CSU

Customer Service Directorate2004 Survey Update

CAPT Larry Kirwan16 August 2004

CSU

Intro / Background

• Standards Published December 2002

• Baseline Survey Oct 2003

• Developed Statistically Accurate Sampling to allow NRA level detail

• Survey Online May 1, 2004

CSU

Status

• Customer Service Survey conducted 1 May to 14 July 2004

• Over 21,700 responses received• Compiled data, reviewed all comments• Developed NRA specific report of results sent to

REDCOMS / AIR for distribution

CSU

Differences Between 2003 and 2004 Surveys

• Modified questions based on customer feedback• Eliminated low importance questions• Added questions on Internet access• Provided interface for COs to monitor response levels• Provided immediate results to survey participants• Established statistically accurate NRA baseline

CSU

Analysis Process

• Analyzed:– Gaps

– Ratio of Negative Comments to Positive Comments

– Total Count of Negative Comments

• Combined these analyses into a Dissatisfaction Index– Indicates areas requiring focus and resources

• Further Analyzed:– Comments

– Comparison Based on Center Size

– Officer / Enlisted Comparison

– Comparison to 2003 Baseline

CSU

Force-Wide Gap Results (the lower the gap the higher the satisfaction)

0.7

1.01.21.21.21.2

1.31.51.6

1.81.91.9

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0P

ho

ne

Pro

b.T

rack

ing

Tra

vel C

laim

s

Em

ail

Pa

y P

rob

lem

s

Em

erg

en

cie

s

Co

re H

ou

rs

Fu

ll S

erv

ice

Un

iform

s

Pro

fess

ion

alis

m

GT

CC

Dri

ll P

ay

Ga

p

CSU

Comment Totals by Category

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Pro

fess

ion

alis

m

Ad

min

Me

dic

al

Dri

ll P

ay

Inte

rne

t

Ph

on

e

Co

re H

ou

rs

Tra

inin

g

GT

CC

Pa

y P

rob

lem

s

Ord

ers

Un

iform

s

Tra

vel C

laim

s

Em

ail

Sta

ffin

g

Afte

r H

ou

rs A

vail

PS

D

Tra

vel

Re

tire

. Po

ints

Em

erg

en

cie

s

CSU

Dissatisfaction Index (based on gap, comment ratio, and total negative comments)

Categories ranked 1 – 12 (with 1 being best)

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Ph

on

e

Tra

vel C

laim

s

Co

re H

ou

rs

Fu

ll S

erv

ice

Em

ail

Pro

b.T

rack

ing

GT

CC

Pa

y P

rob

lem

s

Un

iform

s

Em

erg

en

cie

s

Pro

fess

ion

alis

m

Dri

ll P

ay

Dis

sa

tis

fac

tio

n In

de

x

CSU

Dissatisfaction Index

• Top Four Areas of Need– Communication Responsiveness (Phones and Emails)– Travel Claims– Core Hour Effectiveness (Core Hours and Full Service)– Problem Tracking

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

Ph

on

e

Tra

ve

l C

laim

s

Co

re H

ou

rs

Fu

ll S

erv

ice

Em

ail

Pro

b.T

rackin

g

GT

CC

Pa

y P

rob

lem

s

Un

ifo

rms

Em

erg

en

cie

s

Pro

fessio

na

lism

Dri

ll P

ay

Dis

sa

tis

fac

tio

n In

de

x

CSU

Comment Interpretation

• Professionalism– Highest number of comments (1721)

– Only category where positive outweighed negative (3:1)

• Significant IT dissatisfaction:– Multiple Passwords (Single Sign-on)

– NMCI accessibility

– CAC Requirements (reader installation)

– Lack of training on new applications

• Admin and Medical– Repeat update requirements leads frustration

– Departments often singled out either positive/ negative

CSU

Breakdown by Center Size

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

2.00

2.20

2.40P

hone

Em

ail

Pro

b. T

rack

Cor

e H

ours

Ful

l Ser

vice

Em

erge

ncie

s

GT

CC

Tra

vel C

laim

Dril

l Pay

Pay

Pro

blem

s

Uni

form

s

Pro

fess

iona

lism

Small Medium Large Force

* Small Centers significantly out perform Medium and Large

CSU

2.3

2.0 2

.3

1.4

1.4 1.5

0.5

2.0

0.7

1.8

1.0 1

.2

1.7

1.4 1

.7

1.1

1.2 1.3

1.2

1.8

0.7

1.4

1.2

1.2

0

1

2

3

4

Phone

Em

ail

Pro

b.T

rackin

g

Core

Hours

Full S

erv

ice

Em

erg

encie

s

GT

CC

Tra

vel C

laim

s

Dri

ll P

ay

Pay P

roble

ms

Uniform

s

Pro

fessio

nalism

GA

P

Officer Enlisted

Breakdown by Officer /Enlisted

• Officers more dissatisfied in most areas• GTCC and Uniforms show larger impact on Enlisted

CSU

Results Compared to 2003 Baseline

2.4

2.1

1.9

1.7

1.6

1.3

1.9

1

2.1 2

.2

1.4

1.9

1.6

1.2

1.2 1

.3

1

1.8

0.7

1.5

1.2

1.2

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3P

ho

ne

Em

ails

Co

re H

ou

rs

Fu

ll S

erv

ice

Em

erg

en

cie

s

GT

CC

Tra

ve

l C

laim

s

Dri

ll P

ay

Pa

y P

rob

lem

s

Un

ifo

rms

Pro

fessio

na

lism

Gap

2003 2004

* Significant improvement in Uniforms

CSU

Computer Access (Outside NRA)

88%

43%

13%

2%

57%

39%

8%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Home Work Other None Dial-up HighSpeed

Don'tKnow

* Sailors have internet access, however it is low speed

CSU

Recommendations

• Communication and Core Hours– This is a Leadership issue– The solution is continual emphasis on the importance of:

• Returning Phone Calls• Answering E-mails• Being open for Full Service

– Reinforcement from the top down

• Problem Tracking– Resource requirement for the implementation of a universal tracking system

(GOTS, COTS) for all commands

• Travel Claims – Consistent Process and Procedures– DTS Roll-out plan

• Single Sign-on – Continue push for single sign-on solution