SEVERN TRENT Our approach to our PR19 research and customer engagement CCWater meeting in public 7 November 2018 1
AT PR14 WE ADOPTED AN INSIDE-OUT APPROACH TO GAINING INSIGHT This approach focused firstly on our issues… Interactive choice ‘games’ PR14 – inside-out Shopping centre water taste test • Focused on areas we wanted views on – evidencing support for water focused issues and investments • Engagement through events e.g. water taste tests in shopping centre and on-line interactive gamification …and then evidenced customer support for them 2
FOR PR19 WE’VE DEVELOPED A NEW APPROACH TO CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT Our new approach sought to understand customers’ needs first… PR19 – outside-in New approaches • Started with customers’ own priorities, concerns and needs • Talked to people as individuals – not just as customers • However, engaging about water isn’t straightforward • We developed a strategic framework with our Water Forum … then what we could do to meet them 3
A HIERARCHY OF NEEDS UNCOVERS NEW WAYS TO HELP DELIVER OUR VISION U nderstanding customers’ needs is traditionally focused at the bottom of the hierarchy… Provision of services that facilitate wider fulfilment and a Fulfilment broader societal contribution Integrity, community Drivers of involvement satisfaction Drivers of Psychological Provision of customer service (and other services) that dissatisfaction Empowered, engaged, empower and engage people supported, cared for Understanding our customers Functional Provision of core services such as safe drinking water, Safe, reliable, available removing waste and environmental compliance …exploring the higher end can uncover new ways to drive satisfaction, trust and value for customers 4
WE’VE UNDERTAKEN OUR MOST COMPREHENSIVE INSIGHT PROGRAMME We’ve developed a programme to cumulatively uncover new insight and build on existing knowledge New research approaches A multi-faceted programme Complex topics • Resilience • Renationalisation & Exec pay • Climate change uncertainty Sampling reflecting diversity of our region and ‘harder to reach’ customers • Making research accessible Challenged by our • Removing language barriers Water Forum • Engaging with non responders • Continual challenge of the link between insight and shaping plan • Over 60 challenges relating to customer Supported by high calibre insight research agencies We focused on quality not quantity… 5
AND SOUGHT TO GAIN A RICHER UNDERSTANDING OF OUR CUSTOMERS We’ve used insight tools chosen from our customers’ perspective Deliberative Analysis of customer Stated preference research on more complaints and willingness to pay complex topics contacts research Innovative approach Social media Co-creation to engaging on ODI scraping rates Supporting A buzzing online customers in Revealed preference community vulnerable avertive behaviour - Tap Chat circumstances and tested our plan through robust acceptability research 6
AN INNOVATIVE APPROACH TO HARDER TO REACH CUSTOMERS Despite a representative sample, some customers can be harder to reach Our harder to reach customers Our approach in our willingness to pay (WTP) research • Initial “non responders” • Postal survey for initial “non responders” • Those who don’t speak English / have • Hall tests and translated survey (Punjabi, Urdu, Polish) poor English levels • Face to face fieldwork to capture those digitally • Digitally disenfranchised disenfranchised …but we don’t want to ignore their views! 7
UNDERSTANDING OUR INITIAL “NON RESPONDERS” Challenged by the CCG, we re- contacted those who didn’t want to participate What we did What we found • • Collected 3,000 addresses where Respondent profile broadly repeatedly no answer at the door aligned to core survey, or participation refused although reported income • Self-complete questionnaire level is higher • mailed to addresses in batches, Much higher reported with a post-paid reply envelope experience of service failure • and £10 voucher offered for each Similar levels of customer response returned satisfaction • Significantly different Who replied monetary valuations for • 431 customers responded (327 willingness to pay • “absentees”, 104 “refusers”) Preferences broadly aligned • Good mix of customers responded to core survey, although • High quality of responses leakage less valued and triangulated their views with our other WTP results 8
ANY QUESTIONS?
Recommend
More recommend
