MRASCo

1
MRASCo Customer Satisfaction Research December
2006
2
Background

• The objectives of this research were to measure
  perceptions of MRASCos current performance
  amongst the customer base
• Findings from the research will be compared to
  the previous customer satisfaction surveys
  conducted each November/December from 2001 to
  2005.

3
Method

• 62 telephone interviews from a supplied list of
  104 industry contacts, conducted between 15th and
  29th November 2006.
• Sample breakdown
• 62 interviews completed.
• 1 requested not to be contacted.
• 3 refused.
• 3 off sick / on holiday
• 8 left messages on answer phone.
• 4 incorrect telephone numbers.
• 2 left company / indefinite leave.
• 9 no longer deal with MRASCo / do not subscribe.
• 8 other person in company deals with MRASCo.
• 2 conflict of interest.
• 2 restricted by quota.

104
4
Type Of Company Interviewed
2003 2004 2005 2006 Suppliers
(All) 48 43 46 52 - Large 29 28 34 29 -
Small 19 15 12 23 Distributors
(All) 26 24 28 24 - Large N/A N/A 22 18 -
Small N/A N/A 7 6 Others 26 34 26 24 Base
Total Sample (73) (80) (74) (62)
More smaller company involvement in this years
research.
5
Summary Of Findings

• When viewed against the changes to the MRA
  delivery team, results from this years survey
  provide some grounds for optimism. Whilst value
  scores are only marginally down on last year,
  overall satisfaction levels continue to fall (8
  scores 75 69 61) but still remain
  above 2001, 2002 and 2003.
• The fall on 8 ratings for overall
  professionalism in 2005 has largely been
  reversed. Most other core skill ratings are down
  slightly on 2005 but providing a valuable
  experience resource and understanding your
  business ratings are well down and almost all
  scores are down on 2004. Nevertheless it is clear
  there is general satisfaction with the provision
  of ready access to the right level of experience.
• Around half the sample are involved with the MRA
  through Boards, Expert Groups etc. There are
  clear signs that this involvement played a
  significant role in perceptions of MRASCo during
  2006 - the gain on overall professionalism came
  entirely from this group. Also, amongst those not
  involved in this way, ratings on overall
  helpfulness and understanding your business
  fell sharply (the former being offset by a gain
  amongst those who are more involved). However, it
  should be remembered that last years findings
  revealed the reverse to be true (i.e falls came
  from those more involved).

6
Summary Of Findings

• Ratings on communication showed some gains on
  last year scores on both provision of accurate
  information/answers and provision of all the
  necessary information rose vs. 2005 and only
  on one aspect, overall quality of
  communication, did scores fall. As with core
  skill ratings, those with greater involvement
  through Boards etc. were more positive vs. 2005
  with the remainder less so. But compared with
  2004, all communication ratings are down.
• The website is being increasingly used but, prior
  to introduction of the new site, there are very
  real problems in finding things 8 scores on
  ease of navigation and ease of finding particular
  information have fallen since 2005 and are now
  very low. The same problems emerge from ratings
  of the MRASCo model website.
• It has also probably not helped overall
  perceptions on communication that ratings on the
  help desk are also falling there is a clear
  downward trend on always ringing back and
  accuracy of response and scores on quality of
  response are also well down on 2005.
• Based on these findings, it is crucial that both
  the new website and the relaunch of the
  newsletter hit their targets. The newsletter now
  reaches almost everyone but there remains scope
  for optimisation on information content and also
  on its presentation and format. The increased
  frequency of distribution hasnt changed
  perceptions on frequency.

7
MAIN FINDINGS
8
Number Of People In Company Having Contact With
MRASCo
2001 2004 2005 2006 1 7 6 8 11 2 9
11 9 11 3 14 10 7 8 4 - 5 29 13 18 27 6 41
60 58 42 Average Number 5.3 5.4 5.3 4.8 Base
Total Sample (56) (80) (74) (62)
2004 Reworded Question From points of contact
with MRASCo to How many people in
your company have contact with MRASCo?
9
Level of Company/Personal Experience

• Length of time Length of time
• co. in elec ind. personally involved
• with MRA
• Less than 1 year 5 11
• 1-2 years 8 18
• 3 years or more 87 71
• Base Total Sample (62) (62)

10
Number Of MRASCo Meetings Attended This Year
2001 2004 2005 2006 None 25 24 24 37
1 9 5 3 6 2 - 3 7 15 15 11 4 -
6 16 13 15 11 7 - 10 11 6 16 10 11 32 38 27
24 Base Total Sample (56) (80) (74) (62)
Lower level of involvement this year.
11
Whether Sit On Any MRA Boards, Committees, Expert
Groups Or Working Groups
2001 2004 2005 2006
Base Total Sample
2001 Question Referred Just To MRASCo Boards or
Committees
12
Who Is On The Committees etc. ?

• Sit on Total
• Board / Sample
• Committee
• Distributors 30 24
• Large 20 18
• Small 10 6
• Suppliers 56 52
• Large 43 29
• Small 13 23
• Other 13 24
• Base (30) (62)

Representation of small suppliers is low.
13
CHANGE MANAGEMENT
14
How Well The Change Management Process Is Thought
To Work
Base (56) (78) (71) (58)
This is believed to work well now.
Base Total Sample - Excluding Dont Knows
15
Involvement In MRASCo Change Management Process
2003 2004 2005 2006 Yes - When Its
Important 44 35 22 26 Yes - Generally 34 46 54 45
No 22 19 24 29 Yes 73 76 80 74 No 19 18 7 15 N
ot Able To Comment 8 6 14 11 Base Total
Sample (73) (80) (74) (62)
Have Time To Get Involved
Are Adequately Represented Within The MDB Change
Process
16
How Well MRASCo Handles The MRA Entry Assessment
Re-Qualification Processes
2005 Reworded Question - Entry Assessment
Re-qualification Processes FROM - Entry /
Re-entry Qualification For The Market
Base (41) (80) (74) (62)
Base Total Sample - Excluding Dont Knows
17
How MRASCo Handles The MRA Entry Assessment
Re-Qualification Processes
2005 Reworded Question - Entry Assessment
Re-qualification Processes FROM - Entry /
Re-entry Qualification For The Market
2003 2004 2005 2006
Fair Way Transparent Way
Base Total Sample
18
COMMUNICATION Help Desk
19
Use Of MRASCo Help Desk
2001 2004 2005 2006 Twice A Week
0 0 0 0 Once A Week 4 9 1 0 Once Every 2
Weeks 2 3 1 5 Once Every 3 - 4
Weeks 7 15 9 18 Less Often 14 11 22 19 Hardly
Ever 18 23 32 21 Never 55 40 34 37 Base
Total Sample (56) (80) (74) (62)
26 use the help desk less than they used to.
2001 Question Referred To You Yourself, 2002
Onwards To You Or Your Staff.
20
Ratings Of MRASCo Help Desk - Amongst Users
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10
Accuracy Of Response Always Ringing
Back Quality Of Response Speed Of
Response Overall Helpfulness
Base Users Of MRASCo Help Desk (39)
21
Rating Of MRASCo Help Desk- Amongst Users
8 scores out of 10
2006 Change Since 2005

• Accuracy Of Response -7
• Always Ringing Back -9
• Quality Of Response -18
• Speed Of Response 3
• Overall Helpfulness -7

22
Ratings Of MRASCo Help Desk - Amongst Users
Scale 1 to 10
8 Score (Out Of 10)
2001 2004 2005 2006
Accuracy Of Response Always Ringing
Back Quality Of Response Speed Of
Response Overall Helpfulness
Base Users Of MRASCo Help Desk
23
COMMUNICATION - Website
24
Use Of MRASCo Website
2006 Everyday 8 3 - 4 Days A Week 5 Twice A
Week 19 Once A Week 18 Once Every 2 Weeks 16 Once
Every 3 - 4 Weeks 10 Less Often 8 Hardly
Ever 6 Never 10 Base Total Sample (62)
Use once a week 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2
006
Usage of the website is still growing.
25
Ratings Of MRASCo Website - Amongst Users
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10
Accuracy Of Information Ease Of
Navigation Having The Information You
Need Being Kept Up To Date Ease Of Finding The
Particular Information You Are Looking
For Overall Usefulness
Ratings of the current website are at best luke
warm.
Base Users Of MRASCo Website (56) 2004 Slight
Rewording Of Statement
26
Rating Of MRASCo Website- Amongst Users
8 scores out of 10
2006 Change Since 2005

• 1
• -14
• -10
• 2
• -16
• -14

Accuracy Of Information Ease Of
Navigation Having The Information You
Need Being Kept Up To Date Ease Of Finding The
Particular Information You Are Looking
For Overall Usefulness
27
Ratings Of MRASCo Website - Amongst Users
Scale 1 to 10
8 Score (Out Of 10)
2001 2004 2005 2006
Accuracy Of Information Ease Of
Navigation Having The Information You
Need Being Kept Up To Date Ease Of Finding The
Particular Information You Are Looking
For Overall Usefulness
Ease of finding things is currently a major
problem.
Base Users Of MRASCo Website 2004 Slight
Rewording Of Statement
28
Awareness Of MRASCo Model Website Access To
End-To-End Diagrams Golden Threads
2004 2005 2006 Yes 81 81 89 No 19 1
9 11 Base Total Sample (80) (74) (62)
AWARE OF MRASCo MODEL ACCESS
2006 Rewording of question.
29
Use Of MRASCo Model Website
2006 Everyday 1 3 - 4 Days A Week 0 Twice A
Week 3 Once A Week 5 Once Every 2 Weeks 1 Once
Every 3 - 4 Weeks 11 Less Often 10 Hardly
Ever 56 Not Aware 11 Base Total Sample (62)
30
Ratings Of MRASCo Model Website - Amongst Users
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10
Accuracy Of Information Ease Of
Navigation Having The Information You
Need Being Kept Up To Date Ease Of Finding The
Particular Information You Are Looking
For Overall Usefulness
Again, ease of finding things is a real problem
currently.
Base Users Of MRASCo Model Website (55)
31
COMMUNICATION - Newsletter
32
Do You Receive The MRASCo Newsletter
2005 2006
Yes No
Base Total Sample (74) (62)
Now almost universal coverage.
2005 New Question
33
Ratings Of MRASCo Newsletter - Amongst Recipients
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10 Average
Accuracy Of Information Presentation /
Format Frequency Of Distribution Having The
Information You Need Overall Usefulness
Base Receive MRASCo Newsletter (59)
34
Ratings Of MRASCo Newsletter- Amongst Recipients
8 scores out of 10
2006 Change Since 2005

• Accuracy Of Information -4
• Presentation/Format 6
• Frequency Of Distribution 3
• Having The Information
• You Need
• Overall Usefulness 4

5
35
Awareness Of The Central Administration Service
(CAS) That MRASCo Provides To Support ECOES
2006

Aware Not Aware
Base Total Sample (62)
36
How Well MRASCo Provides The Central
Administration Service (CAS)
2006
8 6/7 1-5

Average 6.9 Base Those aware of CAS (56)
N.B nobody gave a score less than 5
37
COMMUNICATION - Ratings
38
Ratings Of MRASCo- Communication
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10 Average
Providing Accurate Information
Answers Providing All The Necessary Information
Overall Quality Of Communication Attention
To Detail In Administrative Matters Genuinely
Wanting To Talk To You Overall Level Of
Communication
Base Total Sample (62)
39
Ratings Of MRASCo- Communication
8 scores (out of 10)
2006 Change Since 2005
Providing Accurate Information
Answers Providing All The Necessary Information
Overall Quality Of Communication Attention To
Detail In Administrative Matters Genuinely
Wanting To Talk To You Overall Level Of
Communication

• 11
• 12
• -6
• -3
• 0
• 1

40
Ratings Of MRASCo- Communication. Change Since
2005
8 scores (out of 10)
Total Sit on Dont sit on Sample a board a
board etc. etc.
Providing Accurate Information
Answers Providing All The Necessary Information
Overall Quality Of Communication Attention To
Detail In Administrative Matters Genuinely
Wanting To Talk To You Overall Level Of
Communication

• 24 -1
• 19 7
• 4 -16
• 14 -19
• 16 -13
• 9 -7

Gains are entirely amongst those with more
involvement.
41
Ratings Of MRASCo- Communication
Scale 1 to 10
8 Score (Out Of 10)
2001 2004 2005 2006
Providing Accurate Information
Answers Providing All The Necessary Information
Overall Quality Of Communication Attention
To Detail In Administrative Matters Genuinely
Wanting To Talk To You Overall Level Of
Communication
N/A
Base Total Sample
42
CREDIBILITY
43
How Much Trust MRASCo To Faithfully Reflect
Members Issues
Dont Know 7 0 0 0 Base (56) (80) (74) (62)
Improving trust.
Base Total Sample 2001 Member, 2002 Onward
MRAs Parties
44
How MRA Operates
2001 2004 2005 2006
Fair Way Transparent Way
Base Total Sample
45
CORE SKILLS
46
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
2006 Scale 1 to 10
1 - 5 6 / 7 8 - 10 Average
8.5 8.0 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.5 7.3 7.1
Overall Professionalism Overall
Helpfulness Facilitating Industry Debate
Decision Making Providing A Valuable Expertise
Resource Providing ready access to the right
level of experience Providing A Valuable
Experience Resource Understanding Your
Business Being Flexible
Base Total Sample (62) New Statement 2006
47
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
8 scores (out of 10)
2006 Change Since 2005
Overall Professionalism Overall
Helpfulness Facilitating Industry Debate
Decision Making Providing A Valuable Expertise
Resource Providing ready access to the right
level of experience Providing A Valuable
Experience Resource Understanding Your
Business Being Flexible

• 14
• -5
• 2
• -5
• N/A
• -11
• -9
• -3

48
Ratings Of MRASCo - Core Skills. Change Since
2005- Amongst those who sit on any MRA Boards,
Committees or Working Groups.
8 scores (out of 10)
Total Sit on Dont sit on Sample a board a
board etc. etc.
Overall Professionalism Overall
Helpfulness Facilitating Industry Debate
Decision Making Providing A Valuable Expertise
Resource Providing ready access to the right
level of experience Providing A Valuable
Experience Resource Understanding Your
Business Being Flexible

• 26 4
• 15 -24
• 8 -4
• -9 -1
• N/A N/A
• -9 -13
• 4 -20
• -2 -2

N/A
Again, signs that greater involvement matters.
49
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
Scale 1 to 10
8 Score (Out Of 10)
2001 2004 2005 2006
Overall Professionalism Overall
Helpfulness Facilitating Industry Debate
Decision Making Providing A Valuable Expertise
Resource Providing ready access to the right
level of experience Providing A Valuable
Experience Resource Understanding Your
Business Being Flexible
N/A
N/A
N/A
Base Total Sample
50
Ratings Of MRASCo- By Market Sector
8 scores (out of 10)
Change Since 2005
Distributor Supplier Other COMMUNICATION Provid
ing Accurate Information Answers 23 7 7 P
roviding All The Necessary Information
28 9 5 Attention To Detail In
Administrative Matters 21 -6 -25 CORE
SKILLS Overall Professionalism 29 7 15 Under
standing Your Business 6 -3 -31
Most of the gains come from Distributors.
51
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
Scale 1 to 10 8 Scores
52
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
Scale 1 to 10 8 Scores
53
Ratings Of MRASCo- Core Skills
Scale 1 to 10 8 Scores
54
Measuring Changes In Overall Satisfaction

• Two ways of doing this
• ask direct rating scale (excellent poor) with
  answers compared to 2005 and earlier years
• measuring the perception of change.

55
Overall Satisfaction Rating
8 6/7 1-5
Average 7.3 7.9 7.8 7.7 Base (56) (80) (74) (
62)
Base Total Sample
56
Service This Year
Improved A Lot Stayed The Same Is A Little
Worse Improved A Little Is A Lot Worse
0
0
Dont Know 0 9 9 11 Base (56) (80) (74) (62)
Base Total Sample
57
Overall Value For Money Rating
8 6/7 1-5
Average 6.7 7.3 7.5 7.3 Base (48) (60) (50) (
51)
Very similar results to last year.
Base Total Sample - Excluding Dont Knows
58
Ratings Of MRASCo- Overall Ratings. Change Since
2005
8 scores (out of 10)
Total Sit on Dont sit on Sample a board a
board etc. etc.
Overall Satisfaction -12 -3 Value For
Money 4 -10
59
Value For Money This Year
Improved A Lot Stayed The Same Is A Little
Worse Improved A Little Is A Lot Worse
0
Base (56) (80) (74) (62)
Base Total Sample
60
Overall Satisfaction And value For Money Ratings
Scale 1 to 10 8 Scores
61
Reasons For Change In Level Of Service

Improved (NET) - Communication - Information -
CAS - General improvement - Website Got worse
(NET) - Quality/accuracy of info - New staff
not as expert - Procedures need improving Base
Total Sample (62)
62
Reasons For Improvements In ServiceExample
Comments
With the launch of the ECOES system and the
feedback provided regarding that, I feel there is
an improvement.
They have introduced the introduction seminars
newsletters are more frequently received and they
participate to a greater extent in industry
meetings which I attend.
Better communication by email and website is
managed better.
BUT negatively
The quality and accuracy of some of the
information, and meeting papers are poor and it
has been worse this year. Documents have had to
be reissued because of errors and that has
increased this year.
63
Improvements Would Like To See In MRASCos
Service - Amongst Those Saying The Service Had
Stayed The Same

• Website
• More expertise
• Meetings / working groups to
• be more focused
• More authority/strengthen
• enforcement of rules
• Dont know
• Other responses were under 5
• Base (41)

64
Improvements Would Like To See In MRASCos
Service - Example Comments
The website could be better, more user friendly.
The rivals to MRASCo have a new website which is
easier to use, easier to find things.
The turnaround of staff appears to have been
excessive in the last few months there isnt
enough expertise as a result.
It could be improved by strengthening enforcement
of transfer rules.
Stronger chairmanship is required in meetings.
65
Main Areas Would Most Like MRASCo To Improve On

• Improve website / easier navigation / more up to
  date
• Quality control / check for accuracy
• Meetings / working groups to be more focussed
• Training/expertise of staff
• Nothing (happy with service)
• Dont know

responses under 5 not shown
66
Main Areas Would Most Like MRASCo To Improve On -
Example Comments
The ability to find contact points on the
website. There is a lack of consistency in
different types of lists for finding the relevant
contact within the company.
Communications we are heavily reliant on the
newsletter at the moment. We prefer getting
updates on the website. Website enhancement is a
key thing for me.
Quality control before documents are issued.
Effectiveness of meetings resolving issues
quicker.
They have very poor project management skills. I
have sat on a number of professional groups and
there seems to be a lack of control they need
more in house people with more project management
experience.
Nothing in particular quite happy with service.