Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!samsung!munnari.oz.au!manuel!ccadfa!ghm
From: ghm@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
Subject: Re: User Satisfaction ?
Message-ID: <2400@ccadfa.adfa.oz.au>
Date: 21 May 91 23:08:13 GMT
References: <1991May21.152727.27423@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov> <1991May21.163045.25115@cs.utk.edu>
Organization: Computer Centre, University College, UNSW, ADFA, Canberra, Australia
Lines: 30

de5@ornl.gov (Dave Sill) writes:

>In article <1991May21.152727.27423@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>, uudot@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Dorothy Carney) writes:
>>
>>Our upper management, which is not very computer literate, wants to
>>receive quarterly reports (oral: 15 minutes!) which are "METRICs" of
>>customer satisfaction....[stuff deleted]...
>>We do have a Help Desk which tracks telephone requests for help ...
>>but focusing the metrics on problem reports would be negative, and we
>>want to be positive.

>I disagree.  There's no lonely Maytag repairman in this business.  If
>you don't have users calling with questions, you don't have users
>using your systems.  A statistic showing that 95% of user queries are
>resolved within 24 hours would be impressive.  You could also
>categorize the queries and implement a plan to address recurring
>problems.  Then you could show how, e.g., queries about remote
>printing have dropped X% since you published a handout on the topic.

The point which Dave makes implicitly is that you *don't* call them 
"problem reports".  You talk about "client enquiries" or some similarly
pompous phrase (depending on the bullshitability of upper management)
which puts the emphasis on the service you provide rather than the 
problems which the users have found.  However, to do this you do need
some method of monitoring the enquiries that come in, and probably the
best way is to set up a formal "help desk" through which all enquiries
are funnelled and logged.

Geoff Miller  (ghm@cc.adfa.oz.au)
Computer Centre, Australian Defence Force Academy