ARCHIVED - Literature Review on Service Standards
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Literature Review on Service Standards
Prepared for
Innovative and Quality Services Division
Service and Innovation Sector
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Prepared by
Consulting and Audit Canada
Project No.: 550-0743
November 2001
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction
1.1 The
Role Of Service Standards
1.2 Outline Of Literature Review
2.0 What are
Service Standards
3.0 How to
Develop a Service Standard
4.0 Issues Related
to Development and Implementation of Service Standards
5.0 Metrics -
Issues/Hurdles/Barriers Related to Monitoring and Measuring service Standards
6.0 Conclusions
Annex A -
Written Material and Websites Referenced
Annex B - Best
Practices - Service Standards
Australia - Service Standards for Health Insurance
Commission
United Kingdom - Service Standards for the Inland
Revenue Taxpayers
United States - Service Standards for the
Environmental Protection Agency
1.0 Introduction
The Government of Canada is committed to modernizing government management and improving citizen/client satisfaction with the services it delivers. To this end, the government is moving forward on a number of important initiatives, including the Service Improvement Initiative. A key feature of this Initiative is the requirement for government departments and agencies to establish and to monitor service standards, and use them to manage client expectations as a means to improving client satisfaction.
This document presents a brief literature review of service standards. This chapter begins with a discussion of the role of service standards in the government's efforts to modernize government management and improve citizen/client satisfaction is presented. The chapter concludes with an outline of the material covered in the literature review.
1.1 The Role Of Service Standards
The Government of Canada is working to modernize government management in order to respond to Canadians' changing expectations and priorities. To this end in March 2000, the President of the Treasury Board tabled Results for Canadians: A Management Framework for the Government of Canada.[1] The Results for Canadiansframework is intended to facilitate the achievement of management excellence by improving management practices and aiming for the highest quality of service to the public. The framework describes the government's four core management commitments to achieve excellence in areas critical to a well-performing public sector, namely, citizen focus, results focus, strong public service values, and responsible spending.
With respect to citizen focus, Results for Canadians stated that government services must respond to the needs of citizens, be easy to find, and be available through the mail, by phone, on the Internet or - where populations warrant - at walk-in centres. Too often in the past, government services were designed from the "inside out"; they reflected the structures of government organizations more than the needs and priorities of citizens.[2]
One of the government's key means to support the Results for Canadians citizen focus and to modernize government management is the Service Improvement Initiative. This Initiative is intended to achieve significant, quantifiable improvement (of 10%) in citizen/ client satisfaction with services over the next five years[3]. The Initiative provides departments and agencies a framework for service delivery improvement which adopts a citizen's 'outside-in' perspective, is results-based, and is anchored in clients' own service expectations and improvement priorities.[4]
The essence of the Service Improvement Initiative is that the continuous and measurable increase in client satisfaction is the most reliable indicator of improvement in service quality and service performance: it is what quality and continuous improvement should now mean, and how they should be primarily, though not exclusively, measured. Leading-edge service organizations in the public sector, like their private sector counterparts, now use a results-based approach to the continuous improvement of client satisfaction, integrated with the annual business planning cycle.[5]
As illustrated in Figure 1, increased client satisfaction is to be achieved by measuring clients' expectations and priorities for improvement, setting service standards and related service targets linked to these expectations and revising service delivery processes accordingly, monitoring performance against these service standards, and then measuring client satisfaction and expectations again. Establishing and monitoring performance against service standards is a key feature of the Initiative and essential for managing client expectations.[6] In turn, by meeting or exceeding client expectations, government departments and agencies can be assured of being able to increase client satisfaction as suggested by the results of the Citizens First 1998[7]and the Citizens First 2000[8] surveys. Accordingly, continuous improvement would then take place by continuously repeating this process.
Figure 1. Increasing Client Satisfaction Through the Use of Service Standards
The Service Improvement Initiative also commits government departments to report within their existing annual Reports on Plans and Priorities/Departmental Performance Reports to Parliament the following: service standards for all key public services; performance against service standards; annual improvements in client satisfaction; and progress toward client satisfaction targets.
The Service Improvement Initiative policy framework commits those departments and agencies, which have significant direct service delivery activities for Canadians, to carry out a number of tasks and steps to improve client satisfaction and to continuously improve. In particular, one such step is to:
- Adopt and publish core service standards for each service channel (e.g., timeliness standards for telephone service, in-person service, electronic service, and mail service) that are linked to clients' expectations.[9]
As indicated in the Citizens First 2000 report, service standards are used in two main ways:
- to provide staff with performance targets (e.g., "Phone must be answered within three rings")
- to inform clients what to expect (e.g., "Waiting time is less than 10 minutes").[10]
The Citizens First 2000 report indicated that many organizations have seen performance improve dramatically as a result of implementing a program of service standards. The report suggested that governments make their services more accessible across many delivery channels, but especially the telephone. As well, the report suggested that the five drivers of citizen satisfaction (i.e., timeliness; knowledgeable, competent staff; 'the extra mile/the extra smile' [courtesy, and ensuring that the client has the best possible service experience]; fair treatment; and outcome) be incorporated into every line of government business, and that the drivers for specific programs be determined. Finally, the report also suggested that regular measurement of service drivers and service standards be integrated and staff be given feedback on their performance.[11]
1.2 Outline Of Literature Review
The focus of this document is to present a brief literature review of service standards and how it may help achieve client satisfaction. In doing so, Consulting and Audit Canada (CAC) undertook an Internet search to gather information relating to service standards and customer satisfaction practices employed by the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. As well, the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) provided a number of documents. In addition, a number of sources were reviewed dealing with service standards in the private sector, mainly in the United States. A list of the material is contained in Annex A.
The research that follows is divided into the following sections. Section 2 deals with definitions of service standards and related principles by examining how they are understood by public service organizations in various nations and how they fit in the respective client satisfaction improvement initiative. This is followed, in Section 3, by a review of how service standards should be developed in the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada (as reflected in TBS' How-to Guide).
Section 4 deals with issues related to developing service standards, followed by a section dealing with issues related to monitoring performance against service standards. Conclusions are presented in Section 6.
Annex A presents a bibliography of the literature reviewed and Annex B provides detailed examples of service standards in each of the three other countries examined.
2.0 What are Service Standards
In defining a service standard it is useful to examine what other national public service organizations are doing. For the purposes of this report, the service improvement initiatives of the United States, United Kingdom and Australia were examined. Putting Customers First, the United States program initiated in 1993 by the President, is committed to improving government services to citizens. The goal of the initiative is to make government service standards that match or exceed that of private organizations that provide a comparable service. Strong government leadership has led the initiative, however, it is committed to ensuring a 'balanced' approach involving staff and citizens and demonstrating results.
The current United Kingdom Service First program stems from a Citizen's Charter[12]released by the Prime Minister in 1991. The Charter provided a framework to help public sector organizations to provide the highest standard of government services. The current Service First program is committed to setting clear standards of service, reporting on performance, consulting and involving users, and providing remedies if things go wrong. It is also committed to 'locally-owned' programs to involve staff and users to the fullest.
The Australian Commonwealth Government turned to the use of service charters in order to transform the public sector into a more efficient, business like, and client-focused service. In 1997, the Prime Minister announced their program, More Time for Business, to encourage public sector organizations in Australia to focus on services delivered, measure and assess performance, and initiate performance improvement on an ongoing basis.
United States[13]
"Customer service standards are developed with the customer in mind and are designed to meet customer expectations. They are clear performance targets which measure customer satisfaction. These standards describe how accurate, reliable, timely, dependable and accessible services are delivered to customers. Each standard should be measurable, achievable, controllable and address what is most important to our customers."
Australia[14]
The Australian Department of Finance and Administration defines a service charter as follows:
"A service charter is a short publication that describes the service experience a client can expect from an agency. It allows for an open and transparent approach that all parties understand and can work within. It covers key information about an agency's service delivery approach and the relationship the client will have with the agency, including:
- what the agency does;
- how to contact and communicate with the agency;
- the standard of service clients can expect;
- clients' basic rights and responsibilities; and
- how to provide feedback or make complaint.
A charter need not cover every function and service an agency provides, or detail every aspect of service delivery. Rather, it should focus on the key areas seen as important by the agency's clients, stakeholders and staff. Essentially, it is living document that must evolve in line with changes to the agency and its clients. A charter in itself is not intended to confer legally enforceable rights on clients of Commonwealth agencies, although some individual commitments in that charter may have legislative links. Agencies might consider having their charter reviewed by a legal expert to ensure that the wording used does not inadvertently give rise to legal liability. A service charter is a public document that should be used as the driver for cultural change within the agency. This change can encompass client focus, changed business practices, outcomes rather than process, better and more responsive communications, and improved relationships with clients."
United Kingdom
The United Kingdom Cabinet Office's Modernizing Public Services Group defines a 'charter' as follows[15]:
"The main purpose of developing a charter is to improve access to public services and promote quality. It does this by encouraging the involvement of users and others in discussions about the service, telling them how to make contact, what level of service to expect, and how to seek a remedy if something goes wrong. The Charter does not in itself create new legal rights. But it helps users to claim existing rights, and may create new rights that are enforceable through non-legal means (for example through a complaints procedure or independent adjudicator). The key features of a charter are: a statement of the standards of service users can expect to receive; the arrangements for seeking a remedy should something go wrong; and information on the service provided (including contact numbers and addresses). Charters help staff too, by setting out clearly the services their organization provides. But their main audience is the user."
"A good charter will be:
- simple, accessible documents which tell users about an organization's service, the standards it will provide so that both users and staff know what the public can expect, and how they can contribute to setting them;
- based on widespread consultation with users and front-line staff;
- clear and effective in the remedies they set out when things go wrong;
- supported by well-developed systems and procedures, including for staff training, complaints handling and feedback, as well as for reporting and reviewing standards; and
- publicized in management and public documents, so that the organization is publicly accountable to users for delivering its standards."
The South African government has a similar approach. They base their initiative on a 'customer' concept - people should come first. They have identified the following eight principles to follow as part of Batho Pele (People First)[16]:
- Consultation - Citizens should be consulted about the level and quality of the public services they receive and, wherever possible, should be given a choice about the services that are offered
- Service standards - Citizens should be told what level and quality of public services they will receive so that they are aware of what to expect
- Access - All citizens should have equal access to the services to which they are entitled
- Courtesy - Citizens should be treated with courtesy and consideration
- Information - Citizens should be given full, accurate information about the public services they are entitled to receive
- Openness and transparency - Citizens should be told how national and provincial departments are run, how much they cost, and who is in charge
- Redress - If the promised standard of service is not delivered, citizens should be offered an apology, a full explanation and a speedy and effective remedy; and when complaints are made, citizens should receive a sympathetic, positive response
- Value for money - Public services should be provided economically and efficiently in order to give citizens the best possible value for money
This framework, in combination with other factors, demonstrates to the client that the department they are dealing with and the government, in general, is committed to satisfying their service expectations.
From the employees' perspective, the framework also delineates: their service goals and service standards, why these standards are necessary, how important their role is in creating and maintaining these standards, and where to turn should they encounter any problems or have any questions. It demonstrates the importance of client satisfaction as opposed to a series of new rules to follow.
For the federal government, the Treasury Board Secretariat's How-to Guide says "Service standards are a commitment by the organization to provide a certain level of service to clients. These are usually in areas such as communications, access, timeliness, interactions between staff and clients, and costs ... consistency counts…service standards must incorporate performance objectives ... important tools for managing client expectations and should reflect the available resources "[17]
The Guide then describes the elements of service standards:
- a description of the service provided and, where applicable, benefits clients are entitled to receive,
- service quality pledges or principles that describe the quality of service delivery clients can expect to receive, focussing on such elements as openness, fairness, courtesy, professionalism, choice of official language,
- performance objectives for key service aspects, such as timeliness, access, and accuracy of delivery,
- cost of delivering the service, and
- a clear complaint and redress mechanism for clients when they feel standards have not been met.
As part of its reaffirmation of its commitment, the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA) published a guide to assist its managers and staff design, develop, monitor, review or improve their program service standards. The guide states that "Service standards publicly state the level of performance the CCRA is committed to and, correspondingly, that citizens can reasonably expect to encounter".[18] This definition, which is perfectly consistent with TBS' How-to Guide, zeroes in on the essence of what a service standard is.
The CCRA recognizes that service standards for its compliance and enforcement activities have to take into account that many recipients of these activities have difficulty distinguishing between process and outcome issues. Service standards for these types of activities should focus on the process itself by ensuring clear expectations that relate to the CCRA's objective and approach, fair treatment and timeliness, where appropriate, and not on whether the client receives the desired outcome.[19] Accordingly, service standards for regulatory, inspection and enforcement activities should be focused more on the first four drivers of citizen satisfaction rather than the fifth, namely, outcome.
Table 1 compares service standard principles, as defined by Canada, United States, United Kingdom and Australia. The Canadian service principles are based on Appendix F of the How-to Guide for the Service Improvement Initiative.[20]
Table 1. Comparative analysis of Nation service standard principles.
| Service Standard Principles | ||||
| Principle | United States | Australia | United Kingdom | Canada |
| Widespread and equitable | √[21] | √ | ||
| Work with other service providers | √ | √ | ||
| Meaningful to individuals | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Based on consultation | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Drivers of client satisfaction outlined | √ | √ | √ | |
| Attainable yet challenging | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Affordable | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Owned by managers and employees | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Published | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Performance measured and reported | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Reviewed and updated | √ | √ | √ | √ |
| Re-engineering | √ | |||
In essence, a service standard is a criterion adopted by an organization defining how it should behave with respect to its client base (client base may be internal or external, see Chapter 3 - "How to develop a Service Standard"). Service standards may be public or internal policy.
Faye Schmidt makes the distinction between service standards and service targets. She defines service standards as "…statements or pledges that describe what level a service will be provided at (or the quality clients can expect to receive today)…."[22] She contrasts this against service targets, which are "…goals the organization is ultimately working towards." This approach, of "ultimately working towards" a target, highlights the importance of on-going effort and commitment to service measuring and improvement.
The Ontario Government defines service standards in terms of service targets that citizens should expect. The Ontario Public Service (OPS) Quality Service Initiative, which was released in June 1998, was set up with three goals and objectives, namely:
- Increase public satisfaction with OPS service;
- Ontario will measure up to external benchmarks in the public and private sectors; and
- Ontario will set the benchmark for quality among similar jurisdictions.[23]
The quality service framework is supported by Common Service Standards, which enable the OPS to be consistent in their application of the framework with customers or clients across ministries, measure how they are doing over time and demonstrate results. These standards were developed from information obtained in large scale surveys of Onatrio citizens and they reflect the levels of performance that Ontario citizens expect from their government.[24]
The Common Service Standards define minimum levels that ministries are expected to achieve. The Standards define quantitative performance targets for telephone service (e.g., calls are to be answered by the third ring, eight times out of ten during core business hours, calls are not to be redirected more than once), correspondence (i.e., mail, fax or e-mail is to be answered within 15 days of receipt or acknowledged within five days if a conclusive response is not possible within that time frame), walk-in service and complaint resolution (i.e., acknowledged within two days).
Service standard appears to be a very common term as indicated by its usage by the various governments. However, CCRA points out the importance of distinguishing between service standards and operational performance standards, even though they both are measurable indications of work performed and information from both is used to assess performance through the CCRA Balanced Scorecard.[25] Performance measures are important for internal management in order for managers to track progress against overall program delivery objectives. CCRA highlights the differences between service standards and performance standards as follows:
| Service standards | Operational performance standards |
| Client focused | Management focused |
| Publicly known | Internally known |
| External and internal accountability | Internal accountability |
CCRA offers the following example:[26]
- responding to an enquiry within 10 days from the date it has been received by the CCRA is a client service standard from a client perspective; and
- responding to an enquiry within 10 days of assignment to an officer is an operational performance standard from a manager's perspective.
According to CCRA, service standards are formulated with client involvement and focus on the aspects of service that are important to clients, whereas performance standards are internally formulated and focus on control points to manage operations.[27] Operational performance standards can be a good place to start developing service standards, as one moves from an internal processing standard to one that is meaningful to clients and communicated externally. Moving from a performance to a service standard can save design time and effort, and can simplify the issues of monitoring and reporting.
In summary then, a service standard is a client-focused standard, whereas an operational performance or process standard is more of an internal management measure, with the latter two focusing more on how resources, i.e., staff and funds, are allocated and managed.
3.0 How To Develop A Service Standard
As discussed in the TBS How to Guide[28], the first step in creating a service standard is to take stock of the organization's internal workings and capabilities. It is then important to understand and use input from the clients and the employees. The client/employee views on standards can then be matched to the resources available and a plan set to achieve them. The next steps are to implement the changes and monitor progress. The final step is to close the loop by evaluating and restructuring the program as necessary.
The TBS How to Guide[29] details the different aspects and considerations when developing service standards. The step by step guide begins by describing the findings from the Citizens First 1998 survey. This parallels the need for consulting with the client base to determine the areas which clients feel are priorities for service improvement.
Service standard principles to consider when developing service standards include:
- widespread and equitable,
- applicable throughout an organization,
- applied in equitably for each client in each region,
- meaningful to the individual, not only in dealing with issues that concern them but also by using easily understood language,
- based on consultation,
- attainable yet challenging, this is determined through analysis of the business line and its capabilities,
- affordable,
- owned by managers and employees,
- published,
- measured and reported,
- reviewed and updated.
The last two relate more to the importance of maintaining service standards as opposed to service standard development. This aspect would be included in any service commitment or charter and is integral in creating a successful service standard program.
The How-to Guide outlines the six steps to take in developing service standards. These provide the outline for the following discussion.
1. Know the business. This step involves analysing the client base, the services provided, and the business line partners. As mentioned in defining a service standard, a client base can be considered internal or external.
Figure 2 demonstrates the three basic models for client interaction. Scenario A is the most common and simplest model to deal with. This dynamic is the same as with Figure 1. The client initiates an encounter with the service deliverer or vice versa. Service standards are applicable at the point of contact. Standards are measured at that point, either internally or externally and adjusted as needed. This would be the case for services such as information on government programs.
Figure 2. Models of client/service deliverer interaction
In Scenario B, again the client contacts the service provider and seeks approval or a decision. However; the front line service deliverer acts more as a receptionist or gatekeeper than a true service provider and must rely on other service providers to enable the service to be delivered to the client. The same mechanisms apply as in Scenario A, but now the frontline service deliverer is in a client-provider relationship with the authoriser. This interaction now becomes integral in determining the client's reaction. If, for example, the process (authoriser) is not timely, the client will not be satisfied with service delivery. If the service deliverer is frustrated by the process (authoriser), this frustration may filter through to the client.
This scenario demonstrates the importance of establishing some form of internal service standard. It now becomes necessary to identify the limitations to service in internal processes and treat them as interactions in need of service standards. Thus, there can be service standards surrounding the client-service deliverer experience, as well as ones relating to the timeliness and outcome of the process or decision.
Scenario C demonstrates the case with regulators/inspection/enforcement (RIE). In this case, there tends to be regulations and legislation defining responsibilities of both the client and the RIE. Service standards must be carefully tailored to ensure a productive relationship between the two parties, and reflect the client's expectations of the RIE, as well as the RIE's expectations of the client.
2. Consultations. Part of the standard setting process is consultation with clients and staff. The consultations help determine what features are most important to the service, what the client satisfaction levels are (for benchmarking and improvement), what changes the clients need or want, what are the client expectations, and help to define what are the service provider's responsibilities. This step also includes outlining reciprocal roles and responsibilities. The Australian charter specifically mentions client responsibilities[30]. Client-centred public service does not place sole responsibility for reform on the public service; it relies on input through consultations with the client. Service standard practices are determined through dialogue with the client. The goal is to achieve a level of service acceptable to the client, but within the means of the service provider. These consultations may define certain responsibilities of the client as well as the provider. For example, Industry Canada, after consulting with stakeholders determined that to meet the level of service stakeholders expected with respect to merger notification, stakeholders would need to fund the process through a fee. The new fee structure was implemented in 1998. A follow up survey was conducted and found that 92% of stakeholders surveyed agreed that service standards were being met[31].
3. Client-sensitive service standards. The standards are set based on the client's needs and expressed in a way that is easy for them to understand. Pilot projects may be useful for they allow cost projections and reporting, as well the ability to fine tune the process before a large scale roll-out is initiated.
4. Train staff. Staff should be sensitive to the needs of the clients and equipped to deal with any demands the client may have. ACA touches on some aspects that should be considered to help realize that they are an integral part of the process:[32]:
- Empower the employees to do what ever is needed to make the customer (client) happy and reward the employee for doing so.
- Train employees to know whom their customers (clients) are and how to exceed their expectations.
- Be ready to adapt to changing client focus. Client service must be flexible to change, based on the clients' needs and wants.
- Tailor contact information from the client's perspective. Access to services must be simple and clear.
This step also involves training managers and supervisors in their role as leaders and motivators of the improvement program. United States Internal Revenue Service framework expands on the importance of the managerial role by committing to streamlining managerial responsibilities so as to afford them the time to become more involved with the day to day function of their group[33].
5. Communicate to clients and staff. When publishing service standards, it is important ensure client expectations are managed so that they do not exceed the capabilities of the department. Faye Schmidt points out the importance of managing client expectations. She contends that both the standard and the target need to be communicated. For example, the standard may be to answer the telephone within three rings, but the target may be to do this 8 times out of 10. If the client is only aware of the service standard, and that standard is not realized 100% of the time, the client's perceptions of government services may be adversely effected.[34]
Systems should be in place to measure performance achieved with respect to individual service standards based on initial benchmarking. Client satisfaction levels should be closely monitored and reported.
6. Implementation and quality management. Part of the process is to measure performance against service benchmarks. It is important here to develop a service improvement plan and to strive for continued on-going service improvement as well as cultivating the client-centred workplace environment.
In the OPS initiation phase, to focus ministries on the need for change and to help determine the proper course for their ministries the participating ministries were required to:[35]
- Orient and train their teams.
- Evaluate their ministry's performance against OPS quality service cornerstones using the available assessment tools.
- Establish a baseline and identify strengths, weaknesses, and gaps.
- Develop a quality service plan with performance indicators.
- Participate in the independent evaluation of the pilots.
Throughout the process of implementing the service standards, one must keep in mind the context as set by the service standard principles. The context set through these factors must be maintained throughout the implementation phase. These principles help set the tone of the implementation phase and change the overall workplace culture from service-centred to client-centred. They create the context through which the service standard initiative maintains its overall cohesiveness.
The steps in the USAID process for establishing service standards are as follows:[36]
Step 1: Now Your Mission
The mission statement describes your operating unit's role in providing
services to the ultimate customer.
Step 2: Focus On The Vision
The vision is shared by top management, involves customers, employees and
partners to achieve the best sustainable development.
Step 3: List Your Key Customers And Partners
Once you have identified your operating unit's customers and partners,
this will help you clarify the focus for your customer standards.
Step 4: Define Key Services And Link
Customers/ Partners And Employees
Identify the key services and products your operating unit provides.
Step 5: Continue To Listen To Your Customers
USAID's continued commitment to listen to customers is extremely
important.
Step 6: Define What System/Process Changes
Are Necessary To Satisfy Customers
Review the final analysis of what your customers expect.
Step 7: Develop Clear, Simple, Measurable
Customer Standards
Continue to focus on areas that are most important to your customers.
Step 8: Give Feedback To Your Customers
Find ways to let your customers know what your standards are.
Step 9: Monitor And Measure How You Are
Doing
Track your progress.
Step 10: Benchmark Your Success
Know whether customers are satisfied - determine results.
One notable difference among nations is the emphasis that the United States places on 're-engineering' of operating processes to help bring about dramatic changes in service improvements. No other nation gives as much attention to this feature of service standards. This stems from the 'Balanced Measure' approach to public service improvement. This approach identifies three interrelated factors that require attention to effectively improve customer service and satisfaction: employee satisfaction, business results and client satisfaction. All three factors must be carefully considered in establishing organizational objectives and goals, assessing performance, and ultimately, effecting real service improvements.
A second notable difference is that the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada tend to be more prescriptive with respect to how to improve service. Each provides a 'how-to' guide that outlines the drivers of client satisfaction, and includes an emphasis on issues such as providing widespread and equitable services to clients across the country. The summary of suggestions for establishing charter standards in the box below provides an example of the kind of guidance provided by the Service First Initiative.[37]
| Summary of Suggestions for Establishing Charter Standards: United Kingdom Service First Program |
|
Charter standards set out clearly the service that users can expect to receive. Good standards are vital for an effective charter, and should be expressed in a way that is meaningful to all users. They usually focus on different issues from the strategic performance targets set by ministers for their departments and agencies. Standards should correspond to minimum service that central government departments and executive agencies should apply in their dealings with the public. The standards should be based on the views of users and potential users - they should be contacted directly. Find out what is important to them. Others (especially front-line staff) should be involved to tap their ideas for increasing the efficiency and quality of services. Complaints and comments will help identify those issues that users think are important and any weaknesses. Senior managers should also be involved to ensure and show top-level commitment to the process. Charter standards should cover the main services provided. They should focus as much on the quality of the service, and the overall experience for the user as on the more easily assessable measures of activity and process. Standards should relate to: the service provided (for example issuing correctly documented passports, or payment of the correct rate of benefit on the due date); the way in which you deliver the service (for example the speed with which you answer letters or phone calls); and the quality of service provided. Charter standards should, wherever possible, address all users. Try not to write standards in such a way that they address only some (even if the majority) of users. Research shows that many people do not understand percentages. So wherever possible avoid their use. Think carefully about the wording of the charter. It should make clear whether users have a right to each standard that is enforceable through the courts or other means (for example a complaints procedure or independent review), or whether you simply aim to meet them as targets. Enforceable right - a charter standard that applies to all users all of the time they use the service. It must be clear when the standard has not been met, and a remedy must be available. Either the provider must immediately put things right, or it must be possible for the user to enforce a remedy through a dispute resolution process (for example the courts, regulator, an ombudsman, or appeal panel). Target - a level of service which the provider is aiming to provide, but which the user cannot always expect to receive, and for which a remedy is not necessarily available. A target that is likely to be unattainable more than 25% of the time should be changed. You should make clear what happens if targets are not met. Standards should be challenging, but realistic. They should be drawn up, where appropriate, by comparing them with those developed by comparable organizations in the United Kingdom, and where relevant, overseas. Be careful when developing standards to avoid unintended results, for example to focus staff on easy cases at the expense of difficult ones. You should also be honest about what can be provided. Raising expectations unrealistically leads to frustration, which may in turn provoke rudeness or worse. Standards should be easy to understand and written in plain language. Standards should be measurable. There is no point telling people that they will be seen 'quickly' unless you tell people what this means and then monitor your performance. Procedures should be developed to monitor the organization's performance against its standards. This could be done either as part of normal operating procedures (for example time taken to process claims and error rates) or by surveys of users, or mystery shopping (for example sampling how your service is actually being delivered). To demonstrate the effectiveness of the service in an open and verifiable way, wherever possible an external organization should validate your performance independently against your charter standards. This task could be undertaken by a statutory body or a commercial auditor. Users have a right to know how you are performing against your standards. The results of monitoring should be published in such a way that it gets to as many users as possible, and is easily understood by them. Results of monitoring should be regularly reviewed by senior staff and action to be put in hand if standards are not met. Consider whether standards need to be updated in order to remain relevant and challenging. |
Some international examples of best practices in the development of service standards is presented in Annex B.
4.0 Issues related to development and implementation of Service Standards
When implementing service standards, each organization faces challenges specific to its business line. However, there are some common factors that can be considered to help overcome these issues. One of the main elements of Service Improvement Initiative is the consult and survey phase. When examining the OPS Common Service Standards, Carr-Gordon and Erin Research noted that, whether information is gathered before or after implementing service standards, employees may feel as though they are being tested[38]. It is important to instill in those participating that the goal is not to use the information to punish, but rather to improve client satisfaction, improve working environments, and increase efficiency.
In The Service Edge[39], Dr. Karen Brethower, an industrial psychologist, talks about the pitfalls of using Customer Satisfaction data to communicate improvement ideas to employees. There are six areas that must be explored before data can be used to help initiate change:
- Do not use data as a basis to punish, embarrass or scold employees.
- Insure that information is presented with the employee in mind. Show how change can benefit the employee.
- Make sure the information is not outdated. Take into account changes in the working environment since the time the data was collected.
- Insure that the criticisms given are about things that can be changed.
- Insure that information is pertinent to the employee's job.
- The information should be easy for the employees to collect or it will be overlooked.
It is considerations such as these that will help to achieve manager and employee buy in, not only in the initiation phase but also throughout the service standard implementation process.
Once the standards have been initiated, employee buy-in must be maintained. When the OPS implemented its Common Service Standards it found, through a survey, that employees did not necessarily link Common Service Standards and a responsive government. Carr-Gordon[40] suggests that there are some important points to highlight for employees in order to avoid this misconception:
- Service standards are citizen-driven criteria whose foundation rests on extensive research with the public.
- Service standards are minimum service level for everyday situations.
- Each department will expand on the basic service standards as is relevant to their particular situation.
- Service standards are integral to improving public service and should be linked to business results and performance contracts.
Another important factor to consider is the time frames of implementation. With the initiation of the OPS initiative, positive results were seen in the pilot groups within the first year of implementation. The Carr-Gordon[41] report on the pilot project warns that, though improvement had been seen in the first year of the initiative, it would take another five years to integrate the program throughout an organization the size of the OPS.
The report identified some important features of the most successful programs. Each program combined client and employee assessments. Employee assessment helped to determine where programs were needed for training, leadership development, and process improvement. Client assessments help to determine where citizen focus was centered. Some key aspects of this study were the need for:
- Visible senior executive leadership and commitment over time
- Consistent communication of best practices and what makes them so.
- Reward, recognition, and positive reinforcement for those who achieve results.
- Integration of quality service plans with business plans, resource allocation, performance measures, and results.
- Standards and measures that assess quality and allow for comparisons.
- Central support in the form of training, tools, and information sharing.
- Reporting results and accountability for achievement.
The Auditor General of Canada's 2000 report[42] comments on in the implementation of service standards notes the time it has taken to integrate the client service initiative. The report points out that the proper framework has been put in place with such works as the Citizens First 1998 and 2000 reports, the TBS How-to Guide, and web resources. However, the information is not being disseminated quickly enough through the departments. Although many departments have made efforts in some areas, there is a need for a wider acceptance of the overall principles. Departments must begin implementing client service standards on a larger scale. Employee and manager buy-in must be encouraged to a greater degree. The importance of implementing service standard mechanism must become part of the day-to-day function of the public service. Training and monitoring mechanisms must be put in place constantly reminding management and employees of the importance of a client centred public service.
5.0 Metrics - Issues/Hurdles/Barriers Related To Monitoring And Measuring Service Standards
Service standard metrics will generally be of two forms. Either input is overtly generated through requests for information from clients and employees or information is gathered without knowledge of those involved. The first form of metrics includes client feedback forms, complaint forms, non-solicited suggestions, employee feedback forms, consultation groups (client or employee), and client surveys (mail/e-mail, internet, phone/fax or in person). The second form of metrics can include techniques such as the mystery shopper approach employed in the OPS survey. In this case, questions are prepared and a group randomly contacts the department to record the various service aspects of the encounter. This form of metric may also include such measures as silent monitoring and peer review.
In Achieving Common Service Standards[43], three aspects are deemed integral to achieving good service:
- "Measure OPS performance on a regular basis
- Ensure that measures are consistent across ministries
- Report results in a quantitative manner"
The report details reporting procedures to help ensure greater consistency:
|
Reporting requirements for all Common Service Standards Ministries should:
Cabinet Office should:
|
The TBS How-to Guide also includes tools that may help create metrics specific to any business line. Appendix C details what is involved in developing a successful focus group and how a focus group may be most effectively used, as well as referencing and materials to consult should more information be required.
Appendix C also introduces the Common Measurements Tool (CMT) database. This database, maintained by TBS is a collection of client survey questions that may be used by different business lines. There are core questions to be used by all business lines, other questions may be selected by the business line based on appropriateness. The CMT is especially useful in that its consistency allows for extensive benchmarking, within the business line over time, as well as between different business lines. This is one of the areas where the Auditor General of Canada reported there has not been enough use of measuring and benchmarking[44].
An example of business line specific surveys can be found in the TBS report for Corporate Services Branch[45]. This report details how the Service Improvement Initiative may be applied to a specific business line. Annex E shows how questions from the CMT may be tailored to create a client survey touching on issues specific to a business line.
Appendix C of the How-to Guide also examines the use of comment cards. The Guide gives an example of a comment card to be used as a guide to help develop a business line specific card. As comment cards are often used as complaint cards, their use should be supplemented by other types of data, such as focus groups and client surveys.
Appendix D of the How-to Guide describes the creation of an employee survey. The employee survey is helpful in two ways. Employees are on the frontline of client service. They can identify issues that may be developing within the business line. Their input can identify areas in need of improvement. Also, consultation with employees if well handled and acted on, will improve communication, partnership, and motivation. This can increase morale, productivity, commitment, and organizational validity. The appendix details factors to consider when designing employee survey forms.
The second type of metric is best demonstrated in the Reports for the OPS Common Service Standards. They applied the mystery "shopper approach". A series of interactions (questions, information requests, comments, and complaints) were developed. These interactions were than presented to the ministries using the various points of access (in person, e-mail, telephone, mail). Then, each of the encounters was measured against the Common Service Standards.
The main theme of each of the approaches is continuity. It is necessary to maintain a consistent measuring system to measure change over time. However, measurement tools should be monitored as well. It is important to ensure that the appropriate aspect of client service is being measured.
The ACA[46] article and the Carr-Gordon/Erin Research report[47] also point out the importance of developing metrics to deal with processes in place within a department, which reinforces the idea of focusing on the internal client. If internal mechanisms are not monitored, it will be more difficult to implement plans for service improvement.
6.0 Conclusions
Citizens and clients are entitled to know what service quality to expect from government. Well-structured and communicated service standards help clients understand what to expect. Service standards can be an important component in efforts to improve client satisfaction. Problems and issues encountered in the past when developing service standards and metrics can be overcome.
For service standards to be effective they must have buy in from all levels. Managers must be seen as leaders, employees must continue to be trained and properly equipped to work to satisfy the standards. It is important to ingrain the need for consultation and reporting so that weakness can be identified and adjustments made. Departments should consider common reporting methods on service standards and other metrics associated with service improvement. The 2000 Auditor General's report stresses that, though there has been progress, there is still room for improving the measuring and benchmarking processes and it is only through a structured form of measurement that the Service Improvement Initiative can develop and grow with the changing needs of Canadian Citizens.
Based on the research to-date, it is apparent that the United States, United Kingdom and Australia have made substantial gains in the application and implementation of public service improvement initiatives. This provides the Government of Canada and its Service Improvement Initiative the opportunity to learn from the best practices employed in those countries, while keeping in mind the Canadian context. In developing service standard best practices, it may be worthwhile to do additional research on certain practices carried out in other countries, such as the 'Balanced Measures' approach of the United States, the communications plans employed in Australia, or the concept of 'local ownership' employed in the United Kingdom.
Annex A - Written material and Websites referenced
Written Material
Achieving Common Service Standards, External Validation of Phase 1 Standards, Final Report, June 1999, Carr-Gordon Ltd. and Erin Research Inc.
Barnes, James G., Secrets of Customer Relationship Management. McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001.
Client Service Charter Principles, Service Charters Unit, Competitive Tendering and Contracting Branch, Department of Finance and Administration, Australia, June 2000.
Ctizens First, Erin Research Inc., 1998.
Developing and Implementing Service Standards, BMB Consulting Services Inc., April 5, 2001.
Evaluation of the Quality Service Pilot Projects and Common Service Standard, Final Report, June 11, 1999, Carr-Gordon Ltd. and Erin Research Inc.
Operationalizising Citizen's Charters - The Use of Service Standards in Canada, presented to the International Conference on Good Governance, November 30 - December 1, 2000.
Report of the Auditor General of Canada - September, 1996 - Chapter 14.
Report of the Auditor General of Canada - April, 2000 - Chapter 1.
The Service Edge, Ron Semke, Penguin Books, New York, NY, 1989,
Towards Citizen-Centred Service Delivery: A How-to Guide for the Service Improvement Initiative, Innovation and Quality Services Division, Treasury Board Secretariat, 2000.
Websites
United States Government on line Library
http://afr-sd.org:8000/reson/Training/CustomerFocus/customerfocus.html (page not
found)
Service Standard Principles of the United States Evironmental Protection
Agency
http://www.epa.gov/customerservice/standards.htm
Australian Government Service Charters
http://www.hic.gov.au/
United Kingdom Government and Service Charters
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/index.htm
Draft White Paper On Transforming Public Service Delivery, 9 May 1997.
(link not available)
Good Practices in Service Improvement, Planning and Implementation,
TBS web site
http://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/si-as/index-eng.asp
How To Improve Customer Service, the ACA Group.
http://www.theacagroup.com/customerservice.htm
Annex B - Best Practices - Service Standards
The following section provides examples of three service standards, one from the United States, United Kingdom and Australia. Their respective governments recognized the Australian Health Insurance Commission (HIC) and the United Kingdom Inland Revenue Service (IRS) as exemplary examples of departments that improved customer satisfaction through the creation of service standards. The final example is the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a major government agency with eight core programs.
Australia - Service Standards for Health Insurance Commission
The Health Insurance Commission won a 'platinum' Award for Excellence in Customer Service in 1999 for the development and implementation of service charters to improve Medicare access.[48] The prize was awarded on the strengths identified in HIC's efforts to target and recognize rural and non-metropolitan customers, including improved access for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders to Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. The Commission was awarded for the following strengths:
- A proactive approach in seeking out what the customers require;
- Effectiveness of material on staff evaluation, in relation to awareness of the Service Charter;
- Targeting and recognition of rural and non-metropolitan customers;
- Linkages back into the business operations of the organization;
- Commitment to addressing language, cultural, religious and racial barriers between the Commonwealth Government and the Australian community.
| Australia - Health Insurance Commission |
|
Our service standards for public customers[49] Important Note: Claims payment standards relate to the time it takes us to issue a payment. For electronic funds transfer (EFT) claims, please allow 3 working days for bank processing. For cheque claims, please allow 2-6 working days for postal delivery. Medicare For claims made manually (via Medicare office, mail, fax, etc)
For claims made electronically (including via a doctor's surgery)
Childhood Immunization
Compensation
Paying claims
Enrolling for Medicare
|
United Kingdom - Service Standards for the Inland Revenue Taxpayers
Various regional offices of the Inland Revenue Service in the United Kingdom have won awards under the Charter Mark, which is the United Kingdom Government's award scheme for excellence in public service. Since the emphasis of Charter Mark is on user satisfaction, it is also considered a tool to help departments improve customer service and service delivery. Charter Mark judges look for the following criteria:
- communication of 'clear, tough and meaningful' performance standards to the public;
- communication to users about services and how to get the most out of them;
- wide consultation on necessary services and improvements;
- making use of public's ideas;
- availability of services to all who need them;
- polite and helpful staff and a user-friendly approach to customer service;
- opportunities for users to express dissatisfaction and swift response by staff to complaints;
- effective and prudent use of public resources;
- continual innovation and improvements in the quality of service provided;
- cooperation with other providers;
- user feedback that services are actually provided well.
|
United Kingdom - Service Standards for the Inland Revenue Taxpayers |
|
Our overall approach to customer service[50] This Charter covers the service provided to customers with regard to income tax, corporation tax and capital gains tax, by a network of local tax offices within the ten Regional Executive Offices, together with the two Accounts Offices, and Enforcement Office. For each tax, our aim is to provide an efficient, effective and fair service. This Charter has been developed after consultation with our customers and staff, and sets out:
Providing help and assistance to you We provide help:
Contacting us Opening hours Telephone service Addresses Our standards of service If you telephone us, we aim to:
If you visit our Inland Revenue Enquiry Centres, we aim to see you within 15 minutes of arrival if you have not previously made an appointment. If you write to our tax offices, we aim to respond to every question or issue you have raised within 28 calendar days. Where this is not possible, we will tell you why and when you can expect a full reply. However you contact us, we will:
In addition, we aim to:
Specific targets and previous year's results We deliver a national service on income tax, corporation tax and capital gains tax through ten Regional Executive Offices, supported by two Accounts Offices and Enforcement Office. The Regional Executive Offices annually produce customer service leaflets showing:
Inland Revenue Enquiry Centres can supply a copy of their Region's leaflet. Leaflets showing similar information for the Accounts Offices and Enforcement Office are available from those Offices. Information on customer service standards and achievements, together with the service standards operated by the Inland Revenue's specialist tax offices, is also found in the Department's annual report, available from The Stationery Office and on the Internet. Privacy and confidentiality In handling your affairs, we will:
Any special needs If you have any special needs (for example, related to a disability), we will provide whatever help we reasonably can. Most Inland Revenue Enquiry Centres have already been equipped with ramps, hearing loops and other aids, and we are installing Minicom systems (for people with hearing difficulties). Some of our leaflets are being converted, on a rolling program, to Braille, audio and large print. Details of specific services can be found in the Regional Executive Office Customer Service leaflets (available from Inland Revenue Enquiry Centres). If you need to see us, but you have a disability which prevents you from coming to our office, please phone or write explaining the problem and what you need from us. We will make the necessary arrangements to visit you. Please discuss any other requirements with the Customer Service Manager of the office with which you are dealing (you can get their name from any member of staff in the office). They will explain what they can offer to help you. Your legal rights and our Codes of Practice The Inland Revenue produces Codes of Practice explaining our approach and procedures in certain areas of work (especially tax investigations). The Codes set out, as appropriate, your legal rights and the rights of the Inland Revenue, and explain what you can expect to happen. Copies of the Codes are available from Inland Revenue Enquiry Centres and tax offices. How you can help us To help us deal with your tax affairs accurately and quickly, we sometimes need help from you. For example, we may ask you for more information. If we make such a request, please respond as quickly as you can, checking you have provided everything asked for. If you contact us, please have ready your tax reference number (shown on your tax return, provided in our correspondence with you and given on your pay slips). It is also useful if you can tell your tax office when your circumstances change - for example, when you get married or change your address. You are required by law:
It saves everyone trouble if you pay your tax on time. If you experience difficulty, please advise your tax office immediately. If you disagree with us You may disagree with our interpretation of the law or the way we have applied it to your particular circumstances. If so, you should tell us why you disagree. Alternatively, if we have already made a formal decision in respect of your tax liability, you are entitled to appeal against what we have done. We will explain how you can appeal when we give you our decision. If we can not resolve your appeal, you can refer it to the General or Special Commissioners - independent appeals tribunals whose decision is binding on both parties. Appeals on the Commissioners' interpretation of the law can be made through the civil courts. If you wish to complain If you are unhappy about the way we have dealt with your affairs (because, for example, of delays, mistakes or a failure to act on information you have given us), you should complain first of all to the Officer in Charge of the office or unit you are dealing with. Their name is displayed at the head of all correspondence. If you are still not satisfied, you can refer the complaint to the Director with overall responsibility for that office or unit. (The name and address of the Director is shown in leaflet IR120 'You and the Inland Revenue' and can also be obtained from any Inland Revenue office). If you are dissatisfied with the Director's response, you can ask the Adjudicator to look into your complaint. Finally, you can ask your MP to refer your case to the independent Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (the Ombudsman). The Ombudsman will accept referral from any MP, but you should approach your own MP first. IR leaflet IR120 explains these options. The Adjudicator's Office also produces a leaflet (AO1) explaining its role and procedures. Copies of the Adjudicator's leaflet are available from The Adjudicator's Office (Haymarket House, 28 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4SP) or any Inland Revenue office. Listening to your suggestions We welcome your suggestions and use them to improve our service and supporting processes. We supplement these with:
Please make any suggestions for improvement (including this Charter) direct to your Customer Service Manager at your tax office or Inland Revenue Enquiry Centre. Revision date This Charter came into force at 1 April 1999; it will be reviewed annually and (if not amended before then) will be reissued at 1 April 2002. |
United States - Service Standards for the Environmental Protection Agency
|
United States - Service Standard Principles for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)[51] |
|
EPA's Six Principles of Customer Service represent the overarching goals of the Agency for its customer service performance. The Principles are for all employees to use in serving all external and internal customers. The Six Principles are the basic building blocks that apply to any activity that serves customers. There are eight core processes which provide the majority of products and services to external Agency customers. Each of the eight sets of process specific standards should be used in combination with the Six Principles. EPA's Six Principles of Customer Service
Public Access Standards These standards apply to requests for general information from the public. They do not apply where legal requirements take precedence, such as Freedom of Information Act inquiries. They are in addition to the Six Principles and amplify them as they apply to working with the general public.
Research Grants Standards The following standards amplify and expand the Six Principles, applying
Permitting Standards In addition to the Six Principles, four standards apply to this process that serves three major customer groups (the general public, the regulated community and delegated State, Tribal, and local programs):
Pesticides Regulation Standards The standards following apply to pesticide regulation, and should be used in conjunction with the Six Principles.
Partnership Programs Standards The following standards amplify the Six Principles and provide additional goals for the Partnership Programs process:
State, Tribal, and Local Program Grants Standards The following standards apply to this process, in addition to the Six Principles:
Enforcement Inspections and Compliance Assistance Standards The following standards apply in addition to the Six Principles: Compliance Assistance Field Representatives:
Rulemaking Standards In addition to the Six Principles, the following standards apply to the Rulemaking process:
|
The are a number of examples of service standards which have been initiated both in public and private sectors. The 1999 Carr-Gordon/Erin Research report identifies the following best practices[52]:
Footnotes
[1] Treasury Board of Canada, Secretariat, Results for Canadians: A Management Framework for the Government of Canada (Ottawa, 2000), /report/res_can/siglist_e.asp.
[2] Ibid. p.7.
[3] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Toward Citizen-Centred Service Delivery: A How-to Guide for the Service Improvement Initiative (Ottawa: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, December 2000). The How-to Guide can be found at the TBS website: http://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/si-as/howto-comment/howto-comment-eng.asp.
[4] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, A Policy Framework for Service Improvement in the Government of Canada (Ottawa, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, June 2000). The policy can be found at the TBS website: /pubs_pol/sipubs/si_as/pfsi_e.asp.
[5] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Toward Citizen-Centred Service Delivery: A How-to Guide for the Service Improvement Initiative, op.cit. p.2.
[6] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, A Policy Framework for Service Improvement in the Government of Canada, op.cit. p.4.
[7] Erin Research Inc., Citizens First, (Ottawa, Canada School of Public Service, October 1998). The report can be found at the CCMD website: http://www.myschool-monecole.gc.ca/Research/publications/pdfs/cit-first.pdf.
[8] Erin Research Inc., Citizens First 2000, (Toronto, The Institute of Public Administration of Canada, 2001). The study was published by IPAC in 2001. The report can be found at the IPAC website: http://www.ipac.ca/pubs/ipac_publications/citizens_first.html
[9] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, A Policy Framework for Service Improvement in the Government of Canada, op.cit. p.5.
[10] Erin Research Inc., Citizens First 2000, op.cit.
[11] Ibid.
[12] In United States service standards are called 'customer service standards', in the United Kingdom they are called 'charter standards', and in Australia they are referred to as 'service charters'. These terms will be used interchangeably in the text.
[14] Client Service Charter Principles, Service Charters Unit, Competitive Tendering and Contracting Branch, Department of Finance and Administration, Australia, June 2000.
[15] Modernizing Public Services Group publication: "How to draw up a national charter.", United Kingdom, 2000.
[16] Draft White Paper On Transforming Public Service Delivery, 9 May 1997. (Link not available)
[17] Canada, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Treasury Board Secretariat, 2000 p. 27.
[18] Canada, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency's Guide to Service Standards (Ottawa: Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, November 2000).
[19] Ibid. p.7.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Based on minimum central government standards for service delivery in the United Kingdom.
[22] Operationalising Citizen's Charters - The Use of Service Standards in Canada, presented to the International Conference on Good Governance, November 30 - December 1, 2000, P. 10.
[23] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research Inc., Evaluation of the Quality Service Pilot Projects and Common Service Standards - Final Report, June 11, 1999, p.5.
[24] Ibid. p.6.
[25] Canada, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, op.cit. p.12.
[26] Ibid. p.12.
[27] Ibid. p.12.
[28] A How-to Guide for the Service Standard Initiative, Treasury Board Secretariat, 2001.
[29] A How-to Guide for the Service Standard Initiative, Appendix F (pp 71-73), Treasury Board Secretariat, 2001.
[30] Client Service Charter Principles, Service Charters Unit, Competitive Tendering and Contracting Branch, Department of Finance and Administration, Australia, June 2000.
[31] CIO web site, "Good Practices in Service Improvement, Planning and Implementation", http://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/si-as/howto-comment/howto-comment-eng.asp
[32] "How To Improve Customer Service", the ACA Group. http://www.theacagroup.com/customerservice.htm
[33] Balanced Measures review - IRS Site Visit Summary, April 29, 1999.
[34] Operationalising Citizen's Charters - The Use of Service Standards in Canada, presented to the International Conference on Good Governance, November 30 - December 1, 2000.
[35] Evaluation of the Quality Service Pilot Projects and Common Service Standard, Final Report, June 11, 1999, Carr-Gordon Ltd. and Erin Research Inc.
[36] http://www.afr-sd.org
customerfocus.html
[37] Link does not exist.
[38] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research, op. cit.
[39] The Service Edge, Ron Semke, Penguin Books, New York, NY, 1989, pp. 47-58
[40] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research, op. cit.
[41] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research Inc., op. cit. p.4,
[42] 2000 Report of the Auditor General of Canada - April - Chapter 1 - Service Quality
[43] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research Inc., op.cit. p. 28.
[44] 2000 Report of the Auditor General of Canada - April - Chapter 1, Page 13.
[45] BMB Consulting Services Inc., Developing and Implementing Service Standards, Annex E, April 5, 2001.
[46] "How To Improve Customer Service", the ACA Group. http://www.theacagroup.com/customerservice.htm
[47] Carr-Gordon Limited and Erin Research Inc., op. cit.
[48] The Department of Finance and Administration and the Australian Quality Council co-operated to develop the selection criteria and judge entrants from across the Australian public service.
[49] http://www.hic.gov.au/corporate/ (Wrong link)
[50] http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/index.htm
[51] http://www.epa.gov/customerservice/standards.htm
[52] Evaluation of the Quality Service Pilot Projects and Common Service Standard, Final Report, June 11, 1999, Carr-Gordon Ltd. and Erin Research Inc.