Guidelines for Core Key Performance Indicators

Interim Report on Primary Service Channels

Guidelines for Core Key Performance:

Primary Service Channels

Guidelines for Core Key Performance Indicators

Interim Report on Primary Service Channels
September 2004

Executive Summary
The development of key performance indicators (KPIs) for the Government of Canada (GoC) became a priority as Canadas Government Online (GOL) initiative matured from 1998 through 2004. The rapid development of the Internet channel as a means of providing effective public service delivery created an appetite for revolutionary change in all types of service delivery. Prior to GOL, large-scale improvements to service delivery were confined to specific government programs and services. Interdepartmental projects were rare. The advent of the Internet and the preference of Canadians to to access on-line government services has created cutting edge opportunities for change in delivering services to Canadians. In the past three years, dozens of interdepartmental initiatives have taken hold and have helped to foster citizen-centred service delivery. As more and more business improvement opportunities were conceived, it became clear that the Government of Canada needed clear communication for analytical decision making. Many departments have made significant investments in performance management and made progress towards the disciplined decision-making characteristic of the worlds best corporations. Nevertheless, differences in terminology, definitions, usage, data collection, and performance frameworks were quickly identified as limiting the ability to monitor and affect enterprise-level performance. The genesis of the Core KPI project came from the GoCs Telephony Service Working Group an interdepartmental collection of GoC call centre managers and executives that came together to share best practices, establish consistent service standards and generally improve the capabilities of GoC call centre operations. In 2003, this working group quickly identified, and provided precise definitions of, common KPIs. Coincident with this achievement, Treasury Board of Canada, Secretariat developed a modernized approach to the management of the public sector organizations and programs called the Management Accountability Framework (MAF). This comprehensive set of tools, standards, and processes provided an over-arching framework for the Core KPI project. The operational nature of KPIs strongly supported the MAF and provided direct information to two of the primary MAF categories stewardship and citizen-focused service. In 2003, as the GoCs Internet channel rapidly matured and initial significant transactional capability came online, new interdepartmental working committees were formed to deal with the complexities of multi-service, multi-channel delivery alternatives. Internet gateways and clusters rapidly evolved; this helped organize services in parallel with client segments and life events. This has created opportunities to effect corresponding changes in how GoC services are delivered

in-person and by mail. By 2004, there was a clear need to establish common core KPIs and establish a working environment to develop further a common performance language. The Core KPI project brought together numerous government managers experts in delivering services to Canadians, visitors and businesses. Managers with operational responsibility for call and mail processing centres, Internet sites, and in-person locations were engaged in several meetings to identify the KPIs that provide maximum management value. The result of these meetings was a small set of channel-specific core KPIs that reflect specific MAF themes. These KPIs will be required for a variety of reporting requirements, Treasury Board submissions, and ongoing reviews. Additional operational KPIs were identified that are recommended by Treasury Board (but not required) as effective indicators that provide strong operational benefits to service delivery organizations. The Core KPI project is not complete. There is an ongoing requirement for implementation, improvement, and additions as the GoC service delivery strategy evolves. Perhaps the most important and lasting benefit is the networking of the best performance management people in the GoC. These experts continue to develop new techniques and identify improvements to ensure that Canada remains one of the world leaders in public sector service delivery. And that position clearly improves our competitive position in the twenty-first century.

Record of Changes
Version V 0.9 V 1.0 Date August 30, 2004 Sept. 30, 2004 Summary of Changes First draft for formal review Minor edits

Detailed Description of Changes from Previous Version

Acknowledgements
Project Authority: Victor Abele Director, Service Strategy, CIOB Treasury Board Secretariat, Canada Analyst, Service Strategy CIOB, Treasury Board Secretariat, Canada Equasion Business Technologies

Project Analyst:

Phillip Massolin

Author: Contributors:

Dan Scharf Daryl Sommers Colin Smith Reina Gribovsky Dolores Lindsay Daniel Tremblay Kyle Toppazzini Marg Ogden

Web Content:

Morris Miller

Service Improvement - Guidelines for Key Performance Indicators

_______________________________________________________ Table of Contents

Service Improvement - Guidelines for Key Performance Indicators

_______________________________________________________

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Citizens are faced with a greater choice of channels than ever before to access government services (in-person, phone, internet and mail) , creating corresponding challenges for organizations to manage service delivery across all channels. Key Performance Indicators (KPI) are increasingly used by the private and public sectors to measure progress towards organizational goals using a defined set of quantifiable measures. For the GoC, KPIs are becoming an essential part of achieving Management Accountability Framework (MAF) compliance. Once approved, the KPI framework will constitute a key element of departments annual monitoring. You can navigate KPIs by: 0* Channel - each channel includes standard metrics (KPIs) for managing performance, or 1* Management Accountability Framework category A series of government-wide workshops identified the requirement for a consistent approach to measure service delivery performance across the GoC. Workshop results can be assessed to help you create baseline frameworks for channel measurement and provide input into the process.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

2.0 DEFINING THE CHANNELS

Phone Service is the preferred service channel for most Canadians. Primary modes of interaction within this channel are: Interactive Voice Response (IVR) to provide self-service, routing, and broadcast services; Agent-based services the most highly valued service channel for citizens today. Internet Service: most surveys indicate this as preferred channel of the future. Modes of interaction include: Self-service via online transactions, search and website navigation strategies E-mail which provides delayed support both automated and agent authored Online chat technologies which provides real time agent assisted Internet service delivery Mail: primary indicators indicate that this channel the paper channel - is decreasing in popularity. Surveys in the past few years indicate that citizens will increase the use of more timely and interactive channels. Mail is sent using three methods (analogous to the modes of interaction in the other channels): Fax instant transmission via facsimile devices over phone or broadband networks; Courier expedited delivery via priority parcel carriers (within 48 hours); Regular Mail via regular postal services (3 to 10 days). In-Person Service: Canadas extensive network of local offices provides a significant proportion of all government service delivery using primarily queued and appointment based service models. Some In-Person points of service also offer assisted Internet and telephone services through kiosks, publicly available computers, and public phones. There are four services modes for the In-Person Service channel: Queued a managed, multi-agent counter office which often has a reception counter to triage visitors to the correct counter and answer simple questions; Scheduled significant volumes of in-person services are provided on a pre-scheduled one-on-one basis; Outreach several service delivery organizations schedule seminars and training sessions in communities throughout Canada;

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Retail some organizations provide storefront operations where visitors can browse publications and utilize computers for self-service, Service staff are available to help and can either approach the visitor directly on the floor or respond to visitors questions at service counters. Service channels and modes of interaction are impacted by accessibility standards which maximize the availability of channels to people with disabilities. For example, the use of TTY technology within the Phone Channel provides access to hearing impaired individuals. In the In Person channel, the use of ramps, lower counters, and powered doors facilitate access for people who use wheelchairs. The Internet Channel uses W3C accessibility standards to ensure that government websites are accessible using assisting technologies such as screen readers, font magnifiers, and speech recognition. Several GOC organizations are using multi-channel service strategies to achieve higher service value with economic investments. For example, Service Canada uses publicly available computers within its service outlets to provide self-service and, as required, assisted Internet support to visitors. Several departments are experimenting with dedicated, specially trained call-centre agents to support Internet site visitors through toll-free direct assistance lines. KPIs listed in this document are not specifically intended to measure the important service delivery issues of accessibility to people with disabilities and integrated multi-channel implementation characteristics.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

3.0 MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK

The Government of Canada has instituted a consistent management framework for its programs and services. Comprehensive information on the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) can be found at Treasury Boards website (reference: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/maf-crg/maf-crg_e.asp ) . MAF provides deputy heads and all public service managers with a list of management expectations that reflect the different elements of current management responsibilities. Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery are grouped within the MAF categories (Policy and Programs, People, Citizen-Focused Service, Risk Management, Stewardship, Accountability) as shown in the following diagram.

The majority of service delivery indicators relate to the operational nature of the Stewardship category. Additional indicators measure progress to objectives under the Citizen-Focused Service Category and People. The Accountability category provides checklists and processes for establishing effective service level agreements. Specific assessment tools are used for the Policy and Programs and Risk Management categories.

4.0 SERVICE STANDARDS

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

The Service Improvement Initiative defines specific guidelines for all departments and agencies to establish and publish services standards for citizens, international visitors, and businesses using GOC services and programs. The Citizen First Survey provides specific information on client service expectations through a formal comprehensive survey. Trends over the past 5 years indicate shifts in these expectations that provide government service delivery managers with effective direction to prioritize service improvement initiatives. The overarching goal is to establish a 10% increase in client satisfaction by 2005. Departments are required to set standards and measure progress to this goal using primary criteria such as: Timeliness - the time required to receive a service or product Access - how accessible was the service or ordering process to the client? Outcome - did the client receive what was needed? Satisfaction - overall client satisfaction with the service/product request. Common high-level service standards include: Average speed to answer - 5 minutes Expected answer by e-mail - Next business day Queue time for in-person services - 15 minutes.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

5.0 ACCOUNTABILITY and Key Performance Measures

As specified in MAF, service delivery channels must employ clear accountability frameworks. Most frequently, departments and agencies use a Service Level Agreement (SLA) both for internally resourced services and for third party and partnership teams. The following table presents a minimum set of components which must be included in a Government of Canada SLA which provides the foundation for service delivery to citizens, visitors and businesses.

COMPONENT
Service Level Agreement Name Service Description Service Criticality Level

DESCRIPTION
The name of the SLA, particularly useful when a single SLA is used across multiple service offerings. The details of the service the government intends to provide and the benefits the users can expect to receive Normally identified in a Service Catalogue based on already defined metrics. This level of criticality should be based primarily on the service users requirements. Identifies which channels this service is available through e.g. telephone, mail, in-person, Internet, and appropriate contact information for the channels. The department or agency which is primarily responsible for the service. Other partner-departments that provide support to a Primary Service Provider for a service. e.g. GTIS provides the Internet Server to the Health Canada Provides the details of the quality of the service a client can expect. This is frequently time based e.g. Passports will be processed in X number of days. Delivery targets describe the key aspects of the service provided, such as access, timeliness and accuracy. The effective start and end dates of the agreement. A review date must also be identified so that performance measurements can be made and the SLA can be adjusted or action can be taken to improve the performance of an SLA.

Service Channels

Service Primary Service Provider Service Partner Providers Pledge Delivery Targets Dates

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Costs Identifies a cost for service (even when user fees are not required) to ensure that users understand and form realistic expectations about services offered by the Federal Government Provides the service user with mechanisms to resolve their Concerns, for example when the SLA has not been met. Dates: start, end and review Scope: (what is covered and what is not) Responsibilities: Service Providers, Partners and the User Service availability e.g. 24x7. Service hours should provide maximum cost-effective access for the service user. Public holidays must be identified as well as the hours for each channel. Describes the anticipated volumes and timing for activities within a specific service e.g. UI Applications Sep-May=100,000, Jun-Aug=50,000. This is important so that any performance issues, which have been caused by excessive throughput outside the terms of the SLA, can be identified. Identifies the policies surrounding any changes that will affect the service provided to the user. For example, if UIC benefits are going to be mailed out every 2nd month instead of every month, how will the change be managed to ensure that expectations are being met. Identifies inter-departmental policies on the sharing of user information for various services. Organizations must comply with PIPEDA and Treasury Board Policies. Specifies the content, frequency and distribution of service reports and the frequency of service review meetings. This section identifies any agreement regarding financial incentives or penalties based upon performance against service levels. Penalty clauses can create a barrier to partnership if unfairly invoked on a technicality and can also make service providers and partners unwilling to admit mistakes for fear of the penalties being imposed.

Complaint and Redress

Service Hours

Throughput

Change Management

Security and Privacy

Service reporting and reviewing Performance Incentives/Penalties

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

6.0 POLICY AND PROGRAMS

The Policy and Programs in this MAF context refers to relevant lines of activity within Departments and Agencies. Departmental Reports are the primary reporting tool used to document the overall policy effectiveness of specific programs. Readers should consult the MAF, relevant Treasury Board Policies as well as the Program Activity Architecture (P.A.A.) for information and guidance in this category. In the Fall / Winter of 2004/05, we will be consulting with the service community with a view to developing a more comprehensive service policy. This work will allow us to formalize the approach to KPIs which is currently in draft format.

7.0 RISK MANAGEMENT

The Risk Management category of MAF specifies a checklist for departmental management to establish comprehensive and transparent identification of risks, tolerances, mitigation strategies, and effective communication approaches. For detailed information, readers should refer to MAF.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

8.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Phone Channel

MAF CATEGORY: CITIZEN FOCUSED SERVICE Metrics for Access KPI: Call Access Description: Percentage of calls presented that get into the ACD. Objective: Measures overall service capacity from ACD to Agent. Definition: (Calls Answered +Calls Abandoned) divided by Calls Presented. Busy signals generated by switch divided by total calls received in reporting period. Derivation: ACD Suggested benchmark / Range: 40% to 60% Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Caller Access Description: Percentage of unique callers who attempt and successfully access service. Objective: Basic volume measure. Determines service level by counting unserviced callers. Removes repeat callers from accessibility measure. Definition: Total unique phone numbers completed divided by Total Unique Phone Numbers attempted. Suggested benchmark / Range: 80% to 85% Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Abandoned Calls Description: Percentage of calls which are abandoned while in queue due to prolonged delay waiting for service, typically for a live agent. Objective: Key Measure for overall service level. Definition: Number of calls abandoned within agent-queue + IVR abandons before success markers divided by total calls answered + total calls abandoned. Derivation: ACD. Suggested benchmark / Range: 10% to 15% Status: Proposed as a Core KPI Metrics for Delay

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

KPI: Average Speed to Answer (ASA) Description: The average delay, while in queue before connecting to an agent, expressed in seconds. Objective: Primary Indicator of caller satisfaction. Definition: The total number of seconds from ACD queuing of call to agent acceptance / total agent calls. Derivation: Measured by ACD Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Service Level Description: Percentage of calls that reach an agent or are abandoned within a specified time threshold. Objective: This measure is required in order to set and publish telephone service standards. Definition: Calls answered within Threshold + Calls Abandoned within Threshold / (Total Calls Answered + Total Calls Abandoned). Derivation: Measured by ACD Status: Proposed and required for phone service management Metrics for Quality KPI: Answer Accuracy Description: Consistency of IVR and agent answers. Objective: To ensure program integrity. Definition: Local quality scorecard assessed by call monitoring and / or mystery shopper approaches. Derivation: # of calls answered in IVR terminated at success markers +# of agent calls resulting in success status times accuracy evaluation ratio Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Professionalism Description: Encompasses a range of soft-skills that govern the approach to delivering accurate information and reliable services. Objective: Identifies and reinforces effective communication. Definition: Best measured through the use of a mystery shopper program that uses specific planned calls placed to the call centre by a measurement organization. Can also be measured by exit surveys performed immediately after call completion. Status: Recommended as an operational measure.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Client Satisfaction KPI: Client Satisfaction Level Description: Application of Common Measurement Tool (CMT) to assess and benchmark client satisfaction Objective: Primary indicator of client perception of service quality, measured repeatedly, trends provide strong evidence of service improvement levels Derivation: The multi-channel survey tool will be used (at a minimum) to determine the core measures relevant to the telephone channel. Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Service Complaints Description: Count and categorization of complaints received through all channels concerning the Phone channel. Objective: Primary indicator of service quality particularly when measured over time. Derivation: Counted by incident tracking system. Complaints received through other channels must be added to total. Status: Recommended as a Core KPI but not currently feasible as most GoC organizations do not integrate service feedback information. MAF CATEGORY: STEWARDSHIP Metrics for Agent Utilization KPI: Cost per Call Description: The total operational cost of the call centre over the reporting period divided by total calls handled during the reporting period.. Objective: Provides high level indication and trend of overall service performance. Definition: will require further working group consultation Status: Recommended as Core KPI KPI: Agent Capacity Description: The anticipated number of hours of agent time available for telephone service for each full-time equivalent (FTE). Objective: Ensures that agent resources are dedicated to required functions Status: Recommended as an operational measure

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

KPI: Resource Allocation Description: A management indicator assessing allocated FTEs to service delivery. Objective: Measures effective use of channel resources. Definition: Locally defined Status: Recommended as an operational measure KPI: Agent Adherence Description: An assessment of telephone agent adherence to schedule and making oneself available during anticipated service periods. Objective: Contributes to resourcing effectiveness Definition: Calculated as total agent login time divided by scheduled work time Status: Recommended as an operational measure KPI: Agent Occupancy Description: The percentage of agent time spent in direct service including talk and wrap up time. Objective: Ensures accurate resourcing levels to achieve target service levels. Definition: (Talk time + after call wrap up time) divided by total agent log in time over measured period. Suggested benchmark / Range: 85% Status: Recommended as an operational measure

Metrics for Service Effectiveness KPI: First Call Resolution Description: The degree to which the client needs are met without further referral or call-back within a designated time interval. Objective: Minimize cost and maximize client satisfaction. Definition: number of single calls by unique phone number within 48 hour period not abandoned Status: recommended as Core KPI KPI: Accurate Referral Description: A redirect to the correct service for resolution of client need (may be to a higher service tier or to a separate organization/jurisdiction providing the service). Objective: Measures key caller criteria of more than 2 transfers. Definition: will require further working group participation Status: Not recommended. Not technically feasible at this time.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Use of Technology

KPI: Call Avoidance Description: A call that quickly exits the system after an introductory message or bulletin that provides a desired answer for a substantial portion of the calling population, e.g. related to an immediate but temporary service outage. Objective: Measures utility of IVR/bulletins to answer high-volume inquiries. Definition: Calls terminated at specific IVR marker after bulletin Status: Proposed as Core KPI KPI: Calls Answered by IVR Successfully Description: A call that terminates in IVR tree after success marker. Objective: Measures utility of IVR response tree to provide self-service answer; an important indicator of IVR utility; secondary indicator of client satisfaction. Definition: Calls terminated at all IVR success markers. Status: Proposed as Core KPI Metrics for Channel Take-up KPI: Calls Description: Total calls received Objective: Measures overall service demand Definition: Number of calls received at switch. Note that this will include repeat callers who are refused at the switch. Status: proposed as Core KPI KPI: Callers Description: Unique Callers Objective: Measures service demand more accurately. Definition: Unique phone numbers dialing the service Status: proposed as Core KPI

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

MAF CATEGORY: PEOPLE At publishing time, KPIs for the MAF PEOPLE category had not yet been proposed to the working group for review. Some examples of KPIs that might be suitable for this MAF category include: Total Months Staff on Strength, Average Months on Strength per Agent: A measure of the total experience level of the agents within the call centre. Monitoring this over time provides a measure of the impact of staff turnover. Staff Turnover Ratio: A measure of the churn rate within the Agent team. Provides a secondary indicator of Call Centre health and it often correlates to overall customer satisfaction levels. Agent Coaching Ratio: Number of hours of 1 on 1 coaching time/agent. Helps measure the utilization of Call Centre supervisor time as well as the investment in agent skill improvement. Training Days/Agent: Total training days delivered during the measurement period divided by the number of agents. Training is required for program/service delivery, for technology, and for the development of skills related to professionalism and customer interaction. Further discussion with departments and agencies will be conducted to identify effective KPIs under this MAF category.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

9.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS In-Person

Channel
MAF CATEGORY: CITIZEN FOCUSED SERVICE Metrics for Access

KPI: Visitor Access Description: Count of visitors who either a ) are serviced at agent stations or b) obtain selfservice through in-location computers OR Count of visitors entering facility. This depends on the service model and facility. Objective: Basic volume measure. Definition: Total visitors entering facility over measurement period. Suggested benchmark / Range: TBD Status: Proposed as Core KPI. Tracked by all operations. KPI: Visitors Serviced Description: Ratio of visitors receiving agent service to total visitors. Provides indication of utilization of self-service capabilities and overall operational capacity. Definition: Total agent-visitor services divided by total visits Status: Recommended as an operational measure. Metrics for Delay KPI: Average Wait Time (AWT) Description: The average delay from time of entering facility to introduction at agent station. Objective: Primary Indicator of visitor satisfaction. Definition: The total number of minutes from pulling of service ticket to service. Derivation: Measured by service management system Status: Recommended as an operational KPI. Measured by all Queued service operations. Not trackable within retail service model. KPI: Service Level Description: Percentage of visitors that reach an agent within target wait time.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Objective: This measure is required in order to set and publish in-person service standards. Definition: Visitors served within threshold/Total Visitors Serviced Derivation: Measured by service ticketing system Status: Recommended as an operational KPI. Measured by all Queued service models. Not relevant to retail service model. Metrics for Quality KPI: Answer Accuracy Description: Reliability of agent answers. Objective: To ensure program integrity. Definition: Local quality scorecard assessed by supervisor monitoring and / or mystery shopper approaches and/or exit surveys Derivation: # of visitors answered successfully by agents Status: Under review. May be impractical in several service models. KPI: Professionalism Description: Encompasses a range of soft-skills that govern the approach to delivering accurate information and reliable services. Objective: Identifies and reinforces effective communication. Definition: Best measured through the use of a mystery shopper program that uses specific planned visits to the service centre by a measurement organization. Can also be measured by exit surveys either conducted by staff or at self-service computers. Status: Under review. May be impractical in several service models. KPI: Transaction duration variability Description: For operations providing specific transaction services, analysis of variance of transaction duration correlates strongly to application accuracy. Objective: Assess process consistency across agents. Status: Proposed to working team. Applicable only to some operations. Possible as a recommended operational KPI. KPI: Critical Error Rate Description: Some operations monitor application/transaction errors (typically omission of required information) requiring additional interactions with clients. Objective: Assessment of pre-visit instructions to clients and/or reception desk triage procedures. Status: Proposed as an operational measure. Applicability to be reviewed.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Client Satisfaction KPI: Client Satisfaction Level Description: Application of Common Measurement Tool (CMT) to assess and benchmark client satisfaction Objective: Primary indicator of client perception of service quality, measured repeatedly, trends provide strong evidence of service improvement levels Derivation: The multi-channel survey tool will be used (at a minimum) to establish the CSat level for in-person services. Status: Recommended as core KPI. KPI: Service Complaints Description: Count and categorization of complaints received through all channels concerning the In-Person channel. Objective: Primary indicator of service quality particularly when measured over time. Definition: Total service complaints received during reporting period divided by total number of calls. Derivation: Counted by incident tracking system. Complaints received through other channels must be added to total. Status: Recommended as core KPI. Caveat: Members noted that current systems do not currently support the collection and categorization of service complaints that are received through a wide variety of channels (e.g. Ministers correspondence, general e-mails, complaints at end of successful service phone call)

MAF CATEGORY: STEWARDSHIP

Metrics for Agent Utilization KPI: Cost per Contact Description: Total labour costs divided by total service requests. Objective: Provides a snapshot of current operational efficiency specifically related to agent/manpower. Definition: TBD Status: Recommended as Core KPI. Definition of labour cost to be determined. KPI: Agent Capacity Description: The anticipated number of hours of agent time available for counter service for each agent.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Objective: Ensures that agent resources are dedicated to required service functions Status: Recommended as operational KPI for queued service models. KPI: Resource Allocation Description: A management indicator assessing allocated agent positions to service delivery. Objective: Measures effective use of channel resources. Definition: Locally defined Status: Recommended as operational KPI for queued service models. KPI: Agent Adherence Description: An assessment of service agent adherence to schedule and making oneself available during anticipated service periods. Objective: Contributes to resourcing effectiveness Definition: Calculated as total agent login time divided by scheduled work time Status: Recommended as operational KPI for queued service models. KPI: Agent Occupancy Description: The percentage of agent time spent in direct service including talk and wrap up time. Objective: Ensures accurate resourcing levels to achieve target service levels. Definition: (Talk time + after visit wrap up time) divided by total agent log in time over measured period. Suggested benchmark / Range: TBD Status: Recommended as operational KPI for queued service models.

Metrics for Service Effectiveness Working group is asked to contribute suggestions for KPIs in this theme. KPI: Turn Around Time Description: The average time to transaction complete (i.e. receipt by client) expressed as a percentage of target time. Objective: Measures the response time to the client primary indicator of customer satisfaction. Definition: Status: Under review.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Use of Technology

KPI: Self-Service Ratio Description: A visitor to the service office that accesses computers Objective: Measures utility computer facilities within service office. Definition: Count of number of computer accesses divided by total visitors during measurement period. Status: Proposed as a Core KPI. Metrics for Channel Take-up KPI: Visitors Description: Total visitors entering the office. Objective: Measures overall service demand Definition: See ACCESS measure. Status: Proposed as Core KPI. MAF CATEGORY: PEOPLE Total Months Staff on Strength, Average Months on Strength per Agent: A measure of the total experience level of the agents/staff within the service centre. Monitoring this over time provides a measure of the impact of staff turnover. Staff Turnover Ratio: A measure of the churn rate within the Agent team. Provides a secondary indicator of service centre health and it often correlates to overall customer satisfaction levels. Agent Coaching Ratio: Number of hours of 1 on 1 coaching time/agent. Helps measure the utilization of service centre supervisor time as well as the investment in agent skill improvement. Training Days/Agent: Total training days delivered during the measurement period divided by the number of agents. Training is required for program/service delivery, for technology, and for the development of skills related to professionalism and customer interaction.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Further discussion with departments and agencies will be conducted to identify effective KPIs under this MAF category.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels 10.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Internet Channel
The Canadian Gateways team has published a definitive report on Internet Measurement identifying the suitability and meaning of specific web measures (for example, hits versus visits). Readers are asked to review this document (see Appendix B). MAF CATEGORY: CITIZEN FOCUSED SERVICE Metrics for Access
In the Internet Channel, the access theme includes measures concerning the availability of the site to potential site visitors. There are two primary components to site availability: a) How easily can site visitors locate the site through search engines, links from other sites or via publication of the URL through other channels such as the phone and mail? and b) Is the site available for site visitors once it has been located? Other qualitative characteristics contributing to access include compliance with W3C Accessibility Standards to ensure the site is fully inclusive and available to persons with disabilities.

KPI: Search Engine Ranking Description: Relevance ranking weighted from distribution of site visitors who entered the site through commercial search engines. Metric assumes that a high search engine rank provides maximum accessibility to those visitors who access the site via search. Objective: Measures overall site access through search engines. Definition: Sum of (relevance ranking multiplied by search engine referring count) divided by total search engine referrals Derivation: Relevance rank from top five referring search engines using visitor representative sample of search terms Suggested benchmark / Range: Status: Proposed as a Core KPI

KPI: Direct Access Ratio Description: Percentage of visits which access the site directly via same or known URL to total visitors.This metric assumes that visits accessing the site directly are either typing or pasting a URL in from another source (e.g. a brochure) or have bookmarked the site as a result of repeated visits. Objective: Assessment of site memory through known URL or bookmarking; Definition: Visits arriving at any page in site who do not have a referring URL associated with the visit. Derivation: Web traffic statistics counting visits arriving at site without referring URL.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Status: Proposed as a Core KPI

KPI: Server Availability Percentage Description: Total available server hours over total planned server hours during reporting period. Objective: Indicative of overall Internet service capacity Definition: sum of total available server hours less scheduled maintenance hours divided by total planned server hours Derivation: Server/Operating System Logs Status: Proposed as a Core KPI KPI: Referral percentage. Description: Percentage of total visits arriving at the site from planned referral sites. This KPI can be further broken down into specific sites: e.g. GoC Gateways, other GoC sites, other jurisdictions etc. Objective: Measures another access route to the site and can be used to adjust access strategies. Definition: Total visits arriving from specified websites divided by total visits. Status: Proposed as Core KPI KPI: Conversion Rate Description: Rate at which visitors initiate transactions and reach the submit page. Objective: Key Measure of overall service level and visitor satisfaction Definition: Total visits reaching submit pages divided by total visits viewing transaction start pages. Derivation: web monitoring package Suggested benchmark / Range: Status: Proposed as Core KPI

KPI: Abandonment Rate Description: Rate at which visitors initiate transactions but do not reach the submit page PLUS visitors exiting site from non-content pages Objective: Key Measure for overall service level. Definition: Visits with unsatisfactory exit pages divided by total visits Derivation: web traffic statistics Suggested benchmark / Range: Status: Proposed as Operational Measure

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Delay KPI: Average Visit Duration Description: The average duration of a visit. This metric can provide some indication of visitor need. However as more and more transactions are put online, statistics for visit duration may need to be separated according to type of visit (e.g. transactional, browse, search) Objective: Assessment of site stickiness overall relevance of site content and transactions to visitors requirements. Definition: Total elapsed seconds from site entry at any page to site exit for all visits divided by number of visits Derivation: Measured by web traffic software. Status: Recommended as an operational measure. Metrics for Quality KPI: Site Error Messages Description: Capture of all computer identified error conditions. Such as page not found message, invalid links, transaction aborts etc. Objective: Improves overall site quality and response. Definition: Total error page views divided by total visits Derivation: Web activity tracking Status: Recommended as Core KPI KPI: Internet Channel Feedback Description: Total criticisms, complaints and compliments categorized into effective topics, received through all sources. It is recognized by working group that this is difficult to track today. However, it is recognized as high value. Objective: Contributes to program integrity. Definition: Count of complaints by topic over reporting period. Derivation: E-Mail, Phone Incident Tracking System, Ministerial Correspondence system Status: Recommended as an operational measure but not currently used within most departments.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

KPI: Professionalism Description: Encompasses a range of soft skills that govern the approach to delivering accurate information and reliable services. Objective: Identifies and reinforces effective web design and web authoring skills. Definition: Best measured through the use of focus groups and independent testing organizations. Some input may be available from Media Metrics. Quality of e-mail responses where implemented can be verified by Email Response Management System (# of QA corrections, etc). Status: Proposed as Core KPI but must be further developed by working group. Metrics for Client Satisfaction KPI: Client Satisfaction Level Description: Application of Common Measurement Tool (CMT) to assess and benchmark client satisfaction Objective: Primary indicator of client perception of service quality, measured repeatedly, trends provide strong evidence of service improvement levels Derivation: The multi-channel survey tool will be used (at a minimum) to determine the core measures relevant to the Internet channel. As well, period exit surveys should be conducted upon site exit. Timeliness of speed of e-mail response can also be measured. Status: Proposed as Core KPI

MAF CATEGORY: STEWARDSHIP KPI: Cost per Visit, Cost per Visitor Description: The total operational cost of the site over the reporting period divided by total visits/visitors handled during the reporting period.. Objective: Provides high level indication and trend of overall service performance. Definition: will require further working group consultation Status: Recommended as Core KPI Metrics for Agent Utilization The following four measures can be tracked for agent-assisted calls concerning the Internet channel and for all messages/e-mails submitted through the Internet site. All are recommended as Operational Measures.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

KPI: Agent Capacity Description: The anticipated number of hours of agent time available for service for each full-time equivalent (FTE). Objective: Ensures that agent resources are dedicated to required functions KPI: Resource Allocation Description: A management indicator assessing allocated FTEs to service delivery. Objective: Measures effective use of channel resources. Definition: Locally defined KPI: Agent Adherence Description: An assessment of telephone agent adherence to schedule and making oneself available during anticipated service periods. Objective: Contributes to resourcing effectiveness Definition: Calculated as total agent login time divided by scheduled work time KPI: Agent Occupancy Description: The percentage of agent time spent in direct service including talk and wrap up time. Objective: Ensures accurate resourcing levels to achieve target service levels. Definition: (Talk time + after call wrap up time) divided by total agent log in time over measured period. User support metrics Suggested benchmark / Range: 85%

Metrics for Service Effectiveness KPI: First Visit Resolution Description: Unique visitors over x-day period who exited the site from success content pages Objective: Minimize cost and maximize client satisfaction. Definition: number of single unique visits within x-day period who exited the site from specific success (i.e. answer found) pages

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Use of Technology As the Internet Channel is used to provide self-service through Technology, this theme is not applicable within the channel. Metrics for Channel Take-up Web channel take up data is used in comparison with other channels to determine the impact of web site changes. KPI: Visits Description: Total site visits accepted Objective: Measures overall service demand Definition: Number of visit sessions initiated by web servers. Status: Proposed as Core KPI KPI: Visitors Description: Unique Visitors Objective: Measures service demand accurately. Definition: Unique visitors counted either through registration/login processes or via cookies. Status: Proposed as Core KPI

MAF CATEGORY: PEOPLE At publishing time, KPIs for the MAF PEOPLE category had not yet been proposed to the working group for review. Some examples of KPIs that might be suitable for this MAF category include: Total Months Staff on Strength, Average Months on Strength per Agent: A measure of the total experience level of the agents within the call centre. Monitoring this over time provides a measure of the impact of staff turnover. Staff Turnover Ratio: A measure of the churn rate within the Agent team. Provides a secondary indicator of Call Centre health and it often correlates to overall customer satisfaction levels.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Agent Coaching Ratio: Number of hours of 1 on 1 coaching time/agent. Helps measure the utilization of Call Centre supervisor time as well as the investment in agent skill improvement. Training Days/Agent: Total training days delivered during the measurement period divided by the number of agents. Training is required for program/service delivery, for technology, and for the development of skills related to professionalism and customer interaction. Further discussion with departments and agencies will be conducted to identify effective KPIs under this MAF category.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

11.0 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS Mail Channel

MAF CATEGORY: CITIZEN FOCUSED SERVICE Metrics for Access

KPI: Applications/Pieces Opened Description: Count of new envelopes opened during reporting period. Objective: Basic volume measure. Definition: Total envelopes opened less inappropriate mail (junk mail, wrongly-addressed etc) Suggested benchmark / Range: Status: Proposed as Core KPI. KPI: Applications Completed Description: Outbound mail for completed files. Definition: Status: Proposed as Core KPI. KPI: Applications/Mail in Process Description: All files remaining open at end of reporting period. Represents the work in progress within the processing centre. Definition: Previous open files + applications received less applications completed. Status: Proposed as Core KPI. Metrics for Delay KPI: Average Cycle Time (ACT) Description: The average elapsed time that the application/mail was held within the processing centre prior to completion. Objective: Primary Indicator of visitor satisfaction. Definition: The total number of minutes from opening of envelope to mailing of response. Derivation: Measured by mail tracking system. Status: Recommended as a Core KPI.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

KPI: Pass Through Ratio Description: Ratio of total handling time to total cycle time. Objective: Primary Indicator of workflow efficiency. Definition: Total minutes of processing time (time in agent) divided by total elapsed time. Ratio should approach 1.0 to indicate zero delay between processes. Derivation: Measured by mail tracking system. Status: Recommended as an Core KPI. KPI: Service Level Description: Percentage of mail that are completed within target processing time. Objective: This measure is required in order to set and publish mail service standards. Definition: Applications completed within service threshold divided by total applications completed. Derivation: Measured by mail tracking system Status: Recommended as an operational KPI. Metrics for Quality KPI: Response Accuracy Description: Reliability of mail response/completion. Objective: To ensure program integrity. Definition: Local quality scorecard assessed by quality assurance review of outbound mail plus write backs One or more subsequent mail receipts for same applications. Derivation: QA report. Status: Under review. KPI: Professionalism Description: Encompasses a range of soft-skills that govern the approach to delivering accurate information and reliable services. Objective: Identifies and reinforces effective communication. Definition: Best measured through the use of an enclosed feedback postcard or through alternate channel surveys (e.g. post response phone call). Status: Under review. May be impractical in several service models. KPI: Critical Error Rate Description: Some operations monitor application/transaction errors (typically omission of required information) requiring additional interactions with clients.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Objective: Assessment of application instructions to clients Status: Proposed as an operational measure. Applicability to be reviewed.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Metrics for Client Satisfaction KPI: Client Satisfaction Level Description: Application of Common Measurement Tool (CMT) to assess and benchmark client satisfaction Objective: Primary indicator of client perception of service quality, measured repeatedly, trends provide strong evidence of service improvement levels Derivation: The multi-channel survey tool will be used (at a minimum) to establish the CSat level for in-person services. Status: Recommended as core KPI. KPI: Service Complaints Description: Count and categorization of complaints received through all channels concerning the mail channel. Objective: Primary indicator of service quality particularly when measured over time. Definition: Total service complaints received during reporting period divided by total number of mail received. Derivation: Counted by incident tracking system. Complaints received through other channels must be added to total. Status: Recommended as core KPI. Caveat: Members noted that current systems do not currently support the collection and categorization of service complaints that are received through a wide variety of channels (e.g. Ministers correspondence, general e-mails, phone call)

MAF CATEGORY: STEWARDSHIP

Metrics for Agent Utilization KPI: Cost per Contact Description: Total labour costs divided by total service requests. Objective: Provides a snapshot of current operational efficiency specifically related to agent/manpower. Definition: TBD Status: Recommended as Core KPI. Definition of labour cost to be determined. KPI: Agent Capacity Description: The anticipated number of hours of agent time available for mail service for each agent. Objective: Ensures that agent resources are dedicated to required service

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

functions. Status: Recommended as operational KPI for mail processing service models. KPI: Resource Allocation Description: A management indicator assessing allocated agent positions to service delivery. Objective: Measures effective use of channel resources. Definition: Locally defined Status: Recommended as operational KPI for mail processing service models. KPI: Agent Adherence Description: An assessment of service agent adherence to schedule and making oneself available during anticipated service periods. Objective: Contributes to resourcing effectiveness Definition: Calculated as total agent login time divided by scheduled work time Status: Recommended as operational KPI for queued service models. KPI: Agent Occupancy Description: The percentage of agent time spent in direct mail service including wrap up time. Objective: Ensures accurate resourcing levels to achieve target service levels. Definition: (Response time + wrap up time) divided by total agent log in time over measured period. Suggested benchmark / Range: TBD Status: Recommended as operational KPI for mail service models.

Metrics for Service Effectiveness KPI: Description: Objective: Definition: Status: Metrics for Use of Technology

KPI: Automated Response Ratio Description: Ratio of applications received and completed but not handled by agents to total applications received.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

Objective: Definition: Status:

Proposed as an Operational KPI.

Metrics for Channel Take-up KPI: Applications Received Description: Total applications/mail entering the processing centre. Objective: Measures overall service demand Definition: See ACCESS measure. Status: Proposed as Core KPI. MAF CATEGORY: PEOPLE Total Months Staff on Strength, Average Months on Strength per Agent: A measure of the total experience level of the agents/staff within the service centre. Monitoring this over time provides a measure of the impact of staff turnover. Staff Turnover Ratio: A measure of the churn rate within the Agent team. Provides a secondary indicator of service centre health and it often correlates to overall customer satisfaction levels. Agent Coaching Ratio: Number of hours of 1 on 1 coaching time/agent. Helps measure the utilization of service centre supervisor time as well as the investment in agent skill improvement. Training Days/Agent: Total training days delivered during the measurement period divided by the number of agents. Training is required for program/service delivery, for technology, and for the development of skills related to professionalism and customer interaction. Further discussion with departments and agencies will be conducted to identify effective KPIs under this MAF category.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

12.0 USING SERVICE DELIVERY KPIs in DEPARTMENTAL REPORTING

The MAF provides the primary framework for departments to prepare required annual performance reports to provide formal feedback to Deputy Ministers. Treasury Board of Canada, Secretariat is developing a Web-based approach to support and streamline departmental performance reporting. Service delivery key performance Indicators will become an important component of these departmental reports and will significantly contribute to common understanding of overall service channel performance across government.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

13.0 CONTACT INFORMATION

Further information, suggestions and contributions can be forwarded to: Service Delivery Improvement Treasury Board of Canada, Secretariat 2745 Iris Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R5 Victor Abele (abele.victor@tbs-sct.gc.ca) Director, Service Delivery Improvement Telephone: (613) 946-6264 Fax: (613) 952-7232 Shalini Sahni (Sahni.Shalini@tbs-sct.gc.ca) Analyst Telephone: (613) 948-1119 Fax: (613) 952-7232

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

APPENDIX A: Terms and Definitions

ACD Automatic Call Distributor a software/hardware device that manages call queues, delivers IVR recordings as selected by the caller, and routes calls from the queue to appropriate agents based on any number of caller parameters CTI Computer Telephony Integration technology that provides an integrated phone/computer capability to the service agent. CTI provides features such as automatic caller file retrieval, soft phone, referral/call back electronic forms with response script suggestion, caller wait time, and quick access to the mainframe and online reference material.. Channel The primary service channels are telephone, Internet, mail and inperson. IVR/VR Interactive Voice Response/Voice Recognition two related terms describing two types of self-service technology employed in the Telephone Service Channel. Interactive Voice Response provides the caller with a series of options to be selected using the telephone keypad. Voice Recognition allows the caller to speak the question or say an option from a recorded list. KPI - Key Performance Indicator a measurable objective which provides a clear indication of service centre capability, quality, customer satisfaction, etc.

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels

APPENDIX B: References
Citizen First 3 report, 2003. Erin Research Inc, Institute for Citizen-Centred Service, Institute of Public Administration of Canada. Common Web Traffic Metrics Standards, March 21, 2003. Version 1.1., Treasury Board Secretariat, Canada. Key Performance Indicators Workshop, 2003. Service Delivery Improvement, Treasury Board Secretariat, Canada. Performance Management Metrics for DWP Contact Centres, March 14, 2003. Version 2.0. Ivackovic and Costa. Department of Works and Pensions, United Kingdom. Peformance Measures for Federal Agency Websites: Final Report. October 1, 2000. McClure, Eppes, Sprehe and Eschenfelder. Joint report for Defense Technical Information Center, Energy Infomration Administration and Government Printing Office, U.S.A. Service Improvement Initiative How to Guide, 2000. Treasury Board Secretariat, Canada. Service Management Framework Report, 2004. Fiona Seward. Treasury Board Secretariat Canada and Burntsands Consulting. Summary Report on Service Standards, 2001. Consulting and Audit Canada (Project 550-0743)

Key Performance Indicators for Service Delivery Channels APPENDIX C: Summary of Core Key Performance Indicators
These core indicators were vetted by the working group and are recommended for inclusion into the MAF. Phone Call Access Caller Access Abandoned Calls Average Speed to Answer Answer Accuracy Client Satisfaction Level Cost per Call First Call Resolution Call Avoidance Calls Answered by IVR Successfully Calls Callers In-person Visitor Access Client Satisfaction Level Service Complaints Cost per Contact Visitors Internet Search Engine Ranking Direct Access Ratio Server Availability Percentage Referral Percentage Conversion Rate Site Error Messages Professionalism Client Satisfaction Level Cost per Visit, Cost per Visitor Visits Visitors Mail Applications/Pieces Opened Applications Completed Applications/Mail in Process Average Cycle Time Pass Through Ratio Client Satisfaction Level Service Complaints Cost per Contact Applications Received