2009 Irish Civil Service Customer Satisfaction Survey

2009 Irish Civil Service 

Customer Satisfaction Survey 

Prepared by Ipsos MORI on behalf of the 

Transforming Public Services Programme Office 

Department of the Taoiseach

Irish Civil Service - Customer Satisfaction Survey 

Contents 

1. Introduction..................................................................................4 

1.1 Measuring Public Sector Customer Satisfaction....................................4 

1.2 Structure of Report.................................................................................5 

2. Research Methodology...............................................................6 

2.1 Overview of Research Methodology......................................................6 

2.2 Questionnaire Development...................................................................6 

2.3 Survey Administration............................................................................7 

2.3.1 Stand-Alone Survey............................................................................7 

2.4 Sampling Method/Size...........................................................................8 

2.5 Project Management Standards............................................................9 

3. Civil Service Contact ................................................................10 

3.1 Civil Service Department or Office Contact.........................................10 

3.2 Most Recent Contact............................................................................11 

3.3 Nature of Most Recent Contact............................................................12 

3.4 Method of Contact – Any Contact........................................................13 

3.4.1 Method of Contact – Most Recent....................................................14 

4. Satisfaction with Customer Service........................................16 

4.1 Overall Satisfaction with Service..........................................................16 

4.2 Satisfaction with Service Delivery Methods.........................................18 

4.2.1 Satisfaction with Service by Phone...................................................18 

4.2.2 Satisfaction with Service in Person...................................................20 

4.2.3 Satisfaction with Service in Writing...................................................22 

4.2.4 Satisfaction with Service by E-mail...................................................23 

4.2.5 Satisfaction with Service via Internet................................................24 

4.3 Dissatisfaction with Service or Contact ...............................................25 

4.3.1 Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Service or Contact .......................26 

5. Perceptions of the Civil Service...............................................28 

5.1 Civil Service Advocacy.........................................................................28 

5.2 Perceptions of Civil Service Efficiency.................................................30 

2


5.3 Familiarity with the Civil Service..........................................................31 

5.4 Favourability with the Civil Service......................................................32 

5.4.1 Trends in Favourability & Familiarity.................................................33 

5.5 Perceptions of the Civil Service as an Organisation............................34 

5.5.1 Positive Perceptions of the Civil Service as an Organisation...........34 

5.5.2 Negative Perceptions of the Civil Service as an Organisation.........35 

5.5.3 Changes in Public Perceptions of the Civil Service as an 

Organisation – Declining Trust.................................................................36 

5.5.4 Declining Levels of Trust – External Data.........................................38 

6. Access to Services....................................................................40 

6.1 Convenience of Contact Methods........................................................40 

6.2 Language Services..............................................................................41 

6.2.1 Irish Language Services....................................................................41 

6.2.2 Satisfaction with Access to Services (other languages)...................42 

7. Understanding Customer Contact...........................................43 

7.1 The Nature of Customer Contact.........................................................43 

7.2 Measuring Performance.......................................................................47 

Report prepared by: 

Tarik Laher 

Director, Ipsos MORI 

Emmet Ó Briain 

Research Development Director, Ipsos MORI 

Sarah Nitting-Fulin 

Research Executive, Ipsos MORI 

3


1. Introduction 

Ipsos MORI was commissioned in August 2009 by the Transforming Public Services 

(TPS) Programme Office, based in the Department of the Taoiseach, to conduct a 

survey of members of the general public to determine levels of customer satisfaction 

with services provided by Civil Service Departments and Offices, and attitudes to the 

Civil Service among the general public. 

The survey provides a comparison with previous surveys conducted in 2008, 2005 and 

2002 and demonstrates the Civil Service’s commitment to improving the quality of 

service delivery to its customers. 

Once again, the survey considers the views of all citizens, rather than simply 

customers of individual Departments or users of specific services. While the analysis of 

customer experience is restricted to those who had contact with the Civil Service in the 

last 12 months, the measurements of attitudes to the Civil Service is not. All members 

of the general public, including those who have not had direct contact in the last 12 

months, are stakeholders of the Civil Service. Even those without contact may have 

perceptions of its performance in terms of customer service and this provides valuable 

context to the interpretation of customer attitudes to service delivery. 

1.1 Measuring Public Sector Customer Satisfaction 

There are a number of features of customer satisfaction in a public sector context that 

distinguish it from private sector customer satisfaction research. The challenge for the 

Civil Service is to balance distinct, and often competing, factors relating to value for 

money for citizens with high quality, accessible services for customers. 

Firstly, customer surveys are exclusively concerned with clients’ satisfaction with the 

delivery of services at an operational level. However, citizen surveys could consider 

issues such as whether certain services should be provided by the public sector at all. 

Secondly, for customers and users, their priorities are for a better service, even though, 

as citizens, they may also recognise that resources may be better used elsewhere. 

There are also a number of features of public services that make them different from 

private sector services, and which reduce the usefulness of direct comparison between 

the public and private sectors. 

Many commercial models of service quality focus on the aim of increasing consumption 

4


of services and increasing customer loyalty whereas, for certain public services, these 

considerations are in theory less relevant, as customers may be obliged to consume 

the services (such as regulatory services) or where a reduction in consumption would 

be preferred (e.g. health and social welfare). 

An important consideration in evaluating customer satisfaction in the Civil Service is 

that the range of impacts on the image of public services is likely to be wider than for 

private services. In particular, expectations of public services are not only influenced by 

direct communications from the service, or even what the media says about the 

service, but also the reputation of the Government and politicians generally. While it is 

generally agreed that the impact of these factors will be relatively minor when asking 

about very specific service elements, it can have an impact on aggregate ratings and 

on public perceptions of the Civil Service as a whole. 

1.2 Structure of Report 

The report begins with a discussion of the methodology employed for the survey before 

turning to a description of the results. The report concludes with a review of the main 

findings of the research and recommendations arising from the research. 

Throughout the report, results are presented firstly at an overall aggregate level before 

highlighting significant differences between particular subgroups. Generally, results of 

individual subgroups are not reported where no significant differences exist between 

the attitudes, opinions or other results of groups. Results of individual subgroups are 

also not reported where subgroup sample sizes are insufficiently large to permit reliable 

inferences to be drawn. 

Results of other studies are also included in Section 5.4.4 to provide context for 

declining levels of trust that are evident in Ireland at present. 

5


2. Research Methodology 

2.1 Overview of Research Methodology 

This section sets out details of the methodology employed and interviewing approach 

used by Ipsos MORI during the Irish Civil Service Customer Satisfaction Survey. The 

research reported in this document was undertaken by Ipsos MORI, an independent 

research company based in Dublin. The nature and importance of the research project 

demanded robust statistical information as an output, so that the attitudes and 

perceptions of customers and their experiences of interaction with Government 

Departments and Offices could be measured reliably. Thus, the agreed methodology 

was a quantitative survey conducted face-to-face with a nationally representative 

sample of the general public. 

2.2 Questionnaire Development 

At the outset of the project, Ipsos MORI and the project steering team met to agree the 

principal objectives of the research and to prioritise question areas for inclusion in the 

research. It was agreed that question areas from previous surveys remained relevant 

and should be retained so that progress could be reliably measured. These included: 

contact with Civil Service Departments and Offices, frequency and nature of contact, 

satisfaction with customer experience, satisfaction with specific contact methods, 

convenience of contact methods, general perceptions of the Civil Service as an 

organisation, customer advocacy of the Civil Service, as well as reasons for customer 

dissatisfaction and recommendations for future improvements in service delivery. 

6


2.3 Survey Administration 

The survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI using face-to-face interviewing. All 

interviews were conducted by trained Ipsos MORI field interviewers, who are all 

accredited by the Interviewer Quality Control Scheme (IQCS), an independent 

organisation which works with researchers and research clients to ensure the highest 

standards of data collection in professional research. 

The method of administration employed - face-to-face personal interviewing - has 

obvious advantages over alternative approaches, such as telephone and selfcompletion, 

as it allows for greater probing of the respondents’ responses to get more 

detailed and accurate answers. 

2.3.1 Stand-Alone Survey 

When conducted in 2002 and 1997, the Civil Service customer survey was conducted 

as part of a syndicated omnibus survey, whereby a representative sample of the 

general population are surveyed on a variety of topics for a variety of clients to provide 

cost-efficiencies to those placing questions on the survey. However, in 2005, 

recognising the importance of the study, a stand-alone survey was preferred as a more 

reliable and appropriate approach. On an omnibus survey, questions could be included 

(i) at any position in the survey, whereby the quality of responses to questions towards 

the end of a longer survey can suffer due to respondent fatigue, and (ii) alongside other 

unrelated areas such as product purchase behaviour that may distract the respondent. 

This stand-alone approach has subsequently been retained for the 2008 and 2009 

surveys. 

7


2.4 Sampling Method/Size 

Interviews were conducted during September and October 2009, at 100 different 

sampling points in the Republic of Ireland. 

A total of 2,007 interviews were completed with adults aged 18 and older. A sample of 

this size provides robust data at an aggregate level and for certain sub-group analyses 

(e.g. most recent contact, age, socio-economic group, etc). The table below illustrates 

the representative nature of a sample of different sizes. For example, if the results of a 

survey of 2,000 people show that 70% of the public have a favourable opinion of the 

Civil Service, the range which the true figure would lie, if all the population had been 

interviewed would be +/- 2 points (i.e. somewhere between 68% and 72%), 95 times 

out of 100. In fact, the “true” figure is more likely to lie at the mid-point of the range, 

rather than at either extreme. 

Sampling tolerances applicable to results at 

or near these percentages (based on 95% confidence level) 

Sample Size 10/90% 30/70% 50% 

+% +% +% 

1,000 2 3 3 

1,200 2 3 3 

2,000 1 2 2 

The same quotas as last year were applied to ensure that the sample was 

representative of the population and that data was comparable. The applied quotas 

were as follow: 

• 2 gender quotas (male, female), 

• 4 age bands (18-24, 25-39, 40-55, 55+), 

• 4 region quotas (Dublin, Rest of Leinster, Munster and Connaught / Ulster), 

• 2 Socio-Economic Group quotas (ABC1, C2DE). 

8


2.5 Project Management Standards 

ISO 20252:2006 

All aspects of this survey were conducted in accordance with the ISO 20252:2006 

quality standard, the first quality management systems standard laid down by the 

internationally recognised International Standards Organisation to be dedicated solely 

to market, opinion and social research. It supersedes the ISO 9001:2000 standard that 

we previously held, and provides absolute assurance of quality throughout the 

business. Ipsos MORI is the first market research company in Ireland to hold this 

standard. 

MRS Code of Conduct 

As members of the Market Research Society, we adhere to a strict code of conduct 

that encompasses not only quality standards, but also ethical and legislative principles. 

This helps to provide confidence in our findings for our clients, our respondents, and 

our own industry. 

9


3. Civil Service Contact 

This first chapter of results examines the level and nature of contact members of the 

public had with the Civil Service in the 12 months preceding the survey. These results 

detail which Departments or Offices were contacted by customers, how frequently 

these Departments/Offices were contacted and the means used to make contact. 

3.1 Civil Service Department or Office Contact 

Any Contact with Govt. Departments in past 12 months 

Q. For each of the Civil Service Departments and Offices I read out, can you tell me whether or not you have 

had any contact with them over the past 12 months: 

6 

Any Contact 

49% 

Dept of Social & Family Affairs 

26% 

Revenue Commissioners 

11% 

Dept of Foreign Affairs 

Dept of Health & Children 

Dept of Environment Heritage & Local Govt 

Dept of Education & Science 

Dept of Agriculture & Food 

Dept of Transport 

Dept Ent Trade & Employment 

Land Registry/Property Registration 

Authority 

5% 

5% 

5% 

4% 

4% 

3% 

3% 

2% 

Base: All Respondents (2,007) 

All other contacts at 1% or less 

Contact with any Civil Service Department/Office has shown little change in the last 

year, with 49% of the general public interviewed stating that they have had any contact 

with any Government Department or Office in the last 12 months compared to 48% in 

2008 and 46% in 2005. The most frequently contacted Department is the Department 

of Social & Family Affairs, contacted by 26% of all respondents (22% in 2008). The 

next most frequently contacted Departments/Offices are the Office of the Revenue 

Commissioners (11%), the Department of Foreign Affairs (including the Passport 

Office) (5%), the Department of Health and Children (5%) and the Department of 

Environment, Heritage and Local Government (5%). No other Civil Service Department 

or Office was contacted by more than 4% of respondents. 

In terms of frequency of contact, the average number of contacts with a Department or 

Office is between 2 and 4 times by each customer. 

10


3.2 Most Recent Contact 

Most Recent Contact with a Govt. Department 

Q. Which Government Dept or Office did you contact most recently 

9 


44% 

Office of Revenue Commissioners 

15% 


6% 

Dept of Env. Heritage & Local Govt 

6% 

Dept of Agriculture & Food 

6% 

Dept of Education & Science 

5% 

Dept of Health & Children 

4% 

All other contacts at 3% or less 

Base: All who had any contact with a Govt Dept/Office in the last 12 months (n=992) 

Respondents were asked with which Department they had their most recent contact. 

The purpose of this question is to ensure that respondents’ perceptions of Civil Service 

customer delivery is captured through reference to a specific service contact (i.e. their 

most recent contact), rather than an accumulation of experiences. This provides for a 

more focussed and accurate evaluation of the user’s experience. 

In terms of most recent contact, a similar pattern to that of overall contact can be seen. 

Of all who had contact with the Civil Service in the past 12 months, the Department 

most contacted recently is the Department of Social and Family Affairs which was 

contacted by almost half (44%) of all Civil Service customers. The Office of the 

Revenue Commissioners was contacted most recently by 15% of all Civil Service 

customers. These two Departments alone account for almost 60% of all recent 

contacts. 

The Department of Foreign Affairs, the Department of the Environment, Heritage & 

Local Government and the Department of Agriculture & Food were each contacted 

most recently by 6% of Civil Service customers. 

11


3.3 Nature of Most Recent Contact 

Nature Most Recent Contact 

Q. Thinking about your most recent contact with a Civil Service Dept or Office, which of the following best 

describes the nature of this contact 

12 

Enquiring about a particular 

service/entitlement/application 

32% 

Seeking general information 

22% 

Carrying out a transaction 

17% 

Seeking payment/collecting 

allowance 

14% 

Providing Information 

10% 

Querying the 

meaning/accuracy in 

documentation received 

Other 

3% 

2% 

Base: All who had any contact with a Govt Dept/Office in the last 12 months (n=992 in 2009) 

Those who had contact with a Civil Service Department/Office were also asked for the 

reason for their most recent contact. The most popular reason for contact is to enquire 

about a particular service/entitlement/application (32%). A further 22% contacted a 

Department or Office to seek general information. 17% of customers made contact to 

carry out a transaction and 14% of customers were seeking a payment or collecting an 

allowance, an increase from 10% in 2009. 

12


3.4 Method of Contact – Any Contact 

Methods Ever Used For Contact (05-09) 

Q. Which other methods have you ever used 

16 

By phone 

In person 

In writing 

Through e-mail 

Via Internet 

By Fax 

12% 

15% 

18% 

12% 

16% 

12% 

1% 

3% 

4% 

41% 

34% 

37% 

40% 

55% 

53% 

68% 

71% 

81% 

2009 

2008 

2005 

Base: All who had any contact with a Govt Dept/Office in the last 12 months (n=992 in 2009, n=973 in 2008, n=564 in 2005) 

In terms of ‘any’ methods used to contact Government Departments and Offices, 68% 

of those who had contacted the Civil Service had contact by phone, compared to 71% 

of respondents in 2008 and 81% of respondents in 2005. Thus, while telephone 

remains the most used method of contact in the past 12 months, the proportion of 

customers using the telephone is falling. 

In contrast, the proportion of respondents contacting Government Departments/Offices 

in person since 2005 is rising. In 2009, 55% of those who had contacted Government 

Departments/Offices in the past 12 months had done so in person, compared to 53% in 

2008 and 41% in 2005. 

The explanation for this shift in patterns of contact is likely to be caused by a 

combination of the increase in the proportion of customers contacting the Department 

of Social & Family Affairs, whose customers predominantly rely on personal contact, 

and the decrease in those contacting the Office of the Revenue Commissioners, whose 

customers are more likely to contact the Office by phone. 

The proportion of customers contacting Government Departments/Offices in writing is 

also falling. In 2009, 34% of customers had contact with Departments/Offices in writing, 

compared to 37% in 2008 and 40% in 2005. 

In 2005, the level of contacts by e-mail and via the Internet was much higher than in 

13


2002 and 1997. However, this level of electronic contact plateaued in 2008, as 

displayed in the graph above. In 2009, we see a return to the 2005 levels of contact via 

the Internet, with 12% claiming to have contacted the Civil Service via the Internet in 

2009. As in 2008, there is a small decrease in 2009 in the proportion of respondents 

who are using e-mail to contact Departments and Offices. This might be explained, in 

some way, by the proportionate increase in contacts ‘in person’ as a result of the 

greater levels of contact generally with the Department of Social and Family Affairs. 

3.4.1 Method of Contact – Most Recent 

Method of Most Recent Contact (05-09) 

Q. Thinking about this most recent contact, did you mainly deal with the relevant Department or Office by 

telephone, in writing, by e-mail, via a website or in person 

15 

By phone 

41% 

43% 

57% 

In person 

25% 

41% 

36% 

In writing 

Via Internet 

4% 

5% 

2% 

12% 

13% 

11% 


2008 

2005 


2% 

2% 

4% 


The 2009 survey results show that contact in person is now as popular as contact by 

phone as a method of most recent contact. This year, 41% of respondents had their 

most recent contact by phone, the same proportion that had contact in person. This 

represents a significant shift from 2005 when more than twice as many respondents 

had contact by phone (57%) as had contact in person (25%). 

However, this is not especially surprising, given the consistent increase in the 

proportion of customers whose most recent contact was with the Department of Social 

and Family Affairs and, as discussed above, the decrease in recent contact with 

Revenue. 

Other forms of contact remain low for customers’ most recent contact. Most recent 

contact in writing (12%) is comparable to the 2008 (13%) and 2005 (11%) figures. 

14


Electronic forms of contact also remain low for most recent contact, with only 4% of 

respondents’ most recent contact coming via Internet and 2% through e-mail. 

15


4. Satisfaction with Customer Service 

This second chapter of results examines customers’ satisfaction with the level of 

service received from a Civil Service Department or Office in the 12 months preceding 

the survey. These results detail the levels of satisfaction with the overall service 

received and customers’ satisfaction with individual aspects of particular methods of 

service delivery (i.e. by phone, in person, etc.). Customer suggestions for 

improvements to individual service delivery methods are also identified. 

All questions on satisfaction are based on the responses of the 992 respondents who 

had contact with a Civil Service Department or Office in the preceding twelve months. 

4.1 Overall Satisfaction with Service 

Overall Satisfaction with Service (05-09) 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had with a Civil Service Department or Office – overall how 

satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the service you received 

11 

Very Satisfied 

Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 

Very Dissatisfied 

Fairly Satisfied 

Fairly Dissatisfied 

Don't know 

% All 

satisfied 


37% 

41% 

5% 

8% 1% 

7% 

78% 

2008 

44% 

36% 

5% 6% 8% 

1% 

80% 

2005 

42% 36% 

6% 6% 

9% 1% 

78% 


Overall satisfaction (very/fairly satisfied) with service received by respondents is 78%, 

which is consistent with the 2008 (80%) and 2005 (78%) survey results. However, 

there is a significant decrease in the proportion of respondents who are very satisfied 

with the service they received (37% of respondents claimed to be very satisfied 

against 44% in 2008). The proportion of those who are very or fairly dissatisfied (15%) 

with the level of service received has remained consistent compared to both the 2008 

(14%) and 2005 (15%) surveys. 

Respondents were also asked about their service expectations, prior to the most recent 

16


contact they had with a Civil Service Department or Office. 

Meeting Service Expectations (08-09) 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had with a Civil Service Department or Office – was the service 

you received , better than expected, the same as expected or worse than expected 

22 

Better than expected Same as expected Worse than expected Don't know 


21% 61% 

15% 3% 

2008 

26% 

56% 15% 

3% 

Base: All who had any contact with a Govt Dept/Office in the last 12 months (n=992 in 2009, n=973 in 2008) 

The proportion of respondents whose experience was better than expected (21%) in 

2009 is lower than in 2008 (26%). However, as in 2008, the proportion of respondents 

whose experience was better than expected (21%) remains significantly greater than 

the proportion of respondents whose experience was worse than expected (15%). 

This decrease in the proportion of respondents whose expectations were exceeded 

may be a function of either perceived diminished standards of delivery in 2009 or 

increased customer expectations. 

17


4.2 Satisfaction with Service Delivery Methods 

As well as measuring overall levels of satisfaction with the service received, 

respondents were also asked about how satisfied they were with particular service 

attributes specific to the method that was used in their most recent contact. Satisfaction 

with service by each method is now discussed in turn. 

4.2.1 Satisfaction with Service by Phone 

Satisfaction with Service by Phone 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had by phone, please tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you 

were with the following (ranked by mean score) 

Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 

Fairly Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Don’t know/No answer 

25 

% All 

Satisfied 

Helpfulness of staff 

31% 

41% 

7% 4% 3% 15% 

72% 

Manner in which staff explained issues/provided 

information 

30% 

40% 

6% 5% 4% 

15% 

70% 

Knowledge of staff 

28% 

41% 

8% 6% 4% 14% 

69% 

Quality of advice / information received 

27% 

41% 

7% 6% 4% 

14% 

69% 

Ease of finding telephone number 

29% 

39% 

5% 8% 4% 

15% 

68% 

Speed /efficiency with which query dealt with 

25% 

38% 

7% 

9% 6% 

14% 

63% 

Speed with which phone answered 

18% 

33% 

5% 

19% 

10% 

15% 

51% 

Voicemail service 

5% 

17% 

11% 6% 6% 

55% 

22% 

Telephone menu / automated telephone services 

8% 

21% 

11% 

8% 

10% 

42% 

29% 

Amount of time left holding 

14% 

24% 

9% 

22% 

14% 

17% 

38% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact with a Govt Dept by phone in the past 12 months (n=675) 

As in 2008, satisfaction levels with various aspects of service by phone are generally 

high. The aspects of service by phone which have the highest levels of satisfaction 

relate to staff service, such as the helpfulness of staff (72% satisfied), the manner in 

which staff explained issues/provided information (70%), knowledge of staff (69%), and 

the quality of advice/information received (69%). However, compared to 2008, there 

are significant decreases in the proportion of respondents who are very satisfied with 

each of these aspects of service by phone. 

Dissatisfaction with certain aspects of phone contact has also risen considerably since 

2008. The highest level of overall dissatisfaction expressed is for the amount of time 

left holding, with which 36% of phone customers were very/fairly dissatisfied in 2009 

compared to 26% in 2008. 29% of phone customers were dissatisfied with the speed 

with which the phone was answered, compared to 22% in 2008. As in 2008, a large 

18


cohort of respondents gave no answer or did not know how to respond with regard to 

voicemail services and automated telephone services. This is most likely because they 

had no experience of these features. 

Finally, in relation to phone service, phone customers were asked to identify one 

aspect that most needs improving, based on their most recent contact by phone. The 

results are displayed in the chart below. 

Service by Phone - Improvements Required 

Q. Thinking about the most recent contact you had by phone, what ONE thing from this list do you think 

most needs improving 

26 

Amount of time left holding 

20% 

Speed with which phone answered 

Telephone menu / automated telephone 

services 

Speed /efficiency with which query dealt with 

Ease of finding telephone number 

6% 

7% 

7% 

12% 



Manner in which staff explained 

issues/provided information 


Voicemail service 

4% 

4% 

3% 

2% 

2% 

Nothing needs improving 

Don't Know 

17% 

17% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact by phone with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=675) 

The aspects of phone service most frequently identified as requiring improvement echo 

those aspects that recorded the highest levels of dissatisfaction, that is, the amount of 

time left holding (20%) and the speed with which the phone was answered (12%). As in 

previous surveys, timeliness of services represents a recurring concern for phone 

customers. 

17% of respondents said that nothing needs improving and a further 17% were unable 

to identify any required improvements. 

19


4.2.2 Satisfaction with Service in Person 

Satisfaction with Service in Person 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had in person, please tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you 


31 


Location of Department/Office 



Manner in which staff explained issues 

Public service area facilities 

Design and layout of forms 

Help received in filling out forms 

Privacy of Conversation/transaction 

Speed/efficiency with which query 

was addressed 

Hours of Business 

Queuing System 




21% 

16% 

26% 

26% 

22% 

19% 

38% 

33% 

36% 

34% 

32% 

30% 

25% 

34% 

38% 

37% 

34% 

41% 

36% 

41% 

36% 

38% 

37% 

39% 

12% 

4% 5% 

8% 



Don’t know/No answer 

9% 

7% 

7% 

7% 

14% 

7% 

7% 

6% 5% 5% 10% 

11% 

7% 

14% 

13% 

14% 

6% 6% 

8% 

7% 2% 

7% 5% 5% 10% 

5% 7% 5% 10% 

4% 

38% 

13% 

5% 

8% 

7% 

6% 

10% 

11% 

16% 

9% 

11% 

11% 

12% 

10% 

All 

Satisfied 

% 

74% 

75% 

73% 

72% 

70% 

70% 

59% 

41% 

63% 

61% 

62% 

53% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact in person with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=548) 

With regard to satisfaction with service received in person, there are again relatively 

high levels of satisfaction with service attributes relating to staff, such as the 

helpfulness (74%) and knowledge (73%) of staff. As with services received by phone, 

there is less overall satisfaction with the timeliness of delivery. For example, more than 

one in every five (21%) customers were dissatisfied with the speed/efficiency with 

which queries were addressed. However, some of this dissatisfaction may relate to the 

physical environment associated with services delivered in person, as represented by 

the 27% of customers who were dissatisfied overall with the queuing system. 

While phone customers are significantly less likely to be very satisfied with aspects of 

the service than they were in 2008, as discussed in the previous section, this is not the 

case for ‘in person’ customers. Thus, the proportion of customers very satisfied with the 

helpfulness of staff and the knowledge of staff received in person has not decreased to 

the same extent as it has for phone customers. 

There is also evidence that there is lower dissatisfaction with certain aspects of service 

received in person in 2009. In 2008, there was a substantial minority (21%) of these 

customers who were dissatisfied with the quality of advice/information received. 

However, in 2009, only 12% were dissatisfied with the quality of advice and information 

received. 

20


‘In person’ customers were also asked to identify one aspect of service that most 

needs improving, based on their most recent contact in person. The results are 

displayed in the chart below. 

Service in Person – Improvements Required 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had in person, what ONE thing from this list do you think 

most needs improving 

Queuing System 

Speed/efficiency with which query was addressed 

Hours of Business 

Quality of advice/information received 

Design and layout of forms 

Public Service Area Facilities 


Manner in which staff explained issues/provided information 


Privacy of conversation/transaction 

Location of Department/Office 

Help received in filling out forms 

Other 

Nothing needs improving 

Don’t Know 

1% 

2% 

2% 

3% 

3% 

4% 

5% 

5% 

6% 

7% 

7% 

10% 

11% 

14% 

19% 

31 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact in person with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=548) 

Again, timeliness features strongly in the improvements required. 14% of ‘in person’ 

customers identify the queuing system and 10% of customers identify the 

spend/efficiency with which queries were addressed as the aspects most requiring 

improvements. 

Just under one-fifth (19%) of respondents said that nothing needs improving and a 

further 11% were unable to identify an aspect that needs improvement. 

21


4.2.3 Satisfaction with Service in Writing 

Satisfaction with Service in Writing 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had in writing, please tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you 


27 







% All 

Satisfied 

Ease of finding correct 

address/contact 

person 

29% 

43% 

4% 

2% 

1% 

22% 

72% 

Clarity of language 

used in written 

communication 

21% 

46% 

4% 

4% 

1% 

24% 

67% 

Quality of 

advice/information 

received 

20% 

40% 

6% 6% 

3% 

25% 

60% 

Speed and efficiency 

of response to query 

20% 

40% 

5% 

8% 6% 

22% 

60% 

Design and layout of 

forms 

19% 

22% 

8% 25% 

3% 

24% 

41% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact in writing with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=340) 

Turning to customer satisfaction with service in writing, the chart above suggests lower 

levels of user engagement overall with service in writing compared with customer 

experiences of service by phone or in person, as evidenced by the high level of nonresponse 

(don’t know or no answer) on service attributes. While service by phone or in 

person revealed relatively high levels of satisfaction with staff attributes, customer-staff 

interaction does not apply to the same degree with service in writing. 

In 2008, the aspect of service in writing that attracts the highest level of dissatisfaction 

(15%) was the speed and efficiency of response to their query. However, in 2009, 28% 

of customers were dissatisfied with the design and layout of forms. 

This is reflected in the improvements required as identified by customers who had 

contact in writing, 27% of whom identified the design and layout of forms as the 

improvement most required. At best, poor design and layout of forms poses a 

psychological burden to users. At worst, it can render services inaccessible to users 

with poor numeracy or literacy skills. 

22


4.2.4 Satisfaction with Service by E-mail 

Satisfaction with Service by E-Mail 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had through e-mail, please tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied 

you were with the following (ranked by mean score) 

32 







% All 

Satisfied 

Clarity of language 

used in e-mail 

29% 

27% 

2% 2% 3% 

37% 

56% 

Ease of finding 

correct e-mail 

address/contact 

35% 

19% 

1% 6% 3% 

36% 

45% 

Quality of 

advice/information 

received 

20% 

26% 

3% 4% 7% 

39% 

46% 

Speed/efficiency of 

response to query 

21% 

27% 

3% 5% 

8% 

37% 

48% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact through email with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=115) 

As discussed above, the level of customer contact by e-mail remains low compared to 

service by phone or in person. While satisfaction with aspects of service by e-mail is 

also lower than most aspects of service by phone or person, there is relatively little 

dissatisfaction expressed for the different factors of service related to e-mail. The large 

proportions of “don’t know” responses may be a function of the lower level of 

engagement associated with this contact method, which may encourage less 

consideration by users. 

However, as this method becomes more popular, it may be useful to prioritise 

improvements to those aspects of e-mail service with which customers are particularly 

dissatisfied. 9% of e-mail customers were very dissatisfied or fairly dissatisfied with the 

quality of advice/information received. 13% of e-mail customers were very dissatisfied 

or fairly dissatisfied with the speed and efficiency of response to their query, compared 

to 8% in the 2008 survey. 

Nonetheless, despite the fact that relatively low numbers of customers have made 

contact with a Government Department or Office by e-mail, these users appear broadly 

satisfied overall, indicating that the use of such services can yield positive results in 

terms of an efficient user experience. 

23


4.2.5 Satisfaction with Service via Internet 

Satisfaction with Service via Internet 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had via Internet, please tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied 

you were with the following (ranked by mean score) 

37 







% All 

Satisfied 

Ease of finding website 

Ease of using service 

Efficiency of service 

Information/documents available on website 

Ease of downloading material 

Clarity of on-line forms 

Presentation of website 

Speed of response of service or follow up 

Quality of advice/information received 

Comprehensiveness of service 

Speed/efficiency of response to query 

43% 

35% 

34% 

37% 

33% 

34% 

33% 

29% 

31% 

30% 

29% 

16% 

16% 

14% 3% 3% 37% 

3% 2% 1% 

43% 

3% 

1% 43% 

20% 

18% 

17% 

23% 

5% 1% 2% 

4% 3% 1% 

7% 3% 1% 

5% 2% 3% 

35% 

41% 

39% 

35% 

12% 2% 3% 3% 

50% 

21% 

15% 

3% 5% 2% 

5% 3% 3% 

38% 

44% 

15% 1% 5% 3% 

46% 

57% 

51% 

50% 

57% 

51% 

50% 

55% 

41% 

52% 

45% 

45% 

Ease of navigating website 

32% 

20% 3% 6% 3% 

36% 

52% 

Base: All Respondents who had any contact via Internet with a Govt Dept in the past 12 months (n=119) 

As with service by e-mail, a much smaller number of respondents had experience of 

service via Internet compared to traditional methods of customer service. Given the 

relatively small number of Civil Service customers who had contact via Internet, it 

would be unreliable to derive strong conclusions from their experience. 

Compared to 2008 results, there are significantly higher levels of satisfaction with 

almost every aspect of service via Internet. There are also extremely low levels of 

dissatisfaction associated with individual aspects of service. 9% of respondents were 

dissatisfied with the ease of navigating websites and 8% were dissatisfied with the 

speed/efficiency of responses to queries. However, there is very little dissatisfaction 

with website design or the efficiency of service delivery. 

Typical forms of customer contact via Internet, such as the submission of an online 

form or a request for information through a Departmental website, do not necessarily 

require response from, or involve contact with, Civil Service officials and, as such, are 

significantly less interactive than other forms of contact. This lack of interactivity may 

encourage less consideration by users of the quality of specific aspects of the service 

delivery, hence the high levels of non-response depicted above. 

Once again, despite the low numbers of customers that have made contact via the 

internet, their positive experiences augur well for the potential of this channel, where 

appropriate. 

24


4.3 Dissatisfaction with Service or Contact 

Dissatisfaction with Any Aspect of Service or Contact 

(08-09) - All respondents 

Q. Have you been very or fairly dissatisfied with any aspect of service/contact you received from a Civil 

Service Department or office in the past 12 months 

42 

Yes 

No 


15% 

85% 

2008 

17% 83% 

Base: All respondents (n=2,007 in 2009, n=2,002 in 2008) 

Following exploration of their most recent contact with Civil Service Departments or 

Offices, all respondents were then asked if they had been very or fairly dissatisfied with 

any aspect of service received from a Civil Service Department or Office in the past 12 

months. 15% of all respondents said that had been dissatisfied with some aspect of 

service received from a Civil Service Department or Office in the past 12 months, 

compared to 17% in 2008. However, this change is not statistically significant. 

Customers’ reasons for dissatisfaction and other potential motivations for unfavourable 

perceptions of customer service from Civil Service Departments or Offices were then 

explored in greater detail. This was an open ended-question. As such, respondents 

were not presented with or prompted for specific response items and were encouraged 

to provide further details regarding the specific reasons for their dissatisfaction. 

These open-ended answers were coded thematically. The first step was to create a 

code frame of verbatim comments, from which recurring themes could be identified 

through systematic coding. Having coded the verbatim comments of respondents, it is 

also possible to examine the quantitative distribution of themes across the sample of 

dissatisfied respondents. By collating reasons for dissatisfaction across contact 

methods and service encounters, it is possible to identify the common drivers of 

dissatisfaction for Civil Service customers. This quantitative distribution is presented, 

along with exemplary verbatim comments. 

25


4.3.1 Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Service or Contact 

Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Service or Contact 

41 

Q. Can you tell me more about the reasons why you were dissatisfied 

(%) = 2008 data 

(All > 2%) 

Process too slow 

Attitude of staff/rushed 

Waiting time on phone/holding time/automated service 

Lack of knowledge of staff 

15% 

19% 

19% 

30% (26%) 

(20%) 

(21%) 

(18%) 

Provided wrong information 

10% 

Not entitled to benefit/pension/disappointing outcome 

Poor customer care/staff not trained to deal with customers 

Lack of privacy 

Office not clearly laid out /poor queuing system 

Not enough staff on duty 

No response to written query/email/phone message 

Lack of communication between staff/Depts 

One person dealing with enquiry/not passed around 

7% 

7% 

7% 

6% 

5% 

4% 

4% 

2% 

(9%) 

(13%) 

(11%) 

(7%) 

(3%) 

Base: All respondents dissatisfied with any aspect of service/contact in the past 12 months (n=311) 

As illustrated above, and reflecting the survey results on satisfaction discussed 

previously, the main reasons for dissatisfaction identified by respondents relate to the 

timeliness of service delivery, as well as the speed and quality of response by staff. 

The comparative results from the 2008 are also displayed above and demonstrate the 

consistency of the main drivers of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction. 

30% of customers identify the speed of the process as a reason for dissatisfaction with 

a specific contact. A further 19% of customers identify being rushed by staff as a 

reason for dissatisfaction and the same proportion (19%) of customers identify waiting 

time and holding time on the phone. Thus, customers tend to identify aspects relating 

to the timeliness of service delivery as one of the main reasons for dissatisfaction. Of 

course, there is often more than one reason for a dissatisfactory service encounter, as 

the quotation below demonstrates: 

“My wife asked for XXXX Allowance and her file got lost. It took six months to find and 

when I rang, most of the staff were quite rude over the phone until I got talking to the 

right person. Phone calls were not returned and I had to keep ringing back until I was 

able to deal with a supervisor.” 

In 2008, qualitative analysis of these verbatim responses showed that there were two 

fundamental explanations for customer dissatisfaction. Firstly, dissatisfaction occurred 

when a satisfactory explanation for a particular decision was not forthcoming or when 

26


there was no guidance on next steps for the customer. This can be characterised as an 

unresolved contact and was seen by customers as failure at an interpersonal level by 

the official dealing with them. This is captured in the thematic analysis by 

dissatisfaction caused by the lack of knowledge of staff or the attitude of staff: 

Secondly, and more fundamentally, dissatisfaction occurred as the result of a systemic 

failure to prioritise the requirements of the customer: 

“You call at normal working hours and half the time you don't get a response, 

particularly early morning and lunch hours. There should be a service all throughout 

the day and key departments should be open Saturdays with minimum service 

available”. 

The conundrum is that officials adhering to existing quality customer service 

procedures and processes may nonetheless produce a dissatisfactory service for 

customers, as illustrated by the following customer quotation: 

“Their reply just seemed very short and negative and with no come back possible from 

my end.” 

While officials may consider the delivery of quality customer service in terms of their 

specific roles and responsibilities for each customer contact, individual customer 

requirements can cut across Departmental functions, requiring multiple contacts with 

different Departments and Offices for the resolution of a single query. This suggests 

that appreciating the customer journey as a whole, rather than as a collection of 

discrete contacts with individual Departments and Offices, is fundamental to a usercentred 

evaluation of quality customer service. 

In 2009, 15% of the entire sample was dissatisfied with some aspect of service 

received from the Civil Service in the last 12 months, a total of 311 respondents. 

Further analysis indicates that this group only differs from the main sample in terms of 

their age (significantly more likely to be aged 25-39) and gender (significantly more 

likely to be female). 

27


5. Perceptions of the Civil Service 

This chapter examines advocacy of the Civil Service, perceptions of Civil Service 

efficiency and general attitudes towards the Irish Civil Service as an organisation 

among customers and non-customers. 

Results from a number of studies indicate that trust levels in Ireland are declining 

generally. It is worth noting that a useful context for this trend is provided later in this 

chapter in Section 5.4.4 - Declining Levels of Trust – External Data. 

5.1 Civil Service Advocacy 

All respondents interviewed were asked whether they would speak highly or be critical 

of the Civil Service to other people, based on their own experiences or impressions. 

The question was therefore asked of customers and non-customers, those with 

experience of service delivery and those without. 

Advocacy Towards Civil Service (05-09) 

- All Respondents 

Q. Taking into account your own experiences or impressions, which of these phrases best describes 

the way you would speak of the Civil Service to other people 

45 

Would speak highly without being asked 

Would be neutral 

Would be critical without being asked 

% Advocates 

28% 

Would speak highly if I am asked 

Would be critical if I am asked 

Don't Know 

% Critics 

21% 


6% 22% 

28% 

46% 16% 5% 5% 

20% 

2008 

4% 

24% 

50% 

15% 

5% 4% 

32% 

16% 

2005 

3% 29% 

50% 12% 

4% 2% 

Base: All respondents (n=2,007 in 2009, n=2,002 in 2008, n=1,226 in 2005) 

28% of respondents reported that they would speak highly of the Civil Service based 

on their own experience or impressions, which is the same level of advocacy recorded 

in 2008. 21% of respondents reported that they would be critical of the Civil Service, 

compared to 20% of respondents in 2008 and 16% of respondents in 2005. 

Approximately half of all respondents interviewed would be neutral towards the Civil 

Service, which is consistent with the 2008 and 2005 results. 

28


The 2009 results also demonstrate the influence of contact with a Government 

Department or Office on customer advocacy. The table below shows that there is a 

significant difference in levels of customer advocacy between respondents who had 

contact and those who did not have contact. 

Advocacy Towards Civil Service 

The influence of contact 

Q. Taking into account your own experiences or impressions, which of these phrases best describes 

the way you would speak of the Civil Service to other people 

50 

Would speak highly without being asked 

Would be neutral 

Would be critical without being asked 

Would speak highly if I am asked 

Would be critical if I am asked 

Don't Know 

All who had contact 

with any Govt Dept/Office 

in the last 12 months (n=992) 

7% 24% 

45% 

18% 6%1% 

All who had no contact 

with any Govt Dept/Office 

in the last 12 months (n=1015) 

6% 20% 

47% 15% 4% 8% 

Base: All respondents 

Those with contact were both more likely to speak highly and more likely to be critical 

of the Civil Service than those without contact. 31% of those with contact would speak 

highly of the Civil Service, based on their experiences and impressions, whereas only 

26% of those without contact would do likewise. Similarly, 24% of those with contact 

would be critical of the Civil Service, based on their experiences and impressions, 

compared to 19% of those without contact. 

29


5.2 Perceptions of Civil Service Efficiency 

All respondents were asked about their impression of how efficient they feel the Civil 

Service is. 

Impression of Civil Service Efficiency (05-09) 

Q. Thinking of the Civil Service in overall terms, I would like you to give me your impression of how 

efficient you feel it is 

48 

Very Efficient Fairly Efficient No Opinion Either Way 

Fairly Inefficient Very Inefficient Don't know 

% All 

Efficient 


16% 

40% 

17% 

15% 7% 5% 

57% 

2008 

15% 

45% 

15% 

12% 

5% 

8% 

60% 

2005 

16% 

46% 

24% 10% 3%1% 

62% 


The Civil Service is perceived as very efficient or fairly efficient by 57% of respondents 

(after statistical rounding) in 2009, compared to 60% in 2008 and 62% of respondents 

in 2005. 22% of respondents believed the Civil Service to be very or fairly inefficient, 

compared to 17% in 2008 and 13% of respondents in 2005. 

As with levels of advocacy, there are differences in the perceptions of efficiency 

between those who had contact with the Civil Service and those who did not have 

contact. 65% of respondents with contact perceived the Civil Service to be very or fairly 

efficient, compared to 49% of respondents without contact. Equally, 24% of 

respondents with contact perceived the Civil Service to be very or fairly inefficient, 

compared to 19% of respondents without contact. 

Thus, while almost two-thirds (65%) of its customers perceive the Civil Service as a 

whole to be efficient, less than one in every two (49%) non-customers do not. 

30


5.3 Familiarity with the Civil Service 

Familiarity with the Civil Service (05-09) 

Q. Taking into account your own experiences as well as any impressions you may have formed from any 

source, how familiar or unfamiliar do you feel you are with the workings of the Civil Service as they affect 

you 

54 

Very Familiar Fairly Familiar No Opinion Either Way 

Fairly Unfamiliar Very Unfamiliar Don't know 

% All 

Familiar 


11% 

41% 

12% 

22% 11% 3% 

52% 

2008 

8% 

37% 

13% 

27% 

13% 

2% 

45% 

2005 

9% 

31% 

19% 29% 

12% 

40% 


52% of respondents felt they were familiar with the workings of the Civil Service, a 

significant increase in familiarity, compared to levels recorded in 2008 (45%) and 2005 

(40%). The proportion of respondents claiming to be fairly or very unfamiliar with the 

Civil Service (33%) has also decreased significantly from 2008 (40%) and 2005 (41%) 

levels. 

Once again, those with contact are much more likely to consider themselves familiar 

with the Irish Civil Service than those without contact. 60% of those with contact 

consider themselves familiar with the working of the Irish Civil Service, compared to 

43% of those without contact. In 2008, 33% of those without contact considered 

themselves familiar with the working of the Civil Service. 

Taken together, the comparison of results relating to familiarity from this year’s survey 

and previous surveys demonstrates significant rises in the level of stated awareness of 

the workings of the Civil Service by both customers and non-customers. This rise in 

awareness may be a function of the emphasis of recent public service modernisation 

initiatives on openness and transparency, as well as increases in media reporting of 

the workings of the Civil Service. 

31


5.4 Favourability with the Civil Service 

Favourability with Civil Service (05-09) 

Q. Taking into account your own experiences or impressions, how favourable is your opinion of the way 

in which Civil Servants meet the needs of the public 

55 

Very Favourable Fairly Favourable No Opinion Either Way 

Fairly Unfavourable Very Unfavourable Don't know 

% All 

Favourable 


11% 

41% 

22% 

16% 6% 5% 

52% 

2008 

9% 

46% 

23% 

14% 

5% 4% 

55% 

2005 

9% 

48% 

24% 10% 3% 

57% 


The 2009 survey shows a decrease in the proportion of respondents with very 

favourable or fairly favourable opinions of the way in which the Civil Service meets the 

needs of the public, compared to the 2008 and 2005 surveys. In 2008, 55% of 

respondents had a favourable opinion, compared to 57% in 2005. In 2009, the 

proportion of respondents with favourable opinions is 52%. 

There is also an equivalent increase in the proportion of respondents with very 

unfavourable or fairly unfavourable opinions of the Civil Service, compared to 2008 and 

2005. In 2009, the proportion of respondents with unfavourable opinions is 22%, 

compared to 19% in 2008 and 13% in 2005. 

Once again, those with contact are much more likely to have a favourable opinion of 

the Irish Civil Service compared to those without contact. 60% of those with contact 

have a favourable opinion of the Irish Civil Service, compared to 44% of those without 

contact. 

32


5.4.1 Trends in Favourability & Familiarity 

Typically, customer satisfaction research suggests that as familiarity with a particular 

organisation rises, so too does favourability. However, trends over recent surveys run 

contrary to this expected relationship between favourability and familiarity with the Civil 

Service. While familiarity among the general public has increased steadily from 40% to 

52% between 2005 and 2009, favourability has declined from 57% to 52% within the 

same timeframe. Thus, the level of familiarity has increased at more than twice the rate 

the level of favourability has been declining between 2005 and 2009, as depicted in the 

graph below. 

Familiarity/Favourability with the Civil Service (05-09) 

Q. Taking into account your own experiences as well as any impressions you may have formed from any 

source, how familiar or unfamiliar do you feel you are with the workings of the Civil Service as they affect 

you How favourable is your opinion of the way in which Civil Servants meet the needs of the public 

53 

% 

100% 

% Very/Fairly Familiar % Very/Fairly Favourable 

80% 

60% 

40% 

57% 

40% 

55% 

45% 

52% 52% 

20% 

0% 

2005 2008 2009 


As discussed in the introduction to the report, the nature of service delivery in the 

public sector differs from that of private sector organisations in that all members of the 

general public are stakeholders, though not always service users. For the Civil Service, 

stakeholders may have perceptions of its performance, without direct experience of the 

services it provides. It is important to note that, despite the small decline in favourability 

among the general public, satisfaction among customers remains relatively static. 

Furthermore, as in 2008, customers are consistently more positive in their perceptions 

of the Civil Service than those who have not had contact in the past 12 months. 

33


5.5 Perceptions of the Civil Service as an Organisation 

Respondents were also asked a series of statements about the Irish Civil Service and 

asked to what extent they agreed or disagreed with the statements. Respondents were 

presented with both ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ statements about the Civil Service. We 

begin by reporting respondents’ opinions on a selection of these ‘positive’ and 

‘negative’ statements before examining separately a selection of statements for which 

the level of agreement has significantly decreased compared to 2008. 

5.5.1 Positive Perceptions of the Civil Service as an 

Organisation 

Civil Service Perceptions: Positive Statements 

Q. Now thinking about the Irish Civil Service in general, please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree 

with the following statements (ranked by mean scores) 

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree 

Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't know 

51 

% All 

Agree 

The Civil Service offers good career prospects 

for its employees 

28% 

40% 

10% 5% 1%17% 

67% 

I feel that the service provided by the Civil 

Service has improved in the last 5 years 

11% 

39% 

17% 

13% 5% 

15% 

50% 

The Civil Service has become more customer 

focussed over the past 5 years 

10% 

39% 

14% 

16% 

5% 

16% 

49% 

The Civil Service has good procedures for 

making complaints about levels of service 

received 

6% 

23% 

18% 

15% 

10% 

28% 

29% 


Over two-thirds (67%) of respondents agreed that the Irish Civil Service offers good 

career prospects for its employees. Half (50%) of all respondents agreed that I feel that 

the service provided by the Civil Service has improved in the last 5 years and a similar 

proportion (49%) agreed that The Civil Service has become more customer focussed 

over the past 5 years. Approximately a fifth of all respondents disagree with the same 

two statements. 

Less than one-third (31%) of respondents agreed that the Civil Service has good 

procedures for making complaints about levels of service received, with one-quarter 

(25%) of respondents disagreeing with this statement. 

34


5.5.2 Negative Perceptions of the Civil Service as an 

Organisation 

Civil Service Perceptions: Negative Statements 



52 

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree 

Disagree Strongly Disagree Don't know 

% All 

Agree 

The Civil Service has too much red tape 

31% 

39% 

9% 9% 3%9% 

70% 

I get most of my information about the Civil 

Service from coverage in the newspaper, TV or 

radio 

16% 

52% 

10% 

15% 3% 4% 

68% 

Private sector organisations give a better service 

than the Civil Service 

12% 

26% 

24% 

18% 

4% 16% 

38% 

The Civil Service is an old-fashioned 

organisation 

12% 

32% 

15% 

27% 

8% 6% 

44% 

It is difficult to get information you need from 

the Civil Service/Deps/ Offices 

13% 

28% 

12% 

30% 

8% 9% 

41% 


70% of respondents agreed that the Civil Service has too much red tape. While the 

level of agreement with the statement Private sector organisations give a better service 

than the Civil Service is consistent with the 2008 results, there is a significant decrease 

in the proportion of respondents who disagreed with this statement (22%) in 2009, 

compared to 2008 (34%). 

In 2008, more respondents disagreed (42%) than agreed (38%) that it is difficult to get 

information you need from Civil Service Departments or Offices. However, in 2009, this 

has reversed. The proportion agreeing (41%) with this statement is higher than the 

proportion disagreeing (38%). 

Finally, 68% of respondents agreed with the statement I get most of my information 

about the Civil Service from coverage in the newspapers, television or radio. 74% of 

those without contact agreed with this statement, compared to 62% of those with 

contact. As previously reported, those with contact had significantly more positive 

perceptions than those without contact. 

35


5.5.3 Changes in Public Perceptions of the Civil Service as an 

Organisation – Declining Trust 

Overall, the level of agreement with both positive and negative statements is largely 

unchanged from 2008. However, there have been significant differences between the 

levels of agreement with three attitudinal statements between 2008 and 2009. 

Changes in Public Perceptions (05-09) 



50 

Agree Strongly/Fairly 

The Civil Service deals 

with people in a 

fair and equal way 


2008 

2005 

55% 

62% 

67% 

The Civil Service serves 

all segments of society 

in Ireland equally 


2008 

2005 

47% 

54% 

60% 

The Civil Service 

is independent and 

trustworthy 


2008 

2005 

50% 

61% 

61% 


As illustrated in the graph above, there have been significant decreases since 2008 in 

the proportion of the general public that agrees that the Civil Service is independent 

and trustworthy, that it serves all segments of society equally and that it deals with 

people in a fair and equal way. It is noteworthy that the proportions agreeing with these 

statements have decreased by roughly the same amount - between 11% and 13% - 

since 2005. 

The negative changes in these three statements since 2005 are particularly interesting 

because all three statements relate to the objectivity of the Civil Service, in terms of its 

independence and fairness, in dealing with customers. Despite these changes in public 

opinion, levels of customer satisfaction recorded over the three surveys conducted 

between 2005 and 2009 have remained consistent. Therefore, we may need to look 

beyond direct experiences of service delivery for explanations for the decline in the 

perceived independence and fairness of the Civil Service. 

The first explanation may relate more directly to effective communications rather than 

36


performance. Research conducted by Ipsos MORI in the UK consistently demonstrates 

a positive relationship between levels of awareness of communications by public 

service providers and customer satisfaction. This decline in positive perceptions of the 

Civil Service’s independence and fairness may be considered a communications rather 

than a performance challenge. 

A second possible explanation for this increase in negative attitudes may lie in the 

declining levels of trust generally, among the wider public. Most public service 

modernisation initiatives are often underpinned by the assumption that increasing 

quality will lead to increasing trust in public administration and government, generally. 

However, not all of these respondents have experience of Civil Service delivery. The 

chart below illustrates how the attitudes of those with experience of satisfactory service 

delivery in the last 12 months compare to those who had dissatisfactory service 

experiences and to those who had no experience of Civil Service delivery. 

Public Perceptions by Quality of Contact 

Q. Now thinking about the Irish Civil Service in general, please tell me to what extent you agree or 

disagree with the following statements 

The Civil Service deals with people in a fair and equal way 

Satisfactory experience 

54% 

Dissatisfactory experience 

27% 

No contact / neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 

The Civil Service serves all segments of society in Ireland equally 



32% 

46% 

66% 


The Civil Service is independent and trustworthy 


51% 

59% 


26% 


Base: Satisfactory experience (n=775), Dissatisfactory experience (n=152), No contact / no opinion (n=1,080) 

46% 

It is evident that those respondents who were satisfied with the service received were 

more likely to say that they agreed with the positive statements set out above. Those 

who had a negative experience were considerably more likely to have negative 

attitudes. Respondents with no contact at all, or who had no opinion (neither satisfied 

nor dissatisfied), generally fell between the satisfied and dissatisfied cohorts in their 

attitudes. 

37


5.5.4 Declining Levels of Trust – External Data 

The apparent fall in trust for the Civil Service mirrors that of other sectors, as evidenced 

by other data from recent studies. 

Ipsos MORI’s Trust in People and Professions study 1 recently examined trust in people 

and professions among a sample of the general public, benchmarking data from 

January 2010 against results first gathered in 2005. Similar declines in trust were 

uncovered in this survey. 

Trust in People and Professions: 2010 - 2005 

Business Leaders 

Civil Servants 

Doctors 

Gardaí 

Government Ministers 

Journalists 

Ordinary man/woman in the street 

Politicians generally 

Scientists 

Teachers 

Television news readers 

Trade Union officials 

32% 

29% 

21% 

23% 

40% 

45% 

20% 

21% 

40% 

47% 

59% 

63% 

66% 

62% 

66% 

2010 

2005 

92% 

92% 

77% 

83% 

80% 

86% 

89% 

83% 

82% 

Base: (1,000) Adults aged 16+ - Ipsos MRBI Omnibus Survey, Jan 2010 

The results show that just one in three of those surveyed trust business leaders (32%), 

albeit showing a slight increase since 2005. One in five of those surveyed trust 

politicians generally, with a similar proportion trusting Government Ministers – both of 

these results show little change since 2005. In the same time period, trust in civil 

servants has declined (down from 63% to 59%), journalists (from 45% to 40%) and 

trade union officials (down from 47% to 40%). 

Trust in doctors, scientists and teachers remains high, with the latter falling slightly. 

Trust in the Gardaí, meanwhile, has increased from 66% to 77%. 

1 

Source : Ipsos MORI – Trust in People and Professions 2010. 

38


Consideration of a second external report provides further evidence of this decline in 

trust. Edelman’s Trust Barometer (2010) 2 , a survey of opinion leaders recently 

published, highlights that in contrast to other European countries, Ireland is 

experiencing “a profound and continuing trust crisis”. The findings show that Irish 

respondents have the lowest level of trust in politics of the 22 countries surveyed. 

The data shows that trust in a number of important institutions, across all areas of 

public life, is the lowest in Europe. Indeed, Ireland was the only country surveyed by 

Edelman that experienced declines in trust across four areas; business, government, 

media and NGOs. 

The results from both of these studies help to put the results of the Irish Civil Service 

Customer Satisfaction Survey 2009 in context, by demonstrating that declining levels of 

trust are being experienced across a variety of Irish institutions and professions. 

2 

Source: http://www.edelman.ie/index.php/insights/trust-barometer/ The Edelman trust survey 

2010 was undertaken via telephone with a sample of 4,875 college educated 25-64 year old 

members of the public (“opinion leaders”) across 25 countries. 

39


6. Access to Services 

This chapter examines the experiences and perceptions of customers and noncustomers 

with regard to access to services provided by the Irish Civil Service. This 

included the perceived convenience of current service delivery methods as well as 

access to necessary services by Irish language speakers and those respondents 

whose first language was other than Irish or English. 

6.1 Convenience of Contact Methods 

Perceived Convenience of Contact Methods (02-09) 

Q. Thinking of future dealing you may have with Civil Service Departments or Offices, please tell me how 

convenient or inconvenient each of the following methods of communication would be for you if you were 

contacting a Govt Dept 

42 

% very/fairly 

convenient 

By Telephone In Writing By E-mail Via Internet Visiting Dept/Office in person 

100% 

80% 

80% 

67% 

86% 

72% 

84% 

66% 

78% 

63% 

60% 

40% 

37% 

47% 

46% 

44% 

50% 51% 

45% 

50% 

48% 48% 

27% 

20% 

25% 

0% 

2002 2005 2008 2009 

Base: All respondents (n=2,007 in 2009, n=2,002 in 2008, n=1,226 in 2005, n=1,001 in 2002) 

In terms of future contact, all respondents were asked to rate how convenient or 

inconvenient various methods of communication would be for contacting a Government 

Department or Office. As one might expect, the most used method is also perceived 

as the most convenient. Overall, 78% of respondents would find telephone a 

convenient method of communication, compared to 84% of respondents in 2008. 

Visiting a Department or Office in person is now considered convenient by 50% of 

respondents, compared to 45% in 2008, 44% in 2005 and 37% in 2002. 

Despite the currently low levels of service uptake via electronic methods, the chart 

above suggests that such methods may be increasingly seen as more convenient, 

particularly when compared to the results for 2005 and 2002. E-mail and Internet are 

now considered convenient (very/fairly convenient) for around 50% of respondents. 

40


While this underlines the importance of monitoring the potential for the development of 

electronic service delivery where appropriate, it is important to remember that the chart 

above represents the perceived convenience of such forms of contact for all members 

of the general public. It remains the case that electronic service methods have seen 

low levels of uptake by existing customers for existing services. For example, 34% of 

respondents from lower socio-economic occupational groupings consider e-mail 

contact to be personally convenient, compared to 63% of respondents from higher 

socio-economic occupational groupings. 

6.2 Language Services 

Those respondents who required Irish language services and those whose first 

language was neither Irish nor English were also asked about their experience of 

accessing necessary services from Irish Civil Service Departments or Offices. 

6.2.1 Irish Language Services 

The purpose of the 2003 Official Languages Act is to ensure that those who require the 

availability of Irish language services for dealing with the Civil Service, or any other 

official purpose in the State, can access necessary services in Irish. Of the total 

sample, only 2% had ever used a service from the Irish Civil Service in the Irish 

language. A similar proportion, 2%, also expressed a preference for receiving services 

in Irish, if the levels and quality of the services offered were the same in both Irish and 

English. Of those who had accessed Irish language services, 67% were very satisfied 

or fairly satisfied with the level of service received in the Irish language. 13% were very 

dissatisfied or fairly dissatisfied with the level of service received. 

However, it is worth bearing in mind that, while the overall survey sample is 

representative of the population as a whole, this small sample of Irish language service 

users is unlikely to be wholly representative of the Irish-speaking population and does 

not represent a reliable basis for service-critical policy decisions in this area. 

41


6.2.2 Satisfaction with Access to Services (other languages) 

Satisfaction with Access to Services (05-09) 

60 

Q. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with access to necessary services from the Civil Service 






Don't know 

% All 

Satisfied 


21% 

32% 

18% 

3% 3% 23% 

53% 

2008 

23% 

37% 

14% 

5% 3% 

18% 

60% 

2005 

9% 

55% 

19% 14% 

21% 

64% 

Base: All Respondents whose 1 st language is something other than Irish or English (n=70 in 2005, n=127 in 2008 and n=107 in 2009) 

5% of the sample claimed to have a first language that is something other than Irish or 

English. This sub-group were then asked how satisfied they were with access to 

necessary services from the Civil Service. 53% of those with a first language other than 

Irish or English were satisfied with the access to necessary services from the Civil 

Service. Only 6% were dissatisfied, compared to 8% in 2008 and 14% in 2005. This 

might be illustrative of ongoing work being done by the Civil Service to meet the needs 

of this customer base. However, because of the small sample who answered this 

question, this result should only be considered indicative. 

42


7. Understanding Customer Contact 

The Irish Civil Service customer survey provides an objective evaluation of customer 

satisfaction with overall levels of service provided by Civil Service Departments and 

Offices, as well as public attitudes to and perceptions of the Civil Service as a whole. 

While the 2009 survey results are largely positive, showing that overall levels of 

customer satisfaction are consistent with previous surveys, the findings relating to 

customer dissatisfaction discussed in the 2008 customer survey report also remain 

relevant 3 . 

The purpose of this section is to extend our understanding of satisfaction by analysing 

different aspects of customer contact and their relevance to customers’ evaluations of 

service delivery. This is discussed with specific reference to the Department for Social 

& Family Affairs (DSFA) and the Office of the Revenue Commissioners (Revenue), as 

exemplars of two contrasting Civil Service customer experiences. 

7.1 The Nature of Customer Contact 

There have been significant changes in the nature of customer contact in the period 

between 2005 and 2009. Specifically, the proportion of DSFA customers as a 

proportion of all Civil Service customers has been rising since 2005, while the 

proportion of Revenue customers has been steadily falling. In 2009, approximately one 

in every four (26%) members of the public had contact with DSFA, compared to 

roughly one in every ten (11%) who had contact with Revenue. 

As these two Departments account for the majority of public contact with the Civil 

Service, customer experiences with both Departments have a significant influence on 

the overall level of customer satisfaction with the Irish Civil Service. The chart overleaf 

shows the significant difference between the overall satisfaction with service of DSFA 

customers and that of Revenue customers. 

3 

The five most common explanations for dissatisfaction provided by respondents in 2008 were: 

process too slow or complex; attitude of staff; perceived lack of knowledge or information not 

provided; lack of privacy and waiting time for phone or left holding. 

43


Overall Satisfaction with Service - DSFA & Revenue 

Q. Thinking of the most recent contact you had with a Civil Service Department or Office – overall how 

satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the service you received 

19 




Don’t know 




Office of Revenue Commissioners 

18% 

dissatisfied 

6% 

10% 

8% 1% 

34% 

75% 

satisfied 

9% 

dissatisfied 

3% 5% 

4% 

1% 

40% 

86% 

satisfied 

41% 

47% 

Base: All who had any contact with the 

DSFA in the last 12 months (n=438) 

Base: All who had any contact with the 

Revenue in the last 12 months (n=146) 

While 75% of DSFA customers are satisfied with the level of service they received on 

their most recent contact with the Department, 86% of Revenue customers are 

satisfied. Similarly, dissatisfaction is significantly higher among DSFA customers 

(18%), compared to Revenue customers (9%). Thus, the average experience of DSFA 

customers is significantly less satisfactory than that of Revenue customers. 

There are a number of possible explanations for the different levels of satisfaction 

recorded by DSFA and Revenue customers which relate to the nature of contacts they 

are likely to have with the Civil Service. The first possible explanation is the level of 

contact customers have with individual Departments. 

44


Top 3 Depts - Frequency of Contact (05-09) 

Q. How frequently have you contacted those Departments in the last year 

(ranked by highest respondent base) 

Once 2-4 times 5+ times 

8 

Dept of Social 

& Family Affairs 


2008 

2005 

27% 

28% 

35% 

45% 

48% 

45% 

26% 

21% 

22% 

23% 53% 19% 

Office of 

the Revenue 

Commissioners 


2008 

2005 

41% 

30% 

32% 

39% 

37% 

47% 

14% 

13% 

19% 

56% 29% 


(incl. Passport office) 


2008 

69% 

23% 4% 

64% 19% 13% 

Base: All Respondents who have been in contact with each Dept 

As displayed above, Revenue customers are significantly more likely to have had a 

single contact with the Office, compared to DSFA customers who are significantly more 

likely to have multiple contacts with the Department. In 2009, there are almost as many 

DSFA customers who contacted the Department five or more times (26%) in the last 12 

months as there are customers who contacted the Department once (27%). Only 13% 

of Revenue customers had contact five or more times with the Office. This would 

suggest that the processes involved in resolving contacts with the DSFA is 

considerably longer, on average, than when dealing with Revenue. By way of 

comparison, we can also see that 69% of respondents who had contact with the 

Department of Foreign Affairs (including the Passport Office) in 2009 contacted the 

Department only once. This might be a result of process improvements in passport 

application and other systems in recent years. 

In 2008 and 2009, the single most frequently identified reason for dissatisfaction with 

service delivery was that the process was too slow or complex. As we have seen, 

timeliness and speed of delivery is a consistent feature of the improvements required 

by Civil Service customers across contact methods. However, the process involved for 

certain services, such as renewing a passport, can be considerably more 

straightforward than others, such as registering for social welfare services, and the 

length of the process necessarily gives rise to greater potential for dissatisfaction. 

The nature of many DSFA services is that customers typically make contact in person 

by visiting local social welfare offices. As personal visits require travel to and from 

45


Departments, as well as waiting time at the office, they will, all things being equal, 

involve a greater investment of time than alternative contact methods for each single 

contact a customer makes. The contrast in the distribution of contact methods used to 

contact the DSFA and Revenue is displayed below. 

Method of Most Recent Contact – DSFA & Revenue 

Q. Thinking about this most recent contact, did you mainly deal with the relevant Department or Office by 

telephone, in writing, by e-mail, via a website or in person 

15 

By phone 

30% 

41% 

50% 

In person 

21% 

41% 

61% 

In writing 

Via Internet 

12% 

8% 

19% 

4% 

7% 


DSFA 

Revenue 


2% 

3% 

Base: All who had any contact with a Govt Dept/Office in the last 12 months (n=992 in 2009, DSFA n=438, Revenue n=146 ) 

Overall, the proportion of Civil Service customers who made their most recent contact 

by phone is the same as the proportion whose most recent contact was in person. 

However, 61% of DSFA customers’ most recent contact was in person, compared to 

21% of Revenue customers. 30% of DSFA customers’ most recent contact was by 

phone, compared to 50% of Revenue customers. Because of the number of variables 

involved in visiting Government offices, such as the physical environment, queuing 

system, opening hours, and office location, contact in person is often a more complex 

process than contact by phone or electronic means. Again, this may give rise to greater 

potential for a dissatisfactory customer experience. 

The DSFA customer experience is therefore more likely to involve multiple, ‘in person’ 

contacts with the Department whereas Revenue customers are more likely to have a 

single contact by phone or electronic means. Across all services, regardless of contact 

method, the challenge for the Civil Service is to reduce the complexity of service 

delivery for users. For example, Revenue now delivers a number of its services to 

personal and business customers through online interactive services. 

However, this is only possible where such forms of service delivery are appropriate to 

46


customers’ needs and requirements and, while the general public now view internet or 

e-mail contact to be as convenient as personal contact, less than 1% of DSFA 

customers made contact by e-mail or via Internet. DSFA customers are also more than 

twice as likely as Revenue customers to consider either internet or e-mail contact to be 

inconvenient. Thus, while electronic service delivery is an attractive model when 

considering the relative efficiency of different service delivery methods, e-services are 

not equally accessible to all customer cohorts. 

7.2 Measuring Performance 

Given the incredibly diverse nature of services provided by the Civil Service as a 

whole, there is no equivalent organisation against which a direct and meaningful 

comparison can be made, in terms of performance. Nonetheless, these customer 

surveys provide a temporal point of comparison and the 2009 customer survey results 

demonstrate consistency in the perceived quality of service delivery by the Civil Service 

at an overall level, when compared with previous surveys. They also illustrate how 

customer experiences (and requirements) differ in specific contexts and across contact 

methods, depending on the nature of the services involved. This undermines 

somewhat the usefulness of a single benchmark of performance for the Civil Service. 

Just as the complexity of the customer experience differs from service to service, so 

should the level of customer satisfaction, the “Frontier of Performance”, that any 

individual service is expected to achieve. Some services, such as renewing a passport 

or obtaining a tax clearance certificate, are simply more easily administered than others 

and, from a user’s point of view, easier to consume. A deeper understanding of Civil 

Service customer journeys will ensure that services provided by individual Departments 

and Offices reflect the requirements and expectation of their customers, but could also 

be used to develop appropriate targets for individual services. 

Ultimately, the challenge for the Civil Service is to continue to deliver high-quality 

services which are appropriate to the needs of each specific user. 

47

2009 Irish Civil Service Customer Satisfaction Survey

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?