to 10 points out of 100 Tend to rate satisfaction with services slightly lower than others, although the difference on most services is not statistically significant Tend to use certain services less, as might be expected because of their disability (e.g., parks and recreation, employment programs, Employment Insurance) Also tend to use other services less, possibly because of visual and auditory barriers (e.g., National Film Board) Are slightly older and have a slightly lower income than the rest of the population

83. 83 Accessibility problems encountered When asked whether government service providers could improve access for persons with disabilities:  63% of persons with disabilities said yes for phone service  62% reported likewise for visits to government offices  57% reported likewise for Internet usability  63% reported likewise for staff training “I can readily access any government service that I need”  Average agreement score for persons with disabilities is 48 out of 100  Average agreement for others is 53 out of 100 National results

84. 84 Perspectives on the “recent service” of persons with a disability

85. 85 Drivers related to persons with disabilities Persons with disabilities rated satisfaction in their “recent experience” service lower than others by 6 points out of 100 (average scores = 53 and 59, respectively) The drivers fully account for the difference between persons with disabilities and others The problem centres on lack of a positive outcome There is a 13 point spread: 58% of those with disabilities got what they wanted compared to 71% of others A negative outcome is associated with lower ratings of staff performance and timeliness and this in turn reduces overall satisfaction (the model of customer satisfaction explains these dynamics) National results

86. 86 Privacy and security for online services There is an ongoing need to balance ease of use with security and privacy Citizens who use the Internet indicate ease of use is important Most support a common ID to access all government services

87. 87 Overall response to privacy and security questions

88. 88 Regular Internet users favour a common user ID National results

89. New insights into the roots of confidence

90. 90 Confidence in public institutions The new model of confidence in public institutions provides a roadmap for leaders and managers “Confidence” has 2 main components in CF5: Confidence in government, measured by:  “I believe the government does a good job”  “I get good value for my tax dollars” Confidence in the public service, measured by:  “I trust the public service to do what is right”  “I can count on the public service to do what is right for citizens”

91. 91 Drivers of confidence in Government and the Public Service

92. 92 How to read the confidence model… At the top level, confidence in the public service contributes to the broader concept of confidence in government The middle level contains “direct drivers” – things that have a direct effect on either confidence in government or confidence in the public service The impact of the lower level drivers is mainly indirect – they affect the middle level drivers, and through these affect confidence This confidence model accounts for 81% of the variance in citizens’ confidence in government and 82% of the variance in citizens’ confidence in the public service - an excellent result

93. 93 Middle level - “direct” drivers Service reputation scores contribute to confidence in the government and confidence in the public service Service impact of government services: Citizens who believe that services had a positive impact on their lives express greater confidence in government. These citizens also express greater confidence in the public service, though this relationship is not as strong Public Service management: Citizens who believe that the public service is well managed have greater confidence in both the public service and government in general Public Service is in touch with the needs of my community: This perception has a strong impact on citizens’ confidence in the public service

94. 94 Bottom level - “indirect” drivers Satisfaction with recent services: This measure combines ratings of specific municipal, provincial/territorial, and federal services. Positive experiences with government services contribute to the direct drivers. They cause citizens to:  have a more positive view on the impact of government services  regard the public service as more in touch with the needs of their community  give higher ratings of Service reputation Citizens who experience the public service as honest and fair:  see the impact of public services as more positive  see the public service as more in touch with the needs of their community  have greater confidence in the public service

95. 95 Service reputation “Service reputation refers to the overall view that a person holds of the services of an order of government" National results

96. 96 Views on government (1)

97. 97 Views on government (2)

98. 98 Views on the public service

99. The forward path

100. 100 The forward path The results of CF5 are relevant to every member of the public service across Canada. They give service providers and their leadership critical intelligence on what citizens experience, expect, and want in terms of delivery of government services At a high level, action in 3 areas is paramount to successfully achieving a truly citizen-centred public service that delivers services responsively and responsibly »1 Service »2 Research »3 Training and communication

101. 101 Service The key to better service lies in improving performance on the key drivers of service satisfaction, especially timeliness To make every single interaction as positive as possible, service providers should focus on the 5 drivers of satisfaction:  Timeliness: the single most important driver across all services and all governments  Staff performance: which includes fair treatment, knowledgeable, competent staff, and proactive staff who "go the extra mile", make that extra effort  Positive outcome: "I got what I needed"  Ease of access  Quality of recent service experiences: which highlights the importance of consistency in service delivery

102. 102 Service (2) The public service itself contributes to citizens’ confidence in government To increase confidence in government and the public service, leaders and providers must focus on these drivers:  Impact of service on the family and self  Public service management (strong leadership and competent managers)  Public service that is in touch with the needs of its communities  Positive experiences with services  Honest and fair public service

103. 103 Research To build empirically-grounded service improvement, all orders of governments should continue the Citizens First and Taking Care of Business initiatives Each study should build on the knowledge gained. Future studies should advance three priority areas:  Further refine the Confidence Model to include other issues that bear on citizen confidence in service delivery such as views of policy  Continue to track key information on service satisfaction and reputation as well as the patterns of channel utilization and perceptions of issues related to privacy and security (which are areas that have witnessed important changes over time)  As other countries have begun to license Citizens First, future research projects may be able to offer comparisons between international jurisdictions

104. 104 Training and communication Developing talented and responsive public service providers requires leadership, commitment, knowledge, and training It is important that the leadership is committed to enabling staff through training and coaching to achieve the required knowledge and skills One new option is the Certified Service Manager Program offered by ICCS. Doing this will enhance the link in the Service Value Chain between engaged employees and more highly satisfied clients and citizens who have greater confidence and trust in government and the public service Make “Insights” widely available to staff. “Insights” is a new 8-page bilingual resource for government service providers. It summarizes the key results of CF5, providing a handy overview of the important findings CF5 in an accessible format and readable style

105. Appendix

106. 106 4 key terms Driver – is a feature or element that has an important impact on satisfaction or confidence Service standard – is a commitment to delivering service at a particular level (e.g., how long a client can expect to wait in line) Service Value Chain (SVC) – is a model that illustrates the key building blocks in public sector service delivery. It is expressed as three main elements linked together as a chain: employee engagement (a combination of satisfaction and commitment), client satisfaction, and confidence in government Variance – is a mathematical measure of how people differ in their response. It is important to ask how much of the variance an analysis explains. If gender, for example, accounts for 1% of the variance in response to a question, it means that women and men are very similar in their responses. The model of satisfaction accounts for 80% of the variance in customer satisfaction – it provides a very full account of why some customers are satisfied while others are not

107. 107 Demographic profile: Community size & first language

108. 108 Demographic profile: Visible minorities, Aboriginal Canadians & Education

109. 109 Demographic profile: Primary occupation and income

110. 110 Drivers of satisfaction: Mail, email, fax

111. 111 Drivers of satisfaction: Internet

112. 112 Drivers of satisfaction: Staff

113. 113 Drivers of confidence in Government and the Public Service