The effectiveness of service delivery

Both agency and employee survey results indicate that APS agencies are recognising the importance of obtaining their service users’ perspectives on service delivery. This is a good first step in understanding the needs of service users and being able to measure with some rigour the effectiveness of the services agencies are delivering. What it does not provide is a holistic view on how the APS is performing. This is a step towards which some other countries are moving.

In the UK the Cabinet Office is working towards improved measurement of complex data regarding people’s experiences of government service provision. The ultimate aim is a comprehensive customer satisfaction index that can identify, and then track, the degree of customer satisfaction with public services. Despite the existence of sophisticated satisfaction-assessment mechanisms devised by particular service providers, there is a call for a standard measurement system across public services which will allow customers to evaluate the effectiveness of government service delivery and measure how different services compare. Of course the UK jurisdiction varies from the APS in both its composition and the services involved—but the development is of interest in terms of efforts to measure and improve service provision quality.

Last year the Commission examined how a selection of agencies (ATO, AWM, Centrelink, CSA, Customs, DVA, DEWR, DITR) measured both the effectiveness of the services they deliver to the public and service user levels of satisfaction with agencies’ services. In consultation with each of these agencies, the Commission selected one key indicator of service user satisfaction from the survey data where trend data was available that best represented overall satisfaction levels of service delivery in that agency.5 This year those agencies were again asked for satisfaction results for the 2004–05 year. In addition, data has been included on satisfaction with the service provided by the National Museum of Australia (NMA) and DEST—Questacon.

Figure 4.4 plots service user satisfaction with these 10 agencies on a single graph to provide a visual representation of the range of service user satisfaction levels with APS service delivery. Direct comparisons between agencies are not recommended, as agencies conduct surveys in levels of satisfaction within the context of their own business environment and use different methodologies. However, the broad tools of satisfaction and trends in service user perceptions are of interest.

Results of the satisfaction surveys from the 10 agencies paint a positive picture when it comes to service users’ overall satisfaction with the relevant APS organisations. Figure 4.4 shows that, generally, satisfaction levels of agencies sampled are tracking at 70% or higher since 2000, with seven agencies trending above 80% in the current year.

Again, AWM has the most satisfied service users closely followed by NMA and DEST— Questacon (both newcomers this year). These results reflect the high level of satisfaction of visitors choosing to visit these establishments—or, in the case of agencies such as DVA, to access benefits. By comparison, service users of CSA, who are generally required to access CSA services and often to provide child support, advise the lowest satisfaction levels, although still well over 70%; these levels saw a notable improvement in 2003–04 and 2004–05.

Fluctuations in the graph can be accounted for by a number of factors, including seasonal changes, implementation of new initiatives and/or contracts, and/or new training of employees. Nevertheless, for most agencies there has been a trend to increased levels of satisfaction in recent years.

Figure 4.4: Overall satisfaction with APS service delivery, 1997–98 to 2004–05

Source: Agency service user survey data

Notes: Dotted lines indicate non-consecutive years of data collection, with the exception of DITR which represents benchmarked data collected over two years. (a) Centrelink’s measure is ‘overall quality of Centrelink’s people, services and information as either good or very good.’ (b) DEWR’s measure is ‘overall jobseeker satisfaction with service provided by Job Network Members as satisfied or very satisfied.’ (c) AWM’s measure is ‘overall would you say your visit met or exceeded your expectations?’ (d) CSA’s measure is its ‘Professionalism Index’, which measures satisfaction with four key elements of CSA employees’ professionalism: personal characteristics, professional characteristics, treatment of service users, and outcome of the interaction. Results are based on an average result on a five-point index scale to record satisfaction. For representation in this graph the CSA index has been converted to a percentage scale. (e) Customs’ measure is the ‘overall satisfaction of clients with the service provided by Customs that scored 7 or more out of a score of 10.’ (f) DVA’s measure is of ‘clients satisfied or very satisfied with the service provided by DVA.’ Results represented are the average results of surveys conducted within each financial year. (g) ATO’s measure is its ‘Satisfaction with Professionalism Average’, which measures ATO employees on their behaviour and ability including levels of empathy, provision of fair and just outcomes, communication skills and levels of accountability. Results are based on an average result on a five-point index scale to record satisfaction. For representation in this graph the ATO index has been converted to a percentage scale. (h) DITR (AusIndustry)’s measure is ‘overall customer satisfaction with service delivery’. DITR results are unweighted to allow comparison with earlier benchmark data, shown as 2000–01 but which covered 1999–00 to 2001–02. Weighted data for 2002–03 (89%), 2003–04 (90%) and 2004–05 (88%) is slightly higher than the unweighted data. (i) NMA’s measure is overall visitor satisfaction, that is, the percentage of visitors interviewed who were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with their visit. (j) DEST—Questacon’s measure is the percentage of ‘visitors rating their experience as good or very good’.

5 Data provided by the sample agencies may not cover all of an agency’s programmes, and may represent only one aspect of the agency’s business.

go to top of the page