Improving feedback

Around one in five people provide feedback to services, but few are satisfied with how their feedback is handled.

There is an opportunity to improve feedback mechanisms across Australian public services.

Evidence

Just under one in five people provide feedback to services (19%). Of this, 43 per cent provide a compliment, 33 per cent make a suggestion for change, and 25 per cent make a complaint.

Of those who suggested a change or made a complaint, only 32 per cent are satisfied with how their feedback is handled. This indicates room for improvement in how services handle feedback from the public.

This aligns with concerns about responsiveness of services. The Survey found the public is least trusting in the responsiveness of services (27%), placing slightly greater trust in fairness (28%), reliability (29%), openness and honesty (30%) and integrity (31%).

The concern with responsiveness is coupled with an appetite for change. More than one third (38%) of people agree Australian public services need to change to meet the needs of all Australians.

Opportunity

Survey results show APS handling of feedback can be improved. Ensuring services take a responsive and consistent approach to handling feedback is an important goal. Once people provide information to government, the ball is in our court to provide clear information about what we are doing and what they can expect.

Previous work addressing feedback includes the Commonwealth Ombudsman's 2014 Complaint Management by Government Agencies Report, and 2009 Better Practice Guide to Complaint Handling Guidelines.

Feedback is a cross-cutting issue across all APS service delivery. The opportunity exists to improve APS handling of feedback through working with service delivery agencies to share how feedback is currently handled and to identify whole-of-APS areas for improvement. Discussion can include how improvements can be implemented.

The involvement of the Commonwealth Ombudsman would be of significant benefit given extensive subject matter expertise. Broad knowledge could be shared on how feedback is collected, processed and actioned across the APS, identifying good practices that deliver higher satisfaction outcomes.

Case Study: IP Australia

Feedback used for legislative and policy change

IP Australia has created a 'policy register' on their website to enhance public participation in government decision making. This invites the public to provide feedback on intellectual property rights issues in regard to patents, trademarks, designs and plant breeder's rights. The register gives transparency to the public on the status of issues under consideration and aids IP Australia in allocating its policy resources appropriately.

So far there have been over 80 issues uploaded to the register, a database which is searchable by the public. Each issue has its own page which summarises the issue, ranks the priority (high, medium, low) and provides an update on the status of the issue (e.g. is the policy change implemented, on hold, in legislative drafting or being considered by Parliament).

Not only can IP Australia upload issues itself, the public is able to submit issues for consideration. Public comments on individual issues are also welcomed.

IP Australia has taken a consultative approach to the development of the policy register. The policy register was released initially as a beta trial, with feedback incorporated as improvements to the appearance and functionality of the register. IP Australia has surveyed users and continues to encourage feedback to improve the policy register.

For example, the IP Australia website provides guidance on how to provide feedback through the register. The guidance includes key examples, questions for the public to consider when giving feedback, as well as guidance on how to include evidence (such as academic research) in submission of a new policy issue. The guidance was developed in direct response to public feedback about the policy register.

Guidance also clearly sets the expectations of the public. For example, the website notes that while IP Australia welcomes submissions, other considerations will influence the ability to prioritise policy issues, such as "Australia's international obligations, balancing the interest of all stakeholders, complexity of the proposed change (legislative versus non-legislative)... and alignment with Government priorities".

This case study is exemplary of transparency in government processes, providing useful guidance to the public, and setting realistic expectations when handling feedback.