January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
ER- 0484/1/00
2006 OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
Executive summary
January 2007
4
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
DATA SHEET
TARGET PUBLIC: Any individual who has contacted the OHIM between June 2005 to June 2006, whether as an agent or as a proprietor(*)acting directly.
TARGET GROUP: The unit will be the individual.
FIELDWORK: 30/11/2006 to 3/1/2007 QUESTIONNAIRE:
CAWI (Computer Assisted Web Interview), with 2 reminders.
Language: 5 office languages.
(*)INCLUDING EMPLOYEES OF PROPRIETORS (“type-5”agents)
RESPONDENTS: 956 users (520 Agents/436 Proprietors)
• RESPONSE RATE: 8,2% of net mailing addresses• Sampling margin of error: +/-3.23 % on a level of confidence of 95%.
January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
RESULTS
12
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
2006 was an entirely atypical year in terms of Office activity, as the first RENOVATION of the Community Trade Mark took place, after celebrating its first ten years of existence.
This resulted in attending to six times the number of users when compared to the year before: going from 11,600 to more than 64,000.
The Office has been able of maintaining levels of user satisfaction very similar to those of last year,
while more than satisfactorily carrying out the RENOVATION of the Community Trade Mark:
RESULTS
13
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTS: RENOVATIONRESULTS: RENOVATION
PROPRIETOR (N : 59)AGENT (N : 241)
46% 14%
55%(minimum)
82 8067
83 79 70
How satisfied are you with the ...?
... CTM RENEWALS
PROCEDURE?
...payment system of renewals?
... information available on the
state of renewals?
Renewal of a CTM:
Every users satisfied
No user satisfied
PROPRIETORSAGENTS
15
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
AGENT NOT HAVING COMPLAINED
AGENT HAVING COMPLAINED
68,6
USI
67,0
USI AGENT
59,0
USI
RESULTSUser-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006User-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006
PROPRIETOR NOT HAVING COMPLAINED
PROPRIETOR HAVING COMPLAINED
62,5
USI
61,9
USI PROPRIETO
R
55,0
USI
68,3
USI
66,2
USI AGENT
59,5
USI
63,5
USI
62,8
USI PROPRIETO
R
57,3
USI
-0,8
+0,9
2005 2006
PROPRIETORS
AGENTS
Users in general, and especially Agents: satisfied with the OHIM. We don’t see any significant changes but it’s a product of the
compensation of several increases and decreases in the various areas of action that comprise the indicator. As explained below, the changes with regard to last year are substantial in many aspects.
23
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSStrengths and WeaknessesLEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATIONLEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATION
PROPRIETORAGENT
59%
49%
58%
41%
20052006
57%62%59%
53%
55%(minimum)
CORE BUSINESS
INFORMATION
20052006
IMAGE INFORMATION
Every users satisfied
No user satisfied
-9
-8
(N : 520) (N : 436)
67% 65%
IMAGE
50%57%
CORE BUSINESS
+7
Significant increase in satisfaction with the Core Business by Proprietors, positioning it above the bar of “minimums”.
Large decrease in the evaluation of the Information and Communication area in both user groups (Agents and Proprietors). As described in the corresponding section, we believe that the dissatisfaction from both groups comes from different causes.
25
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSStrengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGELEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGE
swiftness
transparency
modernity
prestige
conscientiousness
professionalismquality of
service
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
2005 2006
quality of service
professionalism
conscientiousness
prestige
modernitytransparency
swiftness
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
2005 2006PROPRIETORAGENT
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
+
+
-
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
+
-
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+
The diagnosis of GLOBAL IMAGE for the OHIM continues to be very positive and reflects a situation without any major changes in regard to last year.
January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
CORE BUSINESS
USI (Users Satisfaction Index) USI (Users Satisfaction Index)
CORE BUSINESS
APPEAL REGISTERCTM RCD RENEWALS
28
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
+
+
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
+
+
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesCORE BUSINESS
CTM
RCD
REGISTER
APPEAL20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
20062005
CTM
RCD
REGISTER
APPEAL30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
20062005PROPRIETORAGENT
+ 9
+ 5 + 8
+ 7
+ 15
+ 4
20%
--
Satisfaction is significantly improved in the area of Appeals and with the Register. Both CTM and CD maintain the favourable
positions from last year.
Significant improvements in the satisfaction with the four areas,
especially in its evaluation of the Register.
30
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: CTM APPLICATIONS
Simplicity procedures
Ease forms
Speed publication
Time processing & application
Clarity decisions
Completeness grounds decisions
Consistency decisions
Quality/price
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
2005 2006
+7
+9
+5
- 4
AGENT
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
+
+
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+
+
-
Like last year, all the aspects of relatively high importance are found in the quadrant of strategic weaknesses. Agents significantly
change their perceptions in:
Spectacular increase in the evaluation of “time”.
Improvement in the Simplicity of administrative procedures
Considerable decline in the evaluation of the “Consistency of the examiners’ decisions”. The influence of this aspect in the overall satisfaction is so strong that it neutralized the positive effects of the improvements.
31
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007IN
FLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+
+
-
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: CTM APPLICATIONS
2005 2006PROPRIETOR
Ease forms
Speed publication
Clarity decisions
Quality/price
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Consistency decisions
Completeness grounds decisions
Time processing & application
Simplicity proceduresIn the case of
Proprietors the evaluation is kept practically the same as that of
2005
32
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
INFLU
EN
CE
SATISFACTION
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+
+
-
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: CTM OPPOSITIONS
Consistency decisions
Completeness grounds decisions
Clarity decisions
Time for decisionTime for processing
Ease forms
Simplicity procedures
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
2005 2006AGENT
- 5
+8+7
AGENT (N : 376)
The AGENTS maintain their scores (low) in aspects of importance, but:
considerably improve their satisfaction of Times, both in terms of processing as well as decisions.
decline in the evaluation of the ease of use of forms
33
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
INFLU
EN
CE
-
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+
+
-
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: CTM OPPOSITIONS
Ease forms
Time for processing
Time for decision
Clarity decisions
Completeness grounds decisions
Consistency decisions
10% 20% 40% 50% 60% 70%Simplicity procedures
2005 2006PROPRIETOR
+12
+13
+8
+8
PROPRIETOR (N : 111) SATISFACTIO
N
The PROPRIETORS improve their evaluations in practically all measured aspects, placing their scores in parameters very similar to those of the Agents.
Keep in mind that last year their evaluations were considerably lower than those of the Agents.
34
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007IN
FLU
EN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
SATISFACTION
AGENT (N : 108)
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: CTM INVALIDITY
INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE SIZE
PROPRIETOR
Consistency of decisions
Completeness grounds decisions
Time for processing
Ease forms
Simplicity procedures
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
+10 -7 Clarity decisions
-7
2005 2006AGENT The priorities for action must continue to focus on: “Completeness and depth of grounds for decision” “Consistency of examiners’ decisions”. Improvement in processing Time.
Decline in the evaluations of the ease of use of forms and clarity of decisions.
Significant…
36
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: RCD APPLICATIONS
20052006
AGENT
Substantial improvement in satisfaction with regard to…
Speed of publication Completeness and depth of grounds for decisions
Decline in the evaluation of Ease of use of forms
RCD area doesn’t present any weakness, not even in aspects of low importance: this must be considered in itself
as one of the major strengths of the Office.
INFL
UE
NC
E
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
SATISFACTION
Filing design application
Simplicity procedures
Ease forms
Speed of publication
Security and confidentiality
Consistency of decisions
Completeness grounds decisions Quality/price
40% 45% 50% 55% 75% 80%
Clarity decisions
+7
+3
-4
37
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: RCD APPLICATIONS
INFL
UEN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES SATISFACTION
Security and confidentiality
Quality/price
Completeness grounds decisions
Consistency of decisions
Ease forms
Simplicity procedures
Filing design application
45% 50% 70% 75% 80% 85%
Clarity of decisions
Speed of publication
-4
+3
-8
+8
2005
2006PROPRIETORSubstantial improvement in satisfaction with regard to…
Speed of publication
Simplicity of administrative procedures
Decline in the evaluation of…
Filing a design application
Security and dealing confidentially with information
39
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
2005 2006AGENT
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: APPEAL APPLICATIONS
2005 2006PROPRIETOR
The APPEALS area presents the most positive development of all of those analyzed: it improves in all the measured aspects, both in the Agents’ opinion as well as that of the Proprietors. These improvement include:
Overcoming two significant “weaknesses”: simplicity in administrative procedures and ease of use of forms.
Placing Clarity of decisions and Completeness and depth of grounds for decisions very close to being considered “strengths”.
INFL
UE
NC
E
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
+4
Consistency of decisions
Completeness
grounds decisions
TimeEase forms
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Simplicity procedures+8
+11 +7
+6
Clarity of decisions
SATISFACTION
INFL
UE
NC
E
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
SATISFACTION
+7
Ease forms
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
+11
+18
+5
Time
Simplicity procedures
of decisionsConsistency
Completeness
grounds decisions
Clarity of decisions
41
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: REGISTER
INFL
UEN
CE
SATISFACTION
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
INFL
UEN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
2005 2006PROPRIETOR2005 2006AGENT
PROPRIETOR (N : 260)AGENT (N : 354)
Swiftness
Quality
Swiftness 2005
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Swiftness 2006
Quality
Accuracy
Swiftness
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Accuracy
+7
In 2005, the only aspect that was measured was the OHIM’s swiftness in the issue of documents such as licenses…. The Proprietors very significantly improve their evaluation, while the Agents do so moderately. 2006 included two additional characteristics:
Accuracy of the information: the most important aspect for the users and the highest evaluation, converting it into a “strength” for the area.
Quality of the documents: an
aspect of secondary
importance for the Agents, but highly
valued / very important for the Proprietors, with
acceptable evaluations.
43
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
CTM EMPLOYEES
2005 2006AGENT RCD EMPLOYEES
APPEAL EMPLOYEES OHIM employees constitute the Office’s greatest strengths. And this affirmation applies to all of the areas of the Core Business.
In many cases this is the element that takes the overall evaluations of core business areas to a higher position.
Employees maintain very high evaluations in terms of professionalism, reliability and competence, but…
we observe a strong decline in aspects that have to do with its “accessibility”: easy to contact and efficient in responding to telephone enquiries.
INFL
UEN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES SATISFACTION
Responsive to users ’needs
Polite, friendly
Easy to contact
Efficient telephone enquiries
With professionalism
Reliable
Competent
40% 50% 70% 80% 90%
-7
+3
+3
-3
INFL
UEN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES SATISFACTION
Competent
Polite, friendly
Responsive to users ’needs
45% 50% 55% 60% 65% 75% 80% 85%
-3
-4
Easy to contact
Reliable+4
With professionalism
INFL
UEN
CE
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
SATISFACTION
-4
-4
+4
+4 +8
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
’
Efficient telephone enquiries
Efficient telephone enquiries
Easy to contactPolite,
friendly
With professionalism+4
Responsive to usersneeds
Reliable
Competent
46
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES
2005 2006
AGENT
SATISFACTION
USI (Users Satisfaction Index)
INFORMAT. & COMMUNIC.
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION
Ease of identifying the right person
Ease of obtaining the right
information
Clarity
replacing paper by e-communication
Speed of response enquiries
Accuracy
Command of the languages
Completeness
Fees system
Handling of fees
Current accounts
20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
-5
-4
-3
AGENT (N : 520)
They continue to positively evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the information, but their opinion significantly declines in terms of ease of identifying the right person to speak to, ease of obtaining the right information and clarity of information.
It’s clear that this perception is related to the low evaluations given to employees when referring to their accessibility.
47
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
Are you aware of/have you ever visited the OHIM’s website?
YES 2005: 97%
Please rate OHIM’s website with regard to the following aspects:
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION / OHIM´s website
YES 2006: 99%
AGENT
40% 45% 50% 60% 70% 75% 80%
Clarity of the structure
Completeness of the contents
Speed at which the information is
updated
Usefulness of contents
+5
2005
2006
Their overall evaluation of the OHIM website exceeds the already high evaluation obtained last year. The clarity of information, which constituted their only weakness, has improved to the extent that it has become one of their strengths.
In terms of tools: • CTM Online continues to be the most used
and highly evaluated tool of them all: 9 out of 10 agents say they frequently use it and their evaluations remain at last year’s optimum level.
• The use of e-filing CTM is growing (70% of the Agents use it), which maintains the positive evaluations from last year in speed and security/confidentiality.
• The use of My Page also increases, which goes from 28% of users to 38%, significantly improving its evaluation in all the measured characteristics.
• On the other hand, we observed a loss of users in Design tools (e-filing RCD and RCD Online), accompanied by a decline in their evaluations.
48
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
STRATEGICWEAKNESSES
STRATEGICSTRENGTHS
STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES SATISFACTION
2005 2006
PROPRIETOR
USI (Users Satisfaction Index)
INFORMAT. & COMMUNIC.
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION
Current accounts
Handling of fees
Fees system
Completeness
Command of the languages
Accuracy
Clarity
20% 30% 40% 60% 70% 80%
replacing paper by e-communication
Ease of identifying the right person
Ease of obtaining the right information
Speed of response enquiries
-10
+7
PROPRIETOR (N : 436)
They maintain their poor evaluations from last year in all aspects related to information provided by the OHIM, except in the aspects related to completeness and accuracy, whose results have improved.
Their evaluation of the fees system dramatically declines.
49
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
-8 Clarity of the structure
Are you aware of/have you ever visited the OHIM’s website?
Please rate OHIM’s website with regard to the following aspects:
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION / OHIM´s website
YES 2005: 88% YES 2006: 94%
PROPRIETOR
40% 45% 50% 55% 60% 65%
Usefulness of contents
Speed at which the information is
updated
Completeness of the contents
PROPRIETOR
2005
2006
+6The use of all e-business tools decreases, especially the ones related to RCD, but also those related to CTM.
Nevertheless, among those who continue to use them, the evaluations improve with regard to last year.
We believe this is explained by the fact that the more “expert” Proprietors have continued using them, as many complaints were collected on this aspect in the suggestions section of the survey.
50
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
68 70
AGENTS
26%
I receive it but I don’t
usually read it
7%
Don’t know3%
I am not aware of
it32%
I don’t receive it
32%
Do you regularly receive and read Alicante News?
How would you evaluate Alicante News?
I regularly receive
and read it
RECEIVE IT
33%
PROPRIETORS
I receive it but I don’t usually read
it4%
Yes, I regularly receive and
read it6%
Don’t know6%
36%
48%
I don’t receive it
I am not aware of
it
10%
AGENTS PROPRIETORS
RESULTS: RESULTS: Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION
55%(minimum)
Every users satisfied
No user satisfied
We recommend making an increased effort to
distribute it since, when looking at the
results, it could contribute very favorably to the Office’s image
January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
RESULTSOther questions
54
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
AGENT PROPRIETOR
RESULTSRESULTSPERCEIVED EVOLUTION OF THE OHIM
Generally speaking, do you feel that the OHIM has performed better than, the same as or worse than last
year?
TOTAL AGENT (N : 520) TOTAL PROPRIETOR (N : 436)
The same
41%
Better35%
Don’t know
17%Worse7%
The same
31%
Better16%
50%Worse3%
Don’t know
55
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
Generally, and taking into account all the aspects covered by the questionnaire, what is your OVERALL LEVEL OF SATISFACTION WITH THE
OHIM as a whole?
RESULTSRESULTS BY COUNTRIES
7163 66
58
45 46
80 8274
70 66
54 51
38
5867
Germany France United Kingdom
Italy SpainGermany France United Kingdom
Every users satisfied
No user satisfied
55%(minimum)
N= 156 N= 45 N= 60 N= 52 N= 63 N= 105 N= 72 N= 55
MEDIA AGENT: 64 MEDIA PROPRIETOR: 55
AGENT PROPRIETOR20052006
20052006
Once again we found that, whatever aspect is analysed, for both Agents and Proprietors (when the data is available), British users are the least satisfied group of users, while Italian users -including the addition of Spanish users this year-, are the ones who show the highest level of satisfaction with the OHIM.
January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
CONCLUSIONS and DIAGNOSTICS
59
GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY January 2007
CONCLUSIONS
A good level of overall satisfaction from both types of users (Agents and Proprietors), but better among the Agents and without significant changes in regard to last year in both groups.
Appreciable differences between agents and proprietors, not only in their level of satisfaction, but also in their evaluation criteria and requirements.
The number of complaints increases, but the efficiency and level of resolving them improves.
Significant improvements in satisfaction with the area of Appeals and with the Register, in both groups of users. In the case of the Proprietors, the increase in satisfaction extends throughout all areas of the Core Business.
There is a generalised feeling of loss of accessibility of Office employees.
Just like last year, the main strengths (aspects of importance and very highly valued) of the OHIM, for both Agents and Proprietors are: its Global Image, the Community Design and Models area, and its employees (in all areas). The Information area (with a special mention of the website) is a strength for the Agents, but with aspects to be improved for the Proprietors.
There is a decline in the use and satisfaction with e-business tools among the Proprietors, while this improves among the Agents.
Majority perception of improvement in the functioning of the OHIM in regard to a year ago.
January 2007GfK Group Ad Hoc Research
OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY
Ángeles Bacete; e-mail: [email protected]
THANK YOU!