Customer Satisfaction Survey What you told us...

Transcription

1 Customer Satisfaction Survey 2013 What you told us...

2 Contents Introduction 3 About the survey 5 Overview of findings 8 Questionnaire results 1. Contracts Categories Contract delivery Contract events Contract communications Category engagement Procurement reform Learning & development Regional services Communication & customer service Overall satisfaction 43 2

3 Introduction In the summer 2013, Scotland Excel launched an annual research programme to measure and monitor customer satisfaction with our services and performance. We were delighted that so many of you took the time to complete questionnaires and tell us what you think of our services. In fact, we received such a high response, it has taken longer than expected to analyse your feedback and publish the results! However, we are now able to share the findings of the survey with you in this report. It was encouraging to see that the results were generally very positive, with around three-quarters of respondents reporting above average satisfaction overall. 3

4 Nevertheless, there are areas where we can, and will, do better. We have reviewed the results in detail, and work is already underway on improvement plans across the organisation to respond to your feedback. We might not be able to make every improvement at once, and it might take some time to get things right, but we hope that when we issue our surveys again later this year, you will agree that we are heading in a positive direction. Our thanks go to everyone who took part in our research programme. If you have any questions about this report, please get in touch with us at communications@scotland-excel.org.uk. 4

5 About the survey The survey measured satisfaction with Scotland Excel s performance across six key areas contracts, the contract delivery process, procurement reform, learning and development, regional team support, and general communications/customer service. Participants were asked to score their satisfaction on a five point scale from very good to very poor, with an option of not sure for those who had limited knowledge or experience of a particular area. They were also asked to score their overall satisfaction as customers of Scotland Excel, and additional space was made available to capture comments for all questions. For the purposes of the analysis, the midpoint of the scale ( average ) was considered the minimum acceptable level for satisfaction, and results were considered in terms of how many respondents scored their satisfaction as being above or below average. As customers interact with Scotland Excel in variety of ways and have different levels of knowledge of our activities, the survey was segmented for two separate audiences: Procurement leads/deputies Received a questionnaire covering the full range of services provided by Scotland Excel Procurement/ technical Received a shorter version focusing on the service areas they were more likely to have experienced The surveys generated 166 responses from 30 organisations, (28 local authorities. The number of responses received per organisation ranged from 0 to 12, with most organisations submitting around 4 or 5. Further details can be found in the table on the following page, (Table 1). 5

6 Table 1: No. of respondents by organisation Organisation Leads / Deputies Procurement / Technical Total Responses Aberdeen City Council Aberdeenshire Council Angus Council Argyll & Bute Council City of Edinburgh Council Clackmannanshire Council Comhairle nan Eilean Siar Dumfries & Galloway Council Dundee City Council East Ayrshire Council East Dunbartonshire Council East Lothian Council East Renfrewshire Council Falkirk Council Fife Council Glasgow City Council Highland Council Inverclyde Council Midlothian Council North Ayrshire Council North Lanarkshire Council Orkney Islands Council Perth & Kinross Council Renfrewshire Council Scottish Borders Council Shetland Islands Council South Ayrshire Council South Lanarkshire Council Stirling Council Tayside Procurement Consortium Tayside Contracts The Moray Council West Dunbartonshire Council West Lothian Council Total

7 Although the survey focused on measuring satisfaction at a customer rather than organisational level, the fairly even spread of responses suggests that a balanced range of views from different organisations are represented in the results. Of the 150 respondents who indicated their role, 67% were procurement professionals while 33% described themselves as technical specialists or other. Procurement/technical respondents were also asked to indicate which contract category areas they dealt with, and the results below show a fairly even spread of involvement in different areas, (Figure 1). Figure 1: Contract category areas dealt with by respondents 7

8 Overview of findings The survey found that feedback was generally very positive, with the majority of respondents reporting above average satisfaction in all but a few areas. Satisfaction with contracts was strong, particularly among procurement/ technical stakeholders, with product/service range scored very highly by both groups. Satisfaction was slightly lower for price stability and sustainability among procurement leads, but we are pleased to report that overall there were no major areas of concern. The survey also looked at satisfaction with each category area. Again, responses were very positive, with high levels of satisfaction reported for four out of the five categories. Construction was scored less positively than the other categories, with comments suggesting that more progress was required in this relatively new contract area. Respondents were also generally satisfied with the way in which we develop and deliver contracts. As a Centre of Procurement Expertise, it is no surprise that we scored very highly for strategy and legislative compliance, and most other aspects of contract delivery also scored well. However, there may be a requirement to improve our processes for data gathering and benchmarking. Events and communication relating to contracts were generally well received. Areas highlighted as having potential for improvement included the location of meetings, volume of s, and more timely issue of meeting documentation, catalogues and price changes. Procurement leads were asked to rate their satisfaction with the services of the reform team. Procurement Capability Assessments (PCAs) and the Annual Event scored very highly, and satisfaction with other projects and activities managed by the team was also positive. Feedback suggested 8

9 that the time required to prepare for and complete PCAs could be improved and that there is a need to share examples or models of best practice. Scotland Excel s learning and development services received the most positive feedback, with above average satisfaction levels of at least 80% across almost every aspect of the services. One of the few areas that scored slightly lower was location of courses, and feedback suggested that respondents would like to see more courses taking place outside of the main cities. Satisfaction with the services provided by Scotland Excel s regional teams was also very high, particularly the quarterly business reviews. However, there was some evidence of inconsistency between regions which is being explored as part of a wider review of our regional services. General communication and customer service was the weakest area, although at least half of respondents reported above average satisfaction with all aspects except the online catalogue. A project is currently underway to look at catalogue development processes, and a refresh of the website is expected to begin in the next few months. The findings of the survey are being used to inform improvement plans for the coming year and beyond. In some areas, plans were already underway at the time of the survey examples include greater price stability within contract terms, using video links to extend regional training, and streamlining the delivery of PCAs. However, other areas highlighted by the survey where improvement plans are at an early stage, or which require further examination, are summarised on the following page, (Table 2). 9

10 Table 2: Summary of improvement actions arising from the survey Contract delivery schedules Data gathering & benchmarking Contract documentation Contract updates & e-catalogues Contract & supplier management Events & meetings Savings & benefits Procurement reform Customer contact management Web enhancements Ensure that systems and processes are in place to support on time delivery Allow sufficient time for response and improving the quality of analysis and outputs Implement a consistent approach to documents and contract communication Provide sufficient notice of changes and ensure updated catalogues are made available in good time Improve the visibility of actions being taken in response to customer feedback Facilitate wider participation and improving pre-event organisation Increase customer confidence in savings and benefits reports Increase the availability of best practice examples and sharing expertise Reduce the volume of s and ensuring that information is received by the right contacts Expand the amount of contract information and providing a platform for collaboration 10

11 Questionnaire results This section provides the responses and key findings for each question in the survey. 1. Contracts Respondents were asked to rate their general satisfaction with Scotland Excel contracts across five attributes product range, ease of use, savings and benefits, price stability and sustainability. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups 1, (Figures 2a and 2b). Figure 2a: Contract satisfaction (procurement leads) 1 All graphs in this report exclude not sure or blank responses to better illustrate the proportion of respondents with above or below average satisfaction. 11

12 Figure 2b: Contract satisfaction (procurement/technical) Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied across all aspects of contracts, with only a very small number scoring below average on any criteria in either survey. Procurement/technical respondents reported higher satisfaction scores than procurement leads, with between 69% and 79% of respondents scoring above average satisfaction in four out of the five criteria. At least half of procurement leads reported above average satisfaction on three out of five criteria. Satisfaction with product/service range scored particularly well at 88% above average. Savings and benefits was the weakest area for procurement/technical respondents. However, more than half (56%) reported above average satisfaction. 12

13 Sustainability was the weakest area for procurement leads, with only 35% reporting above average satisfaction. Additional comments suggest that respondents would like to see greater participation by SMEs and/or more in the way of community benefits. Other comments suggest four key areas where customers would like to see improvement easier to use frameworks, extended core lists, better or more accurate savings, and extended fixed pricing periods. Our response: As the delivery of collaborative contracts is at the core of our remit, we are delighted that satisfaction is generally positive. We value your feedback on areas for improvement and have already taken steps to act upon this. Over the past year, we have increased our focus on sustainable procurement and every new contract is now assessed for its potential to include social, economic and environmental benefits. As an example, the domestic furnishing framework awarded in May 2013 is already delivering measurable sustainable procurement benefits, including local employment and training opportunities and the reuse and recycling of goods via charity organisations. In terms of supporting local business, we have undertaken a geographic analysis of supplier spend to understand where development opportunities may lie, and will be looking at this further over the coming year. However, it is also worth noting that around 70% of suppliers to Scotland Excel frameworks are SMEs and almost three quarters are based in Scotland. In respect of pricing, products and savings, we research our markets thoroughly to ensure we achieve competitive prices through our frameworks. A core list supports this by allowing suppliers to offer their best prices for the products which are most in demand, while fixed pricing periods are set to reflect trends within individual markets. We are currently working on a price indexation project to provide greater confidence in savings projections agreed at the start of the contract. However, as framework agreements do not guarantee business, we recognise that councils can sometimes achieve better rates from a framework supplier 13

14 through mini-competition for specific requirements. Although this requires some additional work, there are still significant efficiency benefits to using a collaborative framework compared with tendering a separate contract. Nevertheless, we will consider how we can provide better support with using our frameworks, and continue to optimise the products, pricing, savings and benefits available. Your feedback during the contract development process is crucial to getting this right, and we would encourage you to raise any questions or concerns with our procurement teams at any time. 2. Categories Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with contracts in each of Scotland Excel s five category areas construction/maintenance, corporate/education, facilities, social care, transport/environment. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 3a and 3b). Figure 3a: Category satisfaction (procurement leads) 14

15 Figure 3b: Category satisfaction (procurement/technical) Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied across all categories within the portfolio, with at least 60% of respondents in both groups reporting above average satisfaction in four out of five categories. Satisfaction levels with each category are broadly similar across both groups of respondents. However, satisfaction with social care is stronger amongst procurement/technical contacts, while transport/environment scores more highly with procurement leads. Satisfaction with the corporate/education and facilities categories is strong, with the latter scoring particularly well with the procurement/ technical group. This may reflect the fact that both are well established categories within the portfolio. Satisfaction was lower for construction/maintenance although this category still scores above average for around half of respondents. 15

16 Additional comments suggest that this may be due to perceived lack of progress on higher value constructions contracts. Other comments indicate that respondents have no major issues with any specific categories. Several respondents complimented the work of the social care team, particularly the way in which they have incorporated lessons learned from each new contract into their approach. Our response: This question was included to check that satisfaction levels with contracts were consistent across the portfolio. This seems largely the case, although we recognise that progress in some newer areas, such as construction, has been slower than anticipated. Over the past year or so, we have focused on building stakeholder relationships and developing specialist knowledge within the newer category areas of social care and construction, and this will underpin the delivery of at least seven new contracts in these categories during Contract delivery Respondents were also asked to rate their satisfaction with the way in which Scotland Excel manages the various stages of the contract delivery process. The purpose of this question was to identify opportunities for improving the experience of local authority customers who deal with us during the contract development and management cycle. The graphs on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 4a and 4b). 16

17 Figure 4a: Contract delivery satisfaction (procurement leads) Figure 4b: Contract delivery satisfaction (procurement/technical) 17

18 Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied across all aspects of contract delivery. However, slightly more respondents expressed below average satisfaction than in other areas of the survey. Procurement/technical respondents reported higher satisfaction scores than procurement leads, with between 63% and 92% of respondents scoring above average satisfaction across all aspects of the process. Although procurement leads reported slightly lower rates of satisfaction, seven of the nine contract delivery areas achieved above average satisfaction scores of between 59% and 91%. Strategy development was rated highly by procurement leads with 23% of respondents scoring their satisfaction as very good. However, some respondents commented that they would prefer more time to approve documents. Legislative compliance was highly rated by both groups. Data gathering was considered one of the weaker areas, particularly by procurement leads. Comments suggest that timescales for data gathering are too short and/or inconsistent. Benchmarking also was considered a weaker area, with 19% of procurement leads expressing below average satisfaction. Comments suggest that some respondents feel projected savings are inaccurate or that there is insufficient time to review these before award. Other areas for improvement highlighted in the comments included increasing the visibility of contract management activity and keeping to delivery schedules. There were also some very positive comments about the work of Scotland Excel s procurement teams. Our response: We are pleased that respondents are generally satisfied with how we manage the contract delivery process. However, we are aware that we can certainly make improvements and have recently set up a Quality Improvement Group to look at internal and external processes with a view to improving efficiency 18

19 and customer experience. We will keep you informed of the activities and outputs of this team as they progress their plans. In particular, we recognise that requests for data can be onerous, especially when there are a number of contracts being developed simultaneously. Our contract schedule is published months in advance, so we will work through our regional teams to agree advance dates for gathering data. Timescales can be tight towards the end of the contract delivery process so we understand why some customers feel there is limited time for benchmarking and reviewing savings. However, the methodology used to calculate savings is included within the procurement strategy so we are happy to listen to any concerns you may have about this earlier in the process. The contract and supplier management programme implemented in August 2012 has now been extended to 23 contracts and is providing useful information to improve contract and supplier performance. However, we recognise that we need to share this information more widely with customers. Some of the difficulties we have faced with delivery schedules has related to extended periods of consultation in newer categories, particularly social care. We are now delivering contracts in these areas and, as stakeholder confidence grows, we expect the length of consultation periods to decrease in future. Delays have also been caused by occasional gaps in staff resourcing. As demand grows for public procurement professionals, we are looking at ways of increasing availability through recruiting graduate trainees and modern apprentices, and developing the skills of existing staff. 4. Contract events Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with engagement events hosted by Scotland Excel during the contract placement and management cycle. The graphs on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups (Figures 5a and 5b). 19

20 Figure 5a: Contract events satisfaction (procurement leads) Figure 5b: Contract events satisfaction (procurement/technical) 20

21 Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied with contract events. At least 64% of procurement leads scored above the average satisfaction, rising to over 80% in four out of five event types. At least 72% of procurement/ technical contacts scored above average satisfaction with events, with upwards of 20% scoring their satisfaction as very good. Comments from both groups point to the difficulty in attending User Intelligence Groups (UIGs) and other contract-related meetings due to the travel involved. Many respondents indicated that video conferencing facilities would be appreciated and may help to improve attendance levels. Other comments suggested that there may be room for improvement in pre-meeting organisation, group facilitation, venue logistics and time keeping. Our response: The results suggest that respondents generally value their attendance at our meetings and events. This is good news as it is important that we attract the right people from as many local authorities as possible to come along to meetings and events. By gathering views from a wide range of stakeholders, we can ensure that contracts are developed in line with all requirements. However, as we are aware that everyone is facing constraints on their time and budgets we are holding more regional meetings, particularly in Stirling which has good access from many parts of Scotland. We are open to doing further events outside of our Paisley offices, and would be delighted to hear from councils that could offer to help us host these. We will also continue to explore technology solutions through video or web conferencing. Video facilities can be difficult and/or expensive to access but we have recently obtained web conferencing facilities through the national framework. We are working on plans to make the best use of this technology and hope to be able to offer it as an option in the near future. 21

22 We will also take on board your feedback about event organisation and will aim to issue documentation further in advance. From our perspective, we would welcome your support in cascading information from meetings within your organisations, and provide us with any feedback from your colleagues. 5. Contract communications Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with communications issued by Scotland Excel during the contract development and management cycle. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 6a and 6b). Figure 6a: Contract communications satisfaction (procurement leads) 22

23 Figure 6b: Contract communications satisfaction (procurement/technical) Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied across all types of communication. However, slightly more respondents expressed below average satisfaction than in other areas of the survey. Procurement/technical respondents reported higher satisfaction scores than procurement leads, with at least two-thirds scoring above average satisfaction across all types of communication. At least half of procurement leads reported above average satisfaction across all communication types. Responding to contract enquiries was the highest scoring aspect of communications for both groups, and several respondents praised Scotland Excel staff for their quick and helpful approach. 23

24 Ad hoc updates were considered as one of the weaker areas by both groups, particularly procurement leads where c. 20% expressed below average satisfaction. Comments suggest that this predominantly relates to insufficient notice of price changes and delays in providing updated electronic catalogues. There was some variation in satisfaction rates between the groups in respect of category newsletters. Only 50% of procurement leads scored above average compared with 72% of procurement/technical contacts, which may indicate that a different approach to the content of newsletters is required for procurement leads. Other areas for improvement highlighted in comments include reducing the volume and increasing the relevance of s, a more consistent approach to documentation, more timely issue of meeting documentation, and providing additional guidance on using frameworks. Our response: We are aware that there is significant room for improvement within contract communications. At any given time, our teams are working on a number of different contracts and we recognise that, from your perspective, it may seem as if we are constantly sending s. We are currently investigating options for a system to centralise and manage our contact data and help us target communications more effectively. We also plan to take another look at online collaborative tools for sharing information during the contract development and management process to reduce the number of s. Although we aim to be consistent with our contract documentation, sometimes different approaches are required because of the nature of the products or services. However, we will review documentation across the organisation and look for opportunities for standardisation. We also plan to reintroduce regular category updates as part of our wider communications strategy, as well as looking at a more general publication on all activities which may be of interest to procurement leads. In terms of 24

25 ad hoc updates, we have a timetable in place for price variations and will aim to build in more time to this schedule for notifying changes. The recent implementation of the national Catalogue Content Management (CCM) system has provided an opportunity for us to review our catalogue management processes. Over the coming year, we plan to engage with suppliers and encourage them to use the system to develop and update their catalogues directly to speed up their availability to customers. 6. Category engagement Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with engagement across each of Scotland Excel s five category areas to check that customers receive a consistent experience across the organisation. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 7a and 7b). Figure 7a: Satisfaction with category engagement (procurement leads) 25

26 Figure 7b: Satisfaction with category engagement (procurement/technical) Key findings: Respondents were generally satisfied with engagement across all categories within the portfolio, with only a very small number scoring below average satisfaction. Procurement leads reported higher satisfaction levels than procurement/technical contacts. At least 68% of respondents in this group reported above average satisfaction across all categories, rising to over 80% in three categories. At least 55% of procurement/technical contacts reported above average satisfaction across all categories, rising to over 80% for social care. Both groups scored the construction category slightly lower for engagement, possibly because it is still a developing area. The transport/ environment category was also scored less positively by procurement/ 26

27 technical contacts, and comments suggest that this was due to specific issues affecting contracts around the time of the survey. However, there were some very positive comments made about engagement, particularly in respect of the social care and facilities categories. A number of respondents praised the facilities team for how they engaged within stakeholders during the 'horsemeat crisis'. Our response: This question was included to check that engagement activity is consistent across the portfolio. Responses suggest that this is generally the case although, as before, there is still work to do in the newer area of construction. We have also listened to feedback on specific issues relating to contracts in the transport category around the time of the survey. We were delighted by the very positive comments made by respondents in connection with engagement. In particular, we are pleased to know that we were able to provide you with the information you needed to keep your own stakeholders informed during this difficult period around the 'horsemeat crisis'. 7. Procurement reform The survey included a number of questions to measure satisfaction with projects and activities undertaken by Scotland Excel to help local authorities increase their procurement capability in line with the targets of national Public Procurement Reform Programme. These questions were aimed only at procurement leads as the key contacts for this area. Procurement Capability Assessments The first question measured satisfaction with how Scotland Excel conducted each local authority s Procurement Capability Assessment (PCA) 2. These are

28 annual assessments which take places across the public sector to benchmark procurement capability and measure improvements. The graph below illustrates the spectrum of opinion on the assessments which took place between September and December 2012, (Figure 8). Figure 8: Satisfaction with how the 2012 PCA was conducted Annual Review Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the Annual Review event organised by Scotland Excel each year to discuss PCA results, share best practice and plan a programme of procurement reform activity for the coming year. The graph on the following page illustrates the spectrum of opinion the Annual Review event which took place in February 2013, (Figure 9). 28

29 Figure 9: Satisfaction with the 2013 Annual Review event Reform projects and activities Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with sector/national procurement reform projects and activities delivered or supported by Scotland Excel during The graph on the following page illustrates the spectrum of opinion across each of the projects and activities, (Figure 10). 29

30 Figure 10: Satisfaction with the reform projects and activities Reform communications The final question in this section asked respondents to indicate their satisfaction with how Scotland Excel engages and/or communicates with stakeholders in relation to reform services. The graph on the following page illustrates the spectrum of opinion across the different communication channels used to engage stakeholders, (Figure 11). 30

31 Figure 11: Satisfaction with the reform engagement/communication Key findings: Satisfaction scores for the PCA and Annual Review event were high, with 75% of respondents reporting above average satisfaction for the PCA, and 85% for the Annual Review. Comments indicated that the time required to prepare and complete the PCA is a concern for some stakeholders. Several respondents suggested that further models or examples of best practice are required. Satisfaction with procurement reform projects and activities was generally high, with at least 60% of respondents reporting above average satisfaction for five of the seven activities, rising to over 80% for PCArelated workshops. The roll out of the PCS-Tender e-sourcing tool and the contract and supplier management project were considered weaker areas. Both of these projects were dependent on the roll out of the Scottish Government s national e-commerce tools which experienced some delays. 31

32 Above average satisfaction with procurement reform communication and engagement was reported by at least 65% of respondents for three out of the four channels surveyed. Satisfaction with the online community site, Knowledge Hub, was slightly lower at 58% above average. Comments suggest that respondents would like to see more communication and engagement activity, particularly in respect of sharing best practice information and making better use of the Knowledge Hub. Our response: We are delighted that our work in procurement reform is considered very positively. We have come a long way since PCAs were first launched in the public sector in 2009, and all councils are now using PCAs to benchmark performance, identify improvement opportunities and monitor progress. We were already aware of concerns about the time required to prepare and complete the PCA, so this year we worked with a group of customers to develop three time saving options. These allowed local authorities to submit information in advance to reduce preparation time and/or shorten the length of the assessment on the day. The same score option proved to be particularly successful during the 2013 PCA cycle. Where councils were looking to maintain their previous score on certain questions, they could apply in advance to have their evidence from the 2012 PCA reviewed to determine if it was still valid. An average of 15 questions were reviewed this way for each council, saving them an estimated 3 days preparation time and around 2 hours on the day. We recognise that local authorities face a lot of scrutiny so we are committed to the continued development of the PCA so that it is not just another audit. We are currently participating in cross-sector review of the PCA methodology to ensure that it remains relevant as public sector procurement capability matures. The new assessment will be used from In the meantime, we will place a greater emphasis on communications and sharing best practice as this is an area where we can do better. However, we 32

33 need your support in providing case studies and examples of best practice, so we hope to work with you to build a stronger community, particularly online. 8. Learning and development The survey included a number of questions to measure satisfaction with Scotland Excel s learning and development programme which offers a range of general and specialist courses to improve procurement skills and knowledge. Enhancing Procurement Capabilities Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with a range of aspects relating to the core Enhancing Procurement Capabilities courses. An additional question asked procurement leads to rate their satisfaction with two masterclasses aimed at senior practitioners. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 12a, 12b and 12c). Figure 12a: Satisfaction with course aspects (procurement leads) 33

34 Figure 12b: Satisfaction with course aspects (procurement/technical) Figure 12c: Satisfaction with masterclasses (procurement leads) 34

35 Learning and development communications Respondents were also asked indicate their satisfaction with how Scotland Excel engages and/or communicates learning and development services. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of across each of the survey groups, (Figures 13a and 13b). Figure 13a: Satisfaction with communications/engagement (procurement leads) 35

36 Figure 13b: Satisfaction with communications/engagement (procurement/technical) Key findings: Satisfaction with Enhancing Procurement Capabilities courses is very high, with both groups scoring at least 80% above average satisfaction across all aspects except location. Similar satisfaction levels were reported by procurement leads for the two masterclass sessions. Range of courses scored highest, with 96% of procurement leads and 91% reporting above average satisfaction. Quality was also scored above average by 96% of procurement leads. Although content scored well, some comments suggested that courses were not always tailored for social care. However, it was acknowledged that a specialist qualification has now been developed in this area. Location was considered the weakest aspect of the programme by both groups, although it was scored above average by at least 60% of 36

37 respondents. Comments suggest a demand for more courses to be held regionally. At least 70% of procurement leads, and at least 85% of procurement/ technical contacts, scored above average satisfaction for engagement/communication across all channels. A number of respondents commented that ad hoc communication could be improved. Some also felt that there were too many s promoting courses, while others indicated they would like to see dates for training further in advance. Our response: The results of questionnaire suggest that our learning and development services are continuing to meet your training requirements, and the high levels of satisfaction reflect those that we see regularly on feedback forms for individual courses. However, we recognise that the location of courses can be problem, particularly for those based in more remote areas. One of the ways we have addressed this is by partnering with the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI) and Advanced Procurement for Universities and Colleges (APUC) to deliver courses using audio visual conferencing, which has proved popular with delegates in this area. This year we are holding more courses in Perth to provide more convenient access for delegates in the North East, Tayside and Central Scotland. We can also organise and deliver closed courses in any area if there is sufficient local demand, perhaps through collaboration with neighbouring councils and/or other sectors. We have also looked at developing distance learning options through elearning platforms but have faced technical difficulties due to the range of different systems used across the sector. However, we can support individual councils with their development of elearning modules based on our training courses on request. 37

38 In response to your feedback, dates for our 2014 Enhancing Procurement Capabilities learning and development programme have been published for the full year to allow more time for planning training requirements. We have also taken on board your general comments on communications and will seek ways to improve how we market our training courses. 9. Regional services The survey included questions to measure satisfaction with the services and performance of Scotland Excel s regional teams. Most of these questions were aimed at procurement leads, and measured satisfaction with meetings and services which more commonly involve senior procurement staff. A more general question on regional services was also included in the survey for procurement/technical contacts. The graphs below and on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion for each of the above questions, (Figures 14a, 14b and 14c). Figure 14a: Satisfaction with business reviews (procurement leads) 38

39 Figure 14b: Satisfaction with other regional services (procurement leads) Figure 14c: Satisfaction with regional services (procurement/technical) 39

40 Key findings: Satisfaction with quarterly business reviews was high, with at least 82% of procurement leads reporting above average satisfaction with all aspects of the review. Satisfaction with other work undertaken by the regional teams was also generally positive, and at least 63% of procurement leads scoring above average on four of the five services. Satisfaction was weaker for facilitation of regional contracts (Category C1). One comment suggested that there had been little activity in this area in certain regions. Procurement/technical contacts scored their satisfaction with the regional teams highly, with at least 86% reporting above average satisfaction across all aspects. Comments were generally positive but some respondents said they would like to see more mobilisation activity and more time allowed for hub meetings. Suggestions for additional services included data analysis, market research and supplier performance reports. Our response: We are pleased that satisfaction with the services provided by our regional teams is positive and, in particular, that respondents see the value of regular business reviews to help local authorities optimise the benefits of their membership. Although we have been more active in facilitating local collaboration projects in some regions than others, we are now trialling a new approach of analysing spend data at a category level to identify potential opportunities. These are being discussed directly with the relevant councils so they have the information required to take forward any that are of interest. We are also working towards providing councils with relevant feedback on supplier performance based on data gathered through our Contract and Supplier Management (CSM) programme. To achieve this, we are making 40

41 some improvements to the reporting capabilities of the CSM system, and will begin to incorporate reports into business reviews over the coming months. At a more general level, we are undertaking review of the services provided by our regional teams to ensure that they remain aligned with the evolving needs of councils. The outcome of this review will be communicated to customers in due course. 10. General communication The survey included a number of questions to measure satisfaction with Scotland Excel s general communications and customer service, and to understand what services may be required in future. The graphs below and on the following pages illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 15a and 15b). Figure 15a: Satisfaction with communication/customer service (procurement leads) 41

42 Figure 15b: Satisfaction with communication/customer service (procurement/technical) Key findings: Satisfaction with online resources is somewhat weaker than other areas. Although around half of respondents reported above average satisfaction with the website, more than quarter of procurement/technical contacts reported below average satisfaction with the online catalogue. Customer service channels were more positively received. At least 80% of procurement leads and 75% of procurement/technical contacts who had used the general customer service helpline, address or web-based enquiry form reported above average satisfaction with these channels. Comments suggest that respondents would like to see more contractrelated information and/or documentation delivered online. There were also comments relating to the content and usability of the online catalogue, as well as delays in electronic catalogue files being available following price changes. 42

43 Our response: We recognise that further development of our website has been slower than anticipated due to resource constraints. However, a refresh of the site is being planned for the spring of 2014, and options for introducing collaborative functionality to the website will be researched and appraised during the coming year. While collaborative tools would make it easier to share and manage contractrelated information through online channels, significant investment in new technology platforms will be required and their introduction is likely to be phased as a longer term project. In the meantime, we will look at improving and expanding the contract information that is available through the existing site. We also recognise that our online catalogue has limited functionality so we are looking at how the national Catalogue Contract Management (CCM) system might offer an alternative and more effective resource for councils to access the full range of product catalogues available to them. We are also looking at our processes for developing electronic catalogues to improve content and delivery. 11. Overall satisfaction The survey closed with a question on overall satisfaction and the opportunity to make comments on anything not previously covered. The graphs on the following page illustrate the spectrum of opinion across each of the survey groups, (Figures 16a and 16b). 43

44 Figure 16a: Overall satisfaction (procurement leads) Figure 16b: Overall satisfaction (procurement/technical). 44

45 Key findings: Overall satisfaction was very high, with 77% of procurement leads and 73% of procurement/technical contacts reporting above average satisfaction. Many respondents praised the work of Scotland Excel within the comments section for this question. Other comments reiterated some of the areas for improvement already highlighted within the survey such as allowing more time for feedback during contract development, taking the lead on developing best practice and better targeting of communication. Our response: We are delighted that three-quarters of survey respondents reported their overall satisfaction with our services as being above average. In the very few cases where respondents indicated below average satisfaction, we have taken steps to investigate and address any concerns directly with local authorities. As indicated throughout this report, we are committed to improving our performance in a number of areas and hope to achieve an even higher overall satisfaction in our next survey. 45

46 Thank You Published March