Client Satisfaction Research - 2010-2011 - Long Descriptions

E-mail, telephone and the Agency website are most often used to obtain information about the Agency’s processes and services

Figure 1

This image is a single horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, In the course of your interaction with the Agency, which of the following did you use to get information about the Agency processes and services? Please select all that apply. 72% of respondents selected e-mail, 63% selected telephone, 56% selected Agency website, 18% selected regular mail, 9% selected fax, and 6% selected courier. 1% selected other, 2% selected none, and 1% said that they did not know, or refused to answer. The base size is n=180.

Return to reference 1

Regardless of the nature of their interaction, two in three clients are satisfied with the overall quality of service provided by the Agency

Figure 2

This image is a horizontal stacked bar chart. Respondents were asked, How satisfied/dissatisfied were you with the overall quality of service provided by the Agency? The chart displays the values summed for all respondents and breaks down responses by audience. Overall, respondents selected satisfied (65%), neither (13%), and dissatisfied (21%); the overall base is n=230. For inspection and new licensing, respondents selected satisfied (84%), neither (7%), and dissatisfied (7%); the base is n=45. For travel-related dispute adjudication, respondents selected satisfied (33%), neither (33%), and dissatisfied (33%); the base is n=12. For non-travel dispute adjudication and multi-party determination, respondents selected satisfied (75%), neither (13%), and dissatisfied (13%); the base is n=8. For inquiries, respondents selected satisfied (57%), neither (15%), and dissatisfied (28%); the base is n=47. For mediation, respondents selected satisfied (60%), neither (20%), and dissatisfied (20%); the base is n=10. For facilitation, respondents selected satisfied (64%), neither (13%), and dissatisfied (23%); the base is n=108.

Return to reference 2

Reasons for satisfaction with the services provided by the Agency

Figure 3

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked to, Please provide the main reason for your overall level of satisfaction with the services provided by the Agency. The chart displays the results among those reporting overall satisfaction with the Agency (rating 4 or 5 on the scale). Respondents selected: staff were professional/courteous (27%); they were helpful/informative (27%); issue was addressed/resolved in a timely manner (25%); successful outcome/my issue was resolved (16%); excellent service/they are good at what they do (10%); provides detailed/thorough information/takes the time to explain things (10%); excellent communication/they kept me updated (8%); efficient staff/process (6%); knowledgeable staff (5%); I couldn’t have resolved the issue without them (4%); and don’t know/refused (7%). The chart includes only those answers that were 4% or above. The base size is n=150. Please note, only mentions of 4% or above are shown.

Return to reference 3

Reasons for dissatisfaction with the services provided by the Agency

Figure 4

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked to, Please provide the main reason for your overall level of satisfaction with the services provided by the Agency. The chart displays the results among those reporting overall dissatisfaction with the Agency (rating 1 or 2 on the scale). Respondents selected: am not satisfied/issue was not resolved (46%); poor service (unhelpful/uninterested) (21%); slow service/process takes too long (15%); the Agency needs more power/should be able to help with more issues (13%); biased (towards the transport companies)/does not represent consumer interests (10%); unfair decisions (8%); it’s a waste of time/money (6%); confusing process/paperwork (4%); excellent service/they are good at what they do (4%); none (6%); and don’t know/refused (8%). The chart includes only those answers that were 4% or above. The base size is n=48.

Return to reference 4

As many respondents report that the process fully met their objectives as say it did not at all

Figure 5

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, To what extent did the process meet your objectives? Respondents selected: fully (28%); largely (16%); to an acceptable degree (14%); a bit (11%); not at all (28%); and not applicable (4%). The base size is n=185.

Return to reference 5

Satisfaction with overall quality of service is closely tied to the perception that their objectives were met

Figure 6

This image is a horizontal bar chart that shows the Percent satisfaction with service provided by the Agency among all respondents and among respondents based on the extent to which their objectives were met. Overall satisfaction among all respondents is 65%; the base size is n=230. Overall satisfaction for those who say that their “objectives were fully/largely met” is 95%; the base size is n=84; overall satisfaction for those who say that their “Objectives were met to an acceptable degree” is 52%; the base size is n=27; overall satisfaction for those who say that their “objectives were met a bit/not at all” is 21%; the base size is n=68.

Return to reference 6

Clients who are satisfied with timeliness are much more likely than those who are not to be satisfied with overall quality of service

Figure 7

This image is a horizontal bar chart that shows the Percent satisfaction with service provided by the Agency among all respondents and among respondents based on their level of satisfaction with the time it took to acknowledge and resolve their complaint. Overall satisfaction among all respondents is 65%; the base size is n=230. Overall satisfaction for those who say that they were “satisfied with time to acknowledge” is 74%; the base size is n=105; overall satisfaction for those who say that they were “dissatisfied with time to acknowledge” is 25%; the base size is n=36; overall satisfaction for those who say that they were “satisfied with time to resolve” is 87%; the base size is n=102; overall satisfaction for those who say that they were “dissatisfied with time to resolve” is 32%; the base size is n=66.

Return to reference 7

Most aspects of service receive at least two thirds satisfaction; the variety of means of contact, the time to acknowledge, and especially resolution time, are less satisfactory

Figure 8

This image is a horizontal stacked bar chart. Respondents were asked to, Please indicate the response that best describes your level of satisfaction with the following aspects of service from the Agency. Respondents selected for “courteous”: satisfied (79%), neither (9%), dissatisfied (13%); the base size is n=182; for “easy to deal with”: satisfied (69%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (16%); the base size is n=182; for “knowledgeable and competent”: satisfied (68%), neither (14%), dissatisfied (18%); the base size is n=182; for “helpful”: satisfied (68%), neither (10%), dissatisfied (21%); the base size is n=182; for “information that was clear and easy to understand”: satisfied (67%), neither (13%), dissatisfied (19%); the base size is n=206; for “easily accessible”: satisfied (66%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (18%); the base size is n=182; for “accuracy of information provided”: satisfied (65%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (19%); the base size is n=206; for “impartial”: satisfied (65%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (19%); the base size is n=182; for “offered a variety of means to contact”: satisfied (63%), neither (16%), dissatisfied (21%); the base size is n=206; for “the time it took to acknowledge”: satisfied (60%), neither (19%), dissatisfied (21%); the base size is n=174; for “the time it took to resolve”: satisfied (48%), neither (20%), dissatisfied (32%); the base size is n=199.

Return to reference 8

While the levels of overall satisfaction are fairly consistent, the proportions who are very satisfied differ widely

Figure 9

This image is a horizontal stacked bar chart. Respondents were asked to, Please indicate the response that best describes your level of satisfaction with the following aspects of service from the Agency. Respondents selected for “courteous”: very satisfied (62%), somewhat satisfied (16%), total satisfied (79%); the base size is n=182; for “easy to deal with”: very satisfied (58%), somewhat satisfied (11%), total satisfied (69%); the base size is n=182; for “knowledgeable and competent”: very satisfied (53%), somewhat satisfied (15%), total satisfied (68%); the base size is n=182; for “helpful”: very satisfied (56%), somewhat satisfied (12%), total satisfied (68%); the base size is n=182; for “information that was clear and easy to understand”: very satisfied (38%), somewhat satisfied (29%), total satisfied (67%); the base size is n=206; for “easily accessible”: very satisfied (49%), somewhat satisfied (17%), total satisfied (66%); the base size is n=182; for “accuracy of information provided”: very satisfied (35%), somewhat satisfied (30%), total satisfied (65%); the base size is n=206; for “impartial”: very satisfied (51%), somewhat satisfied (15%), total satisfied (65%); the base size is n=182; for “offered a variety of means to contact”: very satisfied (42%), somewhat satisfied (21%), total satisfied (63%); the base size is n=206; for “the time it took to acknowledge”: very satisfied (39%), somewhat satisfied (22%), total satisfied (60%); the base size is n=174; for “the time it took to resolve”: very satisfied (27%), somewhat satisfied (21%), total satisfied (48%); the base size is n=199.

Return to reference 9

Those satisfied with overall service of Agency identify the clarity of the information and resolution time as areas in need of improvement

Figure 10

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, If the Agency could improve in two of the above areas, which should it focus on? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall satisfaction with the Agency (rating 4 or 5 on the scale). Respondents selected: “the Agency provided me with information that was clear and easy to understand” (48%); “the time it took to resolve the issue” (45%); “I was offered a variety of means of contacting Agency staff” (33%); “the accuracy of any information provided” (27%); “the time it took to acknowledge my issue” (22%). The base size is n=132. Please note, only mentions of 6% or above are shown.

Return to reference 10

Those dissatisfied with overall service of Agency identify the accuracy of the information as the major area in need of improvement

Figure 11

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, If the Agency could improve in two of the above areas, which should it focus on? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall dissatisfaction with the Agency (rating 1 or 2 on the scale). Respondents selected: “the accuracy of any information provided” (56%); “the time it took to resolve the issue” (40%); “the time it took to acknowledge my issue” (38%); “the Agency provided me with information that was clear and easy to understand” (36%); “I was offered a variety of means of contacting Agency staff” (18%). The base size is n=45. Please note, only mentions of 6% or above are shown.

Return to reference 11

Clients are broadly satisfied with aspects of their experience with the Agency; the Agency’s accommodation of those with disabilities and the website are areas of lower satisfaction, as is staff response time

Figure 12

This image is a horizontal stacked bar chart. Respondents were asked to, Where applicable, please indicate the response that best describes your overall experience with the following aspects of service from the Agency. Respondents selected for, “the contact I had with the Agency was in the official language of my choice (English or French)”: satisfied (89%), neither (6%), dissatisfied (5%); the base is n=192; “I was treated fairly”: satisfied (70%), neither (11%), dissatisfied (19%); the base is n=193; “the Agency’s forms were easy to complete”: satisfied (69%), neither (20%), dissatisfied (11%); the base is n=161; “I was offered a variety of means of contacting Agency staff”: satisfied (68%), neither (14%), dissatisfied (17%); the base is n=166; “I was informed of everything I had to do to with respect to the handling of my complaint by the Agency”: satisfied (67%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (18%); the base is n=171; “the Agency let me know what they could and could not do in dealing with my complaint”: satisfied (67%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (18%); the base is n=174; “staff responded quickly”: satisfied (64%), neither (15%), dissatisfied (21%); the base is n=202; “the information on the Agency website was easy to understand”: satisfied (63%), neither (20%), dissatisfied (17%); the base is n=174; “the Agency website had the information I needed”: satisfied (57%), neither (21%), dissatisfied (21%); the base is n=177; “it was easy to find what I was looking for on the Agency website”: satisfied (52%), neither (24%), dissatisfied (24%); the base is n=180; “the Agency interacted with me in a way that accommodated my disability”: satisfied (50%), neither (19%), dissatisfied (31%); the base is n=58. The ‘don’t know’ responses were removed from each to allow direct comparison.

Return to reference 12

Those satisfied with overall service identify the functionality of website, clarity of information, and response time as areas in need of improvement

Figure 13

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, If the Agency could improve in two of the above areas, which should it focus on? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall satisfaction with the Agency (rating 4 or 5 on the scale). Respondents selected: “it was easy to find what I was looking for on the Agency website” (36%); “the information on the Agency website was easy to understand” (30%); “the Agency website had the information I needed” (27%); “staff responded quickly” (23%); “the Agency let me know what they could and could not do in dealing with my complaint” (17%); “I was informed of everything I had to do to with respect to the handling of my complaint by the Agency” (16%); “the Agency’s forms were easy to complete” (16%); “I was offered a variety of means of contacting Agency staff” (15%); “I was treated fairly” (9%); “the Agency interacted with me in a way that accommodated my disability” (4%); “the contact I had with the Agency was in the official language of my choice (English or French)” (4%); The base size is n=135. Please note, only mentions of 4% or above are shown.

Return to reference 13

Those dissatisfied with overall service identify the response time, transparency of process, and fairness as areas in need of improvement

Figure 14

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, If the Agency could improve in two of the above areas, which should it focus on? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall dissatisfaction with the Agency (rating 1 or 2 on the scale). Respondents selected: “staff responded quickly” (42%); “the Agency let me know what they could and could not do in dealing with my complaint” (40%); “I was treated fairly” (36%); “I was informed of everything I had to do with respect to the handling of my complaint by the Agency” (29%); “it was easy to find what I was looking for on the Agency website” (13%); “the information on the Agency website was easy to understand” (11%); “the Agency website had the information I needed” (9%); “the Agency’s forms were easy to complete” (7%); “the Agency interacted with me in a way that accommodated my disability (4%). The base size is n=45. Please note, only mentions of 4% or above are shown.

Return to reference 14

Timeliness of acknowledgement from the Agency

Figure 15

This image is two horizontal bar charts. In the first chart, respondents were asked, How long did it take to receive an acknowledgment from the Agency? Respondents selected: “1-4 days” (35%); “5-9 days” (28%); “10-19 days” (15%); “20-24 days” (3%); “25-29 days” (1%); “30 days or more” (17%). The base size is n=174. In the second chart, respondents were asked, What do you consider an acceptable amount of time for the Agency to receive an acknowledgment? Respondents selected: “1-4 days” (37%); “5-9 days” (39%); “10-19 days” (17%); 20-24 days” (1%); “25-29 days” (3%); “30 or more days” (3%). The base size is n=174.

Return to reference 15

Additional comments from those satisfied with the services provided by the Agency

Figure 16

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, Do you have any additional comments about the Agency and/or its services? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall satisfaction with the Agency (rating 4 or 5 on the scale). Respondents selected: “am satisfied/ I like the Agency/ am grateful for its help” (15%); “the representative/ investigator was very helpful/ effective” (7%); “not helpful/ my complaint was not resolved (to my satisfaction)” (3%); “prompt service/ response” (3%); “slow service/ process takes too long” (3%); “the Agency needs more power/ should be able to help with more issues” (2%); “confusing forms/ applications” (2%); “professional service” (2%); “none” (49%); “don’t know/refused” (10%). The base size is n=150. Please note, only mentions of 2% or above are shown.

Return to reference 16

Additional comments from those dissatisfied with the services provided by the Agency

Figure 17

This image is a horizontal bar chart. Respondents were asked, Do you have any additional comments about the Agency and/or its services? The chart displays the results among those reporting overall dissatisfaction with the Agency (rating 1 or 2 on the scale). Respondents selected: “dislike/ am not satisfied with the Agency” (13%); “not helpful/ my complaint was not resolved (to my satisfaction)” (10%); “the Agency needs more power/ should be able to help with more issues” (10%); “dissolve the Agency” (8%); “biased (towards transport companies)/ does not represent consumer interests” (4%); “bureaucratic” (4%); “should respond to all complaints/ inquiries” (4%); “better address issues regarding disabled travelers” (2%); “passenger’s rights should be (clearly) outlined” (2%); “should address accessibility/ customer comfort while traveling” (2%); “slow service/ process takes too long” (2%); “none” (19%); “don’t know/refused” (17%). The base size is n=48. Please note, only mentions of 2% or above are shown.

Return to reference 17

Date modified: