Results of the first MCC Chairman's Satisfaction Survey

In March 2000, a survey was sent via e-mail to 48 Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of 3GPP Technical Specification Groups and Working Groups. This survey comprised 6 questions and an area for general comments. The aim of the survey was to gauge the level of satisfaction for the support offered to the TSGs by the ETSI Mobile Competence Centre (MCC). The closing date for return of the survey was 30th April 2000. By the closing date very few TSG officials had replied so a reminder was sent and the deadline was extended. Eventually 23 replies were received (see linked table for breakdown of results received). The rating scale was set  from 1 to 10 (see details).

These results are significant when taking into account the results shown on the graph below. This graph shows the total results received classed by question and by TSG. It would seem at first glance that the results received from TSG SA were much lower than those received from TSG T thus implying that TSG SA are much less satisfied with the support offered by MCC than the other TSGs. This result however can be explained by the fact that many more officials from TSG T replied to the survey.

Graph 1: Total results received classed by question and TSG

Graph 2 shows the total results received for each question and it can be clearly seen that while most TSG officials are happy with the support provided during TSG meetings (question 5) and the quality of the support provided by MCC (question 2) however the results of question 3 show a general disatisfaction with the quantity of the support. The results of question 6 show that   the presentation and content of the 3GPP website obviously needs more work in order to make it more user friendly and accepted by the 3GPP officials.

	Graph 2: Total results received
	Graph 3: Highest/Lowest results achieved & the mean results – classed by question

All the comments recieved in the survey have been reproduced and grouped in order of Most satisfied, Least Satisfied and General Comments. Some of the comments and suggestions are already under consideration - these have been marked with a number and this number is linked to the actions being taken by MCC.

This was the first survey carried out by MCC however it will become an annual occurence. As the Standards Making Support (SMS) Department has a very similar customer base and carries out the same basic services as MCC, the most recent results from SMS have been used as a benchmark by which to measure the results gained. It has been suggested that MCC uses external bodies for benchmarking however as yet no suitable bodies have been identified.

In December 1999 SMS sent a questionnaire to the 124 Chairmen and Vice Chairmen of the ETSI Technical Bodies and their Working Groups, the figures below show the results of the SMS survey against the results of the MCC survey. These results are encouraging as SMS has many more years of experience behind them. One of the most important questions was regarding overall satisfaction with the services provided by each department - the results of this are shown in the last row of the table below.

**********************************************************************************************

Most Satisfied

• Meeting organisation
• Meeting invitation
• Confirmation of registration through email
• Preparation for the meeting and support during the meeting (Plenary meetings)
• Secretariat’s reminders, advice and active support during the meeting
• Support for organisational matters (hotels etc. during and before meetings)
• Meeting Logistics is exceptional
• Provision of meeting facilities
• Selection of good accommodation with discount rate
• Secretaries’ activity in the meetings
• Technical secretarial support
• Prompt document distribution through Local Area  Network during meetings
• Technical support on specification development
• Support and advice on the processes of 3GPP
• Wg documents
• The ETSI Website performs a vital role and is now working better, faster, more reliably and clearer than previously
• Quick reactions, good content
• Flexibility of individuals in helping to move the project and process forwards
• I am very satisfied with the support by my MCC secretary. His reports have a very high quality. Support by MCC is very well
• Secretary is very efficient and organised
• Secretaries knowledge of WG decisions
• Fast close of human resource gaps
• Staff are all friendly and helpful
• All secretaries are well prepared and well informed. The co-operation is very successful and in a very friendly manner
• Electronic services
• The mail reflector (although a bit slow sometimes)
• Email lists

Least satisfied

• Unavailability of the allocated staff support during some of the WG meetings
• Amount of support from technical staff; given the importance of 3gpp
• The leadtime to implement CRs agreed by the TSG.  This is a major obstacle for completion of the specs. The working process could be more efficient (pre-implement CRs into draft spec) as well as resources could be increased
• Due to the number of meetings (several TSGs) one secretary has to support, it is sometimes difficult to get support (e.g. updated specifications, tdoc numbers) prior to the meeting
• Duplicated CRs for different releases. This could be prepared by MCC if resources were available : Speed of document updating. N1 specs are very good, but other specs (11.11 and USIM specs are far too slow)
• Delegates are under a lot of pressure at meetings – problems like incorrectly filled out front sheets are common. These non-technical problems should not be the concern of the delegates and could be avoided if more help from MCC was available
• 1. Meeting calendar schedule
• 1. The meeting calendar on the homepage could be improved by a search tool
• Sometimes inefficiency in distributing new tdocs during a meeting (note that most delegates in my group are not connected to the LAN, there are company restrictions on that)
• I would wish to receive a complete CD-ROM including the report after the meeting
• sometimes late availability on 3GPP server
• 2. Web access is cumbersome and information is often stale
• 2.The website could be made more accessible – it is difficult to search particularly for meeting reports and documents
• 2.Much information is available on 3GPP web site. It would be very helpful to have help or search feature since it is difficult to remember all the previous notices
• 3. Liaison statements take a long time to get from one group to another
• 3.In the past I have had some problems with the exchange of Liaison Statements. Some of them went lost. I know that MCC has installed an improved procedure for this. I will see what will happen
• 4. A database for work items should be created and maintained. I know that there is some work ongoing on structuring the work into features, building blocks and work tasks with related work items. However, we have already work items, but they are difficult to find. Even for features where different WGs have to contribute it is important to know the scope of the requested feature
• MCC should be more active in the technical discussions
• MCC support should use his/her technical know how more
• The MCC support does not understand the proposed new working procedures (work packages,….)
• 4.Feature / WI / system co-ordination (but not only MCC fault)
• Getting a tdoc number and/or CR should not require me to write the document first!  The only information needed should be the spec number and a provisional title which may change
• Certain decisions regarding work organisation are taken within MCC, and sometimes it impacts WG progress. Therefore, this should be submitted for approval to impacted WG Chairs
• I think that every delegate would like to get even incomplete draft minutes at the end of the meeting. Could you encourage the secretaries of all meetings to take such customs
• No index of WG documents
• Missing WG documents
• Incomplete picture of incoming documents before start of plenary
• Even better provisioning with Status material (CR-lists spec lists,....)
• Sometimes delayed delivery of meeting reports
• Content of (some) meeting reports
• Not able to report the political situations in other meetings that he/she participated in
• 5. The mailing lists sometimes take a long time to deliver mail
• 6. Electronic Meeting arrangements variable and often unstable
• 7. Some of the MCC computing equipment seems to cause hinderance to the work (especially in the TSGs in Madrid)
• 7 My secretary’s laptop kept failing and should have been replaced earlier, although the new one has now arrived and seems much better
• 7 Need more software support to keep track of documents and decisions during the meeting. This could improve our productivity considerably and should in principle be useful for other groups also
• Search facilities for on-line tdocs
• Mirror service on WGs
• 8. Cellular accessibility of MCC
• 9. Selection of meeting venue to which direct flight from major cities is not available

General Comments

• Excellent support link to the quality of the MCC people. The MCC efficiency has been key for the timely completion of the release. A good permanent support helps a lot the Chairs, and this is greatly appreciated
• Keep up the good work! Virtually every member of the team has very good communication skills and is willing to support and discuss new proposals, and adapt flexibly to changes.  They have to work very hard but meet this task head on, with enthusiasm and optimism!
• I personally appreciate and am satisfied with MCC’s organization and support which is inherited from ETSI experience and leadership. I would like to know where it stands compared to other similar support organization in other competing bodies
• CR/Spec management is the most important issue
• I would appreciate if SA would be started from Monday after weekend so that each TSG has sufficient time to prepare report to be presented at SA and each members review decisions and discussions made at each TSG using weekend
• Very professional organization to work with
• I am very happy with the MCC support being an important part of the social well being of the group
• In a meeting with typically 250 documents and 90 delegates,an efficient  and knowledgeable secretary is vital
• It is expected to put final correct information into 3GPP server rather than to put not well defined information
• we have not had sufficient experience with our new MCC-provided secretariat. But, there were a few instances in which he appeared to have not paid sufficient consideration to the human relation aspects

*********************************************************

Last update: 2000-06-01