Project M/ 371-1

CEN‟s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy

CHESSS Feasibility Study CONSOLIDATED REPORT

In response to EU Mandate M/ 371

Commenced January 2007 and Completed July 2008 Prepared by the CHESSS Consortium Consisting of members nominated by: AENOR; BSI; DS; DIN; EVS; NEN

Project Manager: Mr. Quincy Lissaur CHESSS

Contents

Section 1: Final project report

Section 2: Module reports

2:1 Module 1 2:2 Module 2 2:3 Module 3 2:4 Module 4 2:5 Module 5 2:6 Module 6 2:7 Module 7

page ii

FINAL REPORT

CHESSS Feasibility Study

CEN‟s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy

In response to Mandate M/371

Written by

Mr. Quincy Lissaur Project Executive CHESSS Initiative

CHESSS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 3 INTRODUCTION ...... 5 METHODOLOGY ...... 8 CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 15 THE BENEFITS ...... 28 NEXT STEPS ...... 29 ANNEX A ...... 34 ANNEX B ...... 41 ANNEX C ...... 46

Section 1: page 2 CHESSS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CEN‘s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy (CHESSS) has been an 18 month project, co-funded by the European Commission (EC) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and mandated to CEN under M/371, to determine the feasibility of generic service standardization in Europe.

The project, which started in January 2007, was conducted through the partnership of the National Standards Bodies of Spain (AENOR), Britain (BSI), Germany (DIN), Denmark (DS), Estonia (EVS) and the Netherlands (NEN), and participation from CEN Management Centre (CMC) and Cap Gemini.

In order to ensure a fast, effective and inclusive process for the CHESSS Initiative, the Project Team launched a research program that was structured around seven individual modules, each with a generic service standardization focus.

To determine the feasibility of a generic approach to standardization in each particular area, the modules conducted desk research, surveys, interviews and was presented and discussed in each of four World Café workshops (held in London, Tallinn, Copenhagen and Madrid, attracting a total of 178 participants) and at a seminar in Brussels which had 64 attendees.

A key measure of success of the CHESSS Initiative was the continued positive engagement with all types of stakeholders, including service providers, trade associations, customers, consumer groups, government, academics and NGOs. Therefore the project team set up a website (www.chesss.eu) to keep stakeholders informed about the project. Between June 1 2007 and May 1 2008 the website had 4,848 unique visitors from 108 countries and 385 registered users. To further monitor this engagement we developed a Stakeholder Map, thus ensuring engagement across a broad range of service sectors.

The CHESSS Project Team has found that generic European service standardization is feasible in certain (but not all) areas, and therefore recommends the development of a: ― Single generic European service standard ― Guidance document for the development of service standards ― Pan-European Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) with supporting standard ― Services Glossary & Translations ― Guidance document for customer centricity and interface

These recommendations build on those in the individual modules, and provide for an integrated solution for the project overall.

Section 1: page 3 CHESSS

In addition to the project-wide recommendations in this report, each individual Module has its own set of recommendations. Some of these have not been covered in this report because they are either very specific to their source module or because they recommend the development of semi-generic standards for specific service aspects or groups of services (as recommended in Module 7 for B2B services). Therefore, for a complete and comprehensive understanding of our recommendations it is important not to take this report into consideration on its own but to do so in conjunction with all individual Module reports.

In general terms, the CHESSS Project Team believes the recommendations in this report as well as those in the individual Module reports will be most effective if adopted together as the foundation for an ongoing coordinated program of service standardization. However, if the European Commission and/or CEN determine not to adopt an integrated approach, the possibility remains for each of the recommendations to be adopted individually.

Section 1: page 4 CHESSS

INTRODUCTION

This 18 month EC and EFTA funded project, mandated to CEN under M/371, has been undertaken to determine the feasibility of generic service standardization in Europe.

For the purpose of clarity generic service standards, also known as horizontal service standards, are those that are applicable across multiple or all service sectors. This is in contrast to service-specific standards, which apply to a single service or a specific aspect within a single service. Generic service standards are perceived as complex and have, to date, not been developed in the formal European standardization environment (i.e. CEN). Although there was an indication that generic service standards could be beneficial, this hadn‘t been proven.

Based on the concern that the movement of services across member states‘ borders is not as free as with products, and taking into consideration the success that product standards have had in increasing the movement of products, the European Commission wanted to verify whether service standards could be similarly beneficial for services. Furthermore, it was felt that there may be a possibility for standards to improve the quality and excellence in European service delivery, increase customer confidence in services, and assist in the implementation of the Services Directive. Therefore the European Commission decided to invest in a number of standardization studies, one of which is the feasibility of generic service standards.

Therefore the CHESSS Initiative was set up to determine the feasibility of an integrated program of generic service standardization within CEN. As such, the feasibility study was required to:

― Identify, secure support from and engage all key stakeholder groups (e.g. government, service providers, service users) ― Facilitate a coordinated, common approach to the provision of standards in support of the effective delivery of services ― Provide an implementation plan for the development of new service standards, both as a direct result of the programme and as may be required in future

To achieve these three objectives the CHESSS Initiative was created, through the partnership of the following National Standards Bodies (NSBs): AENOR (Spain), BSI (United Kingdom), DIN (Germany), DS (Denmark), EVS (Estonia) and NEN (the Netherlands). CEN CMC was also a key partner within the project, attending all main Project Team meetings, and coordinating regularly with the project management team. Additionally, Cap Gemini was brought in to provide their independent, expert opinion and moderation techniques in support of the CHESSS Project Team.

This coordinated approach between NSBs was set up for two reasons. First, to ensure the Project Team engaged with a wide range of European

Section 1: page 5 CHESSS

stakeholders in the purchase, provision and use of services. Second, to ensure that the outcomes of this project would be agreed on by a group of geographically dispersed NSBs thereby facilitating the successful implementation of the recommendations.

The underlying concept of our work, derived from a generic approach to services, was that there are fundamental principles of good service, delivery and assessment that are applicable to any service offering, no matter what the sector or its primary focus. To determine whether this concept was accurate the Project Team launched a program of desk research, surveys, interviews, workshops and seminar. Furthermore, the Project Team sought to engage with all relevant CEN Committees, project leaders for other initiatives under Mandate M/371, and structured our processes to ensure they were open and inclusive.

In order to ensure a fast, effective and inclusive process for the CHESSS Initiative, the Project Team launched a research program that was structured around seven individual modules, each with a generic service standardization focus:

1. Guidance in the preparation of service standards 2. Glossary of terms and definitions relevant to service standardization 3. Safety in the delivery of services 4. Good practice in the assessment of customer satisfaction 5. Recommendations for complaints and redress systems 6. Billing and innovative metering practice 7. The specification, sourcing, delivery and quality of business-to- business (B2B) services

Each of the individual modules has produced its own report with its own conclusions, recommendations and next steps. These reports are provided in conjunction with this report.

The structure and roles of the Project Team is demonstrated below in Figure1.

Figure 1 – Project Team

Section 1: page 6 CHESSS

The reader of this report should note that it brings together the conclusions of all seven modules into an overall, comprehensive analysis regarding the feasibility of generic service standardization. Whereas each of the individual seven modules contain vast amounts of data, detailed findings, conclusions, recommendations, and next steps, this report uses the main findings and conclusions from the individual modules and takes these to a more general set of conclusions and recommendations for the project as a whole. For a complete and comprehensive understanding of our recommendations it is important not to take this report into consideration on its own, but to do so in conjunction with all individual Module reports.

With this report we aim to deliver:

- A summary of the activities undertaken - Outline the overall project findings from the research and workshops - Draw out conclusions from those findings - Provide recommendation for the next steps

Section 1: page 7 CHESSS

METHODOLOGY

Timeline

The project was conducted over an 18 month period. A timeline showing the project‘s main activities is given below in Figure 2.

Figure 2 – Project Timeline

CHESSS Internal Coordination

To ensure the project was managed effectively, a dedicated Project Manager and Project Administrator were hired. Their main purpose was to coordinate activities between all the partners, keep records of all activities, plan the World Cafés and Brussels Seminar, manage the website and all other project-wide activities. They also set up and managed an online document management system as a central repository for all documents produced throughout the project.

The Project Team met five times in London and held regular conference calls (on average once a month) to update each other on progress and discuss outcomes. Furthermore, all partners worked together to provide comments on each others findings and reports, strengthening the consensus between all partners and the quality of the final reports.

Website

To maximize CHESSS‘s engagement with stakeholders, at the start of the project a website was created to:

― provide background information about the project ― allow stakeholders to sign up for CHESSS events

Section 1 Page 8 CHESSS

― release presentations and reports for download.

The CHESSS website (www.chesss.eu) went live on 1 June 2007.

Presentations were made available for download for registered users only, thereby enabling us to gather more stakeholder contacts for further engagement and follow-up throughout the project. This was also the reason for channelling all event registrations through the website.

As of 1 May 2008, the CHESSS website had 385 registered users.

From 1 June 2007 – 1 May 2008, the CHESSS website was visited 8,938 times from 108 countries and territories, of which 4,848 were absolute unique visitors. The top ten countries are listed below in Figure 3.

Figure 3 – Website visits by country of origin

For more detailed website statistics please refer to Annex C of this report.

Other Web Activity

Links to the CHESSS website were placed on all the partners‘ own websites and the CEN website. Articles, press releases and general updates were also included on other relevant websites including Metering International, ANEC and the Institute of Customer Service.

Future of www.chesss.eu

Since the CHESSS Initiative and current funding cycle ends on July 31st 2008, the website will be shut down on that date. However, since CHESSS has engaged with such a large number of stakeholders who are familiar with and know how to use the website, we encourage CEN CMC to maintain an online presence for CHESSS either by maintaining the website as it is or creating a microsite on the current CEN website. This would allow CEN CMC and the European Commission to publish this report and communicate its future intentions with regard to generic service standardization to all stakeholders involved. CEN CMC has been informed of this suggestion.

Section 1 Page 9 CHESSS

Stakeholder Engagement

A key requirement of the CHESSS Initiative has been that of fully involving stakeholders at every opportunity. This has been achieved by developing a comprehensive stakeholder engagement strategy, which included the use of the following engagement tools and techniques:

― Development of a detailed stakeholder map ― Development of a bespoke project website ― Publicizing the project on other websites ― A series of letters, mail shots, press releases, e-questionnaires and interviews ― Development and delivery of a series of presentations relating to the project, and generic service standardization in particular ― Staging four World Café styled workshops and one full-day seminar in Brussels

Stakeholder Map

Developed using MS Excel, this fully interactive tool allowed the CHESSS Project Team to record contact details of the stakeholders they engaged with throughout the 18 month project. The map was first populated with relevant, existing contacts from all the partners and CEN CMC, including NSB committee members. New contacts came from across public, private and voluntary sectors as a result of the Module Leaders‘ primary and secondary research processes and through networking opportunities and referrals.

The list was maintained and continually updated by the CHESSS Project Administrator. As new contacts were formed, their details were entered onto the map. The map itself was split into four categories:

― Business to business: administration support services ― Business to business: operations support services ― Business to consumer: indirect delivery services ― Business to consumer: unique delivery services

Underneath these headings, the entire spectrum of identifiable service sectors was listed and each sector was allocated ten spaces. We then limited each sector to ten stakeholders on the basis that this would provide sufficient- but not over-representation for each service sector.

Once on the map, the contacts were continually updated to reflect any change in the communication status. This was achieved by creating 7 stages of Stakeholder Involvement. Whenever a stakeholder passed through one of these stages, their details were updated to reflect this. The 7 stages were identified as follows:

1. Identification 2. First contact

Section 1 Page 10 CHESSS

3. Follow-up 4. Engagement 5. Participation 6. Review/ Consultation 7. Feedback

As of 1 May 2008, the CHESSS Stakeholder Map contained the contact details of individuals from 313 organizations representing service providers, trade associations, customers, consumer groups, government, academics and NGOs. For the full list of organizations, their sector, and country of origin please refer to Annex A.

Future of the Stakeholder Map

The CHESSS Project Team encourages the European Commission and CEN to take the stakeholders that have been engaged with throughout the CHESSS Initiative into consideration as they progress with the recommendations made within this report, and consider engaging with them to take the activities forward where appropriate.

Publicizing CHESSS

Once the stakeholder map was populated, a carefully planned series of email communications and briefings were disseminated. Billed as ―Introducing CHESSS‖, these were the start of the CHESSS Public Relations (PR) campaign to engage with stakeholders from outside of the familiar NSB committee networks.

At the same time DIN, in conjunction with DS, sent out two online questionnaires relating to Modules 3 and 7 to over 25,000 recipients. Due to the sheer numbers involved, it was decided that only those stakeholders who made contact with CHESSS as a result of one of those mediums would be included in the stakeholder map. However, we did not anticipate that some individuals responding to questionnaires would choose to keep their contact details anonymous. There were also data protection issues to consider, which meant that the partners were unable to share their own NSB contact lists to be included on the Stakeholder Map. It was agreed that these stakeholders would instead be targeted by the relevant NSB partner, using email updates and articles in relevant publications and online.

The Module Leaders conducted over 100 in-depth interviews with service professionals from across Europe over a period of approximately four months from January 2008 – April 2008. The methodology for each of the Module Leaders interviews can be found in the relevant Module report. In some cases the interviews were conducted as a follow-up to the stakeholders answering a questionnaire or having had discussions about the project with the Module Leaders.

Finally, most Module Leaders and the Project Executive have, throughout the 18 month feasibility study, delivered presentations about the CHESSS

Section 1 Page 11 CHESSS

Initiative and generic service standardization by invitation at conferences and events organized by external stakeholders.

Summary

A key measure of success of the CHESSS Initiative has been the continued positive engagement from the stakeholders. Much of this is down to the rigorous methods employed to conduct a proactive and sustainable PR campaign over the period of 18 months. The CHESSS stakeholder success is a clear example of the benefits of creating a dedicated project management resource to an Initiative of this size and complexity.

Desk Research, Surveys & Interviews

The desk research conducted for each of the modules consisted of a wide range of traditional research techniques, including:

― Literature review (books, magazines, trade press, other desk research studies, university papers, etc.) ― Review of websites ― Questionnaires and surveys ― Interviews . Face-to-Face . Telephone

The information collected through these techniques were then analysed using statistical software, personal analysis, modelling and mapping techniques to enable the Project Team to draw conclusions and develop recommendations. These were then used to provide the basis for the presentations given at the World Cafés (see further information below).

After completing the World Cafés some Module Leaders conducted further research to supplement any additional findings.

World Cafés

During October and November 2007, the CHESSS team delivered four 3-day workshops in London, Tallinn, Copenhagen and Madrid. Called the ―CHESSS World Café‖ these were an innovative method of engaging with stakeholders to gauge their opinions and expertise in the field of services and service standardization.

Each day was split into two sessions, with the morning session for one Module and the afternoon session for another. Attendees could chose to attend as many sessions as they wanted, with most staying for at least one full day or more. Each session was opened by the Project Executive, giving an overview of the CHESSS Initiative and generic standardization. This was followed by a presentation from the Module Leader, introducing the topic of their module. Each Module Leader than posed two general questions; these questions were designed to be open and stimulate debate. For example, for

Section 1 Page 12 CHESSS

Module 3 the second question was: ―How can standards assist in making services safe?‖ The questions were posed in such a way that the attendees worked together in groups of 3-8 people to answer them together, based on their knowledge, experience and expertise, and avoided simple yes or no answers. To ensure full participation the rooms were set up to create a café- style atmosphere, helping the attendees to relax, feel comfortable and open up.

The results from each discussion were then presented back to the wider audience and some additional discussion and debate was facilitated by the Project Executive to help the Module Leaders capture as many opinions as possible.

Overall, the four events attracted 178 participants with the distribution as follows:

- London = 48 - Tallinn = 59 - Copenhagen = 19 - Madrid = 52

For the full list of organizations, their sector, and country of origin please refer to Annex B.

Brussels Seminar

The one day ―CHESSS Brussels Seminar‖ was held for two reasons: to present emerging conclusions from the CHESSS Project and to receive feedback from stakeholders to determine whether the Project Team was on the right track. The seminar was very well attended with a total of 64 participants, only 22% of whom had attended an earlier CHESSS event. This demonstrates the spread of contact we had throughout the project and continued strong level of interest in the CHESSS initiative.

During the morning session, structured as an information sharing event, a presentation was delivered by the CHESSS Project Executive taking the participants through the interim CHESSS findings and emerging conclusions and recommendations. The session also included keynote speakers from Directorate General Enterprise & Industry and ISO.

The afternoon session was structured as a ―Trade Show‖, with each Module Leader presenting emerging patterns from their individual modules simultaneously in different corners of the room. Upon concluding their presentation, which was delivered three times in succession, the audience was given time to pose questions directly to the Module Leader.

Upon completing the Trade Shows the Project Executive facilitated a general Q&A panel session.

Section 1 Page 13 CHESSS

For a full list of the organizations, their sector, and country of origin that attended the Brussels Seminar please refer to Annex B.

Feedback

At the end of the World Cafés and Brussels Seminar the Project Manager collected feedback forms from the participants. The forms, which cannot be included with this report due to data protection rules, were generally very positive with regard to the format and set-up of the events we ran. Technical comments about content from the presentations were fed back to the individual Module Leaders and used in their assessment of the findings. In general terms, the comments indicated that a majority of stakeholders were satisfied with the direction the CHESSS Initiative had taken and that their concerns with regard to generic service standardization were recognized and addressed properly.

Section 1 Page 14 CHESSS

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Overview

As mentioned in the introduction, this report brings together the conclusions of all seven modules into an overall, comprehensive analysis regarding the feasibility of generic service standardization. Since this report brings together general conclusions and recommendations for the project as a whole it is important to read it together with all individual Module reports.

Figure 4 below provides a summary of all the recommendations of the seven individual Module reports.

SUMMARY OF MODULE RECOMMENDATIONS Module 1 Develop a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards. Develop the Guidance document as a CEN Guide under CEN/BT WG 163 "Services". Prepare and maintain a database with the contents and customer expectations identified in service delivery standards The high occurrence of the same contents in service standards invites to recommend the establishment of some guidance to deal with them. Include a list of service standards. Take into account the blockers for service standardization identified and organized in order of their relative importance when initiating promotional standardization activities. Module 2 Establish a body responsible for the structure, management, coordination and promulgation of terminology for use in the development of new service standards and in relation to service provision, generally. Module 3 Requirements relevant for service safety should be addressed by the single horizontal European service standard recommended in the CHESSS main report. Those safety related requirements are: - information provision - risk assessment - terminology. Develop a guideline for the implementation of existing European Directives that impact on service safety. Provide clear and comprehensive information on the relation between regulation and standardization in service safety in the guidance document developed within Module 1. Include examples and good practices. Make the guidance document publicly available. In the event that European legislation is introduced for the safety of life and health of consumers, European policy makers should work with European standardization bodies to ensure that standardization can support such legislation. Modules 4 & 5 CEN CMC initiate a project to provide Guidance on achieving customer centricity in service provision including the application of new technology in providing effective service provider/ customer interface. CEN CMC engage with service providers and consumer representative bodies in the provision of guidance to customers with regard to how best to facilitate the provision of services likely to meet their expectations. CEN CMC, through BT/ WG/ 163, initiate a project designed to deliver a coordinated set of specifications for complaints handling and redress provision. CEN CMC, through BT/ WG/ 163, initiate a CEN Workshop Agreement (CWA) setting out the requirements for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), maintaining as much synergy as possible between ADR and Online Dispute Resolution (ODR). CEN CMC seek to establish liaison with the European Consumer Centres Network in projects

Section 1 Page 15 CHESSS relating to Customer Satisfaction Indices, complaints handling, redress and alternative dispute resolution with the intention of participation by representatives of ECC in development of the standards and CWA to promote their possible application in relation to ECC activity. CEN CMC, through BT/ WG/ 163, initiate a project for the development of a Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) ‗benchmark‘ standard, setting out the salient requirements and defining principles of CSIs in a manner appropriate for the provision of a CSI and against which, existing and any future CSIs could be compared. The CHESSS overall report should include recommendation that the European Commission and CEN CMC should work together to initiate a project for the development of a single generic European service provision specification capable of supporting claims of conformity that can be objectively verified. Module 6 CEN CMC, through its Sector Forum Energy Management, should seek to liaise with ISO/ PC 239 in respect of the project for Standardization of network services billing. We recommend that CEN and CENELEC cooperate in the development of a shared strategy for future standardization for ‗smart house services and enabling technologies‘ (including meters) for use in the home and work space, in order to ensure that: - multiple service provision is catered for - appliances and equipment are interoperable - customer choice is preserved; and - provision is made for customers to have access to information they require to properly manage their service usage. To facilitate this coordination we suggest that CEN and CENELEC organize a joint stakeholder meeting on the subject of ‗interoperability‘ as soon as practicable, with the following objectives: - Initiate a CWA to establish an interoperability framework for ‗smart house services and enabling technologies‘ - Establish a programme of future standardization for ‗smart house services and enabling technologies.‘ Module 7 CEN CMC to organize the development of a classification of B2B services in a standardization perspective and identify common elements of B2B services. CEN CMC to organize the development of horizontal service standards in a hierarchical system of ABC-Standards. To establish a clear organizational framework for the development of horizontal B2B service standards and within this framework to consider a series of general rules including an examination of existing standards and integration of them in a comprehensible, logical and transparent way; involvement of SMEs and customers and a balanced representation of sectors on the one hand and countries on the other hand. We recommend that the European Commission work with CEN CMC on an information programme to increase stakeholder awareness of the nature and extent of the cooperative relationship intended to exist between regulation and standards. This would help overcome stakeholders expressed concerns that the existence of service related legislation in some member states will make the development of European business to business service standards impracticable. As transparency and quality of B2B services is a major driver in the discussions on (horizontal) service standards, the development of a certification system for good services is recommended as a tool for communicating at least some minimum level of quality.

Figure 4 – Summary of Module Recommendations

The research conducted by the CHESSS Project Team clearly indicates that there is a horizontal dimension to services. To what extent customer confidence will be strengthened by the introduction of generic service standards could not be scientifically determined. However, from the data collected through the desk research, surveys, interviews, the World Cafés and Brussels Seminar, and diligently analysed by the CHESSS Project Team, it is our opinion that generic service standardization can play an important role in

Section 1 Page 16 CHESSS assisting the European Commission achieve its goal to improve and increase movement of services across borders in Europe.

To that end the CHESSS Project Team has developed a set of consolidated recommendations which are listed below in Figure 5. Please note that these recommendations build on those in the individual modules, and provide for an integrated solution for the project overall.

Figure 5 – Consolidated Recommendations

Single generic European service standard

It is the belief of the CHESSS Project Team that it is feasible and beneficial (for service providers, customers and governments) to develop a single generic European service standard in accordance with the recommendations that have been made in the individual Module reports and analysis by the CHESSS Project Team. Below, in Figure 6, please find summary justifications from the individual Module reports for the creation of a single generic European service standard. If the reader requires more in-depth justification we recommend the reading of each of the individual Module reports.

Section 1 Page 17 CHESSS

Figure 6 – Module justifications for a single generic European service standard

In addition to the findings in the individual modules, it should also be recognized that there have been high levels of stakeholder interest (in particular from service providers) in the new ISO services guidance standards which are generic in nature and support the development of international generic service standards. In this context we believe that the development of a single generic European service standard has the potential to deliver a timely, practical solution to meet the needs of service providers in demonstrating, and customers in identifying, high quality in service provision.

The standard, focussing on the essential aspects of service provision, would be applicable to any service provider in Europe and would set out verifiable requirements. Those requirements would address the criteria used by customers to judge the quality of service provision and help ensure that service providers attempt to meet customers‘ expectations.

Based on the research conducted and a review of European legislation (including the new European Services Directive), it has emerged that there are several aspects of service provision that are generic across all service sectors. As demonstrated in modules 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7 generic service standards can be beneficial in creating a common customer-focused approach to service provision across Europe, resulting in more confidence among customers and potentially an increase in cross-border trade. If the

Section 1 Page 18 CHESSS identified aspects are standardized, setting a minimum level of quality that meets customers‘ expectations appropriately, it is expected that service quality will increase together with customer confidence in services delivered from other countries within the European Union (and perhaps even further afield).

These common aspects, put together in Figure 7, could potentially form the basis (or table of contents) of the single generic European service standard.

Section 1 Page 19 CHESSS

Figure 7 – Potential topics to be covered by the single generic European service standard

Section 1 Page 20 CHESSS

This list has been compiled from the individual Module reports and reflects those areas that stakeholders have indicated are most important in helping to improve quality of service and increase customer confidence. It builds on standardization work that has already been completed (or is about to commence). Particular attention is drawn to the inclusion of requirements for providing safety protection for customers (both in the planning and information provision sections) as recommended in Module 3.

The success of such a generic European service standard will be largely dependent on:

― the method by which it is created; ― who it is created by; ― its relationship to existing standards (services-related and otherwise); ― the tools available to support the standard; and ― the support from the European Commission during development and roll-out

These points will be further addressed in the Next Steps section of this report.

For clarity, our research has led us to conclude that a single generic service provision standard can be developed for use in its own right and as a support tool for sector-specific service standardization activities that would cover service deliverable aspects.

Furthermore, the research conducted throughout the project, and in particular comments made from stakeholders during the World Cafés and in interviews for Modules 3, 4 and 5, has indicated that generic standards are seen as lacking the strength of service-specific standards because customers do not recognize whether organizations are complying with them nor do service providers have a method to demonstrate their efforts to comply with generic standards. To this end we recommend that the single generic European service standard be written as a requirement specification, because it enables service providers to be assessed against objectively verifiable requirements in the standard and demonstrate compliance (which cannot be accomplished if the standard is written as a guide or code of practice).

Certification & Quality Marking

One of the findings of the project, in particular from Modules 3, 4, 5 and 7, is that customers are more likely to trust and feel safe using services that are underpinned by certificates and quality marks. Although we did not set out to study quality marks, and based on the research conducted we do not have enough evidence to recommend the development of such a mark, we do believe that benefits may be achieved from its development.

We therefore recommend that the European Commission and CEN work together to determine whether a services quality mark should be introduced alongside the single generic European service standard.

Section 1 Page 21 CHESSS

It is important to note that if a quality mark is created, the certification and quality marking scheme must allow for all three assessment options:

st ― 1 party (i.e. self-declaration) nd ― 2 party (i.e. assessment by an interested party) rd ― 3 party (i.e. assessment by an independent body).

To avoid customer confusion about the type of assessment process undertaken by the service provider, the format and content of declarations should then be strictly governed through a clause in the single generic European service standard, outlining specifically how service providers demonstrate and communicate which type of assessment option they‘ve used.

This system of certification and quality marking is current good practice and therefore should be adopted if a strategy including quality marking is taken forward by the European Commission.

The benefit of a quality marking scheme is that it would be applicable across all service sectors and for all company sizes. The quality mark would provide customers with a simple and direct method to recognize quality in service provision, and in turn instill certainty and confidence that their expectations will be met. It would also allow compliant providers to demonstrate true excellence and expertise in a practical manner.

Summary

Based on the research conducted, and supported by a wide range of service providers engaged with throughout this project, we believe that by standardizing a set of requirements covering generic aspects of service provision the overall quality of services across Europe can be significantly improved. More importantly, if the standard is widely adopted, service quality improvement can be achieved consistently, measurably and effectively across all member states and has great potential to increase cross-border trade in services.

Finally, we suggest that for the single generic European service standard‘s effectiveness can be even further enhanced by the development, implementation, roll-out and take-up of other generic service standards. These are outlined below.

Guidance document for the development of service standards

Based on the findings from Module 1 we have concluded that a guidance document for the preparation of service standards would be welcomed by a majority of stakeholders.

This guidance document would help all types of stakeholders (service providers, customers, government, etc.) willing to participate in service standardization across all service sectors. The guidance document could also support the development of the single generic European service standard.

Section 1 Page 22 CHESSS

As part of the research of Module 1, a draft version outlining the potential content of the guidance document has been developed. This was done as a feasibility exercise to determine whether all the collected information could be put together into a single, coherent document and to stimulate discussion among stakeholders during the World Cafés and Brussels Seminar.

It was developed specifically for use by those stakeholders engaged in the development of formal European standards but may well be of use to others who develop standards, such as developers of informal standards, trade associations developing guidance for members, government departments, NGOs, private companies and any other people that are looking to set standards for services.

Pan-European Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) with supporting standard

One of the key findings throughout the research, and in particular in Modules 4 and 5, is that customers‘ confidence is driven by their ability to identify good service providers who are likely to meet their expectations. Reversely, service providers that meet their customers‘ expectations have indicated that simple ways to demonstrate they do so would be very beneficial to them. It is therefore recommended that a European-wide Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) for services is developed and regularly published.

Recent years have seen a significant rise of price comparison websites across Europe. This phenomenon, which is likely to increase further in coming years, has demonstrated a strong demand among customers for the ability to compare like-for-like services. To ensure this works properly we believe it is necessary to develop a standard that sets out common criteria for the CSI. Those criteria would then need to be uniformly applied by the CSI assessment program to ensure proper comparisons are made.

Taking this into the context of the single generic European service standard recommended earlier, a European CSI would provide customers with a ranking across countries as well as service types. Having a single joined up system, linking the single generic European service standard and the CSI together, will ensure consistency of approach to service quality across the European Union. However, it must be noted that maximum impact will only be achieved if it is seen that the European Commission encourages the use of the European CSI to reduce the risk of proliferation amongst potentially competing CSIs, which to some extent is already starting to happen.

As recommend in Modules 4 and 5, for the CSI to be most effective and be uniform in its application, it is necessary to take a two-step approach. First, CEN should form a Committee to develop a standard that sets out the requirements (i.e. measurement criteria and application methodology) and defining principles of the European CSI. Those national organizations that have already developed CSIs (such as the Institute of Customer Service in Britain and EPSI in Sweden) must be involved in its development, together with service providers and customers, to ensure coordination at the national

Section 1 Page 23 CHESSS level and avoid duplication of effort. Such an arrangement would permit existing indices to continue, subject to their alignment with the standard, as well as helping future developments in this field in a manner that would reduce the potential for future conflict and loss of credibility. Once the standard is complete we recommend that the European Commission initiate a full roll-out of the CSI across Europe.

Developed in conjunction with the single generic European service standard and with input from its stakeholders, we expect that a role-out of the CSI would be very effective and beneficial to customers because it creates the ability to compare like-for-like services across borders. However, even though each can exist independently they would both be strengthened by the existence of the other.

Services Glossary & Translations

As recommended in Module 2, we suggest that a glossary of service related terms is important to the development of European service standards. The research conducted has suggested that without such a glossary the possibility that similar terms will be used for different purposes across various services has the potential to confuse both service providers and customers, which would ultimately have a negative impact on the problem that the single generic European standard is trying to resolve.

Together with a glossary we also recommend the development of a new classification system for services that will permit the grouping and identification of services by service provision characteristics. The need for this was clearly identified throughout the research conducted in Modules 2 and 7.

Noting that existing classification systems such as the European Commission‘s NACE codes and ISO‘s ICS do not adequately provide for this, it is recommended that work be undertaken to develop a new classification system that will enable such a grouping to be accomplished. It is noted that Modules 2 and 7 have found that such a system could have a bearing on the structure of the proposed services terminology database and that there is sound reason for developing a services classification system in conjunction with services terminology structuring.

For this reason it is recommended that responsibility for developing a services classification system for standards purposes be allocated to the same group as that responsible for development of the services terminology database. It is acknowledged that the two work streams may each require the creation of a dedicated group of experts but strongly recommended that their respective projects be undertaken under a single coordinating structure.

As for language, in order for the Services Glossary to be most effective it is also recommended that equivalent terms be provided in as many European languages as possible. This will increase its effectiveness, reduce potential conflict and reduce the potential for erosion of linguistic differences.

Section 1 Page 24 CHESSS

Guidance document for customer centricity and interface

For the single generic European service standard to be most effective it must be used in the context of customer centricity. By customer centricity we mean that service providers put their customers at the heart of their service provision. It has been found throughout the research of modules 4 and 5 in particular that the most successful service providers around the world already do so.

Customer centricity requires service providers to not just acknowledge the existence of their customers but to really understand what they want, need and expect. The pre-requisites for an effective, customer-centric service model are:

― Customer-centric policies that promote service provision in partnership with customers; ― Technology-based infrastructures that are service oriented, designed to deliver enhanced service and not just more efficient business; and ― Highly trained, customer-focused employees capable of listening to and understanding customers.

Service providers engaged with throughout this project have indicated that a guidance document could assist them in becoming more customer-centric. It would assist those service providers that seek to apply the single generic service standard within their business and significantly improve customers‘ satisfaction with the services they take up.

Potential Risks & Limitations

The CHESSS Project Team has identified areas where no generic European service standards are required. For example: ― In Module 3 it was found that a bespoke generic standard to address service safety is not necessary as long as safety is addressed in other generic service standards ― In Module 6 it was found that there is no support for a generic standard to harmonise European billing ― In Module 7 it is not feasible to develop a generic standard for business-to-business services due to a lack of support

These findings, and others indicating areas where generic service standards are not viable for development at this time, can be found in the individual module reports. Please refer to these for further detail.

The CHESSS Project Team also recognizes that there may be some risks and limitations to implement the recommendations. We have identified four key areas that will need to be overcome for the standard‘s successful development and adoption:

1. There is a traditional reluctance to accept a generic approach to service standardization, from within the standardization community and beyond. However, we believe that the events and presentations given

Section 1 Page 25 CHESSS

by the CHESSS Project Team have demonstrated that with proper education and information provision about generic service standards these can be overcome.

2. There is a risk that a single generic European service standard could favor certain service providers over others. To avoid this, careful attention will need to be paid during the development of the standard to ensure that the requirements can be applied equally to all types of services, irrespective of company size, service complexity, cost, lifetime, cultural nuances and market maturity.

3. Full stakeholder engagement in the development of generic service standards, and in particular the participation of global leaders in service provision, is difficult to achieve. Stakeholders engaged with throughout the CHESSS Initiative continually expressed concern with regard to the appropriateness of the constitution of standards committees, particularly in relation to the relatively new area of services standardization, and that these should be carefully reviewed.

4. Throughout the World Cafés and Brussels seminar stakeholders indicated that take-up of generic standards is limited because many are ambiguous, loosely framed and poorly constructed. As a result, usage of those standards is limited because service providers struggle to apply them and are unable derive the intended benefits fully. Therefore it is important that CEN ensures that stakeholders charged with drafting generic service standards work to the CEN drafting rules, thereby avoiding those faults, ensuring the standards are workable in practice, and avoiding the credibility of the whole program being called into question.

In conclusion, the CHESSS Project Team recognizes there may be some risks and limitations en route to developing the single generic European service standard. However, we are satisfied, based on our findings, that these can be overcome and that the potential benefits outweigh the required investment.

Summary of Conclusions & Recommendations

The recommendations in this report have been based on findings, conclusions and recommendations from the individual reports, and further developed to demonstrate their wider applicability to generic service standardization. This includes the development of one additional recommendation for the project as a whole: the development of a single generic European service standard.

In addition to the project-wide recommendations in this report, each individual Module has its own set of recommendations. Some of these have not been covered in this report because they are either very specific to their source module or because they recommend the development of semi-generic standards for specific service aspects or groups of services (as recommended in Module 7 for B2B services).

Section 1 Page 26 CHESSS

In general terms, the CHESSS Project Team believes the recommendations in this report as well as the individual Module reports will be most effective if adopted as the foundation for an ongoing coordinated program of service standardization. However, if the European Commission and/or CEN determine not to do so, the possibility remains for each of the recommendations to be adopted individually.

Section 1 Page 27 CHESSS

THE BENEFITS Figure 8 below gives a summary of some of the benefits we expect to be achieved if the recommendations above are fully implemented.

SUMMARY OF BENEFITS OF CONSOLIDATED RECOMMENDATIONS Single generic European service standard Service Providers Speed of availability of quality service standards for all service providers Reduce the amount of resource invested by avoiding continued duplication in sector-specific service standards Save cost and time (rather than when implementing several standards), especially for SMEs Generic service standards can assist to help the implementation of and compliance with legislation, including the European Services Directive, as found in Modules 3, 4 and 5 Higher availability of skilled labor Guarantee good and safe service provision for customers A method for service providers to improve and demonstrate the good quality and safety of their services Customers The improved safety of services because of the inclusion of risk assessments and information provision of the service-related risks in communication to customers Improved service levels across different services Customer will know what to expect because there will be a more uniform approach to quality service provision and they'll be able to compare like-for-like more easily Greater transparency of the services being purchased More information provided to customers (e.g. safety aspects, communication with service providers, service restrictions, complaint & redress methods) Service Providers & Customers Common approach to services across Europe and the potential for widespread application Benchmarking across sectors In relation to purchasing, but other areas as well, B2B customers and service providers would benefit significantly from standards that set out common principles that can be applied across multiple service sectors Certification and Quality Marking Customer confidence and recognition of service providers compliant with the generic service standard Increased quality of service across different sectors as a result of the application of a generic standard backed by a quality mark Guidance document for the development of service standards Reduce the reluctance to develop service standards because of the availability of good, relevant advice on how to develop service standards Lower costs and need for resources from stakeholders developing service standards Pan-European CSI with supporting standard Greater transparency of services, particularly those delivered from other countries Ability for customers to compare like-for-like services and providers to benchmark themselves Assist customers in comparing levels of service performance across a range of services in different Member States Enable performance benchmarking by service providers, a facility that could be of considerable help in making the decision as to whether offering a service in another Member State would be viable Services Glossary & Translations Uniform understanding among service providers and customers across Europe of services- related communication Guidance document for customer centricity & interface Build in-depth knowledge and understanding of customers' needs and expectations Improve service providers' interaction with customers Figure 8 – Summary of benefits of consolidated recommendations

Section 1 Page 28 CHESSS

NEXT STEPS

Single generic European service standard

Development

Based on the conclusion that a single generic European service standard should be developed, we believe that the best route for its development is through the formal CEN network. Having analysed all options including private initiatives, informal national standards and formal European standards, the best option is for its development within CEN.

Before handing this task to CEN CMC, we believe it is important to have a good, well-developed base document that can be submitted for development in the formal CEN system. In order to do so we suggest the European Commission make funding available for a group of proven, global experts in high-quality service provision, to work with CEN to develop a first draft of the specification.

Once this draft is completed it would be developed into a formal European Standard by a newly formed horizontal services standardization group that reports into BT/WG 163.

We clearly recognize that our recommendation for which sections to include in the generic service standard (outlined in Table 3) may not be adopted by the group of standardizers that come together to develop the standard, however, we strongly recommend that the group that takes this forward take our recommendations into consideration because of its basis within the research we have conducted.

Stakeholder Engagement

It has been found throughout the research conducted by all Module Leaders that it is very difficult to engage stakeholders across European in generic service standardization. One of the main reasons for this is because it is difficult for individual stakeholders to justify their investment of resources (financial, time and otherwise) to standardization work where the impact is much broader than the service in which they are directly engaged.

Despite this difficulty the high rate of success by the CHESSS Project Team to get stakeholders to participate in our project and the length of our stakeholder engagement list, indicates that there is a strong base and interest in generic standardization if it were taken forward.

To that end, and as described in detail in the recommendations of Module 3, stakeholder involvement and awareness raising campaigns should focus on:

― Success factors for businesses ― Success factors for cross-border trade in services

Section 1 Page 29 CHESSS

― Motives for participating in standardization ― Roles and benefits of horizontal European service safety standardization.

This recommendation is valid across all Modules, each of which has recognized the difficulty of involving stakeholders in the development of generic standards.

Based on our stakeholder model, we recommend that significant effort is made within CEN CMC when it sets up a committee for the development of a single generic European service standard, as suggested above. Specifically, CEN CMC should:

― Have a specific marketing campaign to effectively communicate what work needs to be done and what it will entail ― Have a rigorous selection process for members of the group based on: . Global expertise and demonstrated leadership in quality service delivery; and . An appropriate balance of stakeholders. ― Communication of its strategy and other activities in service standardization ― More openness about the development process and procedures.

Certification and Quality Marking

At this time the CHESSS Project Team cannot set out any next steps for quality marking other than to suggest that the European Commission work with CEN to determine whether a quality mark should be developed alongside the single generic European service standard.

Next steps for other recommendations

Since all the other recommendations in the main report have been summarized directly from the individual Module reports, below we have a one paragraph summary for the next steps for those recommendations that have been taken forward into this report. For a full, comprehensive outline of the next steps for these recommendations please refer to each of the individual Module reports.

Guidance document for the development of service standards

For the development of the Guidance Document it is proposed that the work be undertaken by CEN/BT WG 163 ―Services‖ who would be tasked with developing a first draft of the Guidance Document, building on the draft already developed by the CHESSS Project Team, and included as an Annex in the Module 1 report. Once the first draft is complete the process would be open to other stakeholders for comment on a well-developed, consensus- based document. It is estimated that the Guidance Document would be ready for publication 16 months after commencing the work.

Section 1 Page 30 CHESSS

Pan-European Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) with supporting standard

The recommendation for the development and roll-out of a pan-European CSI will require CEN to prepare a proposal, business case and outline a draft for a European Standard for CSI criteria and methodology.

The committee that would be set up to develop this standard would require the participation of service providers and customers of a representative range of service types, as well as the providers of existing CSIs and representatives from the European Consumer Centre network.

Once the standard for CSI criteria and methodology is developed, the European Commission will need to determine how the CSI should be rolled out into the market place and what level of support and encouragement could be applied to reduce the risk of proliferation of competing European CSIs.

Services Glossary & Translations

CEN CMC should develop a proposal for the formation of a CEN Terminology Group and engage a broad cross-section of service providers, customers, terminology experts and standards professionals. This group will then be required to:

― Determine an appropriate services classification structure ― Determine a related terminology structure ― Develop a policy for dealing with linguistic matters.

Once these aspects have been determined the group can start the development of the European services glossary.

The setup of the group and its policies could take 10 to 12 months, subject to acceptance of this recommendation. It is expected that the glossary could be launched 10 to 12 months thereafter.

Guidance document for customer centricity and interface

In order to develop the guidance document for customer centricity and interface, CEN CMC should set up a subgroup to the group developing the single generic European service standard. This group would primarily be made up of members of the single generic European service standard group, as well as Customer Relationship Management (CRM) technology experts, who will be tasked with the development of the guide. The development of this guidance document could take 12 to 18 months once the group is formed.

Additional Next Steps www.chesss.eu

Section 1 Page 31 CHESSS

To ensure continued engagement with the stakeholders engaged with throughout this project, and in particular in recognition of the difficulty to engage stakeholders in generic standardization generally, CEN CMC should maintain an online presence for CHESSS either by maintaining the website as it is or creating a microsite on the current CEN website..

Section 1 Page 32 CHESSS

Timeline for Next Steps

At this time the CHESSS Project Team cannot set out a timeline for next steps because this is entirely dependent on the acceptance of this report by the European Commission. However, we do suggest that in order to keep momentum the European Commission and CEN take our recommendations forward at its earliest possible convenience.

However, to assist the reader, we have included a table below summarising the Next Steps.

Section 1 Page 33 CHESSS

ANNEX A

This annex lists the stakeholders on the Stakeholder Map

ORGANIZATIONS ON THE CHESSS STAKEHOLDER MAP Name of Organization Sector Country Mainori Kõrgkool Academia Estonia Tallinn University Academia Estonia Salamanca University Academia Spain Bournemouth University Academia UK Academia - Estonian Business EBS Executive Training Centre UK School Academia -Technical University of BYG-DTU Denmark Denmark Holstein UK Agriculture UK The UK Accreditation Service Accreditation Service UK Applications & systems Tinc Associates Belgium development consultancy AS SEB Ühisliising Banking Services Estonia Inibio OÜ Biotechnology Estonia Institute of Customer Service Business to Business Operations UK Danish Commerce and Services Chamber of Commerce Denmark Institut d'Expertise Clinique Espagne Chemicals Spain Aldeas Infantiles SOS Childcare services Spain DCS Cleaning Services Denmark EFCI European Federation of Cleaning Services Belgium Cleaning Industries Televida Communications Spain SHL Group Ltd Consultancy UK Institute of Business Consulting Consultancy UK Tourism Research & Marketing Consultancy UK Mindfactory Consultancy Switzerland Morpheus Consultancy The Netherlands Danish Enterprise and Construction Construction Denmark Authority Pavimentos Asfálticos Salamanca Construction Spain S.L. Derrick Braham Associates Ltd Construction UK MART FALK CS Construction Estonia TipTipTap Playgrounds Construction Estonia Soojustuskeskus Construction Estonia Lava Creuna Norge AS Content Management Norway ANEC Consumer association Belgium Estonian Consumer Union Consumer Association Estonia Forbrugerstyrelsen Consumer Association Denmark Consumer Council of Norway Consumer Association Norway Sinergy Events Conference Service Provider The Netherlands Training and Auditing Customer service consultancy UK The Moore Adamson Craig Customer service consultancy UK Partnership The Society of Consumer Affairs in Consumer association Belgium Europe Ipsos Loyalty Customer Satisfaction USA Consumer Council Consumer association Israel Retrieval Systems Cooperation Development and Integration firm Austria Inek (Korea) Digital education research Korea Disabled Peoples International Disability support service Ireland

Section 1 Page 34 CHESSS

UPIK Dunav Disability support service Serbia Docufy gmbh Document computing services Germany CDM Formación Education Spain OÜ Linguajet Education Estonia Puhastusekspert Education Estonia Eaquals Education Estonia Fraunhofer IAO Education Germany Tallinn university of Mechanical Education Estonia Testing The Academy of Economic Studies Education Romania Rautakesko AS Education Estonia State Univertity of Library Studies Education Bulgaria and Information Technologies Bit Media e-Learning solution Education Germany Germanu GmbH University of Acala Education Spain University of Tartu Education Estonia Heinz-Piest-Insitut für Handwerkstechnik an der leibniz Education Germany Universität Hannover Tallinn College of Engineering Education Spain The Young Explorers Trust Education UK Almacenes Eléctricos madrileños SA Electronics Spain Electrical Contractors Association Electronics Electronic Information ForteX Consulting Finland Management Single Market Ventures Electronic News Service Belgium Siemens AG, CSP S Electronics Germany FABEC Elektroonika OÜ Electronics Estonia Hekatron Vertriebs GmbH Electronics Germany ZVEI - Zentralverband Elektrotechnik Electronics and Electric Germany - und Elektronikindustrie e.V. Splashpower Ltd Electronics UK EDF Energy Energy UK INNOMET bv Energy The Netherlands GPX International Ltd Energy The Netherlands Iberdrola Distribucion Electrica, Energy Spain S.A.U. Gas Natural Distribution Energy Spain British Gas Energy UK AS Narva Elektrijaamad Energy Estonia EDF Energy Energy UK TECNIFUEGO-AESPI Energy Spain ND Metering Solutions Energy UK E.V.V.E.e.V. Energy The Netherlands Ista International GmbH Energy Germany Energywatch Energy UK ABA -Tony Brown Associate Ltd Engineering UK Advanced Consulting engineering Engineering Spain Dirección General de Industria,Energía y Minas de la Engineering Spain Comunidad de Madrid PROYECTO Y CONTROL, S.A. Engineering Spain Atomic Weapons Establishment Engineering UK Pump and Valve Consulting Engineering Germany Altran sdb Engineering Spain A.C.E. Engineering Spain Proyecto y Control, SA Engineering Spain SPRI S.A. Engineering Spain JVL.DK Engineering Denmark

Section 1 Page 35 CHESSS

Airbus Deutschland GmBH Engineering Germany Dirección General de Inspección, Energía y Minas de la Comunidad de Engineering Spain Madrid AS Kaanon Kinnisvara Estate Agency Services Denmark European standards and NORMAPME Belgium certification Alcontrol Laboratories Environmental analysis UK Keskonnaministeerium Environment Estonia Forende Service Facility Service and Health Care Denmark Finance Management OÜ Finance UK AMC Amaris AS Finance Estonia Sodexho Food Facilities Management France Emuna Food and Beverage Estonia E.M.S.F.M.S.A Funeral Services Estonia The Federal Public Service Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade and Government Belgium Development Cooperation Department of Enterprise, Trade and Government Ireland Employment Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Government Cyprus Tourism of the republic of Cyprus Ministry for the Economy and the Government Germany foreign Trade Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hungary Government Hungary Finland Ministry of Trade and Government Finland Industry BERR – Deparment for Business, Government UK Enterprise, Regulation Swedish National Board of Trade Government Sweden Ministry of Economic Affairs and Government Estonia Communications BMWi Berlin Federal Ministry of Government Germany Economics and Technology Estonia Ministry of Economic Affairs Government Estonia and Communications Greece Ministry of Economy and Government Greece finance Spain Cooperation and foreign office Government Spain France Ministry of Economy Finance Government France and the Industry Latvian Ministry of Economics Government Latvia Ministry of Economy The republic of Government Lithuania Lithunia Ministry of Economics Affairs Government Spain Maksu- ja Tolliamet Government Estonia European Commission Government Belgium Republic of Bulgaria Council of Government Bulgaria Ministers Danmarks Statistik Government Denmark Instituto Nacional del Consumo Government Spain CSIC Government Spain Ayuntamiento de Alcobendas Government Spain Region de Murcia Turistica, S.A. Government Spain Federal Ministry of Economics and Government Germany Technology Rep of Poland Ministry of Economics Government Poland Federal Ministry for Social Affairs Government Germany and Consumer Protection Gov of the rep of Slovenia, Ministry Government Slovenia

Section 1 Page 36 CHESSS of Economics Department for the Communitarian Government Italy Political Ministry of Competitiveness and Government Malta Communications Ministry of European Integration Government Romania Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros Government Portugal Austrian Federal Economic Chamber Government Estonia Ayutamiento de Alcobendas Government Spain Ministero de Agricultura, pesca y Government Spain Alimentacion Department of Health Government UK Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Government Czech Republic Czech Republic Health Care Board Governmental Agency Estonia Raviamet Healthcare Estonia West Square Associates Healthcare UK Hospital Reina Sofia Healthcare - hospital services Bulgaria KAN Kommission Arbeitsschutz und Health and safety standardization Germany Normung EULEN Sociosanitarios Healthcare Spain Servicio de Salud de Castilla la Healthcare Spain Mancha HSE Health and Safety Commission UK Age Concern Home Help Services UK St Barbara Hotel Hospitality Estonia Tivoli Hospitality Denmark The Cornish Arms Cottage Hospitality UK OÜ Oru Hotell Hospitality Estonia Parque Denia Resort Hospitality -hotel services UK Sokos Hotel Viru Hospitality -hotel services Estonia HOTREC Hospitality - trade association Belgium ICMCI ICT Denmark Reminet Ltd ICT Estonia HDI ICT UK R-Süsteemid OÜ ICT Estonia Forbes Sinclair IT security services Spain Eurochambers Industry and Commerce Belgium VNO-NCW Confederation of Industry confederation The Netherlands Netherlands Industry and Employers Information and knowledge Knowledge Synergy Japan processing Synergy Incubate Information management systems Japan Seesam Rahvusvaheline Kindlustuse Insurance Services Estonia AS Ligent IT systems USA Help Desk Institute IT service and support industry UK CSW engineering and delivery IT outsourcing UK systems Diderot Track IT outsourcing The Netherlands Eurostep IT outsourcing/ consultancy Wales VdS Schadenverhütung Insurance Services Germany Narva Linnavalitsus Local authority/government Estonia Antares Abogados Legal Services Spain Bundesverband der Freien Berufe Legal Services Germany The National Archives of Estonia Library Services Estonia National Library of Estonia Library Services Estonia Layher Scaffolding Machinery Spain Consult.Ing Management Consultancy UK Competence Assurance Solutions Management Consultancy UK

Section 1 Page 37 CHESSS

Ltd. TJO Konsultatsioonid OÜ Management Consultancy Estonia Association of European Management Consultancy Germany Consultancies AEC/VEU Strategic Vision Limited Management Consultancy UK Group 5 training Management Consultancy UK Europe-Asia Trading Consultant Management Consultancy Belgium Agency Ltd European Profiles Management Consultancy Greece Ennsfellner Consulting Management Consultancy Austria Index Information Technologies Oy Management Systems Finland PVC Madrid SL Manufacturing Spain Laser Vision Manufacturing Germany Farm Plant Eesti aS Manufacturing Estonia Gevan Ltd Manufacturing UK Kar Mobiles Ltd Manufacturing India I.D.E.E. Srl Machinery Italy Outokumpu Copper Tubes S.A Manufacturing Spain Direct Marketing Industry Marketing UK TNS Emor Market research Estonia The Market Research Society Market research UK Chartered Institute of Marketing Marketing UK Travel Industry Group HTO Consulting Engineering Media Germany NBS Media UK Semanit Ltd Mobile applications Bulgaria The Workers' Museum Museum Denmark Forbundet Kommunikation og Sprog Charity Denmark Officenet Office knowledge portal Norway Serviguide Ombudsman Service UK E.M.S.F.M.S.A. Other Spain IQMS Reval Ltd Other Estonia Petrol SA Petrol Bulgaria VEA Qualitas Professional Services Spain Quality, safety and environment- Vincotte Belgium related services Det Norske Veritas Estonia Research Estonia Environmental Change Institute, Research Centre UK University of Oxford Scientio Research in artificial intelligence UK Red Ferroviaria Vasca- Euskal Rail Network, transportation Spain Trenbide Sarea Fundación SAR Residential management Spain Centro de Investigaciones Energéticas, Medioambientales y Research centre Spain Tecnológical Praktiker Retail Romania TNS plc Research UK First Choice Recruitment Recruitment services Estonia SSA UK -Self Storage Association Relocation Services UK Estonian Radiation Protection Centre Radiation protection Estonia (ERPC) Enterprise Estonia Science and research institutes Estonia Castle Care-Tech Ltd Security Services UK Tyco Fire & Security Security UK Securiguard A/S Security Denmark Euralarm Security Belgium Tovek Software implementing systems Czech Republic BySky Satellite and Service Providers The Netherlands Elsacom Spa - A Finmeccanica Satellite and Service Providers Italy

Section 1 Page 38 CHESSS

Company EURASIASAT Satellite and Service Providers Monaco EUROPE STAR LIMITED Satellite and Service Providers UK EUTELSAT Satellite and Service Providers France HISPASAT S.A. Satellite and Service Providers Spain HELLAS SAT S.A. Satellite and Service Providers Greece IABG mbH Satellite and Service Providers Germany The Red Dog Company Shipping Services Estonia SBA promotional Products Intl Sourcing products UK AFNOR Standards France CEN Standards Belgium BSI Standards UK Standardization Institute of the Standards Macedonia Republic of Macedonia (ISRM) Pronorm AS Standards Norway Bulgarian Institute for Standards Bulgaria Standardization Estonian Center for Standardization Standards Estonia Cyprus Organization for Standards Standards Cyprus DIN Standards Germany SII - Standards Institution of Israel Standards Israel AFNOR Standards France Standard Norge Standards Norway SIS Standards Sweden Standardization Institute of the Standards Macedonia Republic of Macedonia System development and Bouvet AS Norway business modeling Neofonie Solution providers Germany Datatronics Telecommunications Spain Red Ferroviaria Vasca- Euskal Transportation Spain Trenbide Sarea Aena Airport Transportation Spain Edelaraudtee AS Transportation Estonia Arsaco OÜ Transportation Estonia Banedanmark - Rail Net Denmark Transportation Denmark ADAMS TRANSPORT Co.ApS Transportation Denmark Alpimer OÜ Transportation Estonia Fundacion ICIL Transportation Spain Maersk Transportation Estonia Confederation of Danish Commercial Transportation and Service Transportation Denmark Industries The British Holiday & Home Parks Trade Association UK Association Visit Britain Trade Association UK ABTA - the Association of British Trade Association UK Travel Agents European Tour Operators Tourism - Trade Association Belgium Association Estravel AS Tourism Estonia ECTAA Tourism Belgium Estonian Tourist Board Tourism Estonia Federation of Small Businesses Trade Association UK Technology research and Grammersmith USA consulting Dirección General Tributos Tax Governmental Dpt. Spain Colegio de Abogados de Alava Trade Association - Lawyers Spain IRCA - International Register of Trade Association UK Certified Auditors

Section 1 Page 39 CHESSS

European Federation of Trade Association Belgium Management Consultants Management Consultancies Trade Association UK Association Europe and World Trade Directorate Trade UK Danish Management Board Trade/Development Services Denmark FRANCE TELECOM Telecommunication Operator France DATATRONICS SA Telecommunications Spain AEDI Technology Spain Blue Phoenix Technology Denmark Ceis Technology & Innovation Spain Zehyr Design Technology Estonia Force Technology Technology Denmark Ibérica de Componentes S.A. Technology Spain ZVEI Zentralverband Elektrotechnik Trade association Germany und Elektronikindustrie e.V. The Confederation of Danish Trade Association Denmark Industries GRTU Trade Association - SMEs Malta Minufirma OÜ Trade Association Estonia ZDH German Confederation of Trade association Germany skilled crafts FAMO Trade Association Spain Intertek Eurolab Testing and inspection Estonia Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Testing and inspection Spain Metalrgicas Actaris UK Limited Utility (metering) UK Engage consulting Ltd Utilities Services UK EMASESA Utilities (direct supply of water) Spain Water UK Utilities UK Interchimie werken 'De Adelaar Eesti' Veterinary Healthcare Estonia AS AUTELSI - Asociación Española de Usuarios de Telecomunicaciones y Telecommunication association Spain de la Sociedad de la Información Veolia Vand A/S Water services Denmark Empresa Metropolitana de Aguas de Water supply management Spain Sevilla Severn Trent Utilities Ltd Water, waste and utility services UK Consumer Council for Water Water and sewerage watchdog UK ATEGRUS Waste Management Association Spain World Language Documentation GeoLang Ltd (Osewtry) UK Centre

Section 1 Page 40 CHESSS

ANNEX B

This Annex lists the company name, sector and country of origin of the attendees at each of the World Cafés and Brussels Seminar.

Please note that the total number of organisations in these lists will not correspond to the total number of stakeholders outlined in the main section of the report. This is due to several factors: ― Some companies sent multiple delegates ― Some delegates did not provide the name of the organisation they represented ― Some delegates are self-employed which, due to data protection legislation, prevents us from listing them

London World Café 2-4 October 2008 Name of Organization Sector Country Consumer Council of Norway Consumer Association Norway British Holiday & Home Parks Association Trade Association UK TNS plc Research UK ABA -Tony Brown Associate Ltd Engineering UK ABTA Trade Association UK energywatch Energy UK Young Explorers Trust Education UK BSI British Standards Standards UK Austrian Federal Economic Chamber Government Austria The Market Research Society Market Research UK The Institute of Customer Service Business to Business Operations UK United Kingdom Accreditation Service Accreditation UK HDI ICT UK Splashpower Ltd. Electronics UK ANEC Trade Association Belgium Tyco Fire and Security Security UK Fraunhofer IAO Education Germany DIN/NAGD Standards Germany Dept Innovation University and Skills Government UK Tourism Research & Marketing Research & Marketing UK EAQUALS Education UK Health and Safety Executive Government UK NEN Standards The Netherlands Institute of Business Consulting Trade Association UK Dept Innovation University and Skills Government UK AENOR Standards Spain Severn Trent Water Utilities UK Bournemouth University Academia UK West Square Associates Healthcare UK Department of Health Government UK Age Concern Charity UK Relocation Services - trade SSA UK association UK ETOA Trade Association Belgium Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford Academia UK Consumer Council for Water Utilities UK INNOMET bv Utilities The Netherlands

Section 1 Page 41 CHESSS

Engage Consulting Consultancy UK GPX International Ltd Energy Estonia ND Metering Solutions Utilities UK Tallinn World Café 16 - 18 October 2007 Name of Organisation Sector Country Reminet Ltd. ICT Estonia Puhastusekspert OÜ Education Estonia Rautakesko AS Education Estonia OÜ Linguajet Education Estonia Estonian Center for Standardization Standards Estonia Pärnu College, University of Tartu Academia Estonia Narva Linnavalitsus Government Estonia Sokos Hotel Viru Tourism Estonia OÜ Oru Hotell Tourism Estonia Estonian Radiation Protection Centre (ERPC) Utilities Estonia Det Norske Veritas Estonia Research Estonia National Library of Estonia Education Estonia IQMS Reval Ltd Other Estonia Health Care Board Healthcare Estonia Maksu ja Tolliamet Government Estonia Tallinn University, Knowledge Transfer Centre Academia Estonia Pump-and Valve Consulting Engineering Germany Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie / Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology Government Germany Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications Government Estonia Mainori Kõrgkool Academia Estonia AS Narva Elektrijaamad Energy Estonia First Choice Recruitment services Estonia Farm Plant Eesti AS Agriculture Estonia Estonian Consumers Union Consumer Association Estonia Edelaraudtee AS Transportation Estonia FABEC Elektroonika OU Electronics Estonia Intertek Eurolab Testing and inspection Estonia EVS Standards Estonia Estravel AS Tourism Estonia National Archives of Estonia Education Estonia Raviamet Healthcare Estonia Copenhagen World Café 6 - 7 November 2007 Name of Organisation Sector Country Forbundet Kommunikation og Sprog Charity Denmark Maersk Transportation Denmark Standard Norge Standards Norway Banedanmark (Rail Net Denmark) Transportation Denmark Academia -Technical University of BYG-DTU Denmark Denmark Veolia Vand A/S Utilities Denmark The Workers' Museum Museum Denmark Forenede Service Denmark Kø benhavns kommune Healthcare Denmark Danish Management Board Trade Association Denmark DI Trade Association Denmark ADAMS TRANSPORT Co.ApS Transportation Denmark DCS Cleaning Services Denmark JVL.DK Engineering Denmark Forbrugerstyrelsen/National Consumer Consumer Association Denmark

Section 1 Page 42 CHESSS

Agency Securiguard A/S Security Denmark FORCE Technology Technology Denmark Tivoli Hospitality Denmark Copenhagen Council Government Denmark SIS Standards Sweden TCM Research Denmark ICMCI ICT Denmark Madrid World Café 20 - 22 November 2007 Name of Organisation Sector Country E.M.S.F.M.S.A. Other Spain MA3M Engineering Spain IBERDROLA DISTRIBUCION ELECTRICA, S.A.U. Energy Spain Dirección General Tributos Government Spain Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación Government Spain EMASESA Utilities Spain PROYECTO Y CONTROL, S.A. Engineering Spain Servicio de Salud de Castilla la Mancha Healthcare Spain Aldeas Infantiles SOS Childcare Spain TECNIFUEGO-AESPI Energy Spain Empresa Metropolitana de Aguas de Sevilla Water supply management Spain The Academy of Economic Studies Academia Romania AUTELSI, Asociación Española de Usuarios de Telecomunicaciones y de la Sociedad de la Información. Telecommunications Spain Altran sdb Engineering Spain LASERVISION Manufacturing Germany Serviguide Ombudsman services UK DATATRONICS SA Telecommunications Spain Bulgarian institute for Standardization Standards Bulgaria Forbes Sinclair IT security services Spain Televida Communications Spain Commission for occupational health and safety and standardization - KAN Healthcare Germany REGION DE MURCIA TURISTICA, S.A. Government Spain Fraunhofer IAO Education Germany Ministerio de Industria, Turismo y Comerco Government Spain Parque Denia Resort Hospitality -hotel services Spain A.C.E. Engineering Spain CDM Formación Education Spain VEA Qualitas Professional Services Spain FUNDACION ICIL Transportation Spain FAMO Trade Association Spain Salamanca University Academia Spain AFNOR Standards France AENOR Standards Spain Aena Airport Transportation Spain Standardization Institute of the Republic of Macedonia (ISRM) Standards Macedonia INSTITUT D'EXPERTISE CLINIQUE ESPAGNE Chemicals Spain Servicio de Salud de Castilla la Mancha Healthcare Spain GAS NATURAL Utilities Spain

Section 1 Page 43 CHESSS

AEDI Technology Spain CSIC Government Spain SIS Standards Sweden ATEGRUS Waste Management Spain Colegio de Abogados de Alava Trade Association Spain EULEN SOCIOSANITARIOS Healthcare Spain Instituto Nacional del Consumo Government Spain PVC MADRID S.L. Manufacturing Spain Ayuntamiento de Alcobendas Government Spain Red Ferroviaria Vasca- Euskal Trenbide Sarea Transportation Spain SPRI, S.A. Engineering Spain Fundación SAR Residential Management Spain Antares Abogados Legal Services Spain Dirección General de Industria,Energía y Minas de la Comunidad de Madrid Engineering Spain Ibérica de Componentes S.A. Technology Spain INNOMET bv Utilities The Netherlands Brussels Seminar 2 April 2008 Name of Organisation Sector Country University de Lausanne Academia Switzerland TU Berlin Academia Germany NORMAPME - representing small enterprises Business Association Belgium Business Europe Business Association Belgium The Consumer Council of Norway Consumer Association Norway ANEC - European Consumer Body Consumer Association Belgium Siemens AG Electronic Germany E.V.V.E. e.V. Energy The Netherlands ista International GmbH Energy Germany Energy Watch Energy UK ORGALIME - The European engineering industries association Engineering Belgium VDMA Engineering Belgium Single Market Ventures Electronic News Service Belgium UPIK Dunav - Association of Paraplegic and Quadriplegic Equalities Serbia EU Commission Government Belgium Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology Germany Government Germany Commission for occupational health and safety and standardization - KAN Healthcare Germany HDI - Helpdesk Institute IT service and support industry UK Bundesverband der Freien Berufe Legal Services Germany Competence Assurance Solutions Ltd. Management Consultancy UK Europe & Globe Other Belgium BV Denmark Other Denmark Vinçotte Other Belgium SFS Finland Other Finland H&D Brussels Other Belgium Bundesverband Deutscher Unternehmensberater Other Germany Euralarm Security Belgium ISO - International Standards Organisation Standards Switzerland NEN - Dutch standardization body Standards The Netherlands Standard Norge Standards Norway DIN/NAGD - German standardization body Standards Germany

Section 1 Page 44 CHESSS

CEN - European standardization body Standards Belgium BSI - British Standards Institution Standards UK SIS, Swedish Standards Institute Standards Sweden AFNOR Standards France AENOR - Spanish standardization body Standards Spain Confederation of Danish Industries Trade Association Denmark Danish Industries Trade Association Denmark ECA Electrical Contractors Association Trade Association Belgium ECTAA - European travel agents & tour operators association Trade Association Belgium HOTREC - European association of hotels, restaurants & cafés Trade Association Belgium British Holiday & Home Parks Association Trade Association UK ZVEI - Zentralverband Elektrotechnik- und Elektronikindustrie e.V. Trade Association Germany VNO-NCW Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers Trade Association The Netherlands HTS - The Confederation of Danish Commercial, Transportation and Service Industries Trade Association Denmark INNOMET bv Utilities The Netherlands ATEGRUS - Association for Waste Management & the Environment Waste Management Spain World Language Documentation GeoLang Ltd (Osewtry) Centre UK

Section 1 Page 45 CHESSS

ANNEX C

Detailed website statistic as recorded from June 1st 2007 to May 31st 2008

Visitor numbers

Visits by country

Section 1 Page 46 CHESSS

New vs. Returning Visitors

Traffic Sources

Section 1 Page 47 CHESSS

Project M/ 371-1

CEN‟s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy

CHESSS

SECTION 2 MODULE REPORTS

Section 1 Page 48

CEN‟s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy (CHESSS)

In response to Mandate M/371

Module 1 Guidance in the preparation of service standards

Final Report

CHESSS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 51 2. INTRODUCTION ...... 52 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 55 4. FINDINGS ...... 60 5. CONLUSIONS ...... 72 6. RECOMMENDATIONS and NEXT STEPS...... 74 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 79 8. ANNEXES ...... 81 ANNEX A: List of Standards and Documents of interest for Module 1 ...... 81 ANNEX B: Standard Card ...... 90 ANNEX C: Concept Mapping of World Cafés Ideas ...... 94 ANNEX D: Questionnaire for the Review of the Guidance Document ...... 96 ANNEX E: Standard Cards Results – Quantitative Analysis ...... 132 ANNEX F: Standard Card Results – Correspondence Analysis ...... 136 ANNEX G: Guidance Document for the Preparation of Service Standards ...... 148 ANNEX H: Group of Nine Clusters for Question 1 ...... 219 ANNEX I: Group of Seven Clusters for Question 2 ...... 224

50

CHESSS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This module 1 has studied the feasibility to elaborate a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards and prepare a first draft that could support sectorial service standardization.

The module also looked for misunderstandings about the nature and process of standardization and the benefits it can bring and therefore contribute to the promotion of the standardization in new service sectors.

By achieving those objectives it was expected to support European service standardization development including all service sectors without specific exclusions and every type of stakeholder.

The feasibility study has concentrated in analyzing national, European and international published standards or their projects as well as other sectorial documents such us good practices in order to learn from what has been already done. The findings of this search are useful to understand what and how service sectors have standardized and to write the Guidance document.

51

CHESSS

2. INTRODUCTION

Standards are recognised as useful tools that increase transparency in the exchange of goods and services and hence client‘s confidence. This statement is applicable to every sector and every commercial relation and so it is recognized all over the world1, 2.

However, whilst there is a long tradition and experience in the drafting process of product standards (standards including objective and measurable requirements for tangible products), this has not been the case in service standardization. In spite of the importance of services in the GDP (70% in the EU and higher in some countries as Spain) there is a strong gap with respect to the standardization activities in that sector.

Services standardization has nonetheless, shown a steadily growth for the last 15 years at national, European and international level during which service sectors approached their National Standardization Bodies and both sides have encountered difficulties in fitting such activities into a formal document traditionally used and structured for manufactured products.

Those who have initiated the standardization process of the service sector in which they operate and those who are just in the previous stage (considering whether to enter a standardization process or choose another path) do not always count with a sound background and take their decisions based on what they ―have heard‖. Repeated negative opinions say that service standardization is a too long, costly and useless process and what‘s more, not possible due to the very nature of services (services highly relay on people‘s behaviour) and finally that standardization is valid for products but not for services.

This background, together with the impulse that the European Commission is willing to give to the standardization in services, were the basis of this module, part of the CHESSS Initiative, the main objectives of which are:

To examine currently available service standards, in all service sectors and determine the extent to which a common approach already exists; To assess to what extent and in what manner commonality in approach could have been applicable if appropriate coordination had been available; To consider the feasibility of preparing a CEN document providing guidance for service standards developers on the structure, nature and content of service standards; Dependent upon the outcome of the previously identified objectives, to prepare an outline draft identifying possible structure and content for a future CEN document;

1 ISO Focus. Economic and societal benefits of standards. June 2007. 2 DTI Economics paper nº12 ―The empirical economics of standards‖ June 2005.

52

CHESSS

To identify issues relating to misunderstanding the nature and process of standardization and the benefits it can bring and therefore contribute to the promotion of the standardization in new service sectors; Provide guidance on how to determine whether a standard is truly a service standard or not in order to assist the application of quality management systems to the service sectors; To identify possible participants (countries, experts, service sectors) in the development of the future CEN document; To make recommendations as to the most appropriate process, type of document and responsible body for future CEN service standardization projects.

In doing so, the following information will also be collected:

an updated list of service standards for reference (standards developed by service sectors that have used standardization to support, in very many different manners, their activity); answers and solutions through a database including typical and not so typical ―contents‖ found in service standards; solutions to how standardize customer expectations; an analysis of the various standard service approaches.

Module 1 is also committed to developing a draft document on service standards models and approaches used by service sectors for distribution and discussion.

A Guidance document for the development of service standards is not meant to convince anybody about the benefits of the formal standardization system, however, for those who decide to follow this path, the Guidance document may: minimize any reluctancies that may originally exist; support the standardization process of their sector of activity, providing a methodology; reduce the dedication in time and hence the costs of the process.

The Guidance document should be of use for all possible service stakeholders that may eventually participate (service providers, customers, administration officers, service professionals, different sectorial organizations) and not only to standardization professionals.

This module of CHESSS has been developed by AENOR. PhD Rafael Periáñez (Profesor Titular, Companies Administration and Marketing Department, University of Seville) has supervised the data analysis. Many stakeholders have made inputs through the World Cafés, in the analysis of which a panel of experts has also contributed from AENOR, ICTE, NORMAPME and the University of Seville. Consumer representatives, CHESSS members, standardization professionals and the European Commission (through DG Enterprise and Industry and DG Single Market and

53

CHESSS

Services) have also been invited to participate in module 1 by commenting the draft Guidance document.

This module 1 is focused on every service sector without excluding any one, and on B2B, B2C or B2A services indistinctly.

54

CHESSS

3. METHODOLOGY

The research methodology was summarised in the following steps:

1. Desk research. 2. In depth documental study and preparation of the discussion document. 3. Questionnaires addressed to NSBs and to enterprises. 4. World Cafés. 5. Review of the draft Guidance document. 6. Identification of stakeholders willing to participate in the future standardization process as well as process, type of document and responsible body.

3.1 Desk research

The first step of this research consisted of searching for documents candidate for analysis according to module 1 purposes and objectives.

Although the module was being developed within a European sphere the documental search was extended to international and national as well as European standards. Other documents such as ethic codes, good sectorial practices or quality documents used or developed by service sectors as reference to improve their activity were also pre-selected. No service was excluded. On the contrary, the selection of documents was intended to have the broadest possible range of services and of course, both business to business and business to consumer were represented in the final selection.

The main source of information on national standards was PERINORM, and the criteria used to extract the first list of documents was discriminating by using the word ―service‖ as part of the title or as one of the descriptors, both for published standards and for projects.

Other sources of information were CEN and ISO Web pages as well as national standardization bodies web pages and module 7 referencies.

The initial list of documents for consideration resulted in over 10,000 titles, in which it is assumed that many doubling of titles occurred, organised in four initial files: Published standards with ―service‖ in the title; Published standards with ―service‖ as descriptor; Projects with ―service‖ in the title; Projects with ―service‖ as descriptor.

The following criterion used was the possibility that the selected standards and projects be available in English, French, Italian or Spanish. Taking into account that some NSBs translate some of their documents into English for a greater diffusion, the resulting list of countries selected was: Austria, Australia,

55

CHESSS

Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Switzerland, Sweden, UK and USA.

The next step was an itemized treatment to exclude: documents not available in one of the languages above mentioned; documents using ―service‖ with a different meaning than required (e.g. machinery in service).

A further selection to extract the list of relevant documents of interest was then required.

The final list of analysed documents hits 119 (see Annex A).

3.2 In depth documental study and preparation of the discussion document

Each of the 119 documents was analysed in depth and a ―standard card‖ filled in. The standard card is attached in Annex B.

The standard card includes 21 questions which extract the main information required. It includes explanations for the different questions. An internal document was kept updated to minimize the margin of interpretation of the questions and ensure homogenized answers.

The obtained information was introduced in a database for further cross- reference, analysis and assess.

The standard card was designed to extract three main areas of information: methodology; contents of the standards; customer expectations.

The methodology indicates the approach of the document, how the service activity has been described. This is believed to be a very significant information of great use for other sectors and one of the main outcomes of this research.

The contents included in the documents indicate the sensitive areas for each service sector.

Customer expectations are those criteria used by the client to judge the service according to SERVQUAL3 model (client‘s perception of the service). These are the most fragile because there are no sharp definitions for customer expectations. On the contrary they are very much influenced by the subjectivity of both, the customer and the team responsible of this research.

3 Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and. Berry L.L. (1993). Calidad total en la gestión de servicios. (Delivering Quality Service).. Ediciones Díaz de Santos S.A.

56

CHESSS

Nevertheless, module 1 has intentionally looked for this kind of information because stakeholders find it particularly difficult to express objective means to comply with customer expectations. A good compilation of existing examples that meet customer expectations will perfectly serve for the purposes of module 1.

The information extracted in the in depth study was interpreted by either their relevance in percentage or using the correspondences analysis which is a multivariable technique that consists in the analysis of contingency tables with the objective to find affinities between a pair of variables. The pairs of variables analysed were several groups of information from the standard cards vs service sectors: Contents vs service sectors; Methodology vs service sectors; Expectations vs service sectors.

Preparation of the discussion document

A draft Guidance document for the preparation of service standards was prepared based on AENOR standardization experience and the research conducted under this module. It was conceived as a tool for every type of stakeholder (standardization professionals, service providers, customer representatives, public authorities and any other stakeholders taking part in the standardization process) operating in any service sector (no matter whether B2B, B2C or B2A) in their way through developing a European standard.

3.3 Questionnaires addressed to NSBs and to enterprises

The original purpose of step 3 was aimed at identifying issues related to misunderstanding the nature and process of standardization and the benefits it can bring using two questionnaires.

Step 3 was designed to use one questionnaire addressed to NSBs, which aimed to identify difficulties encountered by standardization professionals to involve new service sectors in standardization. Another was addressed to enterprises to search the degree of knowledge of the standardization process, its benefits and any prejudices that may exist against service standardization.

However module 1 has reconsidered the benefits of step 3 in view of the unique opportunity presented by the four international World Cafés organized by CHESSS, through Europe. With a very interactive design, Question 1 of module 1 (see 4. ―World Cafés‖) provided relevant information in exactly the desired direction aimed by step 3 of module 1. Accumulated experience in standardization allows us to anticipate most of the main reasons by which enterprises renounce to standardization.

Given that module 1 aimed to provide a tool that helps to overcome difficulties in standardization and not to dedicate valuable resources to identify just a few

57

CHESSS other reasons, it was decided to take advantage of the four World Café events to cover the objectives of step 3 and skip this formally.

3.4 World Cafés

Module 1 took the valuable opportunity of the World Cafés to pose the following two questions to the stakeholders:

- What would prevent the creation of a standard in your service sector? - What is a service made up of and which components are common to a majority of services?

The first question directly addressed the purposes of the void step 3. The second question directly supported the drafting of the Guidance document.

Over 200 contributions (single ideas, some of which overlap with each other) were collected for each question, from all four World Cafés. All 200 contributions can be found in a CD of complementary information for CHESSS – module 1.

All contributions were treated with the ―concept mapping‖ technique4 grouping the ideas and scoring them according to a 1-7 Licker scale. (see Annex C). This technique organizes the results in a visual representation of the main ideas and their relative importance. The concept mapping counted with the contribution of an experts panel related to services from different perspectives.

3.5 Review of the draft Guidance document

At this stage the draft Guidance document (discussion document) was due to to review by:

other five National Standardization Bodies (AFNOR, BSI, DIN, DS and EVS); consumer representatives (business to consumer point of view); European Commission authorities (public sector point of view).

In addition the Guidance document was also made available to AENOR staff for internal input.

From this universe of possible interested parties, some of them did actively contribute with their comments to the quality of the possible future Guidance document.

This step was performed by correspondence using a specific questionnaire (see Annex D). The objective was to seek inputs on various aspects of the

4 Concept Mapping Resource Guide http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/mapping/mapping.htm#Knowledge%20Base

58

CHESSS document (length, contents, clarity, usefulness, coherence, completeness) from the above types of stakeholders.

CHESSS World Café sessions also served to obtain the input of professionals participating in module 1 on to the draft Guidance document through Question 2 (see 3.4 World Cafés).

3.6 Identification of stakeholders willing to participate in the future standardization process, as well as process, type of document and responsible body

The identification of the appropriate process, type of CEN document and technical body to develop, in case of feasibility and acceptance, the CEN Guidance document for the preparation of service standards was done on the basis of AENOR experience in standardization and knowledge on the CEN system.

59

CHESSS

4. FINDINGS

4.1 Findings from the desk research

Documents of interest for module 1

In searching for formal standards and documents on or related to services, it has been found that standards are dispersed and not easy to find. It was therefore necessary to consult several lists and databases either for published standards and/or projects.

The documental search has thrown three main types of documents of interest for module 1 (see Annex A): documents developed or used by service sectors to describe or improve their activity (119 documents) - service delivery standard (SDS): standard or document describing the full service provision or part of it, establishing requirements. The description of an internal process has not been considered a SDS. - documents supporting the service activity: standards or documents published by a service sector, not dealing with the service provision but covering sectorial terminology, staff training, describing internal processes, practices or systems as a guarantee of good service, describing products used in support to service provision or other. - applications of a quality management system to the service provision. methodological documents helpful in the drafting of standards (documents including guidance in the preparation of standards on different matters) other standards of horizontal application, relevant to services.

4.2 Findings from the in depth documental study and preparation of the discussion document

Standard cards results – Quantitative results

The quantitative analysis of the information obtained from the standard cards gives a number of indicators (see Annex E).

Service sectors are using the standardization system for their purposes, either to describe the service provision in full or just part of it (Service Delivery Standard), or to cover sectorial terminology, internal processes, systems, products used in services or other.

61% of the documents are considered to be service delivery standards and 39% standards developed by service sectors in support to their activities.

60

CHESSS

Both B2B and B2C equally use the voluntary standardization system for their own purposes. There seems to be no difference.

In the sample of studied documents in this module, B2C standards, where a single person is identified as customer, are more numerous. The customer is not necessarily unique, there are clients of different types (single person, company and their employees, public administration) for the same described service.

The customer is not always clearly identified in the standard, not mentioned or defined. It is assumed that the sector already knows who the client is and to whom the standard is addressed.

It is significant that in 71% of the documents there is some exchange of tangible good(s) between service provider and client, which may take different forms (the product may belong originally to the service provider or to the customer). And in 53% of those documents, there are specific requirements for those goods.

Attending to the methodology, in a clear majority of the documents (38,6%), the service is dealt with in a sequential manner (process approach), describing the service as it takes place as the main thread. The second methodology used most often is that where service requirements are listed to meet directly customer needs and / or expectations (15,1%).

41% of all the documents refer in some way to a quality management system, either to have it fully in place or some of the elements that are usually part of it. When this is referred to Service Delivery Standards, the figure is maintained (42%).

49% of all the documents include some references to subcontracting to ensure a quality service provision in those cases.

Table 2 in Annex E quantifies the occurrence of the predefined contents of the standard card in the documents.

The top five, in this order are: safety and security (in consistency with module 3 findings), technical resources, human resources, terminology and product (tangible goods) which means that between a minimum of 71% and a maximum of 92% of the documents deal with those elements of the service in question.

The less frequent, in this other, with an occurrence below 50%, are: Occupational Health and Safety (OHSAS), sustainability and subcontracting. OHSAS is far from the other two with only a 13%.

All other elements appear in more than 50% of the 119 documents.

Table 3 in Annex E quantifies the occurrence of predefined customer expectations of the standard card in the documents.

61

CHESSS

It has been found that service sectors have been able to express in their standards aspects that impact on ―customer expectations‖.

The top five are, in this order: safety and security, communication, competence, reliability and understanding the customer (customer care) which means that between a minimum of 61% and a maximum of 92% of the documents deal with those elements of the service in question.

The less frequent customer expectations, with an occurrence below 50%, are in this order: credibility, courtesy, accessibility and access.

In view of the high percentage of standards studied marked as including some tangible product (71%), it is worth commenting that the high frequency of ―safety and security‖ both as ―content‖ of the standards and as identified ―customer expectation‖ might be related to the provision of the service or to the product exchanged or used but this cannot differenciated by this study. It is nonetheless a finding that safety and security is at the top of the list for one reason or the other.

Both groups of information, predefined contents and predetermined customer expectations are compiled in an easy to consult list indicating: content or customer expectation, standard code, service sector and clause or subclause where the element has been identified. This list is available in a CD of complementary information for CHESS - module 1.

Correspondence analysis of the information obtained from the standard cards

This analysis was applied on three cases:

contents vs service sectors; methodology vs service sectors; expectations vs service sectors.

The analysis was conducted to know whether there was some clearly identifiable tendency in service sectors that would indicate standardization needs of those sectors. The result is that none of those pairs of elements showed a clear correlation. The explanation might be simply that the sample of standards did not include the appropriate balance of documents, which might be the case as this analysis was not designed from the beginning but decided it would be wise, when the study was already on. The explanation might also be that there is no correlation between those elements which behave independently.

Detailed background on this analysis can be found in Annex F of this report.

Preparation of the Guidance document

A Guidance document for the preparation of service standards has been drafted that provides a methodology for developing sector specific standards

62

CHESSS in the field of services. The Guidance document is designed to support all public or private socio-economic factors relevant to standardization in the service field, irrespective of their activity sector or subsector. The Guidance document helps to identify in a systematic way, topics that each service sector may like to consider for their inclusion in the standard and support them with examples.

The Guidance document is attached in Annex G.

The Guidance document has been structured in the following sections:

0. Introduction

1. Scope: Summary of the purpose of the document and to whom it is addressed.

2. Terms and definitions: List of terms used in the document itself that require definition in order to avoid misunderstanding or double meaning by users.

3. Previous considerations on services: A set of recommended thoughts prior to initiating the drafting of any service standard.

4. Methodology to identify requirements and/or recommendations to be included in the standard: A two step technique based on the CHESSS service life cycle and a detailed checklist to identify eligible items.

5. Structure of the service standards: Models of the possible organization the technical information may take in a service standard.

6. Methods for the assessment of the services provided: A series of proposed measuring methods for the quality of the service provided.

7. Interface with management systems: Clarification of concepts associated to management systems in order to avoid confussion between those and a service standard.

8. Interface of service standards with legal requirements: An explanation of the relation of legislation with standardization that clarifies how the latter can make reference to the former.

The Guidance document also includes several complementing annexes.

Role of the Guidance document vis-à-vis ISO Guide 76 and IFAN Guide 3

The documental search has identified two other Guides of international application and of similar field of activity. It is worth conducting a comparison on the contents and focus between each of them and the Guidance document.

IFAN Guide 3:

63

CHESSS

- oriented to writers of European standards; - not service specific; - the checklist covers formal aspects of the elaboration of standards: such us availability of referenced documents, code of the standard (numbering), need to use a clear language, use of abbreviations; - raises awareness on the impact the standard will cause when nationally adopted; - raises awareness on the need to keep potential users updated; - does not orient on the technical content of the standard.

Guide 76: - oriented to writers of formal standards in the process of drafting a sector specific service standard; - focused on service stakeholders and on the full range of services; - consumer interests focused (needs, key consumer principles); - proposes a methodology on how consumer interests should be identified and taken into account in the development of standards for services; - other aspects covered (not related to the items to be included in the standard): procedural aspects of the process of developing a standard such as ensuring wide consultation, ensuring accessibility to meeting rooms, participation; - incorporates examples.

Guidance document: - oriented to support writers of formal standards in the process of drafting a sector specific service standard; - focused on service stakeholders and on the full range of services; - focused on all service aspects; - proposes a methodology to identify all items candidate for inclusion in a service sector standard; - typifies models (possible structures) of a sector specific service standard; - provides guidance on other technical aspects such us legal requirements, management systems or measuring of service quality; - incorporates examples.

The Guidance document and IFAN Guide cover completely different aspects and are therefore complementary to each other.

The Guidance document and the ISO/IEC Guide 76 aim to support writers of sector specific service standards. Both focus on the full range of services and on every type of stakeholders. The main difference between them being the fact that the Guidance document looks at all possible service aspects whereas ISO Guide 76 concentrates on consumer interests. The Guidance document also analyses other matters in depth that might be of great help to standards writers.

4.3 Findings from the World Cafés

Question 1: What would prevent the creation of a standard in your service sector?

64

CHESSS

Inputs to this question 1 are considered blockers for the development of service standards or for getting involved in the process, identified by stakeholders taking part in one or another World Café.

After application of the concept mapping technique to the inputs, it has been found that the most adequate grouping of ideas, out of 14, is that establishing nine clusters. For each cluster the title summarizes the cluster concept and an explanation follows. The figures in Table 1 below indicate the relative weight of that cluster calculated from the punctuation given by the panel of experts (Licker scale 1-7). The selected group of nine clusters can be found in Annex H and the other 14 groups in the CD of complementary information for CHESSS – module 1.

Cluster 1: ―The elaboration of standards is not worth the effort‖.

Standardization costs time and money to stakeholders, requires human resources (not always ready to participate), research, training and investments. In addition, we do not even know how to deal with standardization, do not have examples to look at, nor experience and, as industry we are asked to make public our knowledge. All in all, the elaboration of standards is a very demanding activity which we do not even know how to tackle and the result may not even be worth the effort as standards do not enforce market protection and provide lower protection to the consumers.

Cluster 2: ―Standards impose requirements and limitations on service providers‖.

Once published, standards impose requirements on service providers not desired nor needed and although voluntary, other agents may beat follow up.They may also be limiting development and innovation or causing loss of identity and competitiveness. There is a perception of inflexibility.

Cluster 3: ―It is not possible to standardize so much diversity‖.

Standardization may not provide solutions for so many different situations and different needs. It is not possible to represent every possible position and reach the right balance in a standard. Customers‘ different demands and services change so fast that standards cannot cover so much diversity.

Cluster 4: ―There is simply no need for standards‖.

In some situations there is simply no need for standards because of the good state of the economy, because anyone can sell everything, or because there is no legal requirement to work with standards either. Oligopolies do not need standards either. There is no need for standards because they do not bring any added value or commercial advantage and companies can find many other solutions in place, such as regulations, self assessment, contracts, internal standards, codes of practice and/or company's own procedures.

65

CHESSS

Cluster 5: ―Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a standard‖.

Stakeholders simply do not know about standards, their benefits, where to apply them, where a standard can be a solution, they are not aware of their existance and who to contact. Standards require promotion. Stakeholders do not know how to develop a service standard and ask for guidance, checklists and examples.

Cluster 6: ―Services idiosyncrasy‖.

Services cannot be standardized because of their own nature. There are too many differences among services that make standardization impossible. B2B are different from B2C, public services are different from private services, companies resolve differently, there are cultural differences and differences from country to country. Services processes are too complex and difficult to assess. They often need to touch issues that cannot be standardized such as human relations, behaviour, emotions, needs or expectations.

Cluster 7: ―There are other solutions in place‖.

In those situations where some reference is needed, new formal standards are not always the solution because the existing standards, Quality Management Systems or professional codes of practice are enough.

Cluster 8: ―Formal standardization lacks a supportive framework‖.

Formal standardization lacks a legislative framework to support its development. There is no requirement to develop standards, there is not a unified impulse and there is a risk of contradiction with national legislations.

Cluster 9: ―Standardization requires resources, also after publication‖.

There is a cost to develop standards but there is also the cost to adhere to them and do the appropriate follow up to ensure correct implementation which is an additional demand of dedication. Standards take time away from the actual delivery of services.

Having found this group of nine clusters the most reasonable of those yielded by the SPSS programme, some adjustments are made for the benefit of coherence. Clusters 1 and 9 are merged into Cluster 1 ―The elaboration of standards demands resources and is not worth the effort‖ and Clusters 4 and 7 are merged into Cluster 4 ―There is no need for standards and there are other solutions in place‖ for their clear connection. Some ideas originally placed in a cluster have been moved to another. These changes are traceable in Annex H.

Question 1 – Clusters organized in descending relative value

66

CHESSS

Table 1 Cluster Title Mean value 5 Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a  5,09 standard 2 Standards impose requirements and limitations on the service provider 4,52 1 The elaboration of standards demands resources and is not worth the 4,42 effort 7 There are other solutions in place 4,15 4 There is no need for standards and there are other solutions in place 3,96 6 Services idiosyncrasy 3,92 3 It is not possible to standardize so much diversity 3,66

In relation to the main objective of module 1, the feasibility of a Guidance document, it is highlighted that there has been not a single statement from the World Cafés, against or expressing the non covenience of the existence of a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards. On the contrary, the most important blocker is number 5 ―Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a standard‖ which refer to the absence of specific examples, guidance or a checklist and the lack of experience in service standardization. The belief that service standardization is not feasible (as in clusters 3 and 6), as it is for products is also indicating in a way, the same background problem identified in cluster 5.

Question 2: What is a service made up of and which components are common to a majority of services?

Inputs to this Question constitute those elements considered common to a majority of services and therefore should be frequently present in services, according to stakeholders taking part in one or another World Café. These elements are indicators of commonalities between services that might be subject of standardization.

After application of the concept mapping technique to inputs received on Question 2 it has been found that the most adequate grouping of ideas, out of 14, is that establishing seven clusters. For each cluster the title summarizes the cluster concept and an explanation follows. The figures in the Table 2 below) indicate the relative weight of that cluster calculated from the punctuation given by the panel of experts (Licker scale 1-7). The selected group of seven clusters can be found in Annex I and the other 14 groups in the CD of complementary information for CHESSS – module 1.

Cluster 1: ―Customer – service provider relationship and customer oriented service‖.

This group contains two main ideas. On one side in services there is interaction and human relationship between the customer and the service provider which may take different forms but in any case implies a communication process, specially but not only, from the service provider to the customer. On the other hand, the service has to take account of customer

67

CHESSS expectations, typology, his/her integration in the service, or in other words be customer focused.

Cluster 2: ―Internal aspects of the service provider‖.

There are a number of items that are kept within the service provider internal process such us: internal communication, several systems, internal management and governance, planning, internal audit.

Cluster 3: ―Society conditions service provision‖.

Society plays a role influencing service providers by indicating ethics, customer rights, different national situations, security and safety or persons or equity.

Cluster 4: ―Resources have to be in place‖.

Human resources (employees but also subcontractors), building, technology, equipments.

Cluster 5: ―Services imply a commercial relation‖.

Every service implies a commercial relation (service production / service consumption). In this process there is marketing, sale, advertisement, purchasing or a contract.

Cluster 6: ―Service definition‖.

Service process has to be defined and this definition has to be precise and customer oriented to maintain competitiveness as each customer is different and mass services may not be satisfactory. Defining the services includes for example indicating service quality levels, deadlines, time criticalness, time delivery, the possible options.

Cluster 7: ―Services have to be customer oriented‖.

Services have to take account of customer expectations, of cultural differences of customers and of customer needs. The service has to be designed for the customer and this conveys a psychological and a communication component also included in this cluster.

Having found this group of seven clusters the most reasonable of those yielded by the SPSS programme, some adjustments are made for the benefit of coherence. Clusters 1 and 7 are merged due to their clear connection in Cluster 1 ―Customer – service provider relationship and customer oriented service‖ and some ideas originally placed in a cluster have been moved to another. These changes are traceable in Annex I.

Question 2 – Clusters organized in descending relative value

68

CHESSS

Table 2 Cluster Title Mean value 1 Customer – service provider relationship and customer  5,52 oriented service 6 Service definition 5,1 2 Internal aspects of the service provider 4,8 5 Services imply a commercial relation 4,68 3 Society conditions service provision 4,2 4 Resources have to be in place 4,17

All these ideas have been covered in one way or another in the draft Guidance document.

4.4 Findings from the review process of the Guidance document

The Guidance document has been distributed to a range of professionals of standardization (at national and regional level), consumer representatives and authorities. The following is a summary of the comments received. The complete list of contributions can be found in a CD with complementary information for CHESSS – module 1.

Further comments are expected after the finalization of this report that will be compiled and considered in the future elaboration of the CEN Guide, if eventually accepted.

The comments received may show some natural differences in points of views across Europe but clearly recognize its completeness and the fact that, in general terms, the document may be useful as a starting point for a future CEN Guide.

NEN has provided some technical and editorial comments, some of them linked with the procedure and status of the draft Guidance document developed under module 1 and its relation with future developments, and some providing an additional approach to cover service standardization.

A member of the DIN/Consumer Council, acting as an independent expert, considered that the guidance document prepared covers all initial aspects to be identified and also considered that it is a good document to use as a basis for a possible European guideline. They highlighted that the structures for service standards identified during the works are useful, as well as the consideration of interfaces with management system standards and also the relation between service standards and legal requirements.

BSI and DIN personnel have indicated that they were not sure about the usability of the guide, but that the document covers all the initial aspects that may be relevant for any service sector. They also indicated that the service cycle included in the Guidance document is a useful and systematic tool for identification of the main areas. Some technical comments have been provided regarding the content of the guide and the annexes. Some of them

69

CHESSS contradictory, such as, for instance in the case of DIN, proposing to delete the national standards for services included in the list of references and BSI proposing to keep them.

ANEC‘s comments were positive on some of the aspects addressed by the Guidance document, such as assessment of customer satisfaction and the relation between service standards and legal requirements, and the possibility to establish a regularly undated list of safety standards to be publicly available. But concerns were also expressed about duplicating some of the work already done at international level. ANEC therefore proposed to adopt ISO/IEC Guide 76 at European level.

AFNOR provided technical and editorial comments, and indicated that the Guidance document is a useful document for aiding a service sector without experience in standardization and that it could be used as a starting reference for working at European level. AFNOR also proposed that annexes should be published in a different informative document. Regarding to specific comments to the content, AFNOR considers that some refining of terms and definitions and some of the elements included in the service lifecycle is needed, even if this is considered a useful and systematic tool.

Personnel of AENOR in charge of the conformity assessment of standards and specifications related with public authorities‘ services indicated that it may be convenient to consider them in the guidance document, as many public authorities are making publicly available their commitments for public service publicly available. Additional examples were provided of Spanish standardization in the field of services to be included in one of the annexes of the guide.

Summarizing the findings in this step, the comments received have been constructive and no substantial opposition has been indentified against the development of a Guidance document in order to raise awareness and provide guidelines about which elements to consider in service standardization. The comments received highlight the completeness of the work performed and the need to shorten it in order to improve the usefulness and increase its applicability the Guidance document.

4.5 Findings from identification of stakeholders willing to participate in the future standardization process, as well as process, type of document and responsible body

Stakeholders expressed in the World Cafés, under Question 1 of module 1 the blockers restraining them from participating in standardization processes, a fact that seems to be more accentuated when it comes to generic standardization (no sector specific) as found in module 7 (―organization and stakeholder engagement for horizontal standardization will be a challenge‖).

70

CHESSS

For the indication on the most appropriate process, type of document and responsible body, module 1 has based its conclusions and recommendations on AENOR standardization knowledge and experience.

71

CHESSS

5. CONLUSIONS

Guidance document for the preparation of service standards

A Guidance document for the preparation of service standards is feasible and will be welcomed by a majority of service stakeholders. This statement is based on several findings and the inputs received during the World Cafés:

1. The most important cluster out of question 1 (identification of blockers in service standardization) in the World Cafés reffers to ―Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a standard‖

2. It has been possible to build up a draft Guidance document under this module 1.

3. Comments received so far on the Guidance document during the revision step indicate the need for improvement but recognize it as a valid document on which to base the formal development of a future CEN Guide. It has never been indicated that developing such a document would be impossible. The unique global negative comment received does not indicate that the document is not feasible but puts into question the need and convenience of doing it (risk of duplication)

4. Demand of guidance, examples and checklist from participants in the World Cafés. The lack of Guidance is at the top (for its importance) in the list of ideas identified with the concept mapping technique: ―Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a standard‖.

With respect to the contents and structure of the draft Guidance document prepared under this module 1, the comments received during the review have been constructive and no substantial opposition has been identified to the development of such a document or the proposed contents. As such it is concluded that the Guidance document prepared under this module 1 would be a valid starting point if a future formal process to prepare a CEN Guide.

Horizontal dimension: high occurrence of same contents in service standards

The majority of the predefined contents in the standard card have an occurrence over 50%. This high repetition brings a horizontal dimension in the sense that there are a number of areas which are regularly brought up in standards with ―Safety and security‖ in the first place of both ―Contents‖ and ―Customer expectations‖ lists. This result is in line with module 7 results, as it indicates its importance in service provision, either in relation to the provision of the service in itself or to the product exchanged or used during the service activity.

72

CHESSS

The result of the concept mapping for Question 2 has identified (as proposed by experts in the World Cafés) that there are clear areas of activity that are relevant to the majority of services and as for the results of the standard card (identification of contents in the studied documents) it can be outlined that there are horizontal aspects of services that might be subject of standardization.

The Guidance document requires further development within a broader group

The inputs received from experts consulted during the review process clearly indicate that the draft document prepared under module 1 although useful as starting point, requires further development.

Difficulty to involve stakeholders

It will not be easy to involve stakeholders in the drafting of a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards.

Difficulty to compile all the information on service standards

Given that standardization professionals find it so difficult to list all the possible standards and projects relevant to service sectors, it is assumed that this search will be even more difficult and time consuming for other stakeholders.

Usage of formal standardization process by B2B and B2C

Both B2B and B2C are equally making use of the formal standardization system which seems to be equally valid for both without identified barriers. Both groups seem to find standardization a useful tool but this is not an indication of the application those standards have in the market. It is therefore concluded that voluntary standardization is not only valid in the industrial environment but also when the individual client is the addressee of the standard.

Usage of formal standardization process by services vs products

The formal voluntary standardization system, as stands for CEN or ISO, seems as appropriate for services as it is for products.

73

CHESSS

6. RECOMMENDATIONS and NEXT STEPS

6.1 Recommendations

Develop a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards

It is recommended that a CEN Guidance document for the preparation of service standards be developed and that the Guidance document prepared under this module 1 of CHESSS be used as a starting draft.

The Guidance document should be readily at hand for: - any service stakeholder approaching the formal standardization system (CEN, CENELEC) intending to promote the standardization of any new service sector (very early stage) and for all the members participating in any service standardization group (drafting stage).

The Guidance document should be known and used from the very beginning of the service standardization process by all stakeholders involved. No different use is foreseen by different stakeholders.

Database with the contents and customer expectations identified in service delivery standards

Prepare and maintain a database indicating the contents developed and the customer expectations tackled by service delivery standards. The contents referred here being those common to many services, as mentioned in the Findings section of this report, and not those related to products used in the service or activities that may be specific of that service.

Guidance on high occurrence contents

The high occurrence of the same contents in service standards supports the establishment of some guidance to deal with them.

Findings indicate that a number of subjects are dealt with in at least 50% of the documents revised under this module 1. This ―need‖ service sectors have to deal with these subjects implies a ―repetition‖ standard after standard. A development of some guidance in the drafting of these subjects seems adequate and worthy.

This part of the Guidance document should be done taking into account the contents of the Single Generic European Service Provision Standard which will cover requirements for generic subjects in services (first recommendation of the CHESSS Feasibility study final report) to avoid contradictions and ensure coherent alignment.

CEN Guide

74

CHESSS

Having considered the different CEN deliverables, their purpose and meaning, it is recommended that the Guidance document for the preparation of service standards be published as a CEN Guide.

The technical body should be CEN/BT WG 163 ―Services‖

The CEN Guidance document could be developed in CEN/BT WG 163 ―Services‖ by indication of the CEN/BT. Standardization professionals of all CEN members have the right to participate in WG 163 and many of them already do so actively. This WG also counts with the participation of some European federations and European Commission representatives.

List of service standards

In the process of promoting European service standardization it is recommended to prepare and maintain a list of standards and other CEN/CENELC and ISO/IEC deliverables including their projects in publicly available stages, updated and easyly accesible by service standard writers, for reference.

The list should contain:

service delivery standards (and projects) or standards published by service sectors to describe or improve their activity; methodological documents helpful in the drafting of standards; other standards of horizontal application relevant to services.

Such a list will illustrate how service sectors have made use of the formal standardization for their own purposes and stakeholders will be able to consult solutions, examples and models used by other service sectors that may support them in their own standardization process and for crossed reference if appropriate.

An accessible list like this would reduce searching time and will also be a means of promoting those for wider application. As service standardization develop, the scene will get more and more complex and the list more and more useful.

Promoting service standardization

Findings from World Cafés have rise a number of standardization blockers that might be worth taking into account when dedicating resources to promote standardization (see clause table under 4.3 of this report). The table is reproduced here for easy reference.

Table 1 Cluster Title Mean value 5 Ignorance about the benefits of standardization and how to prepare a  5,09 standard

75

CHESSS

2 Standards impose requirements and limitations on the service provider 4,52 1 The elaboration of standards demands resources and is not worth the 4,42 effort 7 There are other solutions in place 4,15 4 There is no need for standards and there are other solutions in place 3,96 6 Services idiosyncrasy 3,92 3 It is not possible to standardize so much diversity 3,66

6.2 Next Steps

Develop a Guidance document for the preparation of service standards

Involve standardization professionals in the first place for the development of the Guidance document for the preparation of service standards. This is not exclusive. Other experts should be welcomed from the start if they so wish.

Open the CEN Guidance document to other stakeholders for contributions when mature through all CEN Members and other stakeholders (as a kind of public enquiry).

A CEN Member to propose to CEN/BT the elaboration of the CEN Guide for the preparation of service standards.

Time schedule for the publication of the Guidance document

Once the task had been allocated to CEN BT/WG 163 it would need about 16 months to accomplish the following steps:

- establish a Task Group within WG 163; - seek contributions from CEN/TCs and desirably from ISO/TCs; - full text revision; - seek external inputs (from organizations outside CEN/BT WG 163); - revise text taking into account inputs; - send document for BT decision.

1. List of service standards

The list should be annexed to the Guidance document for the preparation of service standards in the first place and therefore could be prepared by the same technical group (CEN/BT WG 163) that would draft the Guidance document. The list would be updated every time the Guidance document is revised.

As the information in the list will change much more regularly that the Guidance document revised, it is recommended that the list be updated yearly by CEN BT/WG 163 to add the new references and published independently of the Guidance document but with a reference to it, and that this information have its own promotion by CEN.

76

CHESSS

Should a Public web-based resource be finally created as recommended in module 2, the list indicated here should also be placed in such a resource as well as its updates.

2. Maintain a database with the references of the contents and customer expectations identified in service standards available for service standard writers, for reference

This information should be annexed to the Guidance document for the preparation of service standards in the first place and therefore could be prepared by the same technical group (CEN/BT WG 163) that would draft the Guidance document. The database would be updated every time the Guidance document is revised.

CEN/BT WG 163 should seek the kind advice, as far as possible, of those CEN/TCs and ISO/TCs dealing with services to ensure correct interpretation of the standards and identification of the desired ―contents‖ and ―customer expectations.‖

As the information in the database will change much more rapidly that the Guidance document revised, it is recommended that the database be updated annually by CEN BT/WG 163 to add the new links and published independently of the Guidance document but with a reference to it, and that this information have its own promotion by CEN.

3. The high occurrence of the same contents in service standards invites to recommend the establishment of some guidance to deal with them

The further development of guidance about these ―repeated‖ areas of contents is proposed within the Guidance document for the development of service standards in CEN/BT WG 163 and therefore the same time schedule applies.

77

SUMMARY TABLE OF CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS NEXT STEPS A Guidance document for the preparation of service Develop a Guidance document for the preparation of CEN Member to propose to the CEN/BT the elaboration standards is feasible and will be welcomed by a majority service standards of a CEN Guide of service stakeholders Allocation of the works to BT/WG 163 Develop the Guidance document as a CEN Guide Estimated time since allocation to WG 163: 16 months

Prepare and maintain a database with the contents and customer expectations identified in service delivery standards

Horizontal dimension: there is a high occurrence of The high occurrence of the same contents in service To be undertaken by BT/WG 163 with the same same contents in service standards standards invites to recommend the establishment of timescale as for the Guidance document. ―Safety and security‖ as the most repeated subject some guidance to deal with them The Guidance document requires further development The technical body should be CEN/BT WG 163 within a broader group ―Services‖ Difficulty to involve stakeholders Difficulty to compile all the information on service List of service standards To be developed by BT/WG 163 in the fist place as an standards Annex to the CEN Guide Regular updates and publication by CEN as a separate document Inclusion in the Public web-based resource if finally created The formal standardization process seems to be equaly valid for B2B and B2C, without identified barriers The formal standardization process seems as appropriate for services as it is for products Analysis of: ―contents vs service sectors‖ ―expectations vs service sectors‖ ―methodologies vs service sectors‖ Does not indicate clear correlation Take into account the blockers for service As appropriate standardization identified and organized in order of their relative importance when initiating promotional standardization activities

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Accessibility services: opportunity and feasibility of a standardisation work in the area of transport and tourism‘, project No. 2 approved within CEN‘s bid for programming mandate M/371 in cooperation with NEN.

AENOR. UNE 66176:2005 Quality management systems. Guide for measuring, monitoring and analysing customer satisfaction

ANEC 2007. Position on service standardization. ANEC-SERV-2007-G- 061final. 8 October 2007

Calidad total en la gestión de servicios. (Delivering Quality Service). Valarie A. Zeithaml, A. Parasuraman and Leonard L. Berry. Ediciones Díaz de Santos S.A. 1993

CEN. BT Action Plan – Action G ‗To improve the drafting processes‘: - How to deal with horizontal issues in standardization. BT N 7938 and BT N 7998

Concept Mapping Resource Guide http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/mapping/mapping.htm#Knowledge%20 Base

DTI Economics paper nº12 ―The empirical economics of standards‖ June 2005.

Feasibility and opportunity to develop standardisation in the field of residential homes for elderly people, project No. 4 approved within CEN‘s bid for programming mandate M/371.

Feasibility and opportunity to develop standardisation in the field of services for resident people, project No. 5 proposed within CEN‘s bid for programming mandate M/371.

IFAN. (2008). Guidelines to assist members of standards committees in preparing user-oriented European Standards. Guide 3: 2008 (www.ifan.org)

Institut d'études politiques et internationales. Université de Lausanne. September 2007. The Emerging power of services standards in the global political economy. (First Draft)

ISO Focus. Economic and societal benefits of standards. June 2007.

CHESSS

Smart house services for elderly and disabled people, project No. 14 approved within CEN‘s bid for programming mandate M/371 in cooperation with SN

Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A. and. Berry L.L. (1993). Calidad total en la gestión de servicios. (Delivering Quality Service).. Ediciones Díaz de Santos S.A.

80

CHESSS

8. ANNEXES

ANNEX A: List of Standards and Documents of interest for Module 1

A.1 Documents developed or used by service sectors to describe or improve their activity and their distribution

National, European and international standards BODY CODE TITLE SDS¹

AENOR UNE158001:2000 Service management in care homes. Total management YES

AENOR UNE 158002:2000 Service management in care homes. Sites and installations of NO a care home

AENOR UNE 158003:2000 Service management in care homes. Equipment and other NO needs

AENOR UNE 158004:2000 Service management in care homes. Staff qualification. NO Training

AENOR UNE 158005:2000 Service management in care homes. Staff at rest homes. NO Different job and jobs groups AENOR UNE 167001: 2006 Restaurant services. Management requirements YES

AENOR UNE 167002: 2006 Restaurant services. Facilities and equipment maintenance NO

AENOR UNE 167003: 2006 Restaurant services. Provisioning and storage requirements. NO

AENOR UNE 167004:2006 Restaurant services. Hygiene requirements NO

AENOR UNE 167005:2006 Restaurant services. Lounge requirements YES

AENOR UNE 167007:2006 Restaurant services. Requirements for transport YES

AENOR UNE 167008:2006 Restaurant services. Bar requirements YES

AENOR UNE 167009:2006 Restaurant services. Kitchen requirements NO

AENOR UNE 167010:2006 Restaurant service. Central kitchen requirements YES

AENOR UNE 167011:2006 Restaurant services. Vocabulary NO

AENOR UNE 175001-1:2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: General YES requirements

AENOR UNE 175001-2:2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 2. Requirements for YES fishmonger‘s

AENOR UNE 175001-3:2005 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: Requirements for YES opticians

81

CHESSS

AENOR UNE 175001-4:2005 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 4: Requirements for YES butcher‘s and delicatessen AENOR UNE 175001-5:2005 Service Quality for small retail trade: Requirements for flower YES shops AENOR UNE 179001:2007 Quality in dental surgeries and dental services. General YES requirements

AENOR UNE 182001:2005 Hotels and tourist apartments. Service requirements YES

AENOR UNE 184001: 2007 Touring camps and holiday sites. Service requirements. YES

AENOR PNE 185001 Timeshare Organizations. Service Delivery Requirements YES

AENOR PNE 186001 Spa Establishments. Service Delivery Requirements YES

AENOR PNE 188001 Golf Courses. Service Delivery Requirements YES

AENOR UNE 189001: 2006 Intermediation tourism services. Service requirements YES

AFNOR NF X 50-007: 2000 Winter sports equipment hiring service - Definition of the winter YES sports equipment hiring service AFNOR NF X 50-220: 2005 Service standard - School canteen catering service YES

AFNOR NF X 50-700: 2006 Service quality - Approach for improving service quality - The NO Reference and service commitments - Recommendations AFNOR NF X 50 - 720:2004 Quality of services - Recommendations for conceiving and YES improving the welcome - Guidelines AFNOR NF X 50-722: 2005 Quality of services - Measurement and monitoring for NO improving the service quality AFNOR NF X 50-785: 2002 Services provided by electronic security systems companies YES

AFNOR NF X 50-788: 2003 Direct selling - Service of direct selling enterprises YES

AFNOR NF X 50-809: 2004 Highways - Service quality of client welcome areas - Service YES commitments

AFNOR NF X 50 - 820: 1992 Boating services - Specifications for service and provision of YES service - Distribution of yachts and material - Ship maintenance repairing - Motor sale and repairing AFNOR BP X 50-890: 2005 Quality of service in hairdressing salons NO

AFNOR NF X 50-915: 2000 Hydropathic establishments (Spas) - Services to patients - YES Requirements and recommendations AFNOR NF S52-501: 2005 Bungee jumping - Service commitments of organisations YES providing the public with a bungee jumping activity BNQ NQ 9700-010/2001 Customer service. Guidelines for Quality Standards. YES

BSI BS 3375-2:1993 Management Services – Part 2: Guide to method study

BSI BS 7499: 2002 Static site guarding and mobile patrol services - Code of YES practice

BSI BS 7602:1992 Guide to General considerations for telecommunications NO services for electrical power systems. BSI BS 7872: 2002 Manned security services - Cash-in-transit services (collection YES and delivery) - Code of practice BSI BS 7984:2001 Keyholding and response services - Code of practice YES

BSI BS 8406-2:2003 Event stewarding and crowd safety services – Code of Practice NO

82

CHESSS

BSI BS PAS 51 Guide to industry best practice for organizing outdoor events YES

CEN prEN 12522 – 1 Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for private YES individuals. Part 1. Service specification.

CEN EN 12522 – 2 Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for private YES individuals. Part 2. Provision of service

CEN EN 13549: 2001 Cleaning services - Basic requirements and recommendations NO for quality measuring systems

CEN prEN 14012 :2007 Postal services. Quality of service. Complaints handling NO principles CEN EN 14153-3 Recreational diving services – safety related minimum NO requirements for the training of recreational scuba divers – Part 3: Level 3 – Dive Leader

CEN EN 14413-2:2004 Recreational Diving Services - Safety related minimum NO requirements for the training of scuba instructors – Part 1: Level 1

CEN EN 14467:2004 Recreational diving services – requirements for recreational YES scuba diving service providers

CEN EN 14804:2005 Language study tour providers – Requirements YES

CEN EN 14873 – 1 Furniture Renoval Activities – Storage of Furniture and NO Personal Effects for private individuals. Part 1. Specification for the storage facility and related storage provision

CEN EN 14873-2:2005 Furniture removal activities - Storage of furniture and personal YES effects for private individuals - Part 2: Provision of the service

CEN EN 15017:2005 Funeral Services – Requirement YES

CEN EN 15038:2006 Translation services – Service Requirements YES

CEN EN 15221-2 Facility management – Part 2: Guidance o how to prepare YES Facility management agreements

CEN EN 15331:2005 CRITERIA FOR DESIGN, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF NO MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR BUILDINGS

CEN pr CEN/TS CSA Business support – Support services provided to micro and YES 99001 small enterprises – Quality and performance requirements

CEN prEN 15565 Tourism services – Requirements for the provision of YES professional training and qualification programmes of tourist guides

CEN BTTF WD 049 Customer contact centres (BTTF 182) YES

CEN CEN / TR 13200-2 Spectator facilities - Layout criteria of service area - Part 2. NO Characteristics and national situations

CEN CWA 13987-1:2003 Smart Card Systems: Interoperable Citizen services: Extended NO User Related Information - Part 1: Definition of User Related Information and Implementation

83

CHESSS

CEN CWA 14172-2:2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 2: Certification NO Authority services and processes

CEN CWA 14172-8:2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 8. Time- NO stamping Authority services and processes

CEN CWA 14357:2001 Quality of Internet Service – Project Team Final Report NO

CEN CWA 14523:2002 Description for the types of business advice and support YES services provided to small enterprises in Europe

CEN CWA 14641: 2006 Security Management system for secure printing NO

CEN CWA 14644:2003 Quality Assurance Standards (14365:2003) NO

CEN CWA 14921:2004 Web services: Technology and Standardization aspects NO

CEN CWA 15581:2006 Guidelines for eInvoicing service providers NO

CEN CWA 15660: 2007 Providing good practice for Elearning quality approaches NO

DGN NOM-020-SSA2- Provision of medical attention services in mobile units Such as NO 1994 ambulances INN NCh3062.c2006 Adventure tourism – Sand or Sand board Surfing - YES Requirements

INN NCh3063.c2006 Adventure Tourism – Captains - Requirements YES

INN NCh3066.c2007 Adventure Tourism – Muleteers or expert guides - YES Requirements

INN NCh3067.c2007 Tour operators and wholesalers - Requirements YES

INN NCh3068.c2007 Travel agencies - Requirements YES

ISO ISO 10160: 1997 Interlibrary loan application service definition NO

ISO ISO 15928-2 Houses. Structural serviceability NO

ISO ISO/DIS 17090-1 Health informatics NO

ISO ISO 20000-1 Information technology -- Service management -- Part 1: YES Specification

ISO ISO 20000-2 Information technology -- Service management -- Part 2: Code YES of practice

ISO ISO 22222:2005 Personal financial planning — Requirements for personal YES financial planners

ISO ISO 20252:2006 Market, opinion and social research -- Vocabulary and service YES requirements

UNI UNI 10145 Definition of evaluation factors of services maintenance firms NO

UNI UNI 10600 Lodgement and management of complaints for public services NO

UNI UNI 10719 Congress and similar events organization. Service YES requirements and indicators for the enterprises UNI UNI 10771 Management consulting: definitions, classification, YES

84

CHESSS

requirements and service offer UNI UNI 10866 Incentive Travel House. Service Requirements YES

UNI UNI 10891 Services - Private surveillance companies - Requirements YES

UNI UNI 10926 Trade. Goldsmith, silversmith, watchmakers, retail trade. YES Service requirements. UNI UNI 10927 Trade. Buying offices. Service requirements. YES

UNI UNI 10943 Attestation criteria for the assessment of contract award YES procedures of entities operating in the public works, supplies of goods and services

UNI UNI 10948 Service. Assistance to enterprises for granting a loan. Service YES requirements.

UNI UNI 10970 Funds endowment: process of projects initial evaluation, YES monitoring and final evaluation. General requirements UNI UNI 10971 Trade. Colors and paints, wallpapers, floor, lining and fittings. YES Service requirements.

UNI UNI 11010 Residential and day services for disabled persons. Service YES requirements.

UNI UNI 11031 Services - Services for addictes in therapeutic communities YES and alcoholics - Service requirements UNI UNI 11032 Trade. Grocery and fruit and vegetable stores. YES

UNI UNI 11034 Early childhood services YES

UNI UNI 11067 Managing consulting. Criteria for service supply and check. YES

SAA AS 4575 Gas appliances - Quality of Servicing YES

SAA/NZS AS/NZS 4146 Laundry practice YES

SABS ARP 099-1:200X Business process outsourcing and offshoring operations, part YES 1: Outbound contact centre operations

Sectorial Documents Australia Disability Service National standards for disability services (NSDS) NO Standard Working Party, 1993

Australia Australian National relay service plan 2004/05 NO government initiative, 2005

Australia TISSC 2007 TISSC Code of practice (telephone) NO (Telephone Information services Standard Council) European EALTA (European Good practice for the development of exams and language NO Union Association for evaluation Language Evaluation) European EPA (European EPA Urban Parking Policy Guide NO Union Parking Association) European EAR (European Guide for Professional Good Practice for European NO

85

CHESSS

Union Radiologist Radiologists Association) (GBPPRE)

International Commission on ICC International code of advertising practice: 1997 NO Marketing, Advertising and Distribution

Spain FECEI 2003 (Spanish Code of Ethics for Private Language Study centres members of YES federation for FECEI Language training Centres)

Spain Spanish Geriatric and 100 Basic recommendations for continuous improvement of YES Gerontology Society, design and functioning of home care services 2007

United Royal college of Service standards for sexual health services NO Kingdom gynaecologists:2006

United OGC (Office of Delivering world-class consultancy services to the public sector NO Kingdom Government - a statement of best practice Commerce) - UK

¹ SDS = Service Delivery Standard

Total: 119

Distribution of the studied service standards by service sectors

Service sector Number of standards Originating Body Retail trade 6 AENOR +UNI Trade / Wholesale 4 UNI+ AFNOR Geriatric service 7 UNE+Tech. Security services 6 AFNOR+UNI+CEN +BSI Telecommunications 3 BSI + Techn. Spec. Tourism services 32 CEN/TC 329 ―Tourism Services‖ 6 CEN+UNI+AENOR Adventure sports. 4 AFNOR + INN Winter sports equipment hiring 1 AFNOR Hotels and apartments 1 AENOR Restaurant services (CTN 167+NF) 11 AENOR+AFNOR Golf. 1 AENOR Hotel Industry 1 AENOR Hotel Industry, Leisure and Health 2 AENOR+AFNOR Travel agencies and tour operators 4 AENOR + INN+ BNQ Congresses 1 UNI Beauty / hairdressing services 1 AFNOR Transportation services 8 CEN+ AFNOR + Techn. Spec. Cleaning services 1 CEN Funeral Services 1 CEN Translation services 1 CEN Maintenance 1 CEN

86

CHESSS

Education 2 Tech. Spec. Gas Appliances 1 SAA Market opinion and social research 1 ISO Personal financial planning 1 ISO Management services 3 BSI+UNI + Tech. Spec. Event stewarding / Events / Spectator 3 BSI + CEN facilities IT 9 Information Technology 4 ISO +CEN Information and documentation 1 ISO Health Informatics 1 ISO Electronic Invoicing 1 CEN Web services 1 CEN Learning Technologies 1 CEN Business support services 1 CEN Facility management 1 CEN Assessment 4 CEN +UNI Advertisement 1 Techn. Spec. Childcare 1 UNI Complaints management 1 UNI Generic services / quality 4 AFNOR + CEN Building construction 1 ISO Postal Services 1 CEN Customer contact centres 2 SABS +CEN Health care 6 UNE +UNI+Tech. spec.+DGN Laundry services 1 SAA / SNZ Consulting Services 4 UNI +CEN Total 119

Distribution of the studied service standards by originating body

Originating Body¹ Number of standards

AENOR 27 AFNOR 12 SAA 1 SAA/SNZ 1 BSI 7 INN 5 CEN 28 DGN 1 BNQ 1 SABS 1 UNI 17 ISO 7 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (INTERNATIONAL)² 11 TOTAL 119

87

CHESSS

¹ - Acronyms for the National Standards Bodies: AENOR – Spanish Association for Standardization and Certification AFNOR – French Association for Standardization BSI – British Standards Institute UNI – Italian Organization for Standardization SAA – Standards Australia BNQ – Standardization Bureau of Quebec, Canada SNZ – Standards New Zealand SABS – South Africa Bureau of Standards DGN – Mexican National Standards Body INN – National Institute for Standardization, Chile CEN – European Committee for Standardization ISO - International Standards Organization ² - The technical specifications form a separate group but it should be taken in consideration that they come from organizations / associations of the following origin countries: Australia, Spain, United Kingdom, European, and International.

This implies that, of the total of documents studied: 61% were of national origin 39% were of international (CEN, ISO and Technical Specifications) origin.

A.2 Methodological documents helpful in the drafting of standards

- BS 7373-3:2005 Product specifications. Part 3: Guide to identifying criteria for specifying a service offering - ISO/IEC GUIDE 76:2007 Development of service standards. Recommendations for addressing consumer issues - NF X 50-700:2006 Service quality. Approach for improving service quality. The Reference and services commitments. Recommendations - UNI 10427:1995 General criteria for the definition of service

A.3 Other standards of horizontal application relevant to services

- CEN/CENELEC Guide 6 Guidelines for standards developers to address the needs of older persons and persons with disabilities - EN ISO 9000:2000 Quality management systems. Fundamentals and vocabulary (ISO 9000:2000) - EN ISO 9001:2000 Quality management systems. Requirements (ISO 9001:20009 - EN ISO 9004:2000 Quality management systems. Guidelines for performance improvements. (ISO 9004:2000) - EN ISO 14001:2004 Environmental Management System – Requirements with guidance for use - ISO/IEC Guide 73: 2002 Risk management – Vocabulary – Guidelines for use in standards - ISO Guide 50 Safety aspects - Guidelines for child safety - ISO Guide 51 Safety aspects - Guidelines for their inclusion in standards - ISO Guide 71 Guidelines for standardization to address the needs of older persons and people with disabilities - ISO/DIS 10001 Quality management. Customer satisfaction. Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations. - ISO 10002:2004 Quality management. Customer satisfaction. Guidelines for complaints handling in organizations - ISO 10003:2007 Quality management. Customer satisfaction. Guidelines for dispute resolution external to organizations. - IWA 5: 2006 Emergency preparedness (ISO)

88

CHESSS

- NF X 50172:1999 Management de la qualité. Enquête de satisfaction des clients

A.4 Examples of standards that are pure application of Quality Management Systems to a service sector

- IWA 1 Quality Management Systems – Guidelines for process improvements in health service organizations - IWA 2 Quality Management Systems – Guidelines for the Application of ISO 9000 in education - IWA 4 Quality Management Systems – Guidelines for the Application of ISO 9000 in local government - EN 12507 Transportation Services – Guidance notes on the application of EN ISO 9000: 2001 - UNI 10881 Services. Nursing Homes. Guidelines for the application of the UNI EN ISO 9000 standards - UNI 10928 Services. Children‘s homes. Guidelines for the application of the UNI EN ISO 9000 standards

89

CHESSS

ANNEX B: Standard Card

STANDARD CARD (Format 2007-09-13) This standard card extracts relevant information of the mentioned standard for the purpose of Module 1 of CHESSS. This information shall allow to know the essential elements of the service without reading the full text and to rapidly compare many standards amongst each other. Explicit information in the standard is transcribed and also assumptions by the person preparing this standard card in which case it shall be made clear. Service: set of predetermined actions taken to satisfy the individual, corporate or communal needs and/ or expectations of others on a commercial, charitable or not-for-profit basis.

xxxx:yyyy Prepared by: Date dd/mm/year

1. STANDARD TITLE Full transcription as it appears in the standard.

2. OBJECTIVE AND FIELD OF APPLICATION

2.1. OBJECTIVE AND FIELD OF APPLICATION Full transcription as it appears d in the standard.

3. TYPE OF SERVICE DELIVERY STANDARD

3.1. IS THIS A SERVICE DELIVERY STANDARD?: (YES/NO) A service delivery standard considers the four essential elements of any service delivery, to know, service provider, service environment, object of the service and service beneficiary and establishes objective requirements to be complied with or recommendations. A management system, on the contrary, allows the organization to establish its own levels of compliance.

3.2. SERVICE SECTOR (ASSOCIATED TC OR BODY IF IT EXISTS) As quoted by the person preparing the standard card, not linked to any classification.

3.3. BUSINESS TO BUSINESS / BUSINESS TO CUSTOMER / BOTH If the customer is a public authority, it shall be quoted as B2B

3.4. DESCRIPION OF THE FULL SERVICE OR PART OF THE SERVICE A service is described in full in a standard if all the set of predetermined actions are considered. If a service agreement exists that details the full service A full service is that needed or asked for by the service beneficiary, a description of part of the service would be the description of only part of that by the consumer (e.g. IBERIA air lines have certified on board service against ISO 9001).

3.5. OTHER TYPE OF STANDARD Specify, for example: - help on the application of a management system (e.g. ISO 9001) to a service sector - guidance document for service sectors (e.g. ISO/IEC DGUIDE 76) - management system (e.g. EN 15331)

90

CHESSS

- description of requirements of only part of the essential elements of a service

3.6. FREQUENCY OF SERVICE PROVIDER /CUSTOMER INTERFACE? HIGH/LOW (e.g. high: hairdresser; low: luggage handling)

4. SERVICE PROVISION

4.1. WHO IS THE SERVICE PROVIDER? (E.g. Language study tour provider – a legal entity such as school, a tour operator or an agent, which is contracted by a client to provide language study programs, which may include other related services.)

4.2. WHO IS TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARD? (E.g. Language study tour provider or the hotel organization)

5. SERVICE BENEFICIARY Service beneficiary: entity potentially deriving benefit from the delivery of a service that can therefore be assumed to have expectations and needs relating to the object of the service and the nature and location of its delivery NOTE to service beneficiary: The similar terms in common use i.e. customer; consumer frequently carry implications of ‗payment‘ which in the CHESSS context it is appropriate to avoid.

5.1. WHO IS THE SERVICE BENEFICIARY (person, industry, public authority)?

5.2. ARE THERE MORE THAN ONE IDENTIFIED CUSTOMERS? Identify the following or any other possible situations: when the service can be delivered to two different service beneficiaries (person and/or company, independently) and when the service is contracted buy one person but used by others also (e.g. training services for companies, the two service beneficiaries are the company and the staff receiving the training)

5.3. WHO IS ASKED ABOUT HIS/HER SATISFACTION WITH THE SERVICE? In case there are more than one identified service beneficiaries, it may be a requirement of the standard to ask them all about their satisfaction.

6. CONTENTS OF THE STANDARD Mark as appropriate and indicate clause or sub clause of the requirements identified in the standard.

6.1. CONTENTS OF THIS STANDARD

Billing Compensation Contractual or agreement framework Corporate social responsibility (employees, accounting transparency, ethics, etc) Facilities requirements Human resources (training, qualification, experience,…) Legal requirements (as identified in the standard) OHSAS (occupational health and safety) Product (as part of the service delivery; to coincide with 8.1)

91

CHESSS

Quality Management System (to coincide with positive answers to 10.1 and/or if there are any elements which are typically part of a quality management system and which cannot be linked to any other question of this questionnaire and record them (e.g. continuous improvement, customer satisfaction, quality assurance, monitoring, recording, etc.) Safety and security (to coincide with customer expectations) Service beneficiary satisfaction Subcontracting Sustainability (environmental or social balance, etc) Technical resources (equipment, software, other) Terminology (in particular indicate and record definitions for ―service‖, ―quality of service or other common terms for every service‖. For ―customer‖ or ―client‖ details shall be under 5.1) Other (indicate…)

7. CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS The following are criteria used by the customer to judge the service. These are not usually explicitly mentioned in the standard as such but there may be requirements which address those criteria. The standard card reader shall search for and indicate the clause or subclause of those requirements that satisfy customer expectations. This is a subjective exercise but shall be done coherently.

Tangible elements (Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel, printed and visual materials) Reliability (Ability to perform promised service, dependably and accurately by the organization) Responsiveness (Willingness to help customers and to provide prompt service) Competence (Possession of required skill and knowledge to perform service by service provider personnel) Courtesy (Politeness, respect, consideration and friendliness of contract personnel of the service provider) Credibility (trustworthiness, believability, honesty of the personnel) Safety and security (relevant to the service environment, equipment used or the goods supplied and to the person and his/her belongings, investments, identity. ISO/IEC DGuide 76; also freedom from danger, risk or doubt) Access (approachability and ease to establish contact) Accesibility (architechtonic design; in SERVQUAL this is included in ―access‖) Communication (listening to customers, keep informed, easy language)

Understanding the customer / customer care (effort to know customers and their needs)

8. PRODUCT Special attention should be paid to identify in the text if there is an exchange of tangible goods as part of the service delivery (committed in the service agreement or unilateraly by the service provider and without which the service is not complete, as this is not always evident. Both shall be considered in this clause, the product provided by the service provider (e.g. informative documentation) and that given by the customer to the service provider (e.g. dry cleaning)

92

CHESSS

8.1. THERE IS EXCHANGE OF A TANGIBLE GOOD (YES/NO) Quote the product(s)

8.2. DOES THE STANDARD ESTABLISH PRODUCT REQUIREMENTS? Quote the product(s) requirements

9. METHODOLOGY

9.1. METHODOLOGY How is the service dealt within the standard. The service sector, willing to provide assurance of good service, includes in the standard what it considers as a guarantee for the service customer. In doing so the service sector chooses an approach, how and from which point of view requirements are included in the standard.

Mark as appropriate or indicate any new approach (more than one options are possible):

service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) other

10. QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

10.1. IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR A QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM? YES - Record the model if indicated in the standard

11. SUBCONTRACTING

11.1. IS SUBCONTRACTING CONSIDERED IN THE STANDARD?, TO WHAT EXTENT?

11.2. HOW IS SERVICE QUALITY GUARANTEED WHEN PROVIDED BY A SUBCONTRACTED ENTITY? Entity may be both, individual or organization

93

CHESSS

ANNEX C: Concept Mapping of World Cafés Ideas

The concept mapping technique has been used to treat the information generated in Module 1 sessions of the four CHESSS World Cafés.

The concept mapping analysis consists of the following steps: 1. Planning, objectives, experts, calendar 2. Generation of ideas (Brainstorming) 3. Structuration of ideas, ponderation, grouping and naming of the groups 4. Generation of maps, multiple scaling, cluster analysis 5. Interpretation of the maps 6. Use of the maps

The objective was to apply a documented technique to an information presented in a disorderly manner.

The brainstorming took place at the World Cafés stage where more than 200 ideas were gathered for each of the two questions posed to the public. These ideas were merged when repeated but expressed differently with care not to loose any original contribution. We ended with 111 ideas for Question 1 and 75 ideas for Question 2 which were the material for the next step.

Those two groups of 111 and 75 ideas were presented to a pannel of experts professionally related to services. The experts were asked to group, per each of the questions, those ideas that, in their opinion, were connected, making as many groups as necessary and give a name to each group. Experts were also asked to give a value to each individual idea according to a 1 to 7 Licker scale. We received the contributions from 7 experts (from AENOR, ICTE, NORMAPME and the University of Seville).

The experts‘ opinions (for each question in the study) have been tabulated in independent Excel sheets, where the ideas obtained from the brainstorming appeared in lines and columns. The tabulation system consisted in putting a ―1‖ value in the crosses of ideas that the expert had considered belonging to the same group and ―0‖ value in the crossing where this was not the case. Thus were obtained as many 0 and 1 matrices as the numbers of experts participating in the process. The same tabulation system towards all the matrices has been symmetric with respect to the central diagonal. Afterwards the sum of the individual experts‘ matrices has been made for each question thus obtaining a unique matrix that resumes the group‘s opinions and where its evaluations were representative of the existing ―similarity‖ and ―affinity‖ between each idea (a higher value of the crossing of two ideas would mean more similarities in the experts‘ opinions).

The data obtained from the resuming matrix was used as the inputs to the SPSS program in order to be processed by two sequential actions. In the first place, by using the Multidimensional Scaling technique a conceptual mapping of the ideas was obtained that reflected in graphical terms the existing affinity between them according to the experts‘ opinions. After that the ideas were located in a Cartesian plan, each one of them possesses certain coordinates. These coordinates were the input data for the application of the second technique; in this case, the Cluster Analysis, with the objective of obtaining new possible groupings (in this case, of a statistical nature).

The SPSS programme was asked to prepare 14 possible groupings of ideas (clusters), from 2 clusters to 15 clusters for each question. In doing this, the programme takes into account the groups made by the experts and creates new groups out of the coincidence of ideas in the groups prepared by the experts.

94

CHESSS

We have studied each one of these groups of clusters (for both questions) separately looking for the most meaningful. For Question 1 the most meaningful resulted to be the group of 9 clusters and for Question 2 the group of 7 clusters. These two had to be further adjusted by changing some ideas from one cluster to another resulting that the 9 clusters of Question 1 ended in 7 clusters and the 7 clusters of Question 2 ended in 6 clusters. Annexes H and I include these results and their graphic representation.

Findings from the two groups of clusters are documented in 4.3.

95

CHESSS

ANNEX D: Questionnaire for the Review of the Guidance Document

COMPILATION OF COMMENTS ON THE GUIDANCE IN THE PREPARATION OF SERVICE STANDARDS

COMMENTS BY:

Pascal GAUTIER Département développement AFNOR

Nina KLEMOLA ANEC Project Manager

BSI

Kristina UNVERRICHT M.A. Verbraucherrat des DIN/Consumer Council of DIN

Siglinde KAISER DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung e.V.

Petra WEILER DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung e.V.

Gertjan VAN DEN AKKER Senior standardization consultant NEN

- 96 - CHESSS

Comments Mr. Pascal GAUTIER (AFNOR) on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards Validation Questionnaire

FAMILY NAME, Name GAUTIER Your organization AFNOR Country FRANCE Date 13- 05 - 2008

Please fill in this questionnaire by marking the relevant answer and filling your opinion wherever appropriate.

0 ABOUT THE DRAFT GUIDE

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The draft guide is a good tool for providing guidance to a service x sector without experience in standardization The draft guide covers all initial aspects that may be relevant for x any service sector willing to start a standardization process The draft guide has a length that Annex could be makes it a useful tool published separately x (ex : in a technical report) The draft guide is a good document on which to start a x formal European Guide in CEN Additional comments (if any) The guide would contain some indication on the way to write the scope, the importance of the standardization process (originality, accuracy…), the connexion with certification.

1 ABOUT THE “INTRODUCTION”

About the contents in page 1 Some translations and typing errors to complete : ―to preparing‖ ―to identifying‖, ―Mentiones‖ Annex A ―estructure‖,

B2B ok, but not B2G to be replaced by : ―B2C‖

2 ABOUT THE “SCOPE”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure

- 97 - CHESSS

The Scope is clear X The Scope is complete X It truly summarizes the content of The main chapters of the Guide this guide would be presented in a x sentence (for instance : interface with management system ad legislation…) Additional comments (if any) It would be he helpful to define the boundaries with others types of standards : products, management system, competencies….

3 ABOUT “TERMS AND DEFINITIONS”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure More terms and definitions should be used The terms and definitions are Meaning of the clear x definition 2.3 ? (a word is missing ?) The terms and definitions are Definition 2.10 the used in a consistent manner word ―implied” is not appropriate in that context : a requirement must be clearly defined and expressed by the client or the provider. Definition 2.11 : Satisfaction indicator : is a percentage an indicator ? (in definition 2.7 an indicator is a x quantified measure… a percentage is not quantified… Definition of 2.13 ―service‖ ; the concept of pleasure is strange and inappropriate, I propose ―results produced by internal activities of a provider and activities in the interface with a user ; designed to meet the expectations

- 98 - CHESSS

of a client.‖ Definition 2.17 ―user‖ is defined by ―person who uses…‖ we could choose another word : ―person who takes an advantage, or benefits from a provider…‖ Be careful in the definition ―drafting a a sector…‖ Additional comment (if any)

4 ABOUT “PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter raises awareness about relevant issues x previous for a sector to consider its standardization The elements Could you add an explanation of figure 1 included in the (meaning of the squares, the bubbles and chapter are relevant x the colors) ? for the purposes of the guide Additional comments In §3.2 P7 The lists could be organised, some item could be (if any) associated ―they can be abstract, intangible‖ ―they may or may not be tangible result‖ In §3.2 P7 , The concepts of ―order, payment‖ could be added (in 3rd sentence) In §3.3 p8 translation of ―tomar de los procedimientos de CEN‖ In §3.4 add ―contract‖ in the last list, after processes In §3.5 p9 some words eare in Spanish In §3.5 p9 typing errors ―tcustomer, aother, ailments… §3.6 customer service provider interface could be developed ; it is very important

5 ABOUT THE “METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFYNG REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The services cycle (4.2) is a useful x and systematic tool for the

- 99 - CHESSS identification main areas of interest to be developed in the standard The service Specific comments on any of the identified lifecycle is clear elements in the service lifecycle:…. x and complete (Fig.4.1) The check list (4.3) Billing and payment could be very different is a useful and depending on the services (payment before systematic tool for or after the service provision…. Idem for the identification of x Billing. possible items to Billing could be planned with subscription… be included in the So that could appears at different position standard in the model The check list is §4.2.2.3 Competition ; I do not understand clear and complete the meaning of ―it offer…― what is it ?‖ The difference between 4.2.3.1 and 4.2.3.2 is not clear §4.2.3.3 what is ―Panasuraman‖ ? §4.2.3.3. a) we could add : tools, documents, means… b) Reliability is defined by ―in a reliable way…‖ §4.2.3.3 The list could be larger : we could add : information, the way to identify the provider, its Internet website, its signs, direction signs… data protection, diversity of services, proximity, tailor made services capacity, x capacity to react… §4.2.3.4 ―marketing and awareness‖ I do not understand these combination of 2 words… §4.3.4 Could you explain what are the requirements linked with differentiation with the competitors could we use this kind of feature in a standard… ? §4.3.5 I do not imagine to write something about ―price of technology, future evolution of technology, patents rights ―… in a standard §4.3.7 The 1st sentence says ― is not standardizable‖… but it is fooled by a list…… so ―it may be standardizable‖…. Additional comments (if any)

- 100 - CHESSS

6 ABOUT CHAPTER “STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS AND ANNEX A

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure This chapter is usefull x The 6 identified structures in We can reduce this service standards are the main x number to 5 categories ones (see above) There are more structures in We can show some service standard worth to be other kind of standards detailed in the field of service x as measurement or assessment methods, description of competences, The 6 identified structures in The title ―open model‖ service standards are clear is original but not easy to understand ; I propose to add ― list of indicators without objective threshold ― I propose to bring together the number 5 and 6 ―mixed‖ and ―other models‖ x In §5.3 delete the mention ‖servqual‖ In §5.3 how could we write something in a standard on ―reliability‖ or ―credibility‖? In §5.4 Add ―Management system‖ as a content of this kind of standard

One or more of the structures x require further development The list of standards in Annex A is What is the meaning of useful the cross… and why x this order of standards ? The Annex A should only contain European and international x standards but not national The Annex A should be kept This annex could be shorter x published in another document Information about each standard x

- 101 - CHESSS in Annex A is appropriate Additional comments (if any) I need more time to check the list and the classification of the French standards

7 ABOUT “METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful x The chapter covering methods for The certification the assessment of the services process could be provided is clear and complete presented and the difference between the method of x measurement linked to the criteria, and the condition to assess defined by the body in charge of the control. Additional comments (if any)

8 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful X The chapter interface with In §7.1.2 after the 1st § management system is clear and ―by the company complete contracted.‖ We can add ―and impose more organisational constraints and X obligations‖ In §7.3 complete ―see clause XXX‖ The use of ISO GUIDE 72 could be added in §7.3 a) Additional comments (if any)

9 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure

- 102 - CHESSS

The chapter interface with legal Very usefull x requirements is useful The chapter interface with legal requirements is clear and x complete Additional comments (if any)

9 ABOUT ANNEX B AND ANNEX C

The content of x annexes is useful The annexes are You can add : clear and complete x ISO GUIDE 72 ISO 10001 is published (not a DIS) Additional comments Better than a classification by NSB, the list would be useful (if any) with a classification by service area Why the word ―revised‖ in the title…

- 103 - CHESSS

Comments Nina KLEMOLA (ANEC) on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards

ANEC-SERV-2008-G-026final(ext.) April 2008

PRELIMINARY ANEC RESPONSE TO DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CONSUMER-RELEVANT CHESSS PROJECTS1

Module 1 - Guidance in the development of services standards

Considering that services is a relatively new field of standardisation, ANEC recognises the value in having some guidance for the developers of service standards. However, we believe that such guidance should be short and simple in order to ensure the document is actually used by standards developers and relevant stakeholders.

Whilst ANEC is sympathetic with the sections identified in the draft guidance document, and considers that the assessment of customer satisfaction and the relation between service standards and legal requirements are issues that should be addressed when developing service standards, we are skeptical whether a new guidance document will be useful considering the existence of the recently published ISO/IEC Guide 762 (which also draws attention to many of the points noted in the proposed guidance document). ANEC therefore believes that instead of developing a new guide, and thus duplicating much of the work already done, more consideration should be given to the possibility of adopting the ISO/IEC Guide 76 at the European level.

ANEC supports the proposal to establish a regularly updated list of service standards which is publicly available and easy to access for all stakeholders.

Module 3 – Safety in the delivery of services

ANEC welcomes the findings of the study which show that the development of a single horizontal European standard on service safety, and data/financial security would not be feasible at present. ANEC also supports the draft recommendation to strengthen links between standards and legislation at the European level, and to strengthen the involvement of all stakeholders in standardisation, in particular that of consumer representatives. ANEC also agrees with the recommendation that closer cooperation between the European institutions and European Standards Bodies should be promoted.

ANEC strongly supports the recommendation to set up a horizontal legislative framework for the safety of services at the EU level, and to have standards shape

1 The views given in this paper are based on information and presentations given at the CHESSS final stakeholder seminar in Brussels, on 2 April 2008. For more information, please see www.chesss.eu

- 104 - CHESSS

2 ISO/IEC Guide 76:2008 - Development of service standards: Recommendations for addressing consumer issues

ANEC-SERV-2008-G-026final(ext.) April 2008

and underpin regulation. However, ANEC does not believe the New Approach in its current form should be extended to services. Instead, ANEC supports the use of the regulatory model found in the field of eco-design of energy-using products (EuP), which allows for more transparency and increased stakeholder involvement3.

Finally, the study suggests that there are opportunities for horizontal service safety standards related to risk assessment, information on risks, and on terminology. While a generic standard on risk assessment may be feasible, we are not convinced that it would be possible to have e.g. a horizontal safety terminology standard.

Modules 4&5 – Assessment of customer satisfaction and best practices for complaints and redress systems

ANEC welcomes the development of a pan-European CSI standard/methodology, provided that the proposed methodology would include the requirement for indexed information to be subject to independent third party verification. Also, such an approach would need to be transparent and the issue of cultural differences would be need to be adequately addressed. As noted in the CHESSS presentation, comparing service providers‘ performance and ‗ratings‘ is becoming increasingly popular, with consumers often making important purchasing decisions based on the information provided in such indexes. It is therefore of utmost importance to ensure that the criteria is developed togeth r with consumers, and that the service providers do not mark their own performance without any objective, independent verification of those marks. ANEC believes that without a requirement for independent verification the CSIs would lack credibility.

Whilst ANEC strongly supports the establishment of common core principles on complaints, redress and dispute systems, we would like to avoid any unnecessary duplication of work. In this case, much work has already been carried out at the international level with the ISO series on customer satisfaction4. Furthermore,

3 In contrast to the New Approach, the EuP framework directive provides that implementing measures, to be prepared by regulatory committees, should specify the detailed requirements for various energy-using product groups. Thus, standards complement this system by setting the technical specifications and test measures. An important part of this EuP approach is the setting up of a consultative stakeholder forum, which allows stakeholders to provide their contribution on the implementation of the Directive. In ANEC‘s view a similar approach should be adopted in the services field.

- 105 - CHESSS

4 ISO 10001: 2007 Quality management - Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations, ISO 10002:2004 Quality management - Customer Satisfaction - Guidelines for

- 106 - CHESSS

ANEC-SERV-2008-G-026final(ext.) April 2008

ANEC would like to stress the fact that e.g. ISO 10002:2004 on complaints handling is already being used as a reference document in some (draft) European standards, such as prEN 14012 on complaints and redress in postal services. We would therefore at present not recommend the development of other similar, overlapping documents on complaints and redress procedures.

Further to the above, however, we would like to express our agreement with the findings of the study in that any complaints and redress/dispute systems should be easily accessible for all, and that responses and decisions should be provided in a timely, fair and transparent manner.

General remark

In addition to the module-specific remarks above, ANEC would like to underline that, based on the presentations given at the final CHESSS stakeholder seminar, we are concerned about the added value and quality of the project as a whole. ANEC would thus expect the final report of the CHESSS project to provide a much more detailed account of the research done to better explain and qualify the presented conclusions.

END.

complaints handling in organizations, and ISO 10003:2007 Quality management – Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for dispute resolution external to organizations. Also draft ISO 10004 on Quality management - Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for monitoring and measuring should be taken into account.

- 107 - CHESSS

Comments BSI on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards Validation Questionnaire

FAMILY NAME, Name Your organization BSI Country United Kingdom Date 2008-04-25

Please fill in this questionnaire by marking the relevant answer and filling your opinion wherever appropriate.

0 ABOUT THE DRAFT GUIDE

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The draft guide is a good tool for providing guidance to a service X sector without experience in standardization The draft guide covers all initial aspects that may be relevant for X any service sector willing to start a standardization process The draft guide has a length that The document contains makes it a useful tool passages of descriptive text more appropriate for the report and as a result is unnecessarily long. We suggest that this factor is likely to put off X potential users and that the draft be restricted accordingly. Remove non-essential description from the text. – Transfer to Annexes if considered necessary. The draft guide is a good Has the potential to be document on which to start a X but requires further formal European Guide in CEN preparatory work Additional comments (if any) It is not clear what the relationship between the MODULE1 document and Guide 76 might be. We suggest that we cannot just ignore the availability of a published document that is intended to fulfil the same purpose. NB: See also IFAN Guide 3:2008 Guidelines to assist members of standards committees in preparing user- oriented European standards

- 108 - CHESSS

Clarify the relationship between this draft, the guidance document and Guide 76 and the role of the IFAN Guide.

1 ABOUT THE “INTRODUCTION” In the introduction and throughout the document, there are language idiosyncracies that we have not made comment on in view of the fact that text editing is to be undertaken, later.

2 ABOUT THE “SCOPE”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The Scope is clear X The Scope is complete X It truly summarizes the content of X the Guide Additional comments (if any) It is not clear from this document whether it is the guidance document itself or if it is an outline document in preparation for the guidance document. Clarify the scope of this document vis-à-vis that of any guidance document eventually produced.

3 ABOUT “TERMS AND DEFINITIONS”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure More terms and definitions should We suggest that the be used terminology should be reviewed in final draft X to ensure compatibility with sources and use in draft. The terms and definitions are See previous comment ? clear The terms and definitions are See previous comment X used in a consistent manner Additional comment (if any) The draft does identify that the terms are to assist in clarifying the meaning of the draft. We suggest that it be further clarified that the terms and definitions are not put forward as a proposal for a definitive terminology, at this stage.

4 ABOUT “PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter raises Generally agree but see comment below X awareness about Explain the relationship with Guide 76

- 109 - CHESSS relevant issues (see comment above). We suggest it previous for a sector would be useful to undertake a point by to consider its point comparison with guide 76 and standardization identify any differences. The elements 3.1 and fig 1 information considered included in the helpful but we suggest that its value to chapter are relevant future standards drafters is not sufficiently for the purposes of clear. the guide 3.2 This is useful because it helps to clarify what a service is but would perhaps be better placed as notes to the terminology section. 3.3 Generally happy with this. Consider it useful for non-standardisers. 3.4 How to structure a standard is useful information but detailed information on who writes standards and how to go about writing are not instrumental to the writing itself. It might be more helpful to provide a services-focussed version of the key steps of the CEN drafting regulations. The detailed information on who writes the standards and how could be placed in an appendix. Reference to Chapter 6 is incorrect. Change reference so that it refers to Chapter 7 3.5 Very similar to Guide 76, section 6. The requirements for customers are important and should stay however it would be useful to undertake a point by point comparison and identify any differences. Suggest to clarify relation (similarities) with Guide 76. 3.6 This appears to be no more than a presentation of findings. We suggest that it might helpful to provide explanation of why they are included and what use should be made of them. Additional comments (if any)

5 ABOUT THE “METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFYNG REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The services cycle Section on service lifecycle is useful. X (4.2) is a useful and Clauses 4.1 to 4.2.1 should focus on an

- 110 - CHESSS systematic tool for explanation of the origins and guidance as the identification to general application of the model. main areas of interest to be developed in the standard The service 4.2 to 4.1.13 The explanations to the lifecycle is clear model might be better placed in an Annex. X and complete (Fig.4.1) The check list (4.3) Relationship with Guide 76. Again a point is a useful and by point comparison to identify differences systematic tool for might be helpful. the identification of X Clarify relation (similarities) with Guide 76. possible items to be included in the standard The check list is X clear and complete Additional comments (if any)

6 ABOUT CHAPTER “STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS AND ANNEX A

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure This chapter is useful Written as a report or presentation of findings. We suggest that to be useful, this section needs to do more to X highlight the need for the eventual guidance document to provide assistance with making value judgements as to which structure to use. The 6 identified structures in service standards are the main X ones There are more structures in Comment to be service standard worth to be X supplied later detailed The 6 identified structures in We have not had time service standards are clear to do a full analysis of X structure in each standard and will need

- 111 - CHESSS

to refer back on this. One or more of the structures We have not had time require further development to do a full analysis of X structure in each standard and will need to refer back on this. The list of standards in Annex A is It should be explained useful that the list of documents in Annex A is provided to assist in the development of the guide but is not X intended to be carried forward into the guidance document itself. We suggest that a note be added to ANNEX A explaining this. The Annex A should only contain European and international X standards but not national The Annex A should be kept X shorter Information about each standard We have not had time in Annex A is appropriate to do a full analysis of X structure in each standard and will need to refer back on this. Additional comments (if any)

7 ABOUT “METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful To what extent does this relate to/ improve ISO 10004? Although 10004 is still in development it is sufficiently well formed X to reach conclusions. We should not be seen to be ‗reinventing the wheel‘ and should therefore at least identify relationships and differences.

- 112 - CHESSS

Synergy should be sought with ISO 10004 and with ISO/TC 176/SC 3 WG 14 - Measuring Customer Satisfaction Undertake a content comparison as for previous clauses.

The chapter covering methods for We question the use of the assessment of the services the term measurement provided is clear and complete as a generic descriptor. We suggest that the usage of this term should be reviewed as current usage may not be adequate/ X appropriate. Possible use the term ‗assessment‘ or ‗evaluation‘. Moreover, any terms selected should be included in the definitions section.

Additional comments (if any)

8 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful Helpful clause, Good to explain the difference between management systems standards and generic standards, which is something that X in our experience is frequently misunderstood by committee members. Perhaps the clause is somewhat overlong. The chapter interface with The key information management system is clear and could be presented complete more concisely. In particular, we suggest X that it would be preferable that if the list of standards is retained in this draft (for the

- 113 - CHESSS

benefit of those preparing the eventual guidance document) it should be made clear that the guidance points illustrated by the various example standards identified should be extracted and included within the text of any eventual guidance document. Additional comments (if any)

9 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter interface with legal X requirements is useful The chapter interface with legal It is our opinion that to requirements is clear and permit the inclusion of complete requirements of a legislative or regulatory nature is an unsound practice and should be discouraged. X Standards, at the very most should draw attention to the existence of legislation but they should not contain implied requirement to observe the law. Additional comments (if any)

9 ABOUT ANNEX B AND ANNEX C

The content of X annexes is useful The annexes are Why are Guide 76 and BS 7373-C not referred clear and complete to? (we note that BS7373-3 has been used as a terminology source). X To help to ensure credibility we should try to take all current development in the field, into consideration. To be seen to be leaving

- 114 - CHESSS

significant documents aside will undermine the position. Additional comments Some standards and documents are referred to in the main body (if any) but not in the reference list. Assure consistency of referencing throughout the text and the bibliography/ reference list.

NOTE: Ms Anne Ferguson, Ms Sarah Horsfield, Mr Nick Fleming and Mr Brian Such revised the Guidance document submitted by AENOR and held a meeting for gathering/sharing their comments for a total in excess of 10 working hours.

- 115 - CHESSS

Comments Kristina UNVERRICHT (Consumer Council of DIN ) on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards Validation Questionnaire

FAMILY NAME, Name Unverricht, Kristina Your organization Independent expert Country Germany Date 2008-05-05

Please fill in this questionnaire by marking the relevant answer and filling your opinion wherever appropriate.

0 ABOUT THE DRAFT GUIDE

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The draft guide is a good tool for If comments are taken providing guidance to a service into account, yes. x sector without experience in standardization The draft guide covers all initial aspects that may be relevant for x any service sector willing to start a standardization process The draft guide has a length that If comments are taken x makes it a useful tool into account, yes. The draft guide is a good document on which to start a x formal European Guide in CEN Additional comments (if any) Major comment: Chapter 6 has to be deleted from the document (see question 6) and comments in the document as this text is not relevant to standardisation committees, but to people assessing quality of service.

Major comment: The choice of documents must be more comprehensive and European, must include national standards that can be of European relevance. Some standards chosen are not service standards. Relevant service standards like all standards on postal services have been left out. Setting measurement parameters can also be a tool of service standardisation.

1 ABOUT THE “INTRODUCTION”

2 ABOUT THE “SCOPE”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments

- 116 - CHESSS

sure The Scope is clear x The Scope is complete x It truly summarizes the content of Except for chapter 6 the Guide which is not and should x not be part of the scope (see above). Additional comments (if any)

3 ABOUT “TERMS AND DEFINITIONS”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure More terms and definitions should List them, please: …. x be used The terms and definitions are x clear The terms and definitions are x used in a consistent manner Additional comment (if any) Standardised terms and definitions should be used.

4 ABOUT “PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter raises awareness about relevant issues x previous for a sector to consider its standardization The elements included in the chapter are relevant x for the purposes of the guide Additional comments The title is not clear. There is more reasons for standardisation. (if any)

5 ABOUT THE “METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFYNG REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The services cycle (4.2) is a useful and x systematic tool for the identification

- 117 - CHESSS main areas of interest to be developed in the standard The service Specific comments on any of the identified lifecycle is clear elements in the service lifecycle: see x and complete revised document. (Fig.4.1) The check list (4.3) The check list is intransparent, unclear and is a useful and with too many duplications and therefore is systematic tool for not a useful tool. the identification of x possible items to be included in the standard The check list is See above x clear and complete Additional comments (if any)

6 ABOUT CHAPTER “STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS AND ANNEX A

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure This chapter is usefull x The 6 identified structures in service standards are the main x ones There are more structures in Please detail… service standard worth to be x detailed The 6 identified structures in x service standards are clear One or more of the structures Please detail… x require further development The list of standards in Annex A is x useful The Annex A should only contain European and international x standards but not national The Annex A should be kept Should be shorter comprehensive on a x European and International level. Information about each standard Should be taken out of in Annex A is appropriate standards databases – x information seems to be written down by

- 118 - CHESSS

individuals. Additional comments (if any) The choice of documents is biaised, see above.

7 ABOUT “METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful x The chapter covering methods for If more methods are the assessment of the services x needed, please provided is clear and complete detail…. Additional comments (if any) See above: This chapter must be deleted as it is not covered by the scope of the document.

8 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful x The chapter interface with management system is clear and x complete Additional comments (if any)

9 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter interface with legal x requirements is useful The chapter interface with legal requirements is clear and x complete Additional comments (if any) The recommendation should be that legal requirements are NOT repeated in standards. SME will have to know legislation anyway. Reference to legislation can be (but is not necessarily, if legislation is not harmonized on a European level) a good help for users of standards.

9 ABOUT ANNEX B AND ANNEX C

The content of Annex C should show the same x annexes is useful documents as Annex A The annexes are x

- 119 - CHESSS clear and complete Additional comments See above (if any)

- 120 - CHESSS

Comments Siglinde KAISER (DIN) on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards Validation Questionnaire

FAMILY NAME, Name Kaiser, Siglinde Your organization DIN Country Germany Date 2008-05-20

Please fill in this questionnaire by marking the relevant answer and filling your opinion wherever appropriate.

0 ABOUT THE DRAFT GUIDE

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The draft guide is a good tool for it is not very clear for providing guidance to a service whom the guide really sector without experience in is: for service x standardization developers or for developers of a standard… The draft guide covers all initial aspects that may be relevant for x any service sector willing to start a standardization process The draft guide has a length that as it does not have its makes it a useful tool final form yet (layout, x page design, structure, visuals) this is hard to tell The draft guide is a good there are still too many document on which to start a uncertainties on what formal European Guide in CEN the purpose is, who the user will be, etc. Additional comments (if any)

1 ABOUT THE “INTRODUCTION”

2 ABOUT THE “SCOPE”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure The Scope is clear x The Scope is complete x It truly summarizes the content of x the Guide Additional comments (if any) the scope is very different from what really is the contents of the guide !

- 121 - CHESSS

3 ABOUT “TERMS AND DEFINITIONS”

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure More terms and definitions should List them, please: …. be used The terms and definitions are x clear The terms and definitions are x used in a consistent manner Additional comment (if any) it is not clear if Module 2 of CHESSS will be continuously available as original source; it is not clear why you refer to national versions of standards while European ones are available (CHESSS is a European project)

4 ABOUT “PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter raises awareness about relevant issues previous for a sector to consider its standardization The elements included in the chapter are relevant for the purposes of the guide Additional comments This chapter is too far away from standards developing – it is a (if any) guide to develop services, but does not help very much how to extract information from the experiences gained there that can be used for standards development.

5 ABOUT THE “METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFYNG REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The services cycle (4.2) is a useful and systematic tool for x the identification main areas of interest to be

- 122 - CHESSS developed in the standard The service Specific comments on any of the lifecycle is clear and identified elements in the service complete (Fig.4.1) lifecycle:…. The check list (4.3) it is not a checklist, it is just a list of items is a useful and systematic tool for the identification of x possible items to be included in the standard The check list is clear and complete Additional the chapter does not help with the identification – it just describes comments (if any) requirements

6 ABOUT CHAPTER “STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS AND ANNEX A

Statement Not Comments Disagree Agree sure This chapter is usefull it is descriptive but x does not really guide users… The 6 identified structures in not essential service standards are the main ones There are more structures in Please detail… service standard worth to be detailed The 6 identified structures in more or less – but you service standards are clear do not indicate what x the standards developer should do with this knowledge One or more of the structures Please detail… require further development The list of standards in Annex A is x useful The Annex A should only contain European and international x standards but not national The Annex A should be kept shorter Information about each standard level of info not the x in Annex A is appropriate same for all standards Additional comments (if any) this is just a list; there is no assessment of how they can help standards developers.

- 123 - CHESSS

7 ABOUT “METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful x The chapter covering methods for If more methods are the assessment of the services x needed, please provided is clear and complete detail…. Additional comments (if any) methods are not justified (mystery shopper); the chapter has level 1 textbook character, but does not help standards developers how to handle this in a standard.

8 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure This chapter is useful x The chapter interface with management system is clear and x complete Additional comments (if any) Again, I am not sure why you have this in here; it sounds rather like a generic intro to management systems; someone who has no idea what that is, should not develop a service standard….

9 ABOUT CHAPTER “INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS”

Statement Disagree Not Agree Comments sure The chapter interface with legal x requirements is useful The chapter interface with legal requirements is clear and x complete Additional comments (if any) I am not sure the readers will understand the relationship standards-legislation. They might get the impression that following a standard is sufficient.

9 ABOUT ANNEX B AND ANNEX C

The content of it is not clear what they are for. x annexes is useful Seems repetitive

- 124 - CHESSS

The annexes are x clear and complete Additional comments Annex C is misleading as CHESSS did not revise these (if any) standards ! That is the job of TCs, SCs, WGs, not of a research group

- 125 - CHESSS

Comments Petra WEILER(DIN) on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards

Dear Elena,

I am really very sorry I haven't replied so far. It is a pity I don't have enough time to give the guidance document the attention it deserves. I just don't have five days to study this in depth. And what is worse, I don't even know what I could offer you in terms of help, because you probably don't want me to circulate the document within DIN and see whether someone, e.g. Holger or someone from DIN consumer council, is interested in commenting on it?

But well, I nevertheless read through the document and put some comments into the CHESSS comments form, although the Proposed Change column remains empty. Some of the comments might come across as not very positive or even rude. But this is only because of the limitations of written as opposed to oral communication. I hope my comments are of some help to you, and hopefully the other partners will send you comments as well. Before the Brussels Event, I found Raul's comments on my presentation particularly helpful, so maybe you might want to "claim" his assistance in this. Gertjan's might also have some days left on proof reading, as he has got no module report to write. And his role in the project as I understood it, is to look at everything from an observer's and adviser's point of view.

With warm regards,

Petra Weiler DIN Deutsches Institut fuer Normung e.V.

CHESSS template for comments Date: Document: Module #

1 2 3 4 (5)

- 126 - CHESSS

Team Section/ Comment (justification for change) or question Proposed change Agreement Member Paragraph (initials) (e.g. 4. FINDINGS, Paragraph #, Line #) PW Contents Section 6 is missing PW Subsection headlines under 5 appear a little random, structure seems unclear PW General Text should undergo editing by native speaker PW General I am not so sure, whether the guide should refer directly to CHESSS and have standards revised in the CHESSS project as an annex. PW Introduction and I like the text Scope PW Section 2 The terms and definitions should in my view be subject to discussion and there should be consensus among stakeholders on them before publishing the guidance document. Where available international or "neutral" European sources should be used. PW 3.1 Can the reasons be clustered under certain headlines to facilitate differentiation between them, e.g. customers, competitors, company internal, society, government? Also the order of the reasons should be more logical. And, aren't there reasons mission, e.g. efficiently cooperating with other companies, help innovative services access the market, achieve better service quality … PW 3.2 One aspect missing? They can be performed on a tangible product PW 3.1 – 3.3 It is unclear which of the clauses are supposed to be part of a service standard and which contain merely recommendations or help for service standard writers. PW 3.5 and general It does not become clear what is understood by service standard. Only a standard that standardizes the service or in the broader sense?

- 127 - CHESSS

1 2 3 4 (5) Team Section/ Comment (justification for change) or question Proposed change Agreement Member Paragraph (initials) (e.g. 4. FINDINGS, Paragraph #, Line #) PW Section 4 and The guidance document is certainly of much value, but I have the general feeling that there is too much in it and it does not become clear which steps exactly the group has to follow to be on the safe side and not forget important aspects. In addition there is no help given as to what sections should be included in the standard (minimum set of sections). Also, the document is not self-evident. The application of the document needs a lot of assistance and explanation from someone who is very deep into the matter. I think this needs to be simplified to become a real guidance. PW Section 5 This comes very close to a useful guidance. It would be more useful, if it became clear which of the models best to follow in which case. PS: According to Brian 5.5 should probably not be suggested as a model, because it does not support the outcome based approach. PW Section 6 and This is a different level from that of the other explanations in the general document. The structure of the document is not very clear. And it leaves too many questions open. Maybe in the beginning of the document there should be a checklist for the group. Depending on what the purpose, scope, customer etc. of the standard is, the group needs advise on what the best way would be to achieve this PW Section 7 I like this section and I think it could have saved Brian some time, if he had this earlier in the process. We should however be careful to not have contradictory statements in the guidance document and in our recommendations. Please double check that this is in line with the generic standard recommendation. PW Section 8 This is great. Can I refer to this in my recommendations for Module 3? This is a section that definitely will help a lot of stakeholders understand the relation between standardization and regulation a lot better, thus avoiding misunderstandings and contributing to awareness raising.

- 128 - CHESSS

Comments Gertjan VAN DEN AKKER,,Senior standardization consultant (NEN), on the Guidance in the preparation of service standards

Please find below my comments. Sorry for not having used the template, not everything fitted in the template and now it is almost too late.

General comments: 1. The status of the guidance document is missing. As far as I am aware, the guidance document has been prepared by AENOR and will be submitted to CEN as an input document for the development of a CEN guidance document for service standardisation.

The NEN comments on AENOR document should be viewed in this perspective: I will try to improve the document that AENOR will send to CEN as input.

2. Have you thought about the appropriate place to develop the guidance document?

3. How is the guidance document related to the results of the feasibility study and how will this be presented in the report? Will the report on the feasibility study include the guidance document as an example?

4. There are still some Spanish words and sentences.

1. Introduction 3rd clause: This guide is prepared within Module 1 of the CHESSS project … and by the following standardization bodies: BSI (United Kingdom), AENOR (Spain), DIN (Germany), DS (Denmark), EVS (Estonia) and NEN (Netherlands).

This is not the case: the document has not been prepared by the other bodies, just by AENOR.

2. Terms and definitions Customer: in the CCC standard it has been decided to use Client – contractor to distinguish between service beneficiary and the company buying for the service. This is not necessarily the same, especially in outsourcing relations. Customer could lead to confusion.

3. Previous considerations on services I do not see much added value for this clause. It does not harm either.

3.4 STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARD I would like to add yet another approach: see the structure that has been used to create the CCC standard (it was based on the INK model).

Kind regards, Gertjan

- 129 - CHESSS

Gertjan van den Akker, Senior standardization consultant NEN, P.O. Box 5059, NL-2600 GB Delft, The Netherlands, tel: +31 15 2690 426 fax: + 31 15 2690 242 www.nen.nl

- 130 -

ANNEX E: Standard Cards Results – Quantitative Analysis

The results obtained from applying the standard card to the list of 119 documents are quantified in this Annex.

Table 1: Questions with a two options answer (yes/no; high/no high) in the standard card Characteristic Number of % in 119 documents documents 3 TYPE OF SERVICE DELIVERY STANDARD Service delivery standard 73 61% B2B 71 60% B2C 85 71% B2B & B2C 44 37% High frequency of provider/customer contact 60 50%

5 CUSTOMER

Customer person 89 75% Customer industry 59 50% Customer public authority 25 21% More than one type of customer 63 53% 8 PRODUCT Exchange of a tangible good 84 71% Product requirements 63 53% 9 METHODOLOGY Service described sequentially 46 39% Service requirements are chosen from customer 18 15% criteria point of view

Service is described attending to the internal 17 14% organization of the service

Service description – a mix of methodologies 16 13% Other methodologies 53 45% 10 QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Requirement for QMS 49 41% 11 SUBCONTRACTING Subcontracting is considered 58 49%

Data in respect to Service Delivery Standards only (73 documents)

10 QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Total %of SDS Requirement for QMS 31 42% Service described sequentially –15( 48% of 31) Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view – 0 (0% of 31) Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service – 4 (13% of 31) Service description – a mix of methodologies – 4 (13% of 31 )

CHESSS

Other methodologies – 8 (26% of 31)

9 METHODOLOGY Total %of 73 SDS Service described sequentially 43 59% Service requirements are chosen from customer 13 18% criteria point of view Service is described attending to the internal 12 16% organization of the service Service description – a mix of methodologies 8 11% Other methodologies 15 21%

3.6 FREQUENCY OF SERVICE PROVIDER / Total %of 73 SDS CUSTOMER INTERFACE Answer: High Service described sequentially 25 53% Service requirements are chosen from customer 11 23% criteria point of view Service is described attending to the internal 8 17% organization of the service Service description – a mix of methodologies 6 13% Other methodologies 9 19%

3.6 FREQUENCY OF SERVICE PROVIDER / Total %of 73 SDS CUSTOMER INTERFACE Answer: Low/medium Service described sequentially 18 69% Service requirements are chosen from customer 2 8% criteria point of view Service is described attending to the internal 4 15% organization of the service Service description – a mix of methodologies 4 15% Other methodologies 6 23%

Table 2: Occurrence of all predefined contents in the standard card (See Figure 1) 6 CONTENTS OF THE STANDARD Contents criteria Number of % of standards Number of articles of standards the standards Billing 69 58% 236 Compensation 71 60% 257 Contractual or agreement 71 60% 313 framework Corporate social responsibility 61 51% 183

Facilities requirements 71 60% 315 Human resources 105 88% 726 Legal requirements 103 87% 689 OHSAS 16 13% 59 Product 84 71% 343 Quality Management System 68 57% 252 Safety and security 110 92% 823

- 133 - CHESSS

Subcontracting 58 49% 207 Sustainability 50 42% 147 Technical resources 107 90% 616 Terminology 99 83% 267 Other 51 43% 134

Module 1 keeps a record, easy to consult, of clauses and subclauses where those contents are mentioned in each document. This record contains, as additional information, how many times in a standard a specific content is referred to, for example, there might be 5 clauses or subclauses in one document where a reference is made to subcontracting, from different points of view or adding more requirements. As all mentions are counted, there might be some repetitions.

Figure 1: Percentage of presence of contents included in the studied documents Other Contents criteria Terminology

Technical resources

43% Sustainability 83% Subcontracting 90% 42% Safety and security 49% 92% Quality Management System 57% Product 71% 1 13% OHSAS 87% 88% Legal requirements

Standard elements Standard 60% Human resources 51% 60% Facilities requirements 60% Corporate social responsibility 58% Contractual or agreement framew ork 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Compensation Percentage Billing

Table 3: Occurrence of predefined customer expectations in the standard card (See Figure 2) 7 CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS Customer critera Number of standards % of standards Number of articles of the standards Access 56 47% 271 Accessibility 48 40% 193

- 134 - CHESSS

Communication 106 89% 769 Competence 91 76% 347 Courtesy 43 36% 116 Credibility 40 34% 98 Reliability 72 61% 250 Responsiveness 60 50% 179 Safety and Security 110 92% 865 Tangible Elements 65 55% 306 Understanding the Customer / 73 61% 247 Customer care

Figure 2: Percentage of presence of customer criteria in the standards revised

Understanding the Customer / Customer expectations criteria Customer care Tangible Elements

Safety and Security 61% 55% Responsiveness 88% Reliability 50% 61% Credibility 34% 1 Courtesy 36% 76% Competence 89% 40% Communication

Customer expectations Customer 47% Accessibility

Access 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Percentage

- 135 - CHESSS

ANNEX F: Standard Card Results – Correspondence Analysis

Description of the Method

The correspondences analysis is a multivariable technique that consists in the analysis of contingency tables with the objective to find affinities between a pair of variables. Continuous variables shall be transformed in interval variables in order to proceed its analysis.

The correspondence analysis has been done using the SPSS programme (Statistical package for Social Sciences) V 14.0.

The data of the variables is introduced in the programme which produces a number of tables: Tables of correspondences, Line profiles, Column profiles, Summary, Study of the points in lines and in columns. In this annex only the Summary table has been inserted.

In the Summary table the first column on the left is for dimensions. The second column of the Summary table shows single values, the third one shows the inertia (variance), the 4th and 5th are the value of Chi square in the independece test as well as the obtained significance level. Finally 6th and 7th columns show the value of the inertia proportion (explained or accumulated respectively) for each dimension, in percent. Columns 8th and 9th do not contain data of relevance for the analysis.

Dimension (D) are criteria generated by the programme to explain the variability of the original data. The reseracher has to find the concept behind them. When the level of significance obtained in the Chi square test is lower than 0,05 it can be concluded that the variables are dependent from each other. When greater that 0,05, the variables are independent. The number of dimensions found by the programme equals the number of categories of the variable with less values, minus one.

The contribution to each dimension of the categories of each variable is in column ―Contribution of the inertia points into the dimension‖. For example in Methodology vs sectors the contribution of category 12 of VAR1 into Dimension 1 is 0,000 and that of category 13 is 0,649.

The correspondence analysis represents the values of the variables (for example, methodology and sectors) independently from each other, each one in a graph, where the axes of the plane are the two first dimensions identified by the programme. These two dimensions are the most explicative in variance terms, which means they are the ones which contribute most to explain the variability of the entrance data in the programme. A third graph is created crossing all values from both variables. Only the third graph has been included for each crossing including all the points from each variable.

The researcher has then to study the data and the graphs to find the criterion behind each dimension. In this excercise it has to be taken into account that points which are most distant from each other are the most explicative of the dimension (always in strictly horizontal or vertical terms, depending on which dimension is being studied).

Data preparation for the analysis

From the standard cards data, the following documents have been prepared:

1) a general table containing in lines the information of the standard card (see Annex B), all items except for points 1 ―Standard title‖ and 2 ―Objective and field of application‖ and in columns the code of the revised document. A value of ―1‖ is given where there is a cross between standard and an element from the standard card. A value of ―0‖ is given where they don‘t cross.

- 136 - CHESSS

2) two other tables, both containing the same data of the general table in lines, but in columns the documents are grouped by sectors (23 sectors in total) and by standardizing body (13 in total).

From the original identified distribution of the documents in 46 service sectors (see A.1) Module 1 has grouped related sectors ending with 23 service sectors for the correspondence analysis. See table ―New sector grouping‖ below in this Annex.

The information from these three tables was then transferred into a format suitable for the consequent SPSS analysis.

Module 1 decided to analyse only the following crossings: 1. Methodology (VAR 1) vs sectors (VAR 2) 2. Contents (VAR 1) vs methodology (VAR 2) 3. Expectations (VAR 1) vs sectors (VAR 2)

Methodology (4) vs sectors (23)

The methodology group ―other‖ has been eliminated as it distorts the results.

The methodology elements have been extracted from the group of ―characteristics‖ of the standard card, their codes for the analysis being: 12 Service described sequentially 13 Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view 14 Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service (processes) 15 Mix of methodologies.

Methodology vs sectors summary table Confidence for the Inertia proportion single value Single Inertia or Chi- Typical Correlation Dimension value Variance square Sig. Explained Accumulated deviation 2 1 0,606 0,367 0,415 0,415 0,087 0,096 2 0,575 0,331 0,374 0,789 0,063 3 0,432 0,186 0,211 1,000 Total 0,884 62,753 ,591(a) 1,000 1,000

Dimension 1 and dimension 2 explain in total 79,8 % of the variance. As the test of independence 0,591 is higher that 0,05, the two variables are independet from each other.

Analyzing Varialble 1 (VAR00001):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 13 and 15 make the higher contribution to D1 point 13 and 14 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 12 and 15 make the higher contribution to D2 points 12 and 15 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in lines (a) Punctuation VAR00001 in METHODOLO Mass Inercy Contribution the GY dimension

- 137 - CHESSS

of the inertia From dimension points into to 1 2 the dimension Tota D1 D2 1 2 l - 0,00 0,41 0,00 0,93 0,93 12 0,535 0,014 0,147 0,669 0 6 0 8 8 0,64 0,15 0,80 0,17 0,98 13 0,169 -1,525 0,731 0,295 9 7 8 6 4 0,14 0,00 0,28 0,01 0,29 14 0,113 0,893 0,220 0,194 8 9 1 6 7 0,20 0,41 0,29 0,55 0,85 15 0,183 0,818 1,145 0,249 2 7 8 4 2 1,00 1,00 Total activo 1,000 0,884 0 0 a. Symetric standardization

Analyzing Variable 2 (VAR00002):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 1 and 6 make the higher contribution to D1 points 6 and 23 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 19 and 22 make the higher contribution to D2 points 9 (and surrounding points with the same value) and 15 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in columns (a) Punctuation in the Contribution dimension of the VAR00002 Mass Inercy inertia SECTORS From dimension points into 1 2 to the dimension D1 D2 1 2 Total 1 - 0,141 0,054 0,133 0,362 0,001 0,997 0,002 0,998 1,248 2 - 0,085 0,265 0,046 0,010 0,120 0,078 0,867 0,945 0,905 3 - 0,070 0,288 0,029 0,010 0,035 0,122 0,393 0,515 0,532 4 0,028 1,412 1,186 0,073 0,093 0,069 0,467 0,313 0,781 5 0,352 0,370 0,036 0,030 0,080 0,001 0,979 0,009 0,988 6 - 0,014 1,271 0,069 0,148 0,040 0,781 0,189 0,970 2,519 7 - 0,028 0,023 0,024 0,000 0,066 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 8 0,000 ...... 9 - 0,014 0,023 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 10 - 0,014 0,023 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 11 0,014 0,023 - 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896

- 138 - CHESSS

1,163 12 - 0,014 0,023 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 13 - 0,014 0,023 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 14 0,000 ...... 15 0,014 1,350 1,991 0,063 0,042 0,097 0,247 0,511 0,758 16 - 0,099 0,204 0,012 0,015 0,007 0,478 0,201 0,679 0,306 17 - 0,014 0,023 0,012 0,000 0,033 0,000 0,895 0,896 1,163 18 0,000 ...... 19 - 0,042 1,511 0,094 0,105 0,168 0,409 0,587 0,996 1,229 20 0,000 ...... 21 0,000 ...... 22 0,028 1,350 1,991 0,126 0,085 0,194 0,247 0,511 0,758 23 0,014 1,475 0,382 0,111 0,051 0,004 0,167 0,011 0,178 Total 1,000 0,884 1,000 1,000 activo a. Symetric standardization

Gobal Interpretation (VAR1 and VAR2 on the same graph)

Horizontal axe (at the left end): customer criteria vs beauty Horixontal axe (at the right end): processes vs laundry, IT, customer contact centres, personal financial palnning Vertical axe (at the top end): mixture of methodologies vs personal financian planning, customer contact centers Vertical axe (at the bottom end): secuential description of the service vs funeral, translation, furniture removal, maintenance, health and care, security services

A possible interpretation of dimension 1 criteria could be Market orientation (based on internal or market criteria) of the service sector and of dimension 2 could be the extent to which the standard is structured by processes or by a mixture of processes and expectations.

After making this first analysis we have reached the conclusion that the relation between sectors and methodology is not concluding. Either because the number and selection of documents was not the appropriate to find such relation or because sectors use miscellaneous methodologies and do not have any specified criteria when elaborating standards.

- 139 - CHESSS

Puntos de columna y de fila

Simétrica Normalización

VAR00001 VAR00002

15,00 22,00 2,0 19,00 1,5 6,00 15,00 4,00

1,0 13,00 23,00 0,5 16,00 14,00 Dimensión 2 Dimensión 1,00 5,00 0,0 3,00 -0,5 12,00 2,00 -1,0 10,00 9,00 7,00 11,00 -1,5 -3 -2 -1 0 1 Dimensión 1

Leyend translated from Spanish into English: Puntos de columna y de fila – Points from Columns and Lines Simétrica Normalización – Symetric Standardization Dimensión 1 – Dimension 1 Dimensión 2 – Dimension 2

Contents (17) vs sectors (4)

The contents and sector codes are listed below in this Annex.

Contents vs methodology summary table Dimension Single Inertia or Chi- Sig. Inertia proportion Confidence in the value variance square single value Explained Accumulated Typical Correlation deviation 2 1 0,196 0,039 0,255 0,255 0,028 -0,029 2 0,152 0,023 0,153 0,409 0,026 3 0,134 0,018 0,118 0,527 4 0,126 0,016 0,105 0,632 5 0,114 0,013 0,086 0,717 6 0,106 0,011 0,074 0,791 7 0,094 0,009 0,059 0,850 8 0,087 0,008 0,050 0,900 9 0,069 0,005 0,031 0,931 10 0,058 0,003 0,022 0,954 11 0,055 0,003 0,020 0,974 12 0,042 0,002 0,012 0,985 13 0,031 0,001 0,006 0,992

- 140 - CHESSS

14 0,028 0,001 0,005 0,997 15 0,022 0,000 0,003 1,000 Total 0,151 175,512 1,000(a) 1,000 1,000

Dimension 1 and dimension 2 explain in total 40,9 % of the variance. As the test of indepenced 1,000 is higher than 0,05, the two variables are independet from each other.

Analyzing Varialble 1 (VAR00001):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 8 and 14 make the higher contribution to D1 point 1 and 8 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 4 and 5 make the higher contribution to D2 points 4 and 5 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in lines(a) VAR00001 Mass Punctuation Inercy Contribution CONTENTS in the dimension 1 2 of the From dimension inertia to points into the dimension D1 D2 1 2 Total 1 0,059 - 0,474 0,011 0,165 0,086 0,566 0,178 0,745 0,744 2 0,058 - 0,065 0,012 0,007 0,002 0,023 0,003 0,027 0,155 3 0,060 - 0,347 0,010 0,128 0,048 0,473 0,106 0,578 0,646 4 0,049 - - 0,012 0,025 0,315 0,078 0,598 0,675 0,314 0,988 5 0,064 0,487 0,829 0,014 0,077 0,288 0,206 0,464 0,670 6 0,090 0,027 - 0,004 0,000 0,039 0,004 0,258 0,262 0,258 7 0,087 0,034 - 0,004 0,001 0,007 0,005 0,040 0,046 0,109 8 0,014 2,131 - 0,018 0,319 0,000 0,671 0,000 0,671 0,005 9 0,069 - 0,196 0,005 0,002 0,017 0,013 0,076 0,088 0,071 10 0,065 0,314 - 0,009 0,032 0,080 0,143 0,212 0,356 0,434 11 0,094 0,113 0,037 0,005 0,006 0,001 0,051 0,004 0,056 12 0,033 - - 0,009 0,003 0,015 0,012 0,041 0,052 0,124 0,265 13 0,048 - - 0,010 0,043 0,058 0,168 0,134 0,302 0,421 0,426 14 0,041 0,956 - 0,017 0,192 0,006 0,446 0,008 0,454 0,148 15 0,092 - 0,007 0,005 0,000 0,000 0,001 0,000 0,001 0,013 16 0,078 0,015 0,275 0,007 0,000 0,039 0,000 0,131 0,131

- 141 - CHESSS

Total active 1,000 0,151 1,000 1,000

a. Symetric standardization

Analyzing Variable 2 (VAR00002):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 2 and 4 make the higher contribution to D1 points 9 (and surrounding points with very close value) and 23 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 1 and 12 make the higher contribution to D2 points 8 and 12 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in columns (a) VAR00002 Mass Punctuation Inercy Contribution SECTORS in the dimension 1 2 Of the From dimension intertia to points into the dimension D1 D2 1 2 Total 1 0,093 - 0,583 0,014 0,102 0,208 0,277 0,339 0,616 0,464 2 0,102 0,544 - 0,012 0,153 0,035 0,512 0,070 0,582 0,229 3 0,060 0,135 - 0,005 0,006 0,001 0,045 0,002 0,047 0,036 4 0,099 - 0,110 0,009 0,187 0,008 0,806 0,020 0,826 0,609 5 0,348 0,259 0,141 0,010 0,119 0,045 0,482 0,110 0,592 6 0,009 0,331 0,899 0,004 0,005 0,046 0,047 0,269 0,316 7 0,034 - - 0,003 0,039 0,038 0,438 0,261 0,699 0,475 0,417 8 0,006 - 2,032 0,006 0,012 0,164 0,076 0,627 0,704 0,625 9 0,009 - - 0,004 0,015 0,007 0,138 0,035 0,173 0,592 0,341 10 0,009 - - 0,005 0,027 0,000 0,203 0,000 0,203 0,789 0,030 11 0,017 - - 0,003 0,001 0,014 0,016 0,115 0,131 0,118 0,354 12 0,023 - - 0,008 0,012 0,228 0,054 0,622 0,676 0,315 1,221 13 0,007 1,502 - 0,011 0,079 0,000 0,280 0,001 0,281 0,095 14 0,009 - - 0,004 0,033 0,019 0,287 0,101 0,389 0,862 0,582 15 0,006 - - 0,006 0,013 0,005 0,084 0,020 0,104 0,647 0,359 16 0,090 - - 0,007 0,065 0,056 0,350 0,181 0,531 0,376 0,308 17 0,012 - - 0,001 0,001 0,000 0,039 0,005 0,044 0,152 0,062 18 0,007 - - 0,007 0,000 0,005 0,001 0,016 0,017

- 142 - CHESSS

0,068 0,319 19 0,018 0,036 - 0,007 0,000 0,081 0,001 0,257 0,257 0,824 20 0,003 0,195 0,699 0,007 0,001 0,008 0,003 0,026 0,029 21 0,005 0,295 - 0,006 0,002 0,007 0,014 0,027 0,042 0,464 22 0,026 0,304 - 0,003 0,012 0,013 0,137 0,089 0,226 0,279 23 0,009 1,548 0,441 0,007 0,116 0,012 0,600 0,038 0,638 Total 1,000 0,151 1,000 1,000 active a. Symetric standardization

Gobal Interpretation (VAR1 and VAR2 on the same graph)

Horizontal axe (at the left end): billing and contract vs personal financial planning, education, cleaning and customer contact centers Horixontal axe (at the right end): OHSAS vs laundry and gas services Vertical axe (at the top end): facility requirements vs cleaning Vertical axe (at the bottom end): corporate social responsibility vs education

After making this first and a deeper analysis we have reached the conclusion that the relation between contents and sectors is not concluding. Either because the number and selection of documents was not the appropriate to find such relation or because sectors select the contents for their inclusion in the documents without any specific criteria.

Puntos de columna y de fila

Simétrica Normalización

VAR00001 VAR00002 8,00 2

1 6,00 5,00 1,00 16,00 1,00 20,00 23,00 4,00 9,00 15,00 5,00 17,00 3,00 11,00 8,00 Dimensión 2 Dimensión 0 2,00 14,00 13,00 3,00 2,00 10,0016,0012,00 6,00 15,00 7,00 22,00 9,00 18,00 13,00 10,00 14,00 11,00 4,00 21,00 -1 7,00 19,00

12,00

-1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 Dimensión 1

Leyend translated from Spanish into English : Puntos de columna y de fila – Points from Columns and lines Simétrica Normalización - Symetric Standardization Dimensión 1 - Dimension 1

- 143 - CHESSS

Dimensión 2 – Dimension 2

Expectations (11) vs sectors (23)

The expectations and sector codes are listed below in this Annex.

Expectations vs sectors summary table Dimension Single Inetia or Chi- Sig. Inertia Proportion Confidence for the value variance square single value Explained Accumulated Typical Correlation deviation 2 1 0,221 0,049 0,289 0,289 0,029 -0,026 2 0,182 0,033 0,195 0,484 0,032 3 0,158 0,025 0,148 0,632 4 0,136 0,018 0,108 0,740 5 0,112 0,013 0,074 0,814 6 0,104 0,011 0,064 0,878 7 0,088 0,008 0,046 0,924 8 0,075 0,006 0,033 0,957 9 0,068 0,005 0,027 0,984 10 0,052 0,003 0,016 1,000 Total 0,169 128,311 1,000(a) 1,000 1,000 a. 220 degrees of liberty

Dimension 1 and dimension 2 explain in total 48,4 % of the variance. As the test of independence is higher than 0,05, the two variables are independet from each other.

Analyzing Varialble 1 (VAR00001):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 5 and 9 make the higher contribution to D1 point 5 (together with 9) and 2 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 1 and 6 make the higher contribution to D2 points 1 and 6 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in lines (a) Punctuation in the Contribution dimension VAR00001 Of the inertia EXPECTATIO Mass Inertia From dimension points into NS to 1 2 the dimension D1 D2 1 2 Total 1 0,083 -0,728 0,852 0,026 0,19 0,33 0,37 0,42 0,79 9 2 5 2 7 2 0,095 0,593 0,438 0,019 0,15 0,10 0,38 0,17 0,55 1 0 6 3 9 3 0,077 0,148 -0,089 0,012 0,00 0,00 0,03 0,00 0,04 8 3 1 9 1 4 0,120 0,272 -0,094 0,009 0,04 0,00 0,22 0,02 0,24 0 6 3 2 5

- 144 - CHESSS

5 0,057 -1,032 -0,539 0,021 0,27 0,09 0,62 0,14 0,77 3 1 9 1 0 6 0,059 0,011 -0,986 0,021 0,00 0,31 0,00 0,49 0,49 0 8 0 6 6 7 0,139 0,021 0,362 0,010 0,00 0,10 0,00 0,33 0,33 0 0 1 3 4 8 0,074 0,415 -0,220 0,013 0,05 0,02 0,21 0,04 0,26 7 0 1 9 0 9 0,063 -0,908 -0,185 0,018 0,23 0,01 0,62 0,02 0,64 6 2 5 1 6 10 0,137 0,181 -0,093 0,008 0,02 0,00 0,12 0,02 0,15 0 7 7 8 5 11 0,096 0,180 -0,150 0,012 0,01 0,01 0,05 0,03 0,09 4 2 9 4 2 Total active 1,000 0,169 1,00 1,00 0 0 a. Symetric standardization

Analyzing Variable 2 (VAR00002):

With respect to Dimension 1 (D1): points 4 and 16 make the higher contribution to D1 points 7 and 10 are the farthest from each other on the horizontal axe

With respect to Dimension 2 (D2): points 20 and 22 make the higher contribution to D2 points 23 and 21 are the farthest from each other on the vertical axe

Study of the points in columns (a) Punctuation in the Contribution dimension Of the VAR00002 inertia Mass Inercy From dimension SECTORS points into to 1 2 the dimension D1 D2 1 2 Total 1 0,109 -0,129 -0,363 0,008 0,008 0,079 0,050 0,324 0,374 2 0,117 -0,234 -0,233 0,008 0,029 0,035 0,185 0,151 0,336 3 0,051 0,130 0,281 0,004 0,004 0,022 0,052 0,202 0,254 4 0,098 0,640 0,059 0,013 0,181 0,002 0,693 0,005 0,698 5 0,350 -0,320 0,193 0,013 0,162 0,072 0,606 0,181 0,787 6 0,012 -0,640 0,306 0,003 0,022 0,006 0,345 0,065 0,410 7 0,029 -1,053 -0,281 0,014 0,146 0,013 0,509 0,030 0,539 8 0,003 0,456 0,740 0,007 0,002 0,008 0,018 0,038 0,055 9 0,011 -0,056 0,382 0,004 0,000 0,008 0,002 0,074 0,076 10 0,004 1,577 0,461 0,008 0,045 0,005 0,288 0,020 0,309 11 0,008 1,266 1,296 0,011 0,057 0,073 0,252 0,217 0,469 12 0,020 0,367 -0,360 0,006 0,012 0,014 0,106 0,084 0,189 13 0,007 0,276 1,616 0,007 0,002 0,095 0,016 0,453 0,469 14 0,007 1,128 0,509 0,005 0,038 0,009 0,375 0,063 0,438 15 0,011 0,211 -0,793 0,005 0,002 0,037 0,023 0,268 0,291 16 0,078 0,699 -0,261 0,014 0,172 0,029 0,597 0,068 0,665 17 0,009 1,169 0,120 0,004 0,057 0,001 0,693 0,006 0,699 18 0,008 0,371 0,323 0,007 0,005 0,005 0,035 0,022 0,056

- 145 - CHESSS

19 0,022 0,710 -0,288 0,006 0,051 0,010 0,442 0,060 0,502 20 0,005 0,074 2,065 0,008 0,000 0,124 0,001 0,513 0,514 21 0,013 -0,055 -0,858 0,003 0,000 0,053 0,003 0,648 0,651 22 0,025 0,159 -0,849 0,005 0,003 0,100 0,027 0,638 0,665 23 0,004 -0,173 3,030 0,009 0,001 0,200 0,003 0,722 0,725 Total active 1,000 0,169 1,000 1,000 a. Symetric standardization

Gobal Interpretation (VAR1 and VAR2 on the same graph)

Horizontal axe (at the left end): courtesy and accessibility vs furniture removal services Horixontal axe (at the right end): reliability vs translation services Vertical axe (at the top end): tangible elements vs laundry services Vertical axe (at the bottom end): credibility vs postal services

After making this first and a deeper analysis we have reached the conclusion that the relation between customer expectations and sectors is not concluding. Either because the number and selection of documents was not the appropriate to find such relation or because sectors select the customer expectations for their inclusion in the documents without any specific criteria.

Puntos de columna y de fila

Simétrica Normalización

4 VAR00001 VAR00002

23,00 3

20,00 2 13,00 11,00

1 1,00 Dimensión 2 Dimensión 8,00 7,00 2,00 14,00 6,00 3,00 9,00 18,00 10,00 9,00 4,00 0 5,00 10,00 17,00 7,00 11,00 8,004,00 3,00 16,00 2,00 19,00 1,00 12,00 5,00 21,00 6,00 15,00 22,00 -1 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 Dimensión 1

Leyend translated from Spanish into English: Puntos de columna y de fila – Points from Columns and Lines Simétrica Normalización – Symetric Standardization Dimensión 1 – Dimension 1 Dimensión 2 – Dimension 2

CODE New sector grouping CODE New sector grouping 1 Retail and wholetrade (10) 13 Gas Appliances (1)

- 146 - CHESSS

2 Health and care services (14) 14 Market opinion and social research (1) 3 Security services (6) 15 Personal financial planning (1) 4 Telecommunications and IT(12) 16 Management services,Assessment, Consultancy and Business Support (11) 5 Tourism Services, Leisure and 17 Facility management (1) Events (40) 6 Beauty / hairdressing services 18 Advertisement (1) (1) 7 Furniture removal (4) 19 Complaints management and generic quality service(3) 8 Cleaning services (1) 20 Building construction (1) 9 Funeral Services (1) 21 Postal Services (1) 10 Translation services (1) 22 Customer contact centres (2) 11 Maintenance (2) 23 Laundry services (1) 12 Education (3)

CODE Contents of the standard CODE Contents of the standard 1 Billing 9 Product (as a part of the service delivery) 2 Compensation 10 Quality management system 3 Contractual or agreement 11 Safety and security framework 4 Corporate social 12 Service beneficiary satisfaction¹ responsibility 5 Facility requirements 13 Subcontracting 6 Human resources 14 Sustainability 7 Legal requirements 15 Technical resources 8 OHSAS 16 Terminology

CODE Customer expectations COD Customer expectations 1 Tangible elements 6 Credibility 2 Reliability 7 Safety and security 3 Responsiveness 8 Access 4 Competence 9 Accessibility 5 Courtesy 10 Communication Understanding the customer / customer

11 care

CODE Standards bodies COD 1 AS (1) 8 Mexico (1) 2 AS/NZS (1) 9 SAR (1) 3 AENOR (27) 10 NQ (1) 4 AFNOR (12) 11 CEN (28) 5 BSI (7) 12 ISO (7) 6 UNI (17) 13 Technical Specifications (International) (11) 7 Chile (5)

- 147 - CHESSS

ANNEX G: Guidance Document for the Preparation of Service Standards

GUIDE TO PREPARING SERVICE STANDARDS CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 1 SCOPE 2 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 3 PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES 4 METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFYNG REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD 4.1 GENERAL 4.2 SERVICE LIFECYCLE 4.3 CHECK LIST 5 STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS 5.1 GENERAL 5.2 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED FOLLOWING DELIVERY SEQUENCE 5.3 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS ARE CHOSE FROM CUSTOMER‘S CRITERIA POINT OF VIEW 5.4 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED ATTENDING TO THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS 5.5 OPEN MODEL 5.6 OTHER MODELS, DIFFERENT FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONS 5.7 MIXED 6 METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED 6.1 GENERAL 6.2 MEASURING QUALITY IN SERVICE PROVISION 6.3 MEASURING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION 7 INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 7.1 MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 7.2 SERVICE STANDARDS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE INCLUSION OF MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS IN SERVICE STANDARDS 8 INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS 8.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 8.2 INCLUDING LEGAL REQUIREMENTS IN SERVICE STANDARDS 8.3 INCLUDING REFERENCES TO TECHNICAL REGULTATIONS IN SERVICE STANDARDS 8.4 INCLUDING REQUIREMENTS IN STANDARDS THAT FACILITATE COMPLIANCE WITH LEGISLATION IN FORCE 8.5 USE OF AND REFERENCE TO SERVICE STANDARDS IN REGULATIONS

ANNEX A STRUCTURE OF STANDARDS

ANNEX B BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

- 148 - CHESSS

INTRODUCTION

This Guide aims to help all socio-economic actors and not only standardization professionals of any service sector or subsector (B2B, B2G) that have decided to standardize their activity, to start this journey, irrespective of the reasons that have made them do so. This guide does not intend to be a document to convince a sector of the benefits derived from standardization, but to facilitate that role to those that have decided to enter into the voluntary standardization system.

The methodology consists of providing guidelines to facilitate the identification of potential contents to be included in a service standard. In addition, it considers essential aspects such as structure, approach, interface with management system standards or measuring customer satisfaction.

This guide is prepared within Module 1 of the CHESSS project, co-financed by the European Commission, the European Free Trade Association and by the following standardization bodies: BSI (United Kingdom), AENOR (Spain), DIN (Germany), DS (Denmark), EVS (Estonia) and NEN (Netherlands), under standardization mandate M/371.

When starting standardization in the service area, specific aspects and methodologies should be taken into account since they can facilitate the preparation of standards in the said field. Therefore, this guide aims to draw attention to the aspects or requirements to be considered when initiating standardization activities in the service field.

The service life cycle presented in clause 4 of this guide is based on the original model carried out by Brian Such (United Kingdom) in the field of the CHESSS Project.

This Guide is not intended for certification purposes. The Annexes to this Guide provide examples of how to address specific topics into a sector specific service standard. This Guide has been developed taking, as a reference, the CEN system frame and therefore some assumptions may not make sense outside this but may be adapted by the user of this Guide.

- 149 - CHESSS

1 SCOPE

This Guide provides a methodology for developing sector specific standards in the field of services.

This Guide is designed to support all public or private socio-economic actors interested in standardization in the service field, irrespective of their activity sector or subsector.

This Guide helps to identify in a systematic way topics that each service sector may like to consider for their inclusion in the standard and supports them with examples.

2 TERMS AND DEFINITIONS (Module 2 – CHESSS)

For the purpose of this guide, the following terms and definitions apply:

2.1 CUSTOMER

Physical or legal person, prescriptor or user, potential or real of a service.

Person or entity that contracts services from a service provider (which may or may not be for their own use).

[BS 7373-3]

2.2 (CUSTOMER) DISSATISFACTION

Emotional response to the delivery of a service that has failed to meet expectations, for whatever reason.

[CHESSS Module 2]

2.3 (CUSTOMER) EXPECTATION

Anticipation of the level of satisfaction likely to result from receiving a service, including the nature and manner of delivery.

[CHESSS Module 2]

2.4 (CUSTOMER) NEED

Requirement, the meeting of which is fundamental to the provision of a service.

[CHESSS Module 2]

2.5 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

Customer‘s perception of the degree to which the customer‘s requirements have been fulfilled.

[UNE-EN ISO 9000:2000, clause 3.1.4]

- 150 - CHESSS

2.6 GOODS

Products excluding services, thus software, hardware and processed materials, including for example, domestic appliances, home care articles, food, etc.

[ISO/IEC Guide 76, clause 3.2]

2.7 INDICATOR

Quantified measure that permits to appreciate in a pertinent manner the operated aspects in a certain field.

2.8 PROCESS

Set of interrelated or interacting activities which transform inputs into outputs.

[UNE-EN ISO 9000:2000, clause 3.4.1]

2.9 QUALITY

Degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfils requirements.

[UNE-EN ISO 9000:2000, clause 3.1.1]

2.10 REQUIREMENT

Need or expectation that is set, generally implied or obligatory.

[UNE-EN ISO 9000:2000, clause 3.1.2]

2.11 SATISFACTION INDICATOR

Indicatore measuring the quality perceived by the customer based on his expectations (e.g. percentage of customers satisfied with the delivery deadline of a product).

2.12 SECTOR SPECIFIC SERVICE STANDARD, SERVICE STANDARD

A standard that establishes requirements or recommendations to be met by the service provider or the service itself against which they can be assessed.

2.13 SERVICE

Predetermined action(s) undertaken to assist or bring pleasure to one or more people to meet specified needs in accordance with their expectations.

[CHESSS Module 2]

Note: Such actions may be undertaken on a commercial, charitable or not-for-profit basis.

2.14 SERVICE PROVIDER

- 151 - CHESSS

Entity undertaking the delivery of a service.

[CHESSS Module 2]

2.15 SERVICE SECTOR

Grouping of services and service providers created for identification, analysis or similar purposes.

[CHESSS Module 2]

2.16 TANGIBLE ELEMENTS

Appearance of physical means, infrastructures, equipment, material and personnel that participate in the service provision.

2.17 USER

Person who uses the service(s) of the service provider.

[ISO/IEC Guide 76]

Standardization group: group of stakeholders drafting a sector specific service standard.

- 152 - CHESSS

3 PREVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS ON SERVICES

Before addressing the drafting of a standard, the standardization group, ―the Group‖ from now on, should consider a number of issues affecting some important aspects. Responding to these issues will enable the group to identify in advance the purpose of the standard and to subsequently identify the requirements and recommendations to be considered in the document. Having a clear starting point will avoid backward steps.

3.1 REASONS TO UNDERTAKE STANDARDIZATION

This clause presents the potential motivations that may have led to taking the decision to undertake the drafting of a standard or, in other words, the results aimed for with the publication of the standard.

If this approach is to be shown on the standard itself, the appropriate clause in which to include it is usually the ―Introduction‖, since it has an informative nature.

Potential reasons for a service sector to undertake standardization activities are:

- To comply with customer requirements - To differentiate from other offers, stressing the highest part of the offer - To prevet unfair competition (against non professionals, unregistered companies) - To increase market credibility - To differentiate from other markets, to combat market loss - To get ahead of customer requirements - To attend to new demands of customers - To arrange the activity in a sector lacking specific regulations - To position itself in the market - To fill in the lack of specific qualifications of professionals in a given sector - To have certification expectations

Fig. 1 is a representation of various forces influencing the reasons to undertake standardization.

- 153 - CHESSS

Figure 1 – Forces influencing the reasons to undertake standardization

3.2 CHARACTERISTICS USUALLY PRESENT IN SERVICES:

- they can be abstract, intangible - they are impossible to keep in stock - they can be produced, delivered, consumed and marketed all at the same time (simultaneity) - they usually require the customer to actively participate in the process - customer and employee interaction can significantly affect the outcome - they can be performed/delivered in the field, away from the controlled company environment - the outcome for the customer is highly influenced by the experience of the process - there may or may not be a tangible result - it can be difficult to measure the outcome - they cannot be separated from their source of production: inseparability - their use can be restricted due to age, physical or economic ability, or health

With regard to the economic interface between the customer and the supplier:

o with valuable consideration and by agreement between the parties (e.g. lunch in a restaurant) o with valuable consideration by a prescriber (e.g. the company selects their computing equipment suppliers, or insurance for the management team)

- 154 - CHESSS

o with delegated valuable consideration (e.g. medical services in a public Health Centre, tax declaration at the Tax Agency) o in a voluntary way without any valuable consideration (e.g. NGO collaborators)

3.3 SCOPE OF THE SECTOR SPECIFIC SERVICE STANDARD

This clause defines the content of the standard, who shall comply with it and to whom it is addressed: - tomar de los procedimientos de CEN

- What does the standard describe?

- The entire service provided by the service provider (e.g. an airline service) - One or some of the subservices ( e.g. on-board service on a plane) - All or some service categories (e.g. ―Business class‖, safety-related services)

- Who shall meet the standard requirements?

- The service provider - Entities subcontracted by the provider - Who shall offer guarantees of compliance and is held liable in case of non- compliance

- Whom is it addressed to?

- All or some customer segments (e.g. elderly, children, disabled)

3.4 STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARD

The service standard can be drafted following different methodologies; these are some of the possible ones:

- According to internal processes, business areas or functional areas, e.g., some Spanish or Chilean standards for tourist services, or UNI 11067 Standard on Managing consulting, criteria for supply and check, or AS / NZS Standard on Laundry practice. - According to the service provision sequence, e.g., Restaurant services (UNE 167…), Translation services (EN 15038), Event stewarding (BS 8406). - According to customer needs and expectations;the standard sets requirements in accordance with the different generic customer expectations (reliability, response capability, competence, courtesy, etc.) e.g., UNE Standards on retail trade.

Service sectors are usually tempted to use a specific quality management system model to develop the standard for their activity (see clause 6 for further information).

There are numerous examples of standards not following one single approach, but a combination of these.

Therefore, standards will have different structures according to the scope and approach agreed by the organizations participating in the standardization process.

- 155 - CHESSS

As an example, there are service standards including requirements which refer to the following, among others:

o Facilities and equipment (hotels, golf courses, etc.) o Products (fish retail trade, translation services – the text, postal services, etc.) o Activities (market research) o Customer perception (retail trade, customer call centres, etc.) o Processes (UNE draft standard on hotels – Tourism)

3.5 CUSTOMERS

The first consideration to be borne in mind is that the standard shall not impose requirements on the customers since they are not committing themselves to complying with the standard. On the contrary, service providers are those who actually commit themselves to complying with it; services can be standardized, whereas customers cannot be. In the event that a specific contribution by the customer is required at a given moment for the service to be provided at the quality or commitment level acquired, the solution when drafting the standard could be to require the service provider to commit him/herself to requesting said collaboration to the customer in a formal way. In the event that the provider cannot obtain the customer‘s collaboration as requested, the latter commits him/herself not to continue providing the service if the standard prevents him/her from doing so or, otherwise, recording the negative response of the customer (e.g., ISO 20252 )

It is suggested that the customer profile to whom the standard is addressed be identified:

o Customers can be physical or legal persons; potential or actual, service prescribers or users. o The customer can be an individual or a group, a person or an organization with legal entity. There could be consecutive customers (a company and its employees – contracting training for the personnel, an individual and his/her family, a father and his son; an intermediary and his/her customer – contracting of a banquet) with the provider‘s objective to satisfy all of them. It is necessary to know who will evaluate the service, who will be asked about his/her degree of satisfaction and who can bear any influence on the decision to repurchase. In brief, both the customer (the person hiring the service) and the final recipient of the service shall be identified. o Groups of customers with special needs, vulnerable groups (restrictions of use due to age or disability, groups with special demands, with different ethical and cultural background) shall be identified by the Group.

Once the service customer(s) has(ve) been identified, the following actions are proposed:

o Research customers‘ needs, priorities, and preferences in relation to the proposed service (e.g. go shopping in the morning or in the afternoon, early or late, before or after work) o Understand customers‘ problems and values (e.g. patients capable of expressing their ailments in a precise way) o Identify the specific and special needs of the target group of customers o Identify any particular customer preferences for location, physical access, facilities or other

- 156 - CHESSS

Example: In education services, there are two types of customers: the one paying for the service (usually, the parents or tutors of a student) the one receiving the service (the student)

Note: ISO/IEC Guide 76:2008 provides recommendations on criteria which are of interest to customers, in order to take them into account when preparing service standards.

3.6 CUSTOMER-SERVICE PROVIDER INTERFACE

Out of the analysis of standards carried out, the following conclusions were drawn: - Services with a low-intensity interface between customer and supplier usually stresses the processes and functions clearly defined in the standard in order to guarantee the provision agreed with the customer. - Services with a high-intensity interface between customer and supplier usually stresses aspects which are directly linked to customer perception and priorities.

- 157 - CHESSS

4 METHODOLOGY TO IDENTIFY REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE STANDARD

4.1 GENERAL

This methodology consists of two steps. It helps the Group to identify contents for possible inclusion in the standards as recommendations, requirements or other:

- Service lifecycle (astral model) – identification of main areas to be developed in the standard (see 4.1) - Checklist developing said areas, contributing to identifying specific requirements and recommendations of the service in a more precise way (see 4.2)

4.2 SERVICE LIFECYCLE – Identification of main areas

4.2.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

The model illustrated in figure 1 defines in a schematic fashion the phases for service provision (provider cycle) and experience (customer cycle). This model will enable us to follow a methodology in order to identify, in a logical and orderly manner, the relevant information areas to consider when preparing a standard for the service sector.

This scheme shall be interpreted in a flexible way, taking into account that:

- not all services go necessarily through all phases and sub-phases (e.g., public services do not require the customer agreement); - the beginning and termination of each phase is not previously defined, and can vary from one service to another, but in order to work with them, they shall be sequentially set on the graph (e.g., when customized information is provided, the service begins even before agreement is reached between the parties).

There is certainly no previous obligation or commitment of any kind to establish requirements for all phases and sub-phases hereby defined. This decision is up to the standardization group. In fact, the service lifecycle model is represented in full for proper understanding but some of the steps may not likely be standardized in a service standard (e.g., society)

- 158 - CHESSS

Fig. 4.1 – Service lifecycle model

- 159 - CHESSS

4.2.2 PRIMARY EXTERNAL INFLUENCES

These are elements which are present in the environment where service providers operate and have an influence both on them, and on their relations with customers.

These are the influences that broadly define the minimum service that can acceptably be provided at a particular time and in any given community. The service actually delivered is likely to exceed the minimum to an extent determined by the service provider but the core influences will continue to act to ensure that the minimum is at least maintained or the provider is likely to cease to function.

4.2.2.1 Society5

The pressures exerted on a service by the society in which it is provided, will vary from country to country, both in extent and nature (e.g., influenced by how much legislation is enacted and the social awareness/ maturity of the population) there will however almost inevitably be aspects of service provision that a majority of service providers will feel bound to address, in response to those societal expectations. These can also be a driver for the introduction of innovative practice.

4.2.2.2 Legislation

Legislation will influence provider decision from conception through to delivery and have a bearing on customer expectation.

Requirements drawn from legislation can be included in the standard. This way, their observance will become expressly mandatory in order to comply with the standard (for more information, see clause 8).

4.2.2.3 Competition1

It offers similar services to those supplied by the service provider, or even different services (substitutive services) that can attract the customers and prevent them from hiring or experiencing the services supplied by the said provider.

The offer of the competition can have an influence on the cycle, especially on customer‘s decision-taking and on the review phase by the provider, on complaining behaviour and the numbers of complaints made.

4.2.2.4 Technology

Access to existing technology or the emergence of new technology can have significant influence on the quality of service provision and in some instances can be the sole reason for service provision.

5 This subclause is included in order to complete the description of the service cycle but it might not be possible to standardize any aspect relating to it.

- 160 - CHESSS

4.2.3 THE SERVICE LIFECYCLE

4.2.3.1 Conception

This initial sub-phase is where the service idea is conceived, including a preliminary definition of potential target audiences, resources and infrastructures, as well as commercial issues, abilities, necessary knowledge to bring the new service offer to the market, and the consideration of paperwork or legal requirements (see 4.1.2).

Key influences on this decision will be:

Reward, which is at the heart of all offered services, whether that offering is done commercially, socially on a not for profit basis or as a voluntary act. The reward for service provision can therefore range from financial benefit, through political support to the satisfaction of providing a helping hand. Perceived (customer) needs; the service provider‘s understanding of the customer‘s needs in respect of the service provision under consideration.

4.2.3.2 Design

In this model, this includes market research to study and analyse the existing demand for the service conceived in a specific market, in the light of the Primary External Influences and the probability of success.

Process of establishing the nature, sequence and extent of service elements to be provided, the methodology of their provision and the envisaged needs that they will be intended to meet.

This sub-phase covers design, definition, drafting of procedures, preparation of facilities, equipment and infrastructures, selection and capacity-building of human resources, and so on, that are required for the service offer and provision.

4.2.3.3 New customer6

A customer that has not previously received the service, will think about whether it is convenient to receive it or not, entering the cycle.

The following are the criteria to which, according to Panasuraman7, the customer refers when assessing a service. In this clause the group is advised to assess the service taking these criteria into account and with this approach in mind in order to decide whether it is necessary to include a requirement or recommendation that will help the customer have a better concept of the service.

6 This subclause is included in order to complete the description of the service cycle but it might not be possible to standardize any aspect relating to it. 7 This subclause is included in order to complete the description of the service cycle but it might not be possible to standardize any aspect relating to i

- 161 - CHESSS

This approach is complementary to considerations followed throughout clause 4, knowing that some elements have already been mentioned (for instance, communication has already been partially addressed under in 4.7, or tangible elements that have been partially addressed in clauses 2.1.3 design and 4.4 flow of goods).

Criteria used by the customer to assess the service

a. Tangible elements

These include, among other elements, the appearance of facilities, premises where the service is provided, equipment, staff and printed or visual material.

b. Reliability

Ability of the organization providing the service to provide the service agreed in a reliable and accurate way.

c. Response capability

Will be to provide the customers with assistance and to provide a timely service.

d. Professional competence

Having the abilities required and the knowledge so that the provider‘s personnel can provide the service.

e. Courtesy

Education, respect, consideration and friendliness of the personnel recruited by the service provider.

f. Credibility

Honesty, trust and integrity that the personnel and organization providing the service can generate in the customer.

g. Health and safety

Understanding this concept in the broadest possible sense. Relevant for the customer and his belongings, the personnel or subcontractors providing the service and their belongings, the environment where the service is provided, the equipment used, investments, identity, lack of exposure to danger, risks or doubts.

This category also covers all aspects regarding protection of honour, of the cultural or religious identity of customers, of their personal details, etc.

h. Access

Ability to access a service, an attainable service, or a service which is easily hired.

- 162 - CHESSS

i. Accessibility

Design of the built or natural environment where a service is provided, so that it enables persons with and without disabilities to enjoy it. This concept is actually identical to the previous one, but it has been differentiated in order to highlight the importance of taking into account groups with special needs.

j. Communication

Ability to listen to the customers, keep them duly informed and use a simple language.

k. Understanding the customer and customer service

Make an effort to get to know the customers and their needs.

Existence of implicit and explicit requirements (This cannot be standardized)

Customers have a series of needs) that they are usually capable of identifying and transmitting (explicit requirements). In addition, customers carry with them (even if they are not aware or capable of expressing it) a series of expectations.

Some needs and expectations are common for groups, i.e., can be identified as requested by social groups such as persons with disabilities, children, executives, and so on.

Service providers cannot standardize the needs or expectations of the customer, but they can standardize the offer in conformance with the information available regarding both needs and expectations.

For more detailed information on general customer expectations, see 4.8. ISO/IEC Guide 76 also provides detailed information on potential general customer expectations.

4.2.3.4 Marketing and awareness

This covers all aspects of making information available to potential customers with regard to the nature, extent and availability of any particular service and with a view to influencing the customer‘s decision with regard to service take-up, to meet their own perceived and actual needs. Note: This is the stage at which service providers begin to directly influence customer‘s expectations.

This includes ―awareness‖, the extent to which customers become aware and are influenced by service providers‘ promotion activity. Customers assess the different service offers they know of or have reference of, those offers which are of their interest and according to their needs.

4.2.3.5 Agreement

- 163 - CHESSS

During this sub-phase, the service provider establishes its conditions for service provision (e.g., scope, duration, place, required guarantees, payment methods, price, etc).

Customers establish their conditions for accepting the service, or accept the conditions previously established by the service provider, or reach an agreement with the latter. This agreement can include the scope, duration, type of service from the provider‘s range of offers, terms of payment, guarantees, etc.

The customer can pay for the service provided, or deliver an economic sum or a different good as a guarantee, deposit or advance.

Payment by the customer can be made before, during or after service provision.

Moreover, after making a payment, deposit or advance, a document can be generated, whether in physical or electronic format, as evidence or guarantee of the payment or delivery.

4.2.3.6 Billing and Payment

Whilst payment is not necessarily required for all service delivery, billing is likely to be an intrinsic part of the lifecycle of the majority of services. It is essential to recognize that the billing process, which is complimentary to the primary service, can itself be the cause of considerable dissatisfaction on the part of the customer. It should be considered that good service can become unsatisfactory in the mind of the customer as a result of poor billing practice.

4.2.3.7 Service provision / Interaction

Represented in the model by the extent that the blue (continuous) oval is overlaid by the yellow (dashed) oval; this is likely to be the period of closest interaction between the service provider and customer during which the service will be provided and the customer‘s actual experience of that service will be viewed against their expectations for the service that will have developed since their first awareness.

Beginning and termination (milestones) of service do not take place at a specific moment in time; on the contrary, they can vary from one service sector to another and even from one provision to the next.

This phase is the core element of the cycle, where the main interaction between customer and provider takes place.

This service has six elements, such as the following:

What: what the actual service consists of, what the aim of the provision is. Where: the place, even if virtual, where provision takes place. When: the moment or period of time when provision is carried out. Who: the people who actually carry out service provision.

- 164 - CHESSS

How: the way in which the service is provided. Price8

Between the provider cycle and that of the customer, generally during the service provision phases (provider) and service experience phases (customer), exchange of goods can take place. These goods can be either: supplied by the service provider (e.g., food at a restaurant), supplied by the customer for the provider to do something with (e.g., transport of parcels or postal services).

During this phase, customers experience the service and assess it in accordance with their expectations, whether previously conceived or developed during their own experience.

Moreover, they issue specific information (feedback), in some cases with total awareness and in others in an unconscious way involving gestures, which provides the service provider with information on how their service experience is taking place. For this reason, it is during this phase that the service provider can obtain widest information on the customer‘s perception.

4.2.3.8 Service (period) review

This is a point in the service cycle at which the customer‘s experience of the service could crystallize into a conclusion with regard to satisfaction or otherwise, with the service provided. This could occur randomly, in response to some unintended or unexpected feature of the service provision. On the other hand, its occurrence may well be predictable, triggered by a specific stage of the service itself. For a continuous service e.g., provision of a bank account, this point may well be the arrival of a periodic statement whereas for a finite event service e.g., a haircut the conclusion is likely to be drawn at the end of a specific service event.

4.2.3.9 Customer decision

Stimulated by service review (s) and dependent on service type, the customer will make a decision as to whether or not to continue or re-engage with a service or service provider. This decision may or may not be, simultaneous with the review and may or may not be communicated to the service provider (see 4.2.3.12 for customer loss and references to complaining behaviour).

4.2.3.10 Provider review

It is likely that any service will incorporate some process of performance review by the service provider (formally or informally) with a view to confirming continuity of provision or introducing changes for a variety of reasons (e.g., reduce costs, improved profitability, customer retention, brand enhancement, to fend off competition, etc).

It should be recognized that the outcome of the review could be any one of:

8 This element is included in order to complete the description of the service cycle but it might not be possible to standardize any aspect relating to it.

- 165 - CHESSS

Continuation without change (see note 7), the cycle repeats via promotion and awareness) Continuation with changes to correct or enhance the service (see note 9) Withdrawal of the service (see note 11)

Whatever the nature and strength of the drivers/ objectives for improvement, the decision to take relevant action will always be the prerogative of service providers even though they may well feel under considerable pressure to make such changes.

4.2.3.11 Innovation

Action taken to improve/ enhance the service in response to a variety of external and internal incentives. The competing pressures of these various, sometimes conflicting, incentives can, not infrequently, lead to the development of innovative solutions. In the model, the incorporation of this decision is shown as apparently enlarging the service cycle as a means of representing service enhancement. This does not however carry any time or service duration implications. It is recognized that the innovation decision is likely to entail some re-design and new market research, with particular reference to any changes and innovations to be introduced.

Decisions, in all respects, however, will always remain within the remit of the service provider

4.2.3.12 Customer Loss9

The complexity of service provision makes it likely that any service will suffer some loss of customers due to dissatisfaction with the nature of the service objective or the manner of its provision. This unfortunate aspect of the service lifecycle can occur at any stage of the cycle (both before and after completion of the service provision) and the note reference number allocated has little significance to the sequence of occurrence.

Where such loss relates to unrecognized (without reason given or complaint made) loss of customer base for the service provider, then this has an immediate negative impact on the value of the service providers business and impacts the bottom line in a manner that affords the service provider little or no opportunity to influence the outcome, other than in a general and retrospective sense. This should be a significant driver for the introduction of methods, processes, systems for more pro- active customer engagement throughout all contact opportunities during the lifecycle (denoted by bicolour blue/yellow lines and shading) and for the introduction of conscious customer expectations monitoring from the time of earliest contact.

9 This subclause is included in order to complete the description of the service cycle but it might not be possible to standardize any aspect relationg to i

- 166 - CHESSS

The customer does not wish to repeat the service with the service provider, and possibly, in the event of needing the service in the future, will hire a provider of the competition.

4.2.3.13 Termination

A decision not to continue service provision could be made by the service provider for one or more of a variety of reasons and usually as a result of the analysis conducted during the provider review phase; the company may decide not to provide the service again to any customer. In these cases, the guarantees, the consequences regarding contracts previously established or legal requirements, the potential relocation of customers, etc, should be borne in mind.

4.3 CHECK LIST

A list of possible relevant items to be considered when identifying requirements or recommendations to be included in the service standard is provided below. These items are provided following the methodology shown in clause 4.

Some of the items are repeated under different paragraphs, but they should be considered with the relevant different perspectives according to each paragraph.

4.3.1 COMMUNICATION

This item is present everywhere in the Service Cycle. It must be considered as a horizontal aspect in all the phases and sub-phases.

General (relevant for both personnel and customer)

Minimum requirements for agreements. Aspects of the service which may have impact on health, environment, society and culture. Certifications, audits, conformity declarations, adherence to ethical codes or good practices. Special offers and discounts, saving possibilities. Signposting and signalization. Abnormal conditions, incidence, alternative services. Accuracy of information.

Internal communications

Service measurements. Specific agreements with the customers. Changes in the procedures. Improvements. Complaints management. Company policy, mission, vision or strategies towards customers. Abnormal conditions, incidence, alternative services.

- 167 - CHESSS

Availability of documentation, procedures, legal texts, etc., for relevant personnel.

Communications with customers

Information on customer‘s rights. Problem reporting procedures. Meetings, reports, briefing, debriefing, follow up. Complaint access channels and feedback. Company policy, mission, vision or strategies towards customers. Instructions on how to experience the service. Communication of titles and qualifications of personnel. Aspects related with safety, allergies. Access of non-customers to installations and premises. Alternative communication channels (braille, verbal, etc). Changes of the conditions during the service. Permanent contact point.

4.3.2 SOCIETY

As it was said in 4.2.2.1 (Society) this element is not standardizable, but we have to consider it in order to identify related relevant requirements to introduce in the standard:

Environmental protection and impact. Social corporate responsibility, ethics and transparency. Available human resources (qualification of personnel available, culture, etc). Cultural aspects of the environment (culture, religion, values and beliefs, etc). Non discrimination. Political ramifications of the service (or if the service might be affected by society objections, pressures or politics) etc.

4.3.3 LEGISLATION

Reference to relevant legislation and technical regulation: o International treaties, o regional, national, o province, o local legislation and by-laws. Application of safety generic legislation to the specific sector o fire regulations, o tobacco, o emergency planning and evacuation, o earthquakes, o anti-terrorism, o signposting, o waste, o illumination, o persons with disabilities, o personnel protection, o HACCP.

- 168 - CHESSS

Codes of good practice, professional codes, sector codes, Technical standards, state of the art, Constraints for trade between different countries, Licensing, authorization, registration, Insurances, Non discriminatory practices, In the case of professional services, terms and liabilities that apply, Occupational health and safety aspects, Customer safety and security, Other bilateral agreements, Other legal limitations to the service, Service termination legal requirements, Procedures for follow up and updating developments in technical regulations, Differences in national legislations and requirements for services provided between different countries.

4.3.4 COMPETITION

As it was said in 4.2.2.3 (Competitors) this element is not standardizable, but we have to consider it in order to identify relevant requirements to introduce in the standard:

Requirements linked with differentiation with the competitors.

4.3.5 TECHNOLOGY

Technology can be standardized but usually not in service standards. Service standards may refer to the required technology that shall/should be available for a specified level of service provision. Reference can be made to existing standards describing products, technological languages or other:

Technology available, Price of technology, Future evolution of technology, Patent rights.

4.3.6 CONCEPTION

Usually not standardizable

4.3.7 DESIGN

Possible items related to the service design Market Research covered under this main area is not standardizable.

Management

o Commitments, o Functions and responsibilities,

- 169 - CHESSS

o Quality, o Environment, o Ethics, o Health and safety, o Documentation, o Indicators and measurements, o Continual improvement, o Customer feedback and dissatisfaction, o Planning of resources needed (products, personnel, financial, etc…), o Rules of behaviour (general, exceptions, complaints, etc).

Human resources

o Titles, o Qualifications, o Experience, o Assessment of competence, o Continuous trainings, training needs identification, o Language and communication skills (e.g., language used by usual customers), o Staff interpersonal skills, attitude, o Courtesy, o Understanding the customer, o Visual aspect, o Understanding and knowing the internal procedures and the standard, o Availability of healthy and safe working conditions, o Knowledge about service and products, o Knowledge of safety procedures.

4.3.8 CUSTOMER

See 3.5 previous considerations about customers.

Service concept/service delivery

What. This is the core of the service,the reason for all other predetermined actions. o Define the service to be provided, o After sales provision. Where. Requirements for the place/platform in which the service is delivered (in house offices, destination, virtual environment, etc). When. o Timeframe, o time commitment, o deadline, o opening hours, etc, o Out of hours support.

Who. Who is the service addressed to. How. Requirements for service provision. o Reception of customer: . Friendly environment,

- 170 - CHESSS

. Greet the client, . Written procedures to welcome customer on the premises and process communications by telephone, fax, mail, e-mail, . Professional attitude, . Courtesy, . Respect, . Over familiar attitude and respecting privacy.

o Interaction with the customer: . Provide the service adequately and efficiently, . Respect obligations of the contract and ensure delivery of the service, . Punctuality and professionalism, . Comprehensive advice to the customer, . Internal customer (other departments / processes in the organization), . External customer, . Anticipation of customer needs and additional services. o Qualification of staff delivering the service: . List the parties involved, . Minimum number of persons in service provision, . Prevision of personnel needed, o Which customers are eligible for the service (e.g., Age, height, dressing code), disabilities. o Definition of number of customers covered by the service. o Describe how the service will be delivered. o Address customer issues. o Required performance level (for each key parameter of the service) and priorities. o Procedures (internal, service provision, etc). o Types of services contracted. o Categories, segmentation of customers, etc. o Response times. o Normal conditions. o Exceptional conditions. o Reporting of problems during service (problem reporting procedures). o Define how to agree exceptions in the service. o Define how to introduce changes in the normal procedure. o Placing and labelling of the products. o Transport, storage and transformation of raw materials, components and customer goods, including access control, manipulation and transformation by authorized personnel. o Packaging. o Services provide across borders. Price. This item cannot be standardized; a different issue is to offering information on company‘s price policy which can be standardized.

Service offering

Consider the following aspects when preparing a service offering:

o Alignment of the services offerings compared with the requirements,

- 171 - CHESSS

o Define the essence of the service that will make service delivery more likely to be a satisfying experience to the customer, o Design and listing of necessary installations, facilities, areas, environment, etc, o Regulatory considerations, o Location of service delivery, o Atmosphere, aesthetics, image, etc, o Document processes and procedures, o Copyrights, IPR and trademarks, o Environment: packaging, energy, waste disposal and treatment, noise, o Need for records and traceability and hygiene during service provision, o Planning compatibility with other services, o Schedule and time table, opening hours, periodicity, o Lifetime of service offering, duration of offered service, o Service quality, reliability, service level attributes, o Warranty terms, where appropriate (period and extent), o Measurements of the service, o Communication channel between customer and provider.

Requirements for installations and equipment

o Location, o Where and how to receive customers, o Attributes, size, environment, atmosphere, o Illumination, o Acoustics, o Isolation, o Communication, IT system and software; needs and requirements, o Safety and security equipment and installations, o Health and safety requirements for installations, o Legal requirements, o Signposting and signalization, o Maintenance (also relevant for safety and security).

Safety and security

o Confidentiality, o Hygiene, HACCP, traceability, o Availability of adequate medical and health first aid services, o Safety and security at work, o Personal data protection (about personnel and customers data), o Risk management, o Exceptional situations, natural disasters and emergencies, o Access to non-customers to installations and premises, o Payment with credit card; security and safe-payment certificates, o Personnel protective equipment and costumes, o Maintenance of equipment and installations, o Detection and prevention of recurrent accidents.

Subcontracting and providers

- 172 - CHESSS

o Requirements for selecting providers and subcontractors. o Respecting contract and internal procedures of organizations. o Auditing subcontractors.

4.3.9 MARKETING AND AWARENESS

Possible items related to the promotional material and means:

Credibility of the promotional material, Non social group discrimination, Access, Accessibility Compliance with legislation, technical standards, codes of practice and reference to them in the promotional material, Information requirements about price, categories, guarantees, opening hours, etc., in the promotional material.

4.3.10 AGREEMENT (BETWEEN PROVIDER AND CUSTOMER)

General

o Contract, o Definition of service to be provided, o Service level agreement, o Price, o Billing, o Payment methods, including possibilities for financing, o Situations or services where refunds are not possible, o Complaint management, o Guarantees, o Insurances, o Compensations, o After sales service, o Exceptions and deviations from standard service, o Dispute resolution, o Out of hours support, o Meetings, reporting, etc, o Possibility of changes in service provision conditions, o Confidentiality, o Copyright, o Changes, devolutions and refund.

Customer agreement confirmation and communication o Normal agreement, o Exceptions and deviations, o Customer responsibilities in the agreement, o Confirmation that customer understands agreement.

Provider agreement confirmation and communication

- 173 - CHESSS

o Normal agreement, o Exceptions and deviations, o Provider responsibilities in the agreement, o Confirmation that provider understands agreement.

4.3.11 SERVICE PROVISION / INTERACTING

See also clause 5 of this Guide and results of Modules 4 and 5 of CHESSS.

Address customer issues as service is delivered, if possible.

Measurements

o Performance indicators or parameters of the service delivery, o Performance levels for the performance indicators, o Performance measurements (normally quantitative measures, e.g., mystery shoppers, benchmarking), o Measurement techniques and methodologies, o What to do with the measurements in the organization; collecting, compiling the information gathered, o Internal audit, o Supervision of correct performance of the service (according to tasks described in the organization), o Supervision of the level of knowledge of personnel about the service.

Feedback

o Gathering of information and complaints, o Analysis, o Actions and compensations, o Possible revision of service provision.

4.3.12 SERVICE (PERIOD) REVIEW

Regular information (e.g., bank account statement); Milestones of service progress (e.g., consultancy service provider meets with customer throughout the duration of the project; these may allow redefinition of steps or objectives).

4.3.13 CUSTOMER DECISIONS

As it was said in 4.2.3.9 this element is not standardizable.

4.3.14 PROVIDER REVIEW

o Continuous improvement (procedures, allocation of responsibilities), o Monitoring of safety, security and health issues, o Internal audit, o Revisions.

- 174 - CHESSS

4.3.15 INNOVATION

Innovation should be compatible with addressing customer feedback, Standards should not present innovation to take place in between review periods of the European standard.

4.3.16 CUSTOMER LOSS

As it was said in 4.2.3.12 this element is not standardizable.

4.3.17 SERVICE TERMINATION

Process for termination of services, Disposal of personal data and client history / client products, Compensations.

- 175 - CHESSS

5 STRUCTURE OF THE SERVICE STANDARDS

5.1 GENERAL

This clause compiles different structures service standards use to adopt and to describe the service provision.

There is no fixed structure for service standards, as the need for having such standard and the requirements identified to be included can have a definitive influence on the model to be chosen.

After having studied more than 100 standards in the field of services, it has been found that the most commonly used structures for drafting these standards are:

Service is described following a service provision sequence, Service requirements are established to directly meet customer‘s needs and expectations, Service is described depending on the internal organization of the service provider, Open model, Other models different from those mentioned above, A mixture of two or more of the above.

5.2 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED FOLLOWING SERVICE PROVISION SEQUENCE

The standard follows the usual service provision sequence and usually makes reference to the following areas:

Human resources, Technical infrastructure and equipments, Review, Customer information, Agreement or contract, Service delivery, Claims and feedback management, Post service.

A list of standards following this structure can be found in Annex A, A1.

5.3 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS ARE ESTABLISEHD TO DIRECTLY MEET CUSTOMER‘S NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS

Standards following this structure normally include a detailed list of identified (implicit or explicit) criteria used by the customer to assess the service. Sometimes these criteria correspond to SERVQUAL criteria, and sometimes to specific criteria identified for the specific sectors.

For instance, some of the most commonly used criteria in service standards following this structure are:

- 176 - CHESSS

Tangible elements, Reliability, Responsiveness, Competence, Courtesy, Credibility, Safety and security, Access (easy to contact with service provider), Accessibility (physical barriers), Communication, Understanding customer needs.

A list of standards following this structure can be found in Annex A, A2.

5.4 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED ATTENDING TO THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER

The standards follow the usual internal organization of the service providers, specifying requirements for each department or division (e.g., management, reception, purchasing, storage, maintenance, etc).

A list of standards following this structure can be found in Annex A, A3.

5.5 OPEN MODEL

The standard indicates those areas or aspects of the service in which the service provider has to commit him/herself to fix a specific level of compliance.

According to this model two similar service providers (operating in the same market, with similar market share, size and number of employees) will implement quality measures in the same aspects of their activity but may end up with different specific quality service levels.

This type of structure usually includes a ―Continuous improvement‖ clause that commits the service provider to regularly revise the activity, in special with regard to customer satisfaction.

A clear example of a standard following this structure can be found in Annex, A.4.

5.6 OTHER MODELS, DIFFERENT FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONED

This category includes all the methodologies identified which are different from the above mentioned structures.

For instance, in some service sectors, we can sets of standards containing each one different aspects of the service provision such as:

Standard #1: Total management, Standard #2: Facilities and installation requirements, Standard #3: Technical equipment requirements, Standard #4: Human resources requirements and qualification, Standard #5: Safety and security requirements.

- 177 - CHESSS

In addition, we can find standards that have their own methodology, which is completely different from the structures for the rest of the service provisions.

A list of standards following this structure can be found in Annex A, A5.

5.7 MIXED

Some standards are base on two or more structures from the ones mentioned above. Reference to detailed examples of standards following different structures can be found in Annex A, A5.

- 178 - CHESSS

6 METHODS FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED

6.1 GENERAL

In order to define the concept of service quality it is essential to identify a series of quality criteria that represent the customer‘s opinion or perception of the service that has been provided.

The definition of the quality criteria and the appropriate measurement thereof will determine the target quality defined at a corporate level. The selection of the quality criteria that must be measured or rated must be done in accordance with the results obtained in the customer expectation surveys. The number of criteria must be big enough to cover the criteria that are considered to be essential, although it must be set in accordance with the service provider‘s capacity to manage said criteria. It is advisable to start off with a limited number of criteria and then, once the measurement methods are duly mastered, to increase the number of criteria considered. For each quality criterion, it is important to define what is understood by ―compliance‖ and ―non compliance‖.

Measurements are a useful management and motivation tool, provided that they lead to improvement measures (EN 15140). Measurement processes must be adequately planned, validated, implemented, documented, and monitored. During the design stage, it is important to define what kind of measurements are required to ensure the quality of the service provided and to consider the means and equipment needed for the measurements, as well as the skills and capacities that the staff must have in order to perform this task.

Due to the inherent nature of services, there are often differences between the quality of the services provided (delivered quality) and the quality that is perceived by the customer (perceived quality). Differences between them depend on the customers‘ knowledge of the service provided and of their own experiences (or experiences reported by third parties) regarding the service or on their cultural or social status.

The table below summarizes the different ways of measuring delivered and perceived quality:

DELIVERED QUALITY PERCEIVED QUALITY

MEASUREMENT PROVISION SATISFACTION

DIRECT Measurements, times, temperatures Satisfaction surveys

INDIRECT Mystery Shopper Management indicators related to customer

- 179 - CHESSS

satisfaction In order to perform an overall assessment of the service provided, it is important to measure the quality of the service provided first and then the level of customer satisfaction.

6.2 MEASURING QUALITY IN SERVICE PROVISION

The measurement of the quality of the service provided (delivered quality) must be, where possible, customer-oriented. This approach must be implemented when measuring the aspects of service that are relevant for customers (current or potential) or even for a wider audience (i.e. society in general) in accordance with the results obtained in the market studies that have been previously undertaken. Thus, service provision related measurements must consider the specific needs both of the service provider and of the customers, as well as the local conditions.

It is important that provision measurements are based on accurate definitions so that all the parties involved are perfectly aware of the aspects that are being measured, the data collection method that has been implemented and the frequency of measurements.

In order to assess the quality of the services provided it is necessary to define the quality requirements and criteria, to set objectives and to select measuring methods or techniques. The implementation of the quality cycle principle involve:

- Defining and assessing the customer‘s explicit and implicit expectations. - Specifying the service considering these expectations (e.g., specifying a reference service, a level of demand, and an acceptability threshold). - Providing a service in accordance with the specifications. - Communicating with customers. - Measuring customer satisfaction. - Analysing results and adopting corrective measures, where necessary.

One of the methods used to measure the quality of service provision indirectly is known as mystery shopping. This method assesses the quality of the service based on both objective and potential observations that have been made independently by teams of pollsters trained to act as customers and to assess the service in accordance with previously defined provision levels. The goal of the mystery shopper is to verify, on a regular basis, if the customer perceived the product or service in exactly the same terms as those defined by the company, and thus to see whether there are dysfunctions in the said perception.

By implementing the mystery shopper method, the company can carry out an in-depth assessment of each of its business areas regarding aspects such as exterior appearance,

- 180 - CHESSS reactions, commercial implementation, decoration, range of products, commercial assistance, telephone assistance, means of payment, post-sales service, logistics, incident management, etc., thus adapting each of these aspects to the reality of its business and studying those areas that are critical both for the company and for the customers.

It is advisable that data collection and analysis is proportional to the size of the company that provides the service. Furthermore, it is important to consider the cost-effectiveness of service provision measurements in order to make sure that the cost is in line with the objectives of the measurements.

6.3 MEASURING CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

In order to determine the level of satisfaction of customers‘ needs and expectations it is possible to use direct measurements (obtaining their opinion via surveys, interviews, etc.) or to observe the evolution of the results obtained though indirect measurement methods.

Direct measurements provide information from the point of view of the customers regarding their level of satisfaction with each of the aspects of the service identified as well as their relative importance, allowing for an assessment of the evolution of this importance throughout time. In general, direct measurements are very costly and are often difficult to implement.

Indirect measurements must be based on the indicators implemented by the service provider regarding the different aspects of services and their conformity and the implementation of processes related to customer satisfaction and to the environment. Service providers can have access to indirect measurements on a constant basis, although it is important to mention that their level of accuracy can be much lower than that of direct measurements. Indirect measurements can be used to assess the evolution of customer satisfaction during the period that runs between two direct measurement processes.

The service provider should define the frequency of the direct measurement of customer satisfaction and the convenience of having indirect indicators to monitor satisfaction during intermediate periods.

The customer satisfaction measurement process can be it direct or indirect and must include the following stages: a) Planning. During this stage, it is important to consider the objectives or characteristics of the information in order to make sure that it is useful for the analysis, as well as the inputs or requirements identified by the service provider regarding customer needs and expectations, the

- 181 - CHESSS sequence of activities and the methods needed to carry out the measurement in accordance with the objectives that have been defined. These activities must include, at least, the following tasks:

- Analysis of previous studies, - Identification of population and segmentation, - Estimation of the sample size, - Choosing a data collection method, - Designing the survey, - Customer survey, - Registration of the data obtained in the measurement.

During the planning stage it is also important to consider the human and material resources required to perform the measurement, the skills that the staff involved in the process must have, the responsibilities vis-à-vis process design, implementation and monitoring, the frequency of measurements and the associated costs thereof, the speed of change in the markets, the lifecycle of the service provided, and the results, specifying the measurement method and the methodology used to present the information. b) Implementation of measurements c) Analysis of the data obtained, which shall shed light on the degree of customer satisfaction and its evolution, offer guidance regarding the aspects of the service that can have a greater impact on customer satisfaction, and enable the identification of priority areas, i.e. areas that require improvement. d) Verification and improvement, to verify the efficiency of the measurement process. In this stage, it is important to verify, amongst other aspects the:

Completeness of information: it is important to verify that the data collected are complete. For example, if a self-answered questionnaire is used, it is possible that a considerable number of items have not been answered.

Information accuracy: if sampling techniques are used, it is important to verify the sample error for the confidence interval chosen in the sample data.

Segmentation: a high degree of variability in answers can be due to the quality of the services provided. However, if indirect measurements reveal a high degree of quality stability, this variability can be due to an inadequate segmentation of customers.

- 182 - CHESSS

Relevance of features: identifying the aspects of services that can have a substantial impact on customer satisfaction can be useful, since it enables companies to focus their improvement measures on those aspects that have a greater impact on satisfaction.

Consistency of results: the evolution of customer satisfaction measurements should be consistent with the evolution of other satisfaction-related indicators. For example, growing trends in customer satisfaction could be contradictory with negative trends in customer loyalty.

Customer satisfaction surveys are a tool used to gauge customer satisfaction and it is important to distinguish them from service provision tools. Customer satisfaction is measured on a scale in order for customers to assess the extent to which the service provided responds to their needs. When measuring satisfaction, it is important to compare results with the quality that the customer expects from the service.

- 183 - CHESSS

7 INTERFACE WITH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

There is a very strong interface between service standards and management system standards. Such interfaces become more important as more emphasis is made by service standards in the internal procedures and processes of the company that provides the service.

In principle, the sector promoting standardization in the service field is free to decide the service standard model it wishes to develop. However, clarification of certain concepts is required in order to avoid, insofar as possible, developing new unnecessary management systems for those cases where there are generic management system models that can be directly applied, or adapted to the relevant specific sector.

7.1 MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Management systems

System (set of interrelated or interacting elements) to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objectives

Management systems are used by organizations to develop their policies and operate them to achieve objectives and targets, using:

an organizational structure where all duties, responsibilities, authorities, etc., are defined, systematized processes and associated resources to achieve the objectives and targets, a measurement and assessment methodology to evaluate the organization‘s performance against the objectives and targets, planning the system improvement based on the subsequent analysis of results, and , a review process that ensures problems are corrected and improvement opportunities and recognized and implemented once justified.

Any organization has (be it consciously or not, documented or not) a management system through which their objectives are established, operated and controlled.

The management system of any organization is unique and characteristic of the latter, although it may include different management aspects such as quality management, environmental management, information security management, risk management, or financial management, etc.

Example – A service providing company has a single management system which addresses different aspects. With this aim it has a single internal management manual and different internal procedures that cover some of said aspects:

Quality management, Environmental management, Occupational health and safety management, Information security management, Other horizontal aspects.

- 184 - CHESSS

Service providing companies have several international, regional or national standards, be they generic or sector-specific, to be used as a tool to develop the different aspects of a company‘s management system that will facilitate the implementation and subsequent conformity assessment (self-declaration, verification by the customer or certification by an independent certification body) of the service providing the company against said standards.

Fig. 6.1 – Horizontal management system standards and sector specific management system standards

7.1.1 GENERIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STANDARDS

The following are some examples of national, regional or international standards that cover horizontal or generic aspects of an organization‘s management system.

Examples of generic standards or technical specifications on management aspects:

Quality management: UNE-EN ISO 9001:2000 Quality management systems. Requirements. (ISO 9001:2000)

Environmental management: UNE-EN ISO 14001:2004 Environmental management systems. Requirements with guidance for use. (ISO 14001:2004)

Information security management: UNE 71502:2004

- 185 - CHESSS

Specifications for Information Security Management (ISMS)

UNE-ISO/IEC 17799:2002 Information Technology. Code of practice for information security management.

UNE-ISO/IEC 27001:2007 Information Technology. Security techniques. Information security management systems (ISMS). Requirements. (ISO/IEC 27001:2005)

Research, development and innovation management: UNE 166002:2006 R&D&i management: R&D&i management system requirements.

Occupational health and safety management: OHSAS 18001:2007 Occupational health and safety management systems

7.1.2 SECTOR SPECIFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM STANDARDS

The following are some examples of sector specific management system standards.

Examples of management system standards not included in the service sector:

EN Aerospace management

EN 9100:2003 Aerospace series. Quality management systems. Requirements (based on ISO 9001:2000) and quality systems. Model for quality assurance in design, development, production, installation and servicing (based on ISO 9001:1994).

Automotive sector

ISO/TS 16949:2002 Quality management systems. Particular requirements for the application of ISO 9001:2000 for automotive production and relevant service parts organizations.

A service standard developing requirements for the management system of a sector specific service company can cover all those aspects considered as relevant by the group promoting standardization. Therefore, a service standard may contain particular requirements for quality management, environmental management, human resources management, etc., so that it can develop its own management system model, which will not necessarily be similar to existing and internationally recognized generic management systems (e.g., ISO 14001), or recognized by other sectors (e.g., the aerospace standard or ISO/TS for the automotive industry). This can have the advantage of leading to a better adaptation to the specific needs of the sector but, on the other hand, it can also have the disadvantage of creating difficulties for the user or customer or customer when identifying which is the management system applied by the company contracted.

On the contrary, there is another possibility; which is to make a reference to a specific generic management system standard (e.g., ISO 9001, ISO 14001, ISO standard on Information

- 186 - CHESSS

Management Systems, the new OHSAS 18001, etc), and establish particular requirements or conditions for the application of said standards in the relevant sector. The main advantage of this model lies in the direct reference to management systems which are widely recognized by society, but it may have the disadvantage of having to conduct said adaptation exercises.

The group promoting standardization in a given service sector shall decide which of these 2 options to choose, i.e., whether they wish to establish their own management system model in the service standard, including those aspects considered as relevant (quality, environmental management, information security management, occupational risk management, etc.) or whether to make reference to generic management system standards, including particular requirements for the adaptation of said standards to the relevant sector (ISO 9001 with specific requirements, references to ISO 14001 with specific application requirements, etc.).

The promotion group shall be aware of the fact that, in the second case, by complying with the service standard, they will be able to declare or certify conformity against the management system standards widely recognized within the market and, in most cases, internationally recognized.

7.2 SERVICE STANDARDS AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

In the same way that there is a clear difference between a product standard and a management system standard, similarly we can establish a distinction between:

Standards including specific requirements for services (and the result of the latter), and Management system standards that can be applicable to services.

In the first case, we can declare, prove or assess the conformity of the service provided by the company while, in the second case, we can declare, prove or assess the conformity of the management system operated by the company.

Although the difference may seem obvious from a theoretical perspective, in the services field, in practice we can find a wide range of possibilities that can be summed up in four cases:

7.2.1 THE STANDARD IS A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

In some cases we find service standards where no requirements are established for the result of service provision, but the standard itself establishes requirements for a service provision management system (including aspects such as quality, environmental production, occupational health and safety, etc.).

ISO/IEC 20000-1 Information technology – Service management. Part 1. Specification

ISO/IEC 20000-1 is a standard where the requirements for a service provider to supply managed services of an acceptable level of quality for its customers are defined. Nevertheless, the standard itself indicates that it is not designed for the evaluation of the services provided.

In the event that this model is applied, the sector does not establish any common reference to the sector regarding service provision. In this case, requirements are established for management system elements of the company such as:

- 187 - CHESSS

Policy and objectives, Documentation management, Human resources management, Definition of duties and responsibilities, Internal communication, Customer satisfaction measurement, etc.

7.2.2 THE STANDARD INCLUDES REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SERVICE PROVIDED AND ALSO FOR THE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF THE SERVICE PROVIDING ORGANIZATION

A large amount of standards combining requirements for service provision and evaluation with requirements for the establishment of quality, environmental, occupational health and safety, risk, information security management systems, etc.

ISO 20252:2006 Market, opinion and social research – Vocabulary and service requirements (ISO 20252:2006)

This standard establishes requirements for the management system of the organization providing market research and study services, also establishing specific requirements for the service provided.

PNE 182001:2007 Hotels and tourist apartments – Service requirements

This Spanish draft standard, based on process based management, includes specific requirements for service provision and requirements for quality and environmental management, as well as some considerations regarding occupational health and safety and social responsibility.

In the event that this model is applied, the sector decides to combine management aspects and service provision. This can provide the sector with positive aspects, but also with the problem of missing the possibility of conducting clear conformity assessment against internationally recognized generic management systems.

7.2.3 SERVICE STANDARD CONTAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICE AND MAKING REFERENCE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

There are standards which establish requirements for service provision and/or result and also require the implementation of a management system (be it generic or one including references to specific management system standards), adding particular requirements to said management systems which are applicable to this type of service.

UNE-EN 13816:2003 Transportation – Logistics and services – Public passenger transport – Service quality definition, targeting and measurement

This standard establishes generic requirements for public passenger transport service provision. It has a brief clause which makes reference to the need to implement a quality management system.

- 188 - CHESSS

In the event that this model is applied, the sector can apply (and assess its conformity against) the service standard and, at the same time, it can apply (and assess its conformity against) a standard which establishes requirements for a management system, so that both standards are clearly differentiated. The fact that particular requirements can be established for management systems addressing this type of service generates added value in the event that generic management systems are applied.

Note: Conformity assessment against two different standards does not imply conducting two separate conformity assessment processes.

7.2.4 SERVICE STANDARD WITH NO REQUIREMENTS FOR A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

In addition, there are standards establishing requirements for service provision and/or results which do not contain requirements for management systems or do not require the implementation of a management system (be it generic or one including references to specific management system standards).

ISO 22222 Personal financial planning – requirements for personal financial planners

This standard establishes requirements for personal financial planners, and does not contain any requirement for management systems.

This standard considers:

Process, Practice management, Requirements for core competences, Demonstration of continuing competence.

UNE 179001:2007 Quality in dental surgeries and dental services. General requirements

This standard establishes requirements for services provided by these surgeries. It makes a distinction among dental services aiming to fight against the entry of unqualified people into the profession and misleading advertising of certain entities. Moreover, it identifies all legal requirements to which this sector is subject to. It has been prepared as a supplement to ISO 9001:2000 since it does not contain requirements for the management system.

In the event that this model is applied, the sector can apply (and assess its conformity against) the service standard with the ability to apply, or not, a management system standard, since it does not include any type of requirement in this regard.

7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE INCLUSION OF MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS IN SERVICE STANDARDS

- 189 - CHESSS

The group promoting standardization should prepare standards which comply with the following conditions:

They shall meet the needs and expectations of the sector , They shall have the highest possible level of compatibility with other existing horizontal or generic and even specific standards that can be applied by the sector.

Note: Among the implicit needs of the sector we can find the ability to assess the conformity of organizations against the service standard and/or that the application of the standard by the organization could be understood and recognized by a wide group of customers (be they national, regional or international). As a result, compatibility with existing international or regional standards can be important.

Compliance insofar as possible with the 2 basic conditions mentioned above could be facilitated by pursuing the following recommendations: a) Try to clarify whether the sector is demanding:

a.1. A standard with requirements for service provision and result. a.2. A standard establishing requirements for the management system for entities within the sector. a.3. A standard containing requirements both for the service and for the management system.

Note: For the purpose of this guide, the cases in which the sector only wishes to prepare a simple standard for application of management system standards are not considered, such as, example.g., ISO 14001, for certain sectors, although to some extent the situation is similar to case a.2. b) In cases a.2 or a.3, try to find out whether the group promoting standardization can meet their needs by means of:

b.1. Reference to existing generic management system standards (e.g., ISO 9001, ISO 14001, etc.), adding sector specific application requirements. In the case of a.2 the rest of the standard will contain other requirements for service provision and/or result. b.2. Requirement establishing a generic management system (without mentioning any standard in particular but enabling the application of internationally recognized management system standards), indicating minimum application requirements for said management systems in the sector. In the case of a.2 the rest of the standard will contain other requirements for service provision and/or result. c) If the group promoting standardization wishes to develop its own model, through the preparation of a standard which establishes requirements for a specific management system (case a.2), or that in addition the said management system establishes requirements for service provision and/or result (case a.3), rejecting alternatives b.1 or b.2, incompatibilities with existing systems in internationally or regionally recognized standards should be avoided, insofar as possible.

- 190 - CHESSS

8 INTERFACE OF SERVICE STANDARDS WITH LEGAL REQUIREMENTS

8.1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

When drafting a service standard, the group promoting standardization can assess the convenience of including legal requirements in the standard or not, either by incorporating the legal requirements directly in the document or by making a reference to said requirements in the text.

When making a decision, the service sector must consider whether the advantages that this practice produces are greater than the disadvantages.

Note: 7.2 includes some insights and recommendations that can be useful if the sector decides to include legal requirements directly in the standards, along with the other requirements. On the other hand, 7.3 includes insights and recommendations for those cases in which the sector decides to include references to the legal requirements instead of the requirements directly.

Furthermore, the group promoting standardization can consider the possibility of developing solutions, through service standards that enhance compliance with the legal requirements contained in the regulations in force.

In general, with the exception of those cases that establish transitional periods for the implementation of a given regulation, standards should not include requirements that are incompatible with applicable legislation, except in the case of regional or international standards regarding national legislations, in which case this conflict must be clearly reported following the procedures established under CEN, CENELEC, ISO or IEC.

Note: In the case of CEN or CENELEC, see ―Type A Deviations‖ in the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations (and / or CEN/BOSS, in the case of CEN).

It is important to specify that the existence of legislations (be they local, territorial, national or regional) applicable to the service sector does not represent an obstacle to the existence of voluntary standards regarding the service sector.

Lastly, this clause describes the approach of making references to standards in technical regulations as a way of using documents that have been adopted by consensus between the service sectors and service users.

8.2 INCLUDING LEGAL REQUIREMENTS IN SERVICE STANDARDS

Including legal requirements directly in service standards (i.e. together with the remaining voluntary requirements) is a practice that exists in the standardization world and that is being implemented, mainly because some sectors prefer to have one sole reference document.

The advantages of this practice are, amongst others, the fact that it helps SMEs comply with applicable legislation through compliance with one sole, complete and understandable document that covers not only the legal requirements, but also the requirements that result from the consensus reached in the sector and with service customers and users.

- 191 - CHESSS

The most important disadvantage of this practice is the need to ensure, if there is a change in the corresponding legislation that leads to new requirements or to a modification of existing ones, that it is possible to update the standard in a short period of time. It is advisable that those sectors that decide to include legal requirements directly in the standard, along with the remaining requirements, identify them clearly (e.g., in an annex that lists the clauses or sections of the standard that correspond to each of the applicable regulations). By doing so, the users of the standard will be able to identify said legal requirements clearly and thus, to update them in case the corresponding regulation has been subject to changes or are declared null.

8.3 INCLUDING REFERENCES TO TECHNICAL REGULATIONS IN SERVICE STANDARDS

Including references to technical regulations (for example, by mentioning the identification code and the title of the technical regulation, with its date of approval and / or the official journal in which it was published) in the service standards is a method that has both advantages and disadvantages.

One of the advantages is that the risk of having a standard that does not comply with the legislation in force is lower. However, one clear disadvantage is that SMEs have to allocate efforts to coordinating the implementation of both the mandatory requirements of technical regulations and the voluntary requirements of the standards.

If it is decided to refer to the technical regulations, it is important to mention that all references made in the document were in force when the standard was published, which means that it is possible that subsequent changes were adopted or even that new legislation was passed in order to annul or replace previous legislation (be it totally or partially).

8.4 INCLUDING REQUIREMENTS IN STANDARDS THAT ENHANCE COMPLIANCE WITH THE LEGISLATION IN FORCE

8.4.1 GENERAL SCENARIO

There are many cases in which, in spite of the existence of legislation regarding a specific sector, a series of standards are developed in order to provide solutions that enhance compliance with legislation. These cases are especially useful for small and medium-sized enterprises, since they enable them to achieve a degree of technology transfer that would otherwise be very costly.

Large enterprises also benefit from these solutions, given that they can report their own solutions to legal compliance to different companies that can eventually act as service providers or subcontractors. In addition, they promote a decrease in unfair competition (e.g., of the competition that operates in the market but does not comply with legislation as a result of a lack of knowledge thereof).

As established under 7.2 and 7.3, it is important to adopt precautionary measures to make sure that the requirements included in the text or the references made to regulations are all duly identified, accurate and updated.

8.4.2 SPECIFIC INTEGRATION OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY REQUIREMENTS

- 192 - CHESSS

One of the most important aspects when drafting service standards is to include health and safety requirements that do not only affect customers, but also, in some cases, the employees of the companies that provide the services (this applies, for example, in the case of emergency management, when both customers and employees have to be evacuated). It must not be forgotten that, in the case of business-to-business services, customers can also be employees of the companies that hire the services, which means that when we are talking about customer protection we are also talking about protecting another company‘s employees.

Broadly speaking, 7.4.1 applies fully to the scenario mentioned above. However, it is worth mentioning that in issues of health and safety, namely of occupational health and safety, it is essential to be extremely careful not only in identifying requirements but also in making sure that the solutions proposed in the standards comply with the legislation in force (this is always true, more so in this case, given that there are more lives at stake).

Note: With regards to the specific inclusion of requirements related to employee health and safety in European standards, there have been cases in which national standardization bodies have decided to vote against service standards on the grounds that there is a European Union Framework Directive that defines minimum requirements, leaving it to each of the Member States to specify the occupational health and safety levels. This is not to say that European service standards cannot adopt occupational health and safety recommendations, but there is certainly a risk of encountering opposition from certain countries, thus hindering the approval of the European standard.

8.5 USE OF AND REFERENCE TO SERVICE STANDARDS IN REGULATIONS

Standards are documents that are initially developed as voluntary compliance documents. Public administrations, which are responsible for developing regulations, can refer to the existing voluntary standards in their technical regulations, if they consider that said documents can be beneficial to society.

Thus, the possibility of having an impact on legislation in a specific sector through standards, which are documents that represent a high degree of consensus amongst all the parties involved, is one of the factors that promote the drafting of standards.

There are different ways in which public administrations can refer to standards in technical regulations:

As documents that contribute to compliance with specific legislation, maintaining their voluntary nature, As documents that, when complied with, entail compliance with the corresponding legislation, even though there are alternative solutions, therefore maintaining the voluntary nature of these documents, or As the only solution that ensures compliance with legislation, which means that standards become mandatory at the territorial and sectorial level of application of the regulation that refers to the standards (local, territorial, national, regional, or other).

To decide which of the ways to make reference to the relevant standard(s) falls under the exclusive competence of local (Town Councils), territorial (in Spain, Autonomous Communities,

- 193 - CHESSS in Germany, Landers, etc.), national (ministries) or regional (e.g., the European Commission or the EFTA Secretariat) authorities.

ANNEX A. EXAMPLES OF STRUCTURE OF SERVICE STANDARDS

CHAPTER A.1 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED FOLLOWING SERVICE PROVISION SEQUENCE

UNE 167007 Restaurant services. Requirements for transport

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard describes management responsibilities, then service requirements (the full cycle of transportation): service provider – client relation, general transport conditions, requirements for charging and discharging, requirements associated to the service provider, requirements associated to the transport vehicle.

UNE 179001: 2007 Quality in dental surgeries and dental services. General requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard describes the requirements for the management of the dental centre, the centre itself (facilities, equipment, storage, etc.), information and communication to the client, patient‘s and sanitary staff security, clinic processes, merchandise, commitment with the society.

NF X 50-785 Services provided by electronic security systems companies

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard poses first general requirements for quality: requirements for the personnel (responsibilities, education, and complementary education in quality) and confidentiality (requirements for the personnel and the installations). Then is described the process of realisation of the services after assuring that all legal requirements are respected. Quality requirements for the different phases are required as follows:

Reception, presentation of the company, study and technical and commercial proposition, order, conception phase; Execution of works, control and service disposition, reception of works, phase of education and assistance; Periodic maintenance and repairs; Treatment of complaints, evaluation of client satisfaction.

EN 15038: 2006 Translation services – Service Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard ―encompasses the core translation process and all other aspects involved in providing the service, including quality assurance and traceability‖, but also meets the commercial terms and service specifications recorded in the client – TSP agreement (4.4).

- 194 - CHESSS

Prerequisites: ensure competence of human resources, ensure availability of technical resources, put QMS in place, C-SP relationship.

Detailed description of the internal translation process: managing the translation process

– project manager, preparation (administrative aspects, availability of technical aspects, recording any specific linguistic requirements), translation process: translation, translation guarantee (checking, revision, review, proof reading, and final verification).

Ensure communication with the client every time there is a need for supplementary information or clarification of ambiguities.

Added value services.

BS 8406-2: 2003 Event stewarding and crowd safety services – Code of Practice

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) It should be taken in consideration that the standard serves only as guide and recommendations thus there is not a specific part on quality service requirements. However, it is mentioned that the service provider should operate a complaints management system (including a determined complaints).

First the service provider should carry out a site survey then they should prepare a written contract with obligations to be respected by both parties (customer and SP). The SP should assess the possible risks and then they should elaborate an operational plan on how they intend to achieve both legal and contractual obligations. Moreover, they should assure that staff is properly selected and trained and in respect of the code of conduct (refreshing training, vocational training, etc.).

EN 14467: 2004 Recreational diving services – requirements for recreational scuba diving service providers

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) There are common requirements for two of the services specified in this standard (training and education; organised and guided diving for certified divers; excluding rental of diving equipment), which are as follows:

Information: prior to the service provision and during service provision; Risk assessment; Emergency equipment and procedures; Diving equipment; Documentation.

Then, for each service there are special requirements, all of them have in common staff requirements.

For different services the requirements are as follows:

1. Training and education: general, training locations, staff;

- 195 - CHESSS

2. Organised and guided diving for certified divers: provision of services to groups, organised dive, guided dive, locations, staff; 3. Rental of diving equipment: service, diving equipment, staff.

EN 14804:2005 Language study tour providers – Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies the methodology for the whole process of the service delivery. The methodology is as follows:

1. Information provision:

Pre-booking: general, care of minors, legal documentation, special requirements, accommodation, course details; Pre-departure; On-arrival information.

2. Service provision:

Staff management; Tuition: curriculum, teaching, premises, teaching staff; Accommodation: assistance for minors, general requirements, home stay accommodation, residential accommodation, self catering apartments; Leisure; Welfare (including care of minors); Group leaders; Monitoring of client and/or participant satisfaction; Liability insurance.

EN 14873-2: 2005 Furniture removal activities – Storage of furniture and personal effects for private individuals – Part 2: Provision of Service

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) Yes.

- Preliminary information, including agreement/contract: Emphasis in this part. - Service provision, including handing over and withdrawal of goods, storage and transport if appropriate; -Post sale service.

For each step of the service process the standard establishes requirements on:

- The aspects to work about but does not establish how to do it or the level to comply with. E.g. agreement terms, dates of handing over and withdrawal, identification of the transport company (if appropriate), (there are some particularities e.g. ―unique identification‖ but it does not establish the identification system); - Human resources; - Technical means (the service provision may require the use of technical means).

- 196 - CHESSS

EN 15331: 2005 CRITERIA FOR DESIGN, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR BUILDINGS

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) Planning – Execution – Control/Monitoring – Feedback data First there is maintenance plan, and then based on the resources (internal or external) they prepare the program/orders, execute the service and then is the stage of monitoring/control and feedback. The information system shall provide a continuous assessment of the maintenance plan by using the feedback data. By taking into account company/property strategies and building management policy a maintenance policy is elaborated based on a diagnostics on operating conditions with respect to recognised standards (qualitative), then intervention strategies are elaborated based on service standard (maintenance work and frequency of intervention) and the costs estimation. Then the plan is implemented followed by monitoring and feedback. The whole process is operated by an information system.

PrEN 12522-1: 1997 Furniture removal activities – Furniture removal for private individuals – Part 1: Service specification

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) First the standard describes the minimum and optional furniture removal service (including general principles, initial contact and preliminary information, specifications for minimum service and recommendation for additional service). Then it states the requirements for contractual and statutory documents and finally gives description of the principles governing the conditions of the contract which are as follows: conditions, services carried out by the company, information, subcontracting, terms of payment, cancellation, liability, compensation and formalities in the case of loss or damage).

EN 15017: 2005 Funeral Services - Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standards indicates the requirements for the service, which are as follows: Personnel, Complaints handling procedures, Monitoring system, Care of deceased (obligations, education of personnel, facilities, etc.), Removal, transfer and transport (including necessary requirements), Funeral home facilities, Funeral itself, Advisory service (responsibilities of director, costs, etc.), Pre-arrangement.

NF S52-501:2005 Bungee jumping – Service commitments of organisations providing the public with a bungee jumping activity

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies the following requirements (taking into account safety and security requirements): documentation, personnel, methodology of supervision, operation and installation; technical material for the jump, aid and emergency resources, protection of the environment.

NF X50-820: 1992 Boating services – Specifications for service and provision of service – Distribution of yachts and material – Ship maintenance and repairing – Motor sale and repairing

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

- 197 - CHESSS

The standard specifies general requirements for the 3 services described and then in Annex A it specifies some particular requirements that should be respected for each service. It specifies requirements for contractual documents, general sales conditions and formation of personnel.

NF X50-007 Winter sports equipment hiring service – Definition of the winter sports equipment hiring service

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the following elements of the service provision: welcome, personnel, materials, written documents, hiring card and customer satisfaction survey.

NF X50-220:2005 Service Standard- School Canteen catering service

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the provision of the service without specifying requirements for the mode of food preparation. It contains the following elements: facilities, children welcome, duration of lunch, personnel, organisation of collective life, transparency in information exchange, guarantees of the public service.

NF X50-788 Direct selling - Service of direct selling enterprises

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The service is delivered following a sequence order (first contact, product presentation, contract formation and conclusion, contract execution) and taking into account customers necessities and willingness of being attended.

NF X50-915: 2000 Hydropathic establishments (Spas) – Services to patients – Requirements and recommendations

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) This services is developed following the delivery sequence, specifying requirements for the information provided to customers, booking process, clients‘ access and welcome, circulation within the building, realisation of the treatment, environment of cares and treatment of complaints.

EN 15221-2: 2006 Facility Management- Part 2: Guidance on how to prepare Facility Management agreement.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) – yes The standard specifies full service description. First, it specifies the different types of facility management agreements, then their main characteristics , their preparation and implementation and finally it points out the facility management agreement structure.

UNI 11034: 2003 Early childhood services

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) – Yes The standard first specifies service requirements including general requirements and then requirements for planning of innovative services. It is written as a complement of ISO 9001.

BS 7499: 2002 Static site guarding and mobile patrol services – Code of practice

- 198 - CHESSS

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the organization (structure, finances, insurance), the resources (premises, control room, staff, equipment and uniforms, training, suppliers) and the service itself (sale, assignment instructions, static sites, mobile patrol services, control of keys).

BS 7872: 2002 Manned security services – Cash-in-transit services (collection and delivery) Code of practice

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the organization (finance, insurance, premises, service sale, information, health and safety), for the operations (survey and risk assessment, contracts, service schedule, control, equipment, documentation), for the staff (selection, terms of employment, identification, uniform, training) and for the technical resources and facilities.

BS 7984: 2001 Keyholding and response services – Code of practice

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the organization and documentation of the activity (structure, finance, insurance, premises, service sale, contract drafting), the staff (selection, terms and conditions of employment, training, etc.) and the service itself (response to events, key management, assignment instructions, response centre, secure facility).

NCh 3062.c2006 Adventure tourism – Sand or Sand board Surfing - Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the activity development (organization, specific for the activity performance, personnel, equipment, procedures, limits and obligations, customer requirements), for the instructor, and criteria for activity competence (customer conformity, service quality of the guide/personnel/providers, customer service, use of equipment, organization).

NCh 3068.c2007 Travel agencies - Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the service organization, the service provision (customer attention, bookings, sales, after sale), equipment and supplies, suppliers evaluation and commercial and marketing requirements.

UNI 10719: 1998 Congress and similar events organization. Service requirements and indications for the enterprises.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the following service elements: human resources, service requirements (information, service phases, complementary services, contract and remuneration, customer satisfaction), indications for the organization.

UNI 10866: 2000 Incentive travel house. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

- 199 - CHESSS

The standard specifies requirements that the incentive travel house should respect during the whole cycle of service provision, i.e consultancy, planning, fiscal consultancy, elaboration of an offer, contract, operative management of the project; personnel requirements.

UNI 10926: 2001 Goldsmith, jeweller, silversmith, watchmaker‘s retail trade. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specified service requirements for the following elements: phases of the service (market analysis, customer information, supply, storage, and contract), additional services, personnel requirements, training and improvement of the service.

UNI 10927: 2001 Buying offices. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The service specifies requirements for the following elements: general, service provision (phases, complimentary services, definition of contractual agreement), personnel management, control, verification, analysis and improvement.

UNI 10948: 2001 Assistance to enterprises for the granting of a loan. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the entire service cycle: customer information, provision of the service, monitoring, conventions with financial bodies and human resources management.

UNI 10970: 2002 Funds endowment: process of projects initial evaluation, monitoring and final evaluation. General requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies general requirements for definition of the policy of the service provider, but also it specifies process requirements that are: strategic plan and intervention program definition, informative resources, requirements for the body evaluating the project, evaluation and approval of the project, management and monitoring.

UNI 10971: 2002 Colours and paints, wallpapers, floor, lining and fittings. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the following elements: service classification, customer information, service provision, human resources management, monitoring activity.

UNI 11010: 2002 Residential and day service for disables persons. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the following elements: service requirements (service requirements, missions, information, admission phase, individualized project, treatment phase, demission phase, general characteristics, personnel requirements) planning of innovative services: , collecting of a data base, definition of process specifications and performance procedures, re-examination, verification and validation, monitoring).

- 200 - CHESSS

UNI 11031: 2003 Services for addictees in therapeutic communities and alcoholics. Service requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies service requirements (missions‘ definition, information, admissions phase, individualized project definition, treatment phase, personnel, etc.) and projection of innovative services (basic data collection, re-examination, verification, monitoring).

UNI 11032:2003 Grocery and fruit and vegetable stores. Service requirements.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies requirements for the whole cycle of service provision: customer information; verification, customer satisfaction and claims management, personnel training, control, service definition, providers, warehouses, product elaboration, additional services. Besides, it specifies transparency requirements and HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point).

AS 4575: 2005 Gas appliances – Quality of servicing

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) The standard specifies general requirements for service quality, then requirements for personnel competency, tools and equipment, materials, quality of servicing work, reports and records and auditing.

- 201 - CHESSS

CHAPTER A.2 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS ARE ESTABLISHED TO DIRECTLLY MEET CONSUMERS NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS

UNE 175001-3: 2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: Requirements for opticians

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view This standard is developed using the SERVQUAL methodology as well as it has adopted some criteria from Quality Management Systems (e.g. 6. Improvement).

UNE 175001-2: 2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 4: Requirements for fishmongers

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view This standard is developed using the SERVQUAL methodology as well as it has adopted some criteria from Quality Management Systems (e.g. 6. Improvement).

UNE 175 001-4: 2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 4: Requirements for butcher‘s and delicatessen

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view The standard follows the SERVQUAL methodology.

UNE 175001-1: 2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: General requirements

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view This standard is developed using the SERVQUAL methodology as well as it has adopted some criteria from Quality Management Systems (e.g. 6. Improvement).

EA 0012: 2002 Technical specification for quality of service for small commerce/retail service(replaced by UNE 175001-1: 2004 Calidad de servicio para pequeño comercio. Parte 1. Requisitos generales‖)

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view The standard establishes requirements for each of the 10 SERVQUAL criteria: courtesy, credibility, response capability, client comprehension, reliability, communication, safety, accessibility, tangible elements, and professionalism. For each SERVQUAL criteria the standard establishes the aspects to work about but does not establish how to do it or the level to comply with.

NF X50-720: 2004 Quality of services – Recommendations for conceiving and improving the welcome - Guidelines

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view This document gives only the general guidelines for a quality welcoming for any type of service or client. It does not specify the techniques of reception and does not fix the qualitative and quantitative levels, which should be specified by each entity.

NF X50-700:2006 Service quality – Approach for improving service quality – The reference and service commitments - Recommendations

- 202 - CHESSS

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view The idea of this generic service standard is to give general guidelines and recommendations for a generic quality approach for service sectors based on customer expectations.

NF X50-722: 2005 Quality of services - Measurement and monitoring for improving the service quality - Recommendations

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view – Yes. Approach orientated towards customer and his satisfaction, carrying out of the service depending on the objectives.

- 203 - CHESSS

CHAPTER A.3 SERVICE IS DESCRIBED ATTENDING TO THE INTERNAL ORGANIZATION OF THE SERVICE PROVIDER

PNE 185001: 2005 Timeshare Organizations. Service Delivery Requirements

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) The standard gives description of service requirements for the following departments and processes: Management, Reception, Cleaning, Restaurant service, Maintenance of installations, Supplies and storage, Animation, Special events. Each of these parts contains the responsibilities, service requirements and control mechanisms.

UNE 182001: 2005 Hotels and touristic apartments. Service requirements

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) The standard specifies requirements for the following departments or processes: management, reception, cleaning and maintenance, restaurant service, animation, maintenance of installations, delivery and storage, special events.

BS 3375-2: 1993 Management Services – Part 2: Guide to method study

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

There is analysis/examination stage. The method or procedure should be periodically reviewed to identify deviations from the specification and to correct such deviations or to incorporate them in the specification if appropriate. Such review of methods is most effective when part of a formal system of systematic review or methods auditing. Also communication of results is an important part for the successful completion of the project. This is a circular process requiring constant re-evaluation of basic assumptions and constant re-examination of each stage in thinking and progress in the problem solving.

There are two main procedures of method study: SREDIM procedure (select, record, examine, develop, install, maintain) and evolved procedure (definition of the problem, solutions finding, choice of the most appropriate solution, and implementation of the solution), which is an evolution of the SREDIM procedure.

There should be determined terms of reference (objectives, scope and scale of the method study) and plan of action and then the phases should be followed. There is a choice of all techniques to be used depending on the appropriate stage in the basic procedure. Then it is followed by Techniques and Install stage which comprises of final testing in order to ensure effective installation, identification and rectification of the problem, if any. The final stage is the maintenance of the improved method that has been installed.

BS 7602: 1992 Guide to General considerations for telecommunications services for electrical power systems

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

- 204 - CHESSS

Key parameters such as quality, security, reliability, dependability and availability are required in various services. Also special attention is paid to timing when providing services. A suitable telecommunication management network should be implemented. There are specified service requirements for each telecommunication and operational service, which are as follows: administrative telephony, operational telephony, tele control, load management, tele protection, mobile radio, computing traffic and other services.

In the service provision participate various departments: headquarters, computing centre, control centre, thermal power station, substations, hydro power station, transmitter and maintenance centre.

NCh 3067.c2007 Tour operators and wholesalers - Requirements

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard specifies requirements for the following processes: for the tour operator (organization, equipment, suppliers, after sale), design of tourist packages (design, control, modification) and commercial and marketing (commercialization, booking and sales, corporate image and advertisement).

UNE 184001: 2007 Touring camps and holiday sites. Service requirements.

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) – yes The standard specifies requirements for the following departments or processes: management, reception, basic services, supplies and maintenance, additional services, restaurant services, renting.

UNI 11067:2003 Managing consulting. Criteria for service supply and check.

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) This standard specifies the procedures for realization of management consulting service including the elaboration of working plan, responsibilities, resources management, process management and measurement of provided service and customer satisfaction.

AS/NZS 4146: 2000 Laundry practice Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard first specifies general requirements and recommendations for laundry facilities and management, transportation equipment, collection and storage of linen, laundry operation, storage and packaging of cleaned linen. It also specifies minimum requirements that include statutory, operating theatre linen, specific laundering, disinfection, records. There is a normative annex part that specifies technical recommendations for better laundry services.

- 205 - CHESSS

CHAPTER A.4 OPEN MODEL

EN 13816:2002 Transportation. Logistics and services. Public passenger transport. Service quality definition, targeting and measurement.

- 206 - CHESSS

CHAPTER A.5 OTHER MODELS

UNE 158001: 2000 Service management in care homes. Total management.

Other The service follows the service delivery sequence but there is also a quality management system implemented.

The standard comprises of the following elements: Service provision: generalities, external identification of the establishment, preliminary information, contractual documents, arrival, functional evaluation of the client, accommodation, maintenance and support services, personal hygiene, geriatric attention, post mortem service; Evaluation of customer satisfaction; Quality management of the care home.

UNE 158002: 2000 Service management in care homes. Sites and installations of a care home.

Other The standard describes the requirements for the installations and equipment in care home, looking for comfort and safety.

UNE 158003: 2000 Service management in care homes. Equipment and other needs.

Other The standard gives description of the necessary equipment in care homes.

UNE 158004: 2000 Service management in care homes. Staff qualification. Training. Other The standard specifies the minimal qualification and training required for the care home staff.

UNE 158005: 2000 Service management in care homes. Staff at rest homes. Different job and jobs groups. Other The standard gives description of different job and jobs groups of the care homes and of functional areas.

ISO/IEC 20000-1: 2005 Information technology – Service management – Part 1: Specification

Other: service management system

This standard is developed with the contents and structure of a management system standard.

ISO/IEC 20000-2: 2005 Information technology – Service management – Part 2: Code of practice

Other: service management system

- 207 - CHESSS

This standard is developed with the contents and structure of a management system standard.

EN 12522-2: 1998 Furniture removal activities – Furniture removal for private individuals- Part 2: Provision of service

Other This standard is described by specifying human and technical skills and means during the phases of performance of the service (preliminary information, carrying out phase, post sale service) but also it describes a quality approach.

ISO 20252: 2006 Market, opinion and social research - Vocabulary and service requirements

Other: Methodology is a mixture between following internal organization procedures and methodology of a specific management system for research service provision

The standard describes the methodology by processes. First it poses requirements for QMS (organization responsibilities, confidentiality, documentation requirements, competence and training, subcontracting / outsorcing, reviewing the effectivenees of the QMS). Then it poses requirements for managing the executive elements of research, data collection, data management and processing and report on research projects.

PrEN 15565: 2006 Tourism Services – Requirements for the provision of professional training and qualification programmes of tourist guides Other The training programme shall be designed such a manner that the knowledge and skills as specified in clause 6 and clause 7 are delivered both theoretically and practically. The standard specifies requirements for the following elements: competencies, framework of training programmes, subjects to be studied, practical training, assessment, training providers.

UNE 167009: 2006 Restaurant services. Kitchen requirements.

Other: this standard describes the different steps (kitchen facilities and equipments, preparation, elaboration and conservation of food) to develop meals.

UNE 167011: 2006 Restaurant services. Vocabulary

Other Description of terms and definitions

EN 14873-1: 2005 Furniture removal activities – Storage of furniture and the personal effects for private individuals – Part 1: Specification for the storage facility and related storage provision

Other: the standard describes the requirements for the provision of storage facilities. Description of minimum requirements for the provision of storage facilities and related services.

- 208 - CHESSS

EN 14153-3: 2003 Recreational diving services – safety related minimum requirements for the training of recreational scuba divers – Part 3: Level 3 – Dive Leader

Other: Service is described by determining minimum safety requirements for the training of recreational scuba divers

This is a series of standards from level 1 to 3 and each level poses more requirements for the scuba diver. The standard (level 3) comprises of minimum safety requirements that a recreational scuba diver at a level ―dive leader‖ should respect. These are as follows:

Competencies of a recreational scuba diver; Prerequisites for training (minors, health requirements, minimum diving experience); Introductory information; Required theoretical knowledge; Personal scuba skills (scuba skills, deep diving, navigation); Leadership skills (dive related skills, dive rescue, first aid, etc.); (without this part for Level 1 and 2) Practical training parameter; Assessment (knowledge, scuba skills).

EN 14413-2: 2004 Recreational Diving Services – safety related minimum requirements for the training of scuba instructors – Part 2: Level 2

Other: The standard establishes a series of specifications for safety practices for the training of scuba instructors. This is a series of standards from level 1 to 2 and the second level poses more requirements for the scuba diver. This standard (level 2) comprises of safety related minimum requirements that a candidate for scuba dive instructor should respect. These are as follows:

Competences; Prerequisites: practical experience, health requirements; Scuba instructor candidate information; Required theoretical knowledge; Personal scuba skills; Theoretical teaching skills; Teaching and supervision of scuba skills; Emergency procedures: diver rescue, first aid, oxygen administration; Scuba instructor-trainers; Certification: minimum age, minimum practical experience, theoretical knowledge, teaching techniques, teaching and supervision of scuba skills, supervision and guidance of guidance of diving activities, emergency procedures.

EN 13549: 2001 Cleaning services - Basic requirements and recommendations for quality measuring systems

Other: This is not a service delivery standard but a standard for provision of basis requirements for quality measurement systems for cleaning services.

- 209 - CHESSS

The methodology of the standard is divided into two basic parts: requirements (clause 4 ) and recommendations (clause 5) for the quality measurement systems.

ISO 10160: 1997 Information and documentation- Open Systems interconnection- Interlibrary Loan Application Service Definition

Other

Specification of service system used by libraries to perform loan-orientated activities. The standard first specifies the service model, then it gives definition of the services and finally of the sequences of primitives.

UNE 167001: 2006. Restaurant services. Management requirements.

Other This standard is partly an application of a QMS and has introduced some elements specific to restaurant services such as food security and prevention of work hazards, good environmental practices, accessibility and security in buildings and facilities.

UNE 167002: 2006 Restaurant services. Requirements for the maintenance of facilities and equipment.

Other

Requirements for facilities and equipment and their maintenance.

UNE 167003: 2006 Restaurant services. Provision and storage requirements.

Other

Description of provision and storage requirements.

UNE 189001: 2006 Intermediation tourism services. Service requirements.

Other: Methodology similar to a management system, but is a service standard

CWA 14641: 2006 Security management system for secure printing (2006).

Other

This workshop has the same methodology as a management system. The CWA prescribes which elements a security management system contains and not how a specific organization implements these.

- 210 - CHESSS

It can be grouped in the 5 basic points: basic elements of security managements system, Management responsibilities; Resource management, Product realisation requirement, Measurement, analysis and improvement requirements.

The organization of whole process approach and the security management system‖ is based on the quality standard ―ISO 9001:2000‖.

ISO 15928-2: 2005 Houses –Description of performance - Part 2: Structural serviceability

Other

Description on the structural serviceability performance of houses, the standard covers user needs, provides performance descriptions, establishes parameter descriptions and outlines evaluation processes.

ISO/DIS 17090-1: 2005 Health Informatics– Public key infrastructure. Part 1. Overview of digital certificate services

Other

This standard describes the common technical, operational and policy requirements that need to be addressed to enable digital certificates to be used in protecting the exchange of healthcare information with a single domain, between domains and across jurisdictional boundaries (Introduction).

UNI 10943: 2001 Attestation criteria for the assessment of contract award procedures of entities operating in the public works, supplies of goods and services

Other

The standard specifies the necessary conditions for certification of attestants and accreditation of attestation bodies, the attestation system and the evaluation of awarding procedures of public contracts respecting EU Directives.

NQ 9700-010: 2001 Customer service - Guidelines for quality standards.

Other: Different aspects of tourism organizations, but not any of the methodologies mentioned before

CEN/TR 13200-2: 2005 Spectator facilities - Layout criteria of service area - Part 2. Characteristics and national situations

Other

Specification of facilities‘ requirements and security considerations.

CWA 13987-1: 2003 Smart Card Systems: Interoperable Citizen Services: Extended User Related Information – Part 1: Definition of User Related Information and Implementation.

Other

- 211 - CHESSS

This CWA provides guidelines and specifications for designing an open scheme that supports the use of different types of smart card for accessing multiple applications at different types of system terminals bu specifying basic principles, architectural context, implementation and definition of user related information.

CWA 14172-2: 2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance- Part 2: Certification Authority Services and Processes.

Other The standard gives guidance on how to assess the conformity of CA to standards ETSI TS 101 456 and ETSI TS 102 042 by specifying requirements for independent bodies, assessors, assessment teams; the process itself and specific ones for each standard.

CWA 14172-8: 2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance – Part 8: Time-stamping Authority services and processes

Other

The standard gives guidance on how to assess the conformity of CA to standard ETSI TS 102 023 by specifying requirements for independent bodies, assessors, assessment teams; the process itself and specific ones for the standard.

CWA 14357: 2001 Quality of Internet Service – Project Team final report

Other

The service is delivered based on customer needs and the technology available. The standard suggests approaches for measurement of service quality and identifies the elements to be measured and assessed and the necessary tools for this; it also specifies useful information to be provided to users.

CWA 14523: 2002Description for the types of business advice and support services provided to small enterprises in Europe

Other

This service is customer-focused and based on customer necessities. The adviser enterprise must capitalize on the experience acquired during the course of previous intervention, which implies that the business advice is based on a methodological approach that guarantees the coherence and continuity of the service. The standard also specifies requirements and values of the advisors.

CWA 14641: 2006 Security management system for secure printing (2006).

Other

This workshop has the same methodology as a management system. The CWA prescribes which elements a security management system contains and not how a specific organization implements these.

- 212 - CHESSS

It can be grouped in the 5 basic points: basic elements of security managements system, Management responsibilities; Resource management, Product realisation requirement, Measurement, analysis and improvement requirements

The organization of whole process approach and the security management system‖ is based on the quality standard ―ISO 9001:2000‖.

CWA 14644:2003 Quality Assurance Standards

Other

This workshop specifies quality approaches for design and development processes during the lifecycle of a learning resource by using different methods and giving practical examples. This standard is oriented to products and processes The first section deals with the terminology in the field of quality assurance. The selection on classification schemes deals with approaches to classify and categorize approaches, methods, and concepts of quality assurance. This classification allows to analysis phase in which existing approaches of QA are classified, analyzed, and evaluated. Additionally, current standards and approaches are analyzed concerning information for learners. The last part deals with the synthesis which combines existing approaches for QA in the field of learning technologies.

CWA 14921:2004 Web services: Technology and Standardization Aspects.

Other

This present document gives guidance on technological and standardization aspects in the area of Web services. It is divided in three parts, the first one analyzes existing standardization work and technological foundations for Web services, and then a brief overview is made of application areas for Web services. The last part deals with identification of current shortcomings of Web services.

CWA 15888 : 2006 Guidelines for invoicing Service Providers

Other

Specification of requirements for delivery of e-invoice (legal, agreements, etc.).

CWA 15660: 2007 Providing good practice for E-learning quality approaches

Other

The workshop specifies at different levels how to implement quality management system or quality approach based on surveys and practical examples for each element.

NCh 3063.c2006 Adventure Tourism – Captains - Requirements

Other

This standard mainly specifies specific and security requirements for captains but also it gives brief service description and technical resources requirements.

- 213 - CHESSS

NCh 3066.c2007 Adventure Tourism – Muleteers or expert guides - Requirements

Other

This standard mainly specifies specific and security requirements for the muleteers / guide experts but also it gives brief service description and technical resources requirements.

ISO 15928-2: 2005 Houses –Description of performance - Part 2: Structural serviceability

Other

Description on the structural serviceability performance of houses, the standard covers user needs, provides performance descriptions, establishes parameter descriptions and outlines evaluation processes.

ISO/DIS 17090-1: 2005 Health informatics – Public key infrastructure. Part 1. Overview of digital certificate services

Other

This standard describes the common technical, operational and policy requirements that need to be addressed to enable digital certificates to be used in protecting the exchange of healthcare information with a single domain, between domains and across jurisdictional boundaries (Introduction).

UNI 10145: 2007 Definition of evaluation factors of services maintenance firms

Other

This standard specifies elements for the evaluation of organization providing maintenance service by specifying documentation requirements and requirements for evaluation of the organization by visit.

- 214 - CHESSS

CHAPTER A.6 MIXED

UNE 167010: 2006 Restaurant service. Central kitchen requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard describes the following requirements: management responsibilities, sanitary and hygiene, staff, facilities and equipment, productive process of prepared dishes.

UNE 188001: 2005 Golf Courses. Service Delivery Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard gives requirements for the whole service as follows: management, information management, sales and bookings, management of the game, complementary and auxiliary services, Management of the club and environmental management, Design of the golf club.

UNE 186001: 2006 Spa Establishments. Service Delivery Requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard describes service requirements for the different departments and processes of a spa station, which are as follows: management, reception, medical services, additional services, human resources, cleaning and hygiene, supplies and storage, facilities, maintenance of facilities and air conditioning, quality management, general design. For each of these are describes responsibilities, system for operative control, functions development, quality registers.

UNE 167004: 2006 Restaurant services. Hygiene requirements

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

Other: This standard gives description of the hygiene requirements in all the areas of the establishment

UNE 167005: 2006 Restaurant services. Lounge requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

- 215 - CHESSS

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) The standard specifies requirements for the lounge and the provided services, including the organization of events. The Standard includes requirements from the welcoming to the billing and farewell.

UNE 167008: 2006 Restaurant services. Bar requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view This standard first gives description of the management responsibilities, facilities and equipment and then describes the requirements for service provision respecting customer expectations. It poses general requirements, then requirements for menus and sales supports, preparation of the service, and client service (from welcoming to billing and goodbye).

BP X50-890: 2005 Quality of service in hairdressing salons

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) – YES

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

Approach based on the customer intending to point out the engagements of hairdressing companies towards their clients based on a service quality approach respecting their expectative. The standard specifies requirements from the welcoming of the client until customer evaluation.

ISO 22222: 2005 Personal financial planning — Requirements for personal financial - planners

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard specifies the methodology of the process following the 6 bellow mentioned stages:

Establishing and defining the client and personal financial planner relationship 4.2; Gathering client data and determining goals and expectations4.3; Analysing and evaluating the client's financial status 4.4; Developing and presenting the financial plan 4.5; Implementing the financial planning recommendations 4.6; Monitoring the financial plan and the financial planning relationship 4.7.

It also determines requirements for ethics, competence and experience; claiming of conformity.

CEN BT TF 181 No 63 Business support – Support services provided to micro and small enterprises – Quality and performance requirements

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops)

- 216 - CHESSS

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

This Service is specified with regard to customer necessities. The technical specification specifies requirements on the business support service providers as well as it gives guidelines for enterprises. There are three phases of service provision: selection of a service provider, performance of the service, assessment.

NF X50-809: 2004 Highways- Service quality of client welcome areas- Service Commitments

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) – Yes.

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

The service provision pays special attention to providing to the customer all necessary information during the whole service cycle and managing their complaints.

CEN BTTF 182 Customer contact centers — Main element — Complementary element

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

Other

This standard describes the service specifying requirements for the following elements: management strategy and policy, human resources, technical resources, processes, employee & stakeholder satisfaction and societal responsibility. In all these parts it pays particular attention to the quality of provided service.

UNI 10891: 2000 Private surveillance companies.

Service is described following delivery sequence (order in which the service develops) – Yes

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes) – yes

The standard specifies and classifies minimum requirements for offered services by private surveillance companies. It specifies requirements for the mode of operation, technical resources and mode of service control for each surveillance service described.

UNI 10600: 2001 Lodgement and management of complaints for public services.

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

Service is described attending to the internal organization of the service provider (internal procedures, by departments, by processes)

The standard specifies requirements for the following elements: complaints form and procedure (access, relevancy, understanding, use, personnel), internal and external complaints management.

- 217 - CHESSS

UNI 10771: 2003 Management consulting. Definitions, classification, requirements and service offer

Other

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view

The standard first gives a classification of consultancy services and its area of activity, then it specifies requirements for the service according to customer expectations and finally it specifies requirements for the service offer and contract.

ARP 099-1 200X: 2007Business process outsourcing and off shoring operations, part 1: Outbound contact centre operations

Service requirements are chosen from customer criteria point of view and also by internal processes

This standard is customer focus and quality approach based and committed to customer satisfaction and fulfilling their expectations, each service / requirement shall be measured. It is also structured by processes – customer service, human resources, and operational and technical resource management practices.

- 218 - CHESSS

ANNEX H: Group of Nine Clusters for Question 1

CHESSS - MODULE 1 Guidance in the preparation of service standards Final Report - Annex H "GROUP OF NINE CLUSTERS FOR QUESTION 1" Question 1 - 9 CLUSTERS

Cluster 1 “The elaboration of standards is not worth the effort” Mean value 4,42 Original cluster Weighting The length of time between the first initiative and the publication of the standard I 1 minimizes the interest on the standard 1 3,7 The amount of time and other resources required from stake-holders reduce their I 2 rediness to participate 1 5,6

I18 It is put into question how standards enforce market protection 5 4,4

I32 Costs of developing and adhering to standards 9 6

I34 Standards provide lower protection to consumers 2 3,9

I40 Fear that quality of horizontal standard is not high enough 3 3,6

I42 Considering that the result is not worth the economic effort of participating 1 5,3 Standards from other countries or companies are not available as examples, reference I58 or even for direct application. If available, it would support other standards 1 4,1

I59 Lack of experience in service standardization 1 5,6

I64 There anot enough human resources ready to participate in standardization 1 4,7

I65 Standardization can become too bureaucratic 1 4,7 Need to follow up to ensure implementation and increase awareness, this is an I79 additional demand on dedication, time, etc. 9 5,1

I84 Standards taking time away from actual delivery of services 9 4,4

I86 Few [little] participation 1 5

I93 standardization requires research, consulting 1 3,7

I95 Training requirements 1 4

I96 installation requirements 1 4,7 The lack of continuous support of the different stakeholders in the development of new I 103 standards 1 5

I106 The fact that standards are not accepted when they do not communicate guarantee 5 3,4

I107 Can not be used on the national level 3 2,7 Internal specifications have to be made publicly available in the standardization I111 process and companies may not like this 9 3,3

Cluster 2 “Standards impose requirements and limitations on the service provider” Mean value 4,52 Original cluster Weighting

- 219 - CHESSS

I3 Fear of external intervention in the service provider way of doing its business 2 6

I28 Perception that standard may hinder or prevent innovation and change 5 3,4

I30 Client may beat follow up 2 4 Some stakeholders feel that, with standards, are going to be limited (perception of I 36 inflexibility) 2 5,3

I89 Fear to loose the identity 2 4,3

I90 Loss of competitiveness (lack of differentiation) 2 3,3

I91 The companies become dependent to other companies (certification companies) 2 4,9 There are groups who do not want ―higher‖ level of standardization like European I 105 standards 2 5

Cluster 3 “It is not possible to standardize so much diversity” Mean value 3,66 Original cluster Weighting

I4 Because it is not possible to standardise everything 3 3,7 Standards only contain minimum requirements and the need may be of higher level, I5 therefore the standard would not satifay either providers or clients or both 3 3,6

I16 The standardization process has to take account of all jurisdictions 3 3,4

I17 Standards do not really represent every possible position 3 4

I38 Terminology problem: need for common definitions before standardization can beguin 3 4 Customer segmentation gives rise to different demands making standardization not I 43 possible 3 2,9

I53 Personal things are important - may not be standardized 3 3,7

I66 Difficulty to reach the right balance in the standard (not too wide nor too specific) 3 4,1

I69 Terminology is different in different services constitute an obtacle for standardization 3 3,3

I71 Differences between linguistics in different countries 3 3,3

I87 Hard to agree 3 4,4

I92 Services are changing very fast 3 3,6

Cluster 4 “There is simply no need for standards” Mean value 3,96 Original cluster Weighting

I6 Standards only recommend requirements as they are of voluntary application 4 3 The existance of Trade association codes of practice or conduct cover the needs of the I11 group a companies within that association 4 4,4

I12 Regulations impose requirements that may be enough for the activity 4 4,7 Each company has its own custom or practice in place that prevents from I 15 standardization 4 3,6

I19 The belief that new standards are not needed and that the existing ones are OK 7 3,4

I20 The belief that standards do not contribute with any added value 4 4,7 Internal standards already exist in many large companies and organisations and do I21 not need standards of standardization bodies 4 4,3

I23 The perception that QMS are enough 7 4

I24 Proliferation of standards make people sceptical or cynical about them 7 4,3

I25 There is simply no demand for standardisation from clients and customers 8 4,7

- 220 - CHESSS

I26 The self-regulation by professions is enough 4 4

I27 Standards are perceived as a competitive threat to existing professional/ trade bodies 2 5,1

I31 No perceived commercial advantage (supplier) 4 5

I35 Lower degree of enforcement of standards than regulations 4 3,3 People consider that existing standards and Bodies focus more on the process than on I 41 the outcome 7 3,7

I55 There is no need for standards because of the good state of economy 4 1,9

I56 Everyone can sell everything (no need for quality) 4 1,6

I57 If there is only one company, there is no interest in standardization 7 4,1

I61 Sometimes no room for standards due to overregulation 4 4,7

I62 Companies prefer self assessment (ISO 9001 for example is strong) 4 3,6

I73 No need for standard if there is not service provision across borders 7 3,7 Reference documents from professionals may cover the needs and make standards I 74 not needed 7 4,3

I76 Businesses do not have tradition in using service standards 7 6

I109 Specially sectors that operate in as oligopolies (ex: gas) do not need standrads 4 3,7 Contracts with public administrations are specific, already indicate requirements and I110 time frames and the need for standardization is not clear 4 3,4 3,96

Cluster 5 “Ignorance about the benefits and how to prepare a standard” Mean value 5,09 Original cluster Weighting

I7 There are not specific examples to guide stakeholders in the standardization process 5 5,4

I8 The absence of a checklist to help stakeholders in the standardization process 5 5,3

I33 Industry does not know what standards to follow… 9 4,4 Small organisations do not participate because they do not know, do not care or have I44 difficulties to engage in standardization 5 6,6 Key stakeholders are difficult to get involved because they do not know about I45 standards, need support to get involved 5 5,3 Lack of information and awareness about the process, who is to participate in service I46 standardization and lack of existing standards that may serve as a guide 5 5,3

I60 Difficulty in identifying where exactly there is the need for standards 5 5,4 Lack of understanding as to how standards could contribute and their benefits, I 67 applicability, usefulness 5 6,4 Because there are standards available that do not go to the point and constitute a I68 waist of time, standards have to be practical documents 5 4,7

I72 Lack of control over standardization 5 4,1

l77 ―Experts‖ (consultants) advising not to use certain standards 7 2,9

I78 Misuse of the term ―standard‖ (legal vs non-legally binding standards) 7 4,4 The need for earlier explanation of standardization and its utility to rise people's I 80 awarness 5 6 Need more innovative ways of presenting standards (eg.: innovative IT systems) - I85 standards result boring, not easy to understand and apply 5 5,1

I104 Helpful to have guidance paper (the absence of a guidance document is a problem) 5 5,1

- 221 - CHESSS

Cluster 6 “Services idiosyncrasy” Mean value 3,92 Original cluster Weighting

I9 It is difficult to handle the market as to agree a standard text 6 4,4 B2B service has its own characteristics different from B2C (with respect to advertising, I10 sales, conciliation, arbitration, etc) and therefore they need different standards 6 4,9

I13 Services depend very much upon individuals who cannot be standardized 6 4 Two companies may deal with the same content, legal framework or style but when it I14 comes to the detail they behave differently 6 3,6

I37 Different level of trust and use of standards depending on the sector 4 4 Different sectors still battling problems in pre- standardisation phases (identity), I39 therefore are not ready for standardization in itself 3 3,9

I48 Cultural differences may lead to different requirements /levels 6 4,3

I49 Differecies from country to country (history, practice, lack of standardization tradition) 6 4,6

I50 Service process are too complicated 6 2,9

I51 Service sector is very broad 6 3,3 Difficulty to achieve good communication and trust between provider and customer - a I52 document does not cover this 6 4

I54 Customer expectations are different 6 4,3 Standards must have different structure depending on the sector's needs, therefore I63 common standards do not seem feasible 6 4,6

I70 Can not standardize emotions and emotions are a significant element in services 6 3,9

I81 Levels/ type of competition in services render standards obsolete 2 3,1 Difficulty to measure success/ quality of service delivery (except in terms of customer I 82 satisfaction) 2 4,4 Difference between public and private sector services affects development of common I 83 standards 6 2,9

I94 Service could be good or bad depending on who is the beneficiary 2 2,3

I97 Being up to date on customer‘s issues 6 4,1

I98 Customer size (large vs small companies) 6 4,3

I99 Assessment of the provided service 6 3,6

I102 The difficulty in finding common elements between one or different sectors 6 5

Cluster 7 “There are other solutions in place” Mean value 4,15 Original cluster Weighting

I22 There is no no legal or regulatory need to publish standards 4 3,1

I29 Legal proceedings may result from non-compliance (fear) 8 4,9

I47 Missing legislative framework on European level in support of standardization 8 4

I75 Lack of national initiative to promote standardization 5 4,1 Fear that voluntary standard becomes mandatory both at national and international I 88 levels 8 6

I100 Non existing background legislation 8 3,7

I101 The lack of unified legislation in the specific sectors of activity 8 3,1 Risk of contradiction with national regulation (for example if national regulation I 108 specifies service levels) 8 4,3 4,15

- 222 - CHESSS

P≥5 (3 niveles) 99 5>P≥4 (2 niveles) 9 49 48 4>P (1 nivel) 50 97 63 52 13 83 111 14 102 10 30 32 98 51 33 69 71 79 39 54 70 87 53 34 91 3 84 66 43 3,92 38 3,66 4 82 81 105 59 2 86 17 92 36 94 89 644,4293 5 90 96 107 4,52 1 65 42 27 16 25 58 28 95 103 40 100 101 85 44 106 37 108 68 60 31 47 88 45 72 104 73 4,15 29 46 18 6 55 22 80 67 57 8 y 7 20 56 75 24 19 110 35 80 23 109 61 74 3,9615 76 26 12 41 11 78 21 5,09 77 62

Question 1 result – Graphic representation

- 223 - CHESSS

ANNEX I: Group of Seven Clusters for Question 2

CHESSS - MODULE 1 Guidance in the preparation of service standards Final Report - Annex I “ GROUP OF SEVEN CLUSTERS FOR QUESTION 2"

Question 2 - 7 CLUSTERS

Cluster 1 “Customer – service provider relationship and customer oriented service” Mean value 5,52

Original cluster Weighting Interaction and relationship between customer and service provider (B2B or B2C), e.g. I1 email, web, people, phone, face to face, etc. Close connection. 1 6,4 Communication to clients: communication chains, emotional exchange, making the ‗offer‘ I2 including complaints, information on exceptional circumstances, organisation´s transparency, marketing and reaching expectations, first contact with customer, make clea 1 6,4

I7 Customer integration (people, machines, objects etc.) 1 5,3

I8 Customer type 1 4

I17 Complaints handling, complaint rules 5 6

I18 Redress system 6 5

I20 Psychology 7 4,7 Implied customer expectations (from experience, from promise, from others): trust, speed, I22 availability, comfortability, friendliness, professionalism, cost, emotions, keep the promises, feedback (how quickly), responsibility, confidence, reliability, empa 7 5,7

I26 Culture differencies 7 4,9 Communication / information to the service beneficiary: first contact with customer, make I29 clear customer's needs and expectations, give info about product / service, feedback from customer, Information, standards of symbols, communication, Exchange of inf 7 6,6

I32 Make sure customers‘ needs can be met (responsibility) 7 6

I35 After sales service 7 5 Finding out customer needs, talk about the needs of your customers, different needs of

I36 customers, help assistance of customer‘s needs, anticipation of need, Identify, describe and meet the need of your customer 7 6,9 Develop markets/ finding customers: customer relation,examples/reputation of the I 38 provider,trust in provider 1 5,6

I41 Quality defined as ‗meeting customer expectation‘ 1 5,9

I46 Client support system speed 6 4,3

I58 Customer service 7 4,4 Customers satisfaction/ dissatisfaction, procedures, monitoring and measuring clients‘ I60 satisfaction. Importance of feedbacks. 7 6,6 Focus on service consumer (now Public authorities have to focus on consumer too not only I74 on compliance with legislation) 1 5,3

Cluster 2 “Internal aspects of the service provider” Mean value 4,8

- 224 - CHESSS

Original cluster Weighting Internal communication (within company): staff knowledge of circumstances, staff I3 knowledge of business, training and internal communications 2 5,9

I9 Safety / risk management system 2 5,1

I10 Service = system 2 3,9

I27 Company specifications 4 3,6

I33 Common practice 3 3,4

I42 Terminology 2 3,9

I47 Clear goals/ objectives 2 5,6

I50 Management of staff 2 5,9

I51 Results measurement – expected outcomes, not process 2 5,3

I52 Managing subcontractors 2 4,1

I71 Planning (ways and means) 2 5,3

I72 Good service governance 2 5,1 Service provider internal audit: how am I doing, feedback assessment, what to do if service

I75 does not meet the needs?, process to measure if outcomes have been delivered, post- service follow-up 2 5,3

Cluster 3 “Society conditions service provision” Mean value 4,2 Original cluster Weighting

I4 Conditions (despite sectorial approach) 3 2,9

I6 Legal relevant regulation of market e.g. equal access, compliance, unfair practices 4 4,9

I23 Security & safety - persons 3 5,4

I30 Customer rights 3 6,3

I49 Involvement of relevant authorities 4 3

I53 Ethics and conduct – conflict of interests 3 4,3

I55 Reference to other applicable standards 4 3,7

I65 Different national situations have to be taken into account! 3 3,7

I66 Equity in distribution - clients 3 3,6

Cluster 4 “Resources have to be in place” Mean value 4,17 Original cluster Weighting Human factor (employees): training, profound knowledge, qualification, personality, I11 competencies of those delivering (need to be identified) 4 6,1

I16 Building 4 2,6

I24 User friendly interface in computerised services 4 4

I25 Tangible elements 5 4,4 Common components of standards must be capable of independent validation and I 31 assessment 4 4,7

I39 Develop/maintain resources (people, equipment…) 4 4,9

I45 Technological support 4 4,9

I64 Difference between ―classical‖ standards for products and service standards 4 3,1

- 225 - CHESSS

I67 Differences in transportation 4 2

I73 Company and providers who provide the service (service provision) 4 5

Cluster 5 “Services impy a commercial relation” Mean value 4,68 Original cluster Weighting

I5 Transaction: order, payment, billing, compensation, invoicing, ect. Exchange/ transaction 4 5

I13 Delivery & presentation 5 5,1

I14 Marketing sale services, advertisement 5 4,1

I15 Purchasing 5 3,6

I21 Promise: marketing corporate, previous personal contact ‗custom & practice‘ 7 5,7

I57 A service is an action (intangible) 5 4 Contract between user/ consumer and legal framework, clear contract terms, payment, I63 tendering, legal contract (S.L.A.), Because of legal framework and even public officers 5 5,6

I68 Service production/ service consumption 5 4,4

Cluster 6 “Service definition” Mean value 5,1 Original cluster Weighting

I12 Activities 4 4,7 Service process: Provider (corporate) - Client choice (limited) - Delivery - practicallity I19 moment of truth - end user (beneficiary) - monitoring (follow up of the service) 1 5,4

I28 The closer the service is to the customer, the more important is the process 6 5

I34 Offer (definition) 7 4,9 Design of service: each customer is different, mass services vs individual services, not I37 revealing competitive edge 6 5,1 Service specification: delivery of service (the process itself), producing on time guarantees, I40 individual adaptation of service 6 6

I43 Service level, value adding process, minimum level of quality 6 5,4

I44 Client process based (order - delivery - closing) 6 6

I48 Define the service 6 6,1

I54 Confidentiality – to be considered depending on service situation 6 4,6

I56 Deadlines, time criticalness, time delivery 6 5,3

I59 Fidelity 7 5,6

I61 Ways / types of ending the service 4 3,7

I62 Definition of framework of possible options 6 4,4

I69 Clear characteristics 5 4,9

I70 Service / goods relations 5 4,6

- 226 - CHESSS

P≥5,5 (4 niveles) 53 5,5>P≥5 (3 niveles) 4,2 33 23 5>P≥4,5 (2 niveles) 65 4,5>P (1 nivel) 4 30 42 66 52 9 18 48 4,81047 3 38 50 72 43 44 7 75 51 62 74 8 71 54 5,1 37 58 49 31 40 5,521 19 27 46 28 60 2 6 55 56 41 11 61 29 36 73 12 59 32 22 5 13 68 35 39 4,1767 24 34 26 45 64 17 69 20 21 16 70 15 4,68 57 63 14 25

Question 2 result – Graphic representation

- 227 -

CEN‟s Horizontal European Services Standardization Strategy (CHESSS)

In response to Mandate M/371

Module 2 Services Glossary Final Report

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 230 2. INTRODUCTION ...... 232 3. METHODOLOGY ...... 233 4. FINDINGS ...... 234 5. CONLUSIONS ...... 246 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS: ...... 248 7. BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 250 8. ANNEXES ...... 254 Annex A: CHESSS - Foundation Terms with definitions ...... 254 Annex B: List of Standards reviewed for potential terminology conflict .... 257 Annex C: Terminology review –Terms extracted for comparison ...... 261 Annex D: Terminology references in the CHESSS World Café discussions ...... 269 Annex E: Industry Classification Systems and the CHESSS Stakeholder Map ...... 271 Annex F: Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 12 December 2006 Services in the Internal Market ...... 273 Annex G: Extract from Development of indicators on consumer satisfaction and Pilot survey...... 275 Annex H: References to Terminology and Classification in M/ 371 project reports ...... 277 Annex I: Examples of user friendly presentations of terminology information ...... 283

229

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

It is apparent that in formal standardization terms, much of the existing terminology base was developed in relation to a tangible, product dominated world that may no longer be wholly applicable in today‘s situation in which services have emerged as a significant commercial element in their own right. The emergence of service dominant business models and product service systems require a level of sophistication that would not have been previously considered.

This report therefore suggests that we would be failing in our responsibilities if we were not prepared to revisit existing terminology and at least question its validity to today‘s services delivery model. Preliminary work has therefore been undertaken to review existing terms and definitions used in currently published standards and in common use, to establish what need there might be for review and re-definition.

No formal attempt has been made to prepare proposals for such re-definition other than where the terms appeared to be critical to understanding of the CHESSS report (identified as CHESSS foundation terms).

Throughout the project, stakeholders have been unequivocal in identifying ‗terminology‘ as a prime candidate for a generic approach. Although participants were quick to identify cultural differences as being a contributor to variations in terminology usage it was suggested that one role for a generic services glossary might be to identify equivalency between service related terms in different languages.

Participants also identified a range of sources of new terms and definitions entering into use in the service sector. In addition to published standards, service specific custom and practice, text books, EU and National government legislation and consultation, were referred to. Concern was expressed that terms were being introduced without attempt at cross-reference and that as a result some of those terms and their definitions may contribute to misunderstanding or confusion in service provision, rather then resolving it.

In relation to service provision, the interest of any individual customer is unlikely to be confined to a single or a narrow band of services. Rather, those individuals will wish to engage over time, with providers offering a wide range of services. Unnecessary variation in the use of language between those services may therefore give rise to erroneous assumption of understanding on the part of the customer, ambiguity in the provision of critical information by the provider and at its worst, make deliberate misrepresentation less easy to detect. With imprecise language, even the best intentioned of service providers may well have difficulty in conveying a clear description of the services they offer.

With implementation of the Services Directive, the resulting ‗Points of Single Contact‘ (PSC) will need to be aware of, accommodate, explain and work with these same terminological differences as will the National Consumer Centres Network (NCC-Net) in fulfilling its role as cross border mediator. Both will function

230

more effectively and efficiently if unnecessary differences in the terminology used in various services, can be eliminated.

In considering the most appropriate medium for presentation of a common services terminology data base, it is necessary to seek to maximise the potential for use by all stakeholders. It is suggested that using an electronic medium such as the internet would have the potential to provide access whenever and wherever required, to a readily searchable, encyclopaedic services related knowledge base, as well as a coordinated source reference library for services concept, terms and definitions.

This module therefore recommends that, as the European Standards Body under which a significant amount of European Service Standardization is likely to take place, CEN should establish a group responsible for devising an appropriate structure for and the coordination of, concepts terms and definitions used in services and service related standardization.

This new group should also be tasked to undertake a project to provide a more services sympathetic classification system for services and to be responsible for liaison with other groups involved in the development of services terminology (notably in ISO) in order to promote the maximum achievable degree of synergy between their various outputs.

It is recognised that funding and hosting in relation to web-site provision could be an issue but the potential benefits appear to be significant and worth the preparation of a detailed business case. It is believed that the hosting of such a facility could be of interest to one or more National Standards Bodies and it is suggested that there could be potential for sponsorship in such a venture, without detriment to the credibility of the resource.

231

2. INTRODUCTION

Consulting a dictionary to establish the definition of the term ‗service‘ could provide any one of 11 definitions (see findings), none of which are wrong but all of which are imprecise or incomplete. In addition, turning to standards and in particular ISO 9000, for clarification will provide the information that ‗service‘ is one of four generic categories of product, with ‗product‘ being defined as the result of a process (also see findings). It is perhaps understandable therefore that many service providers do not make an immediate connection. Clarity of understanding is fundamental to acceptance and trust and could therefore have an important role to play in customers‘ willingness to accept services from countries other than their own. All of which serves to highlight why service terminology is a subject meriting particular examination in the CHESSS feasibility study.

The rapid growth of technical documentation relating to products (e.g. maintenance and service literature) has resulted in the establishment of consistent and coherent processes for managing terminology bases and for their presentation not only for human use but also to facilitate and optimize automated storage, translation and search facilities. These terminology tools provide an effective environment for managing a simplified and controlled vocabulary with well defined meanings, an essential requirement for clear communication, whether oral or written.

There has always been a tendency for those preparing technical papers on specific subjects to attribute particular meanings to certain terms in order to ensure the clarity of their message. That these particular ‗definitions‘ were sometimes developed without reference to other pre-existing definitions was of little consequence provided their use remained related to the finite world for which they were introduced. Today however, with so many technical papers being made available via the internet, many of these sector specific definitions are leaching into general use via internet search facilities and increasing the potential for misunderstanding. Often, the originators of such definitions convey an authority that predisposes their acceptance into general use e.g. when particular definitions are developed in relation to legislative activity or as part of a government public consultation. In the internet age, the potential for conflicting definition and therefore misunderstanding is therefore increasing exponentially with the result that the need for a coordinated central terminology resource to provide a point of reference, becomes even greater.

The pressures to apply a coordinated approach to terminology are possibly greater for services than for products, since the service customer is integral to service provision and not merely an end user. With standardization for services still very much in its infancy, now would seem to be a good time to introduce that coordination. The CHESSS Initiative included this module in order to investigate this situation.

232

3. METHODOLOGY

It was envisaged that research for this module would be stimulated by the identification of terms that have been the cause of misunderstanding or ambiguity during the work on the various CHESSS Modules. In the event, this did not happen to any great extent

To aid understanding of the concepts examined in the CHESSS feasibility study, some attempt was made to provide services specific definitions for key terms not addressed in this way, elsewhere (see Annex A)

The detailed research undertaken has been to review existing services related standards (see Annexes B & C) and instances of terms in common usage in the particular services sectors in which they are used in order to establish the extent to which diversity in application and definition may already be apparent. In addition, key terms have been cross referenced to commonly used dictionaries, particularly those available via the internet. Research has also been undertaken with regard to the principles and methodologies of terminology development and presentation.

Because terminology is inherently a part of all the CHESSS modules it was not the subject of a World Café discussion in its own right. Attention was however drawn to its significance at each of the module sessions and participants were requested to submit comment on the proposals for fundamental terms and definitions made available at that time (see Annex D). These had been made available to all stakeholders via the web-site and were issued again to participants attending in the World Café discussions. It is not necessarily the intention that those definitions should be taken forward into any subsequent terminology or glossary for services although it is recommended that they be considered on their merits at the appropriate time.

Although this module starts from the fundamental principle that we should not be seeking to apply new terms or redefine existing terms without good reason it has become apparent from the research undertaken that in standardization terms the existing terminology base was developed in relation to tangible, product dominated activity and may not therefore be wholly applicable in today‘s situation. With service provision having developed as a significant commercial element in its own right, services have developed terminology requirements of a level of sophistication that appears not to have been recognised previously.

In view of this it is evident that we should be at least prepared to revisit existing terminology and to question its relevance to today‘s services delivery model. It is to this end that a dialogue has been opened with some of those involved in the development and maintenance of ISO 9000 terminology

233

4. FINDINGS

4.1 The need for structure in service terminology For humankind, terminology is fundamental to the description, ordering and transfer of knowledge. For the purpose of terminological development it is not necessary to identify and name every individual object in the world. It is possible that by observation of characteristics, and a process of mental grouping, objects can be categorized into mental constructs called concepts which can be represented in various ways, in communication.

For the purposes of a specific terminology, concepts are considered to be mental representations of objects within a particular context to which a designation or definition is attributed, rather than to the objects themselves.

The link between an object and its designation is therefore made through the concept, as the higher level of abstraction and establishing a hierarchy of relationships between concepts is essential for complete understanding. .

Producing a service terminology therefore requires understanding of the conceptualization that underpins human knowledge in services and service provision and providing for its expression in the various forms of human communication, according to the system used.

In natural language terminology, concepts take the form of terms and definitions. They can sometimes be represented by codes or formulae or graphically as icons, pictures or diagrams. Concepts may also be expressed by sign language, facial expressions or body movements but such physical representations are not, commonly addressed in a work of terminology.

4.2 Structure and classification We have presented above the case for taking the time to prepare suitable structure to accommodate the requirements of future services standardization. Reference has also been made to the benefits that would accrue from building that structure, taking account established classification principles already in the use in relation to services, particularly in a European context.

On a broader basis, in carrying out its remit to look at the feasibility of taking a generic approach to services standardization, the CHESSS Initiative has experienced the need to turn to existing business classification systems 10 & 11for information about the practical grouping of services. Our experience has been that these systems (including the revised NACE introduced from January 2008) are not helpful in enabling grouping by service characteristics (necessary for the determination of commonality in service provision) and that some additional work in this respect would be beneficial to any future service standardization programme.

10 ICS International Classification for Standards http://www.iso.org/iso/ics6-en.pdf 11 NACE http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/mergers/cases/index/nace_all.html

234

There are several classification systems in use but outside of the United States, primarily those of the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) and "Nomenclature Generale des Activites Economiques dans I`Union Europeenne" (NACE) are applied. Whilst there is a considerable degree of synergy between these two systems neither is especially sympathetic for use in relation to services. In developing its own stakeholder map, the CHESSS study sought to make use of an existing structure but was unable to find one suitably configured. Annex E contains the table of service categories and types developed for this purpose. This will be found to be compatible with SIC and NACE codes and provides an overview of the categories identified for use in the CHESSS study.

Given the essentially European focus of the CHESSS feasibility study, the NACE classifications should be used as the basis for any necessary services classification in relation to CEN services standards.12 However, noting that the current NACE version that came into effect in January 2008 13 was the product of work undertaken between 2002 and 2007, it is considered unrealistic to expect that any revision in respect of services be undertaken in the immediate future.

Several aspects of the overall CHESSS study (see modules 1, 4 and 7) identify that there is need for work to be undertaken on a system for grouping and classifying services, taking particular account of the extent to which each employs the primary characteristics of service provision, identified in the study. This work will have a bearing on and preferably be undertaken in close relationship with, the task of structuring a future CEN services terminology database. For this reason, responsibility for developing a services classification system for standards purposes should be undertaken in close liaison with the development of a services terminology database. The two work streams may each require the creation of a dedicated group of experts but the respective projects will be better managed under a single coordinating structure.

4.3 Preserving linguistic difference During the CHESSS World Café discussions, concern was expressed by several participants that service standardization, not withstanding its acknowledged benefits, has the potential to smother cultural difference. This is, perhaps, an understandable concern, given that standardization inherently focuses on uniformity of approach.

There have been many initiatives to draw attention to the importance of terminology in development. The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages (1992), which includes terminology aspects stressing the value of multiculturalism and multilingualism, is an excellent example.

Internationally, UNESCO has consistently sought to create better awareness

12 Attention is drawn to the fact that Module 7 of the CHESSS Feasibility Study also makes reference to the ICS classification system (http://www.iso.org/iso/ics6-en.pdf ). Hitherto, in relation to product standardization, it is the ICS system that has been the more frequently used. Neither system however has been found to be particularly helpful for services. 13 the European Union's industrial classification system, NACE (NACE Rev. 2).

235

of the important role of language in bridging the digital divide that co-occurs with inequality of access to information and knowledge, which is in turn associated with inequality in linguistic access. Inadequate terminology is a key factor in the inequality of linguistic access,

UNESCO also promotes actions to achieve world-wide access to electronic content in all languages, improve the linguistic capabilities of users, and create and develop tools for multilingual access to the Internet, emphasizing that language continues to be the primary means of inter-human communication. UNESCO has drawn attention to an ever increasing body of empirical evidence that indicates a critical relationship between individuals‘ opportunity to use their mother tongue in a full range of cultural, scientific and commercial areas, and the socio-economic well-being of their respective language communities. They have published guidelines providing methodological assistance for formulating and implementing a terminology policy based on consolidated language planning14 .

The principles addressed in these guidelines focus on the critical need for language and terminology planning and the development of appropriate implementation policies capable of sustaining the terminology infrastructure.

The guidance includes reference to: the roles of general purpose (every-day) language (GPL) and special purpose language (SPL) and to the accommodation of both in language policies; The parallel approaches of descriptive and prescriptive terminology.

With regard to the relationship of GPL and SPL, it is acknowledged that: whilst SPL is the remit of formal terminology work (e.g. in standardization) and being primarily concerned with the development, representation and accessibility of terms for use in technical or professional communication; and GPL consists of the descriptive, perhaps less precise, language used in every-day life by the general population.

However, given the influence that scientific/ technical development has on modern life, SPLs are increasingly having a strong impact on the development of their respective GPLs.

This could have significant implications in the field of service provision. The customer is, by definition, an integral part of the provision process and is therefore directly affected by the development of service related terms in a way that his product related counterpart is not. Unlike in product related activity, where much of the technical communication is between technicians and professionals, the customer interested in the final outcome but not necessarily in the detail of how that is achieved.

14 Guidelines for Terminology Policies -Formulating and implementing terminology policy in language communities -Prepared by Infoterm

236

With regard to descriptive and prescriptive terminology approaches to introducing new terms into a language, it is noted that the descriptive approach only seeks to observe, record and analyse the emergence of terms whereas the prescriptive approach involves reaching agreement between potential users to adopt a term for common and repeated use, in given circumstances. The prescriptive approach includes the processes of unification, harmonization and standardization and can deliver a variety of security, safety and commercial benefits. It is also the aspect that gives rise to the concerns about loss of cultural/ linguistic, diversity, referred to at the beginning of this section of the report.

Estimates of the number of languages existing today vary, but the average figure is claimed to lie somewhere between 6,000 and 7,000 (without considering dialects and local variants). Protecting such diversity in an environment of increasing global cooperation is never going to be easy, unless the science fiction dream of an instant, universal language converter, worn perhaps like an ipod, became a reality.

Formal terminology work can however provide a helpful alternative, albeit a more time consuming one.

It is true that terminology standardization almost always involves a choice between competing terms and that some may then mourn the loss of the deprecated term(s). However, given a process for making decision by consensus, and transparency of decision making (i.e clear reasons for choice, e.g. one term may be less cumbersome than others or another may have negative social or political implications) these discussions are usually manageable.

The benefit of doing so is that the provision of a formal SPL terminology, structured and populated in accordance with established principles and methodology in terminology work (see reference to ISO/TC 37 and related terminology standards (see 4.4) can then be used to inform a GPL for every- day use, provided the relevant information is provided via a readily accessible, easy to understand medium. If the established terminology principles relating to the hierarchy of concepts and terms15 & 16 are adhered to and a system for making language equivalents (rather than translations) available is introduced in direct relationship with the formal terminology base then the proponents of the value of linguistic diversity should have little to be concerned about.

An interesting development to emerge from the World Café discussions in Tallinn was the suggestion from at least two participants, that far from being the enemy of cultural and linguistic diversity, standards could actually play a positive role in protecting diversity.

4.4 Applying existing principles, methodologies and rationale

15 ISO 704 – Terminology Work – Principles and methods 16 Wright, S.E. and Budin, G. Handbook of Terminology Management. 1997.

237

In any field of endeavour, the actual utilization of consistent terminology upon which all potential users can agree, reflects the quality of the collective body of documents that capture and convey the nature, methodologies and objectives of that particular area of activity or knowledge.

The objective of terminology standardization, which is the unification and harmonization of concepts, terms and definitions, is to provide a vocabulary in which each concept is represented by a single term and one term only and corresponds to any one concept, thus reducing ambiguity and misunderstanding.

Given that the potential benefit of terminology standardization is often not recognised until ambiguity has begun to present a problem in use, it is not unusual for terminology work to commence long after competing terms have emerged to identify common concepts and variations in definition have been brought into common use. Any terminology project therefore, needs first of all to collate, structure and harmonize the concepts and terms in common use, before they can begin to rationalise those terms and facilitate the creation of new terms, in accordance with the principles and methods of terminology good practice (see ISO 704).

This should result in a standardized terminology capable of supporting unambiguous communication in the specific subject area, that consists of sets of single concepts with related designations and definitions, used in that particular field of human knowledge. This will not only improve communication but will also provide better access to and management of, the related information data base.

There are significant economic benefits to be derived when general consensus is achieved on the understanding of concepts and the meaning of terms. In all areas of human endeavour, be it product or services related, the harmonization of concepts and terms (see ISO 860), can assist in improving efficiency and productivity and facilitate trade generally including that across national borders. This latter aspect is of particular importance because it is in relation to international transactions that inconsistent use of terminology will most likely lead to the biggest misunderstanding and potential economic loss.

Our research has established that with the development of standardization in relation to services being relatively recent, there is only a small body of existing concepts and terms to be harmonized and little evidence of conflict requiring resolution. The early initiation of a project to undertake any necessary rationalization and provide for future coordination of services terminology will therefore have the potential to avoid the cost that would result from allowing services terminology to develop in an uncoordinated manner for an unspecified period and then needing to rework and gain acceptance for a much larger and more disorganized terminology base, at some future date.

238

There is already a sound body of knowledge in relation to the principles, methodology and rationale for standards terminology development by making optimum use of the standards identified in table 1.

Table 1 – Terminology Standards

Existing terminological standards base Primary identifier Subject* ISO 704: 2000 Terminology work – Principles and methods ISO 860: 2007 Harmonization of concepts and terms ISO 1087-1: 2001 Terminology work Vocabulary – Theory and application ISO 1087-2: 2000 Terminology work Vocabulary – Computer applications ISO 10241: 1992 International terminology standards – Preparation and layout ISO 12616: 2002 Translation oriented terminography ISO 15188: 2001 Project management guidelines for terminology standardization. ISO 22128: 2008** Terminology products and services – Overview and guidance Note 1: * The subjects identified are drawn from the title of the relevant standard but may not be an exact replication of it. Note 2 ** at public enquiry stage.

The primary objective for such a project will need to be the preparation of a generic services terminology base capable of providing for unambiguous communication in relation to ‗service provision‘ across all services, and product service systems, into the foreseeable future. The use of the pre- established principles and guidelines will help to ensure that the resulting terminology resource can start to make its contribution in the shortest practicable time whilst keeping the project productive and cost-efficient.

4.5 Definition of service Depending upon which dictionary is consulted, the term service will be found to mean: act of assistance Concise Oxford English Dictionary system supplying a public need such as Concise Oxford English Dictionary transport, or utilities such as water. work performed by one that serves Concise Oxford English Dictionary contribution to the welfare of others Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary useful labour that does not produce a tangible Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary commodity facility supplying some public demand Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary industry that provides a service for Cambridge International Dictionary of people but does not result in the English production of goods work done by one person or group that One look dictionary search benefits another act of help or assistance One look dictionary search

239

a company or agency that performs a One look dictionary search public service; subject to government regulation act or instance of helping Wordsmyth Dictionary work done by somebody for Encarta somebody else as a job, duty, punishment, or favour action done to help somebody or as Encarta a favour to somebody act of helpful activity Infoplease performance of helpful or professional Infoplease duties or work for another person (other persons)

Which by example, illustrates why terminology is potentially such a fundamental and contentious issue in the development of standards and why some level of coordination across the range of service standards will prove beneficial.

Review of the available dictionary definitions identified the following common service characteristics:

action or activity; undertaken by one party in respect of another (or others); beneficial intent.

For the purposes of the CHESSS Initiative, service is considered to be wholly customer centric 17and is therefore defined as: predetermined action(s) undertaken for the benefit of particular recipients and a service can therefore be defined as: scheme to undertake action(s) for the benefit of recipients

There is some negative reaction to this definition because the inclusion of the reference to benefit is said to bring a qualitative element to the definition. However, without this element of beneficial intent, we are left with action or activity by one party in respect of another, a definition that could be seen as recognising ‗murder‘ as a service.

Inevitably, much of the standards work undertaken and in progress is concerned with the ‗quality‘ of services and wisely, those involved in their development have looked around for existing definitions on which to rely. Unsurprisingly, one of the key references has been ISO 9000 Quality management systems – fundamentals and vocabulary

17 A service will also be undertaken on a commercial, charitable or not for profit basis to meet objectives set by the service provider but customer centricity requires that those objectives be commensurate with fulfillment of the fundamental service definition.

240

4.6 Service relationship with ISO 9000

Given that ISO 9000 is already being used in relation to services as well as products, it is not unreasonable to expect that terms appropriate to service provision will have been included.

The most recent edition of ISO 9000 does not however provide any service specific terminology. All definitions have been developed with reference to product and are claimed to be equally appropriate for application in connection with services and service provision.

ISO 9000 (2005) provides the following:

3.4.2 Product result of a process (3.4.1)

NOTE 1 There are four generic product categories, as follows: — services (e.g. transport); — software (e.g. computer program, dictionary); — hardware (e.g. engine mechanical part); — Processed materials (e.g. lubricant).

Many products comprise elements belonging to different generic product categories. Whether the product is then called service, software, hardware or processed material depends on the dominant element. For example, the offered product ―automobile‖ consists of hardware (e.g. tyres), processed materials (e.g. fuel, cooling liquid), software (e.g. engine control software, driver's manual), and service (e.g. operating explanations given by the salesman).

NOTE 2 Service is the result of at least one activity necessarily performed at the interface between the supplier (3.3.6) and customer (3.3.5) and is generally intangible. Provision of a service can involve, for example, the following: — an activity performed on a customer-supplied tangible product (e.g. automobile to be repaired); — an activity performed on a customer-supplied intangible product (e.g. the income statement needed to prepare a tax return); — the delivery of an intangible product (e.g. the delivery of information in the context of knowledge transmission); — the creation of ambience for the customer (e.g. in hotels and restaurants). . Software consists of information and is generally intangible and can be in the form of approaches, transactions or procedures (3.4.5). Hardware is generally tangible and its amount is a countable characteristic (3.5.1). Processed materials are generally tangible and their amount is a continuous characteristic. Hardware and processed materials often are referred to as goods.

241

NOTE 3 Quality assurance (3.2.11) is mainly focused on intended product.

This explanation is accepted as being both accurate and adequate in the context of ISO 9000, although in the body of the standard the contribution of the explanation may perhaps be less effective as the text refers exclusively to product, throughout.

This is not helpful however is for those working specifically in service provision. Discussions with service providers have indicated a lack of connection with the principles of ISO 9000 and suggestion that it is difficult to engage service operatives in the process when the terms used do not reflect the service processes involved. This is seen as a possible contributor to the relatively low level of application for ISO 9000 to service provision.

Discussion with some of those experts actively involved in the development of ISO 9000 has indicated some hesitation in considering the introduction of changes to what has been a successful formula. To some extent this is understandable since change introduced for the benefit of new users will need to be accommodated by those successfully using the standards currently.

Nevertheless, with the current business trend towards service dominant business models and the development of ‗product service systems‘ 18it may be that some of those in the product world, may appreciate adjustment towards a more sympathetic treatment of service concepts. It could be therefore that the development of a more service focused approach to quality management systems will also be of assistance to previously product dominant enterprises, where hitherto ISO 9000 systems have been found to be applicable.

If it is ultimately concluded that a more services focused input to future ISO 9000 terminology development could be beneficial in helping to overcome this perceived mismatch with service standardization needs, input to this process, from CEN Committees engaged in service standards development, would perhaps be more effective if coordinated and presented by a dedicated terminology group. It is suggested that such a review of services related terminology could, in turn, be beneficial to the ISO 10001, 2, 3 and 4 series of standards addressing various aspects around customer satisfaction, complaints handling and redress provision.

4.7 Other terminology considerations One other example of variation in definition, across a range of services standards concerns the term customer (see Annex B) 19 for which the following definitions have been identified:

18 The Service-dominant logic of marketing – Dialogue, debate and directions Robert F. Lusch and Stephen L. Vargo. Pulished by M.E. Sharpe Inc. New York and based on articles published in the Journal of Marketing, during 2004.

19 Attention is drawn to the CHESSS Foundation Terms (see Annex A) in relation to which attempt was made to introduce the term (service) beneficiary as a more appropriate term than (service) customer. This has not however found any support amongst the CHESSS stakeholder community and the proposal has been abandoned.

242

organization or person that receives a product (e.g. client, end-user, retainer, beneficiary or purchaser); individual or body retaining the services of the sole or principle provider of specified services to that particular customer; individual or organization that employs a CIT company to carry out agreed services and is responsible for remunerating the company in accordance with an agreed price and contract; individual or body retaining an organization to carry out services in accordance with a contract.

Clearly not differences of fundamental significance but still having the potential to create misunderstanding and therefore justifying attempt to reach a more uniform understanding.

In our technology based world, technical papers are published with increasing frequency and this is true for services, just as much as for products. Quite rightly, their authors seek to attribute particular meanings to certain terms in order to ensure the clarity of their message. That these new ‗definitions‘ are developed without reference to other pre-existing definitions is almost inevitable in the absence of a generally accepted services terminology source. This is not a new phenomenon and hitherto has been of little consequence given that awareness of the particular application, remained related to the finite world for which they were introduced (for example see Annex F). Now however with almost every technical paper being made available via the internet, many of these particular definitions are finding their way into more general use via internet search facilities. Often, the originators of these definitions convey an authority that predisposes their acceptance into general use, increasing the potential for conflicting definition and misunderstanding. This is not to suggest that definitions emerging in this way are necessarily incorrect, indeed they can be both thought provoking and generally helpful (see Annex G). Never-the-less, the potential for quite rapid introduction of uncoordinated difference, is a matter for concern.

In recognition of the fact that the CHESSS project is just one of eleven studies undertaken under the remit of Mandate M/ 371 and that any or all of the other ten studies may have reached conclusions with regard to terminology that impact on this report, Annex G examines the terminology issues raised by the other ten projects, to determine whether collectively or individually they identify concerns or recommend actions that require provision to be made in the module 2 conclusions and recommendations.

The result of this exercise serves to reinforce the module 2 proposal for the initiation of a services terminology group to underpin future service standardization through provision of a common structure and coordination for the terminology work undertaken by groups developing both generic and service specific standards. Reference to concerns with regard to the absence

243

of an appropriate classification system for services are also noted, and this too is in line with the conclusions reached in module 2.

4.8 Drivers for a service focus in terminology At this stage in the development of services standardization, with relatively few standards having reached publication, there is little sign of serious conflict having emerged between the terms and definitions that they provide. There are a few fundamental differences between the definitions applied to key words (see Annex B) but as yet there is nothing to give rise to serious concern.

There are however ongoing concerns. As the rate of development of services related standards increases, as seems likely if current trends continue, the likelihood that potentially conflicting use and definition of particular terms will emerge, will increase. This could be particularly damaging for customers who will inevitably make use of a range of services and as a result could experience the use of particular terms with varying meanings or the application of a term to completely different concepts as they interact with different service areas. Without some attempt at coordination, the potential for misunderstanding will tend to increase as the number of standards increases, a result that is somewhat contrary to the objectives of standardization. Ideally, this situation could be managed through liaison between the groups developing the new standards but experience shows that this is an unrealistic expectation that certainly could not be relied upon.

Terms and definitions relating to services and service provision are of value to customers as much if not more than, to service providers. With the terminology base confined to the pages of standards there is concern that customers will not have the ready access that will be necessary for them to make use of the information.

Making the information available in a freely and more readily accessible form will therefore have long term benefit. The nature of that availability will be critical to its usefulness and for that reason provision of a glossary (terms and explanations see example Annex C) in addition to precise definition would seem to have considerable merit not just through provision for direct access by customers but also in connection with the establishment of the required Points of Single Contact (PSC) to be established by Member States by the end of 2009. These are intended to provide a unified source of information for service providers, to assist them in delivering services across national borders and It would seem to be self evident that access to a common terminology database, of which they might otherwise be unaware, should be part of that information provision.

Another potential beneficiary of such a facility would be the network of European Consumer Centres, whose role it is to assist in the resolution of complaints and disputes that arise as a result of making purchases across national borders. Here again the use of common terms with common meanings can only lead to improved understanding.

It is apparent that there are a range of sources for services related terms and definitions, all of which are likely to be considered to be ‗official‘ in one way or another and which therefore have the potential to cause misunderstanding or

244

conflict. In addition to standards, these sources include EU and national legislation and consultation documents all of which have the potential to unintentionally add to the proliferation and misunderstanding of competing terms. Whilst it is not suggested that a standards terminology database should dictate the terminology used by these other sources, its ready availability may well provide the basis for a form of voluntary coordination between the originating bodies.

In considering the most appropriate medium for presentation of a common services terminology database and glossary, it is necessary to seek to maximise the potential for use by service providers, service customers, legislators etc. It is suggested that by using an electronic medium such as the internet such a facility could have the potential to provide ready access to an encyclopedic services related knowledge base, as well as a coordinated source reference library for terms and definitions.

In spite of attempts made to encourage drafting bodies to coordinate terminologies as they develop them, it is evident from work in progress that overlapping and inconsistent terminologies will continue to emerge because documents and policies are produced in different contexts. Even after the introduction of the proposed service terminology database, there will still be the danger that those developing service specific terminologies will not always be aware of or remember to refer to the resource. In addition, concepts and terms will inevitably develop differently in individual languages and will be influenced by professional, technical, scientific, social, economic, linguistic, cultural or other factors.

The existence of the database will therefore require regular and broad promotion on an ongoing basis if this uncoordinated growth is to be contained and managed.

The terminology group will therefore need to establish mechanisms for monitoring developing service terminology if harmonization is to be achieved. For standards purposes it is necessary that harmonization starts at the concept level and continues at the term level, because:

differences between concepts do not necessarily become apparent at the designation level; similarity at the designation level does not necessarily mean that the concepts behind the designations are identical; mistakes occur when a single concept is designated by two synonyms which by error are considered to designate two different concepts.

245

5. CONLUSIONS

5.1 Formation of a Services Terminology Group Although this study has not found a substantial body of conflicting services terminology, there is evidence from projects currently in progress, that as the rate of development of services standards increases, this will become an increasing problem. The formation of a services terminology group to provide coordination for terminology developed in relation to services standardization would provide an effective means of managing the future growth in services related terminology.

5.2 Classification of Services and Services Terminology Structure The first task of the new group should be to review the need for development of a classification system that will permit the grouping and identification of services by service provision characteristics. Noting that existing classification systems (e.g. NACE and ICS) do not provide for this, it is recommended that work be undertaken to develop a new classification system that will enable such grouping to be accomplished. Such a system will have a bearing on the structure of the proposed services terminology database and that there is therefore sound reason why the development of a services classification system should be undertaken in close relationship with, the task of preparing a structure for a future CEN services terminology database.

It is acknowledged that the two work streams may each require the creation of a dedicated group of experts but it is strongly recommended that their respective projects be undertaken under a single coordinating structure.

5.3 Formal and informal presentation The output from the Services Terminology group should be:

1. a formal, structured (SPL) services terminology to support the common understanding of service related documentation and communication and capable of electronic interrogation.

2. a (GPL) glossary providing terms with explanation20 intended to facilitate the widest possible use (see Annex I for examples). It is further concluded that provision of a table of equivalent terms in a range of languages used in the European Union, would contribute to the preservation of language diversity and add considerable value to the resource.

5.4 Relationship with ISO 9000

20 In the event that a free access resource were to be achievable and in relation to proposal made in Module 4, the web-based terminology resource could be used to facilitate the provision of advice to service customers on how best to participate in a service relationship to ensure receiving optimum benefit from service providers.

246

Provision of a services focused input to future ISO 9000 terminology revision would be beneficial in helping to introduce terms and definitions more directly relevant to service standardization needs. Input to this process, from CEN Technical Committees engaged in service standards development, would perhaps be more effective if coordinated and presented by a dedicated terminology group.

5.5 Glossary availability Making services terminology information for general information, available in the most readily accessible form21 commensurate with ensuring ongoing availability, will have benefit for:

Service providers; Service customers; Legislators; Information providers (e.g. Member State Points of Single Contact); Mediation and Arbitration services (e.g. European Consumer Centres Network; Ombudsman Services).

The most appropriate medium for presentation of the proposed database would be through a dedicated free-access web-site hosted on the inter-net.

21 A ‗free access‘ core facility would potentially increase the usability of such a resource.

247

6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS:

6.1 Recommendation As the European Standards Body under which a significant amount of European Service Standardization is likely to take place, CEN should initiate a project designed to establish a body responsible for the coordination of services terminology, with the remit to:

a. develop and implement a services standardization terminology policy, including the aspects of services classification and preservation of language diversity; b. develop a system for classifying services; c. determine the means and extent of preservation of language diversity; d. provide a common framework or structure to relate the various concepts characteristics, terms and definitions associated with services and service provision; e. provide a methodology as to how this structure should be implemented by other groups or individuals having a need to contribute further services terms to the service terminology data base; f. recognise, cross relate and explain the relationships between, the various service related terminologies in use in the European Union; g. establish a range of preferred terms and definitions to facilitate the provision of a services terminology standard; h. develop a glossary providing a list of preferred terms with explanations and language equivalents, for general use; i. provide terminology coordination for ongoing standards development projects; j. be responsible for liaison and co-working with ISO service terminology groups to promote coordination across service standardization generally; k. establish and be responsible for the management of a web- based resource to make the product of a, b, c, d, e and f available to the widest practicable range of potential users; l. examine and recommend to CEN/ BT, value adding services that could be provided from the CEN terminology data-base.

6.2 Next Steps

1. Development of new work proposal, business case and outline drafts for the recommendation that a CEN Terminology Group be initiated and its submission to CEN new work procedures, for approval (possibly under the remit of CEN/ BT/ WG 163).

248

2. Identification and approval of Services terminology group, Secretariat and Chairman. 3. Engagement of broad cross-section of service stakeholders, including terminology experts and standards professionals. 4. Development of draft services standardization terminology policy, including the aspects of services classification and preservation of language diversity. 5. Preparation of draft implementation plan, including proposed timeline. 6. Promulgation of awareness of policy and implementation plan with a view to not only informing service stakeholders but also attracting additional expertise. 7. Finalize and gain approval for policy and implementation plan. 8. Commence implementation of plan. 9. Seek sources of sponsorship and/ or hosting for the proposed services terminology resource*. 10. Inform those responsible for the development of national points of single contact (PSCs) and the National Consumer Centres Network (NCC-Net) of the likely availability and timing of an internet based resource, establish their possible interest and any presentational linking issues that may be relevant*.

Note: items 9 and 10 should be addressed during the period of undertaking items 1 to 8, as practicality and confirmation of progress permits.

Timing

It is envisaged that completion of stages 1 through 7 could take 10 to 12 months and it is therefore recommended that subject to acceptance of the recommendation, work on stage 1 should commence no later than October 2008.

249

7. BIBLIOGRAPHY

AENOR. PNE 185001. Timeshare Organizations. Service Delivery Requirements. ————. PNE 186001. Spa Establishments. Service Delivery Requirements. ————. PNE 188001. Golf Courses. Service Delivery Requirements. ————. UNE158001:2000. Service management in care homes. Total management. ————. UNE 158002:2000. Service management in care homes. Sites and installations of a care home. ————. UNE 158003:2000. Service management in care homes. Equipment and other needs. ————. UNE 158004:2000. Service management in care homes. Staff qualification. Training. ————. UNE 158005:2000. Service management in care homes. Staff at rest homes. Different job and jobs groups. ————. UNE 167004:2006. Restaurant services. Hygiene requirements. ————. UNE 167005:2006. Restaurant services. Lounge requirements. ————. UNE 167007:2006. Restaurant services. Requirements for transport. ————. UNE 167008:2006. Restaurant services. Bar requirements. ————. UNE 167009:2006. Restaurant services. Kitchen requirements ————. UNE 167010:2006. Restaurant service. Central kitchen requirements. ————. UNE 167011:2006. Restaurant services. Vocabulary. ————. UNE 175001-1:2004. Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: General requirements. ————. UNE 175001-2:2004. Service quality for small retail trade. Part 2. Requirements for fishmonger‘s. ————. UNE 175001-3:2005. Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: Requirements for opticians. ————. UNE 175001-4:2005. Service quality for small retail trade. Part 4: Requirements for butcher‘s and delicatessen. ————. UNE 175001-5:2005. Service Quality for small retail trade: Requirements for flower shops. ————. UNE 167001: 2006. Restaurant services. Management requirements. ————. UNE 167002: 2006. Restaurant services. Facilities and equipment maintenance. ————. UNE 167003: 2006. Restaurant services. Provisioning and storage requirements. ————. UNE 189001: 2006. Intermediation tourism services. Service requirements. ————. UNE 179001:2007. Quality in dental surgeries and dental services. General requirements.

250

————. UNE 182001:2005. Hotels and tourist apartments. Service requirements. ————. UNE 184001: 2007. Touring camps and holiday sites. Service requirements. AFNOR BP X 50-890: 2005. Quality of service in hairdressing salons. ————. NF S52-501: 2005. Bungee jumping - Service commitments of organisations providing the public with a bungee jumping activity. ————. NF X 50 - 720:2004. Quality of services - Recommendations for conceiving and improving the welcome – Guidelines. ————. NF X 50 - 820: 1992. Boating services - Specifications for service and provision of service - Distribution of yachts and material - Ship maintenance repairing - Motor sale and repairing. ————. NF X 50-007: 2000. Winter sports equipment hiring service - Definition of the winter sports equipment hiring service. ————. NF X 50-220: 2005. Service standard - School canteen catering service. ————. NF X 50-700: 2006. Service quality - Approach for improving service quality - The Reference and service commitments – Recommendations. ————. NF X 50-722: 2005. Quality of services - Measurement and monitoring for improving the service quality. ————. NF X 50-788: 2003. Direct selling - Service of direct selling enterprises. ————. NF X 50-809: 2004. Highways - Service quality of client welcome areas - Service commitments. ————. NF X 50-915: 2000. Hydropathic establishments (Spas) - Services to patients - Requirements and recommendations. ————. NF X 50-785: 2002. Services provided by electronic security systems companies. BSI BS 7373-3: 2005. Product specifications – Guide to identifying criteria for specifying a service offering. ————. BS 8406-2:2003. Event stewarding and crowd safety services – Code of Practice. ————. BS 7499: 2002. Static site guarding and mobile patrol services - Code of practice. ————. BS 7872: 2002. Manned security services - Cash-in-transit services (collection and delivery) - Code of practice. ————. BS 7984:2001. Keyholding and response services - Code of practice. ————. BS 8477: 2007. Code of practice for customer service. ————. BS 8600: 1999. Complaints management systems – Guide to design and implementation. ————. BS PAS 51. Guide to industry best practice for organizing outdoor events. UK Royal college of gynaecologists. (2006). Service standards for sexual health services. UNI. UNI 11034. Early childhood services. ————. UNI 10600. Lodgement and management of complaints for public services.

251

————. UNI 10970. Funds endowment: process of projects initial evaluation, monitoring and final evaluation. General requirements. ————. UNI 10971. Trade. Colors and paints, wallpapers, floor, lining and fittings. Service requirements. ————. UNI 11010. Residential and day services for disabled persons. Service requirements. ————. UNI 11031. Services - Services for addictes in therapeutic communities and alcoholics - Service requirements. ————. UNI 11032. Trade. Grocery and fruit and vegetable stores. CEN EN 12522 – 2. Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for private individuals. Part 2. Provision of service. ————. EN 13549: 2001. Cleaning services - Basic requirements and recommendations for quality measuring systems. ————. EN 14153-3. Recreational diving services – safety related minimum requirements for the training of recreational scuba divers – Part 3: Level 3 – Dive Leader. ————. EN 14413-2:2004. Recreational Diving Services - Safety related minimum requirements for the training of scuba instructors – Part 1: Level 1. ————. EN 14467:2004. Recreational diving services – requirements for recreational scuba diving service providers. ————. EN 14804:2005. Language study tour providers – Requirements. ————. EN 14873 – 1. Furniture Renoval Activities – Storage of Furniture and Personal Effects for private individuals. Part 1. Specification for the storage facility and related storage provision. ————. EN 14873-2:2005. Furniture removal activities - Storage of furniture and personal effects for private individuals - Part 2: Provision of the service. ————. EN 15017:2005. Funeral Services – Requirement. ————. EN 15038:2006. Translation services – Service Requirements. ————. EN 15331:2005. Criteria for Design, Management and Control of Maintenance for Buildings. ————. pr CEN/TS CSA 99001. Business support – Support services provided to micro and small enterprises – Quality and performance requirements. ————. prEN 12522 – 1. Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for private individuals. Part 1. Service specification. ————. prEN 15565. Tourism services – Requirements for the provision of professional training and qualification programmes of tourist guides. ————. BTTF WD 049. Customer contact centres. ————. EN 15221-2. Facility management – Part 2: Guidance o how to prepare Facility management agreements. ————. CEN / TR 13200-2. Spectator facilities - Layout criteria of service area - Part 2. Characteristics and national situations. ————. CWA 13987-1:2003. Smart Card Systems: Interoperable Citizen services: Extended User Related Information - Part 1: Definition of User Related Information and Implementation. ————. CWA 14172-2:2004. EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 2: Certification Authority services and processes.

252

————. CWA 14172-8:2004. EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 8. Time-stamping Authority services and processes. ————. CWA 14523:2002. Description for the types of business advice and support services provided to small enterprises in Europe. ————. CWA 14644:2003. Quality Assurance Standards (14365:2003). ————. CWA 14921:2004. Web services: Technology and Standardization aspects. ————. CWA 15581:2006. Guidelines for e-invoicing service providers. ————. CWA 15660: 2007. Providing good practice for e-learning quality approaches. ————. CWA 14641: 2006. Security Management system for secure printing. ISO 9000: 2005. Quality management systems – fundamentals and vocabulary. ————. 10001: .Quality management – customer satisfaction – Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations. ————. 10002: 2004. Quality management – customer satisfaction – Guidelines for complaints handling. ————. 10003. Quality management – customer satisfaction – Guidelines for dispute resolution, external to organizations. ————. CD.2 10004. Quality management – customer satisfaction – Guidelines for monitoring and measuring customer satisfaction. ————. ISO 10160: 1997. Interlibrary loan application service definition. ————. ISO 20000-1. Information technology -- Service management -- Part 1: Specification. ————. ISO 20000-2. Information technology -- Service management -- Part 2: Code of practice. ————. ISO 15928-2. Houses. Structural serviceability. ————. ISO/DIS 17090-1. Health informatics. ————. ISO 20252:2006. Market, opinion and social research -- Vocabulary and service requirements. ————. ISO 22222:2005. Personal financial planning — Requirements for personal financial planners.

253

8. ANNEXES

Annex A: CHESSS - Foundation Terms with definitions service: predetermined action(s) undertaken to deliver benefit to particular recipients

Note: Such actions may be undertaken by the service provider on a commercial, charitable or not-for-profit basis

Commentary to term ‘service’ and modified definition. The above definition has been through several iterations during the study, involving discussion with stakeholders expressing an interest in services terminology. service deliverable the benefit(s), delivery of which is the primary reason for contracting a service service provision actions undertaken in making a service deliverable available to its intended recipient(s), other than those intrinsic to that service deliverable

(service) customer: entity deriving benefit from a service

Commentary to term ‘service customer’ and modified definition. An initial proposal to introduce the term service beneficiary as the entity potentially deriving benefit from the delivery of a service that can therefore be assumed to have expectations and needs relating to the object of the service and the nature and location of its delivery was generally not accepted by stakeholders,. Engaging with the study. service provider: entity undertaking (predetermined) action(s) to benefit particular recipients service sector: grouping of services and service providers created for identification, analysis or similar purpose

(service customer) need requirement, the meeting of which is fundamental to the provision of a service

(service customer) expectation anticipation of the level of satisfaction likely to result from receiving a service including that derived from the service deliverable and the nature and manner of its provision.

Note to expectation: Expectations which could be positive or negative, are likely to be informed by the service customers‘ view of their rights, prior experience, non experiential information (e.g. advertising; word-of-mouth) and knowledge of charges to be made by the service provider

(service customer) dissatisfaction

254

emotional response to the provision of a service that has failed to meet expectations, for whatever reason. Note to dissatisfaction: Dissatisfaction is the primary reason for loss of service custom. It is possible for a service to meet the actual needs of the service customer and yet still be the cause of dissatisfaction because it failed to meet expectations..

Other terms submitted for consideration.

In addition to the CHESSS foundation terms addressed above, the following terms have been identified as requiring common definition for application across services generally.

Cross-sectoral/ horizontal/ generic standard Consumer/customer/client/beneficiary Deliver/provide/supply Product-service-systems/integrated customer solution Product-related services Pure services Single services Service bundle Business-related/business-to-business/business services Service information/information on service Service safety/safety of service/safety of customer in the delivery of service Service delivery Service contract Service level agreement Standard service catalogue Service catalogue service offers Procurement/ sourcing Tendering/tendering process/call for proposal Negotiation of service contracts Award of service contract Service agreement Placing service order bid proposal management tender comparison delivered service/received service management/controlling of service provider customer interaction customer service After-sales service Technical service complaints handling customer support acceptance of a service evaluation of a service

255

performance of a service provider process efficiency of the service delivery controlling of service provider management of employees formal standard/industry specific standard/consortium standard/company standard customer-provider interface quality assurance of services privacy of personal data consumer security/safety service safety/security security/safety of the financial existence threat for life and health physical integrity consumer safety/customer safety Home for the handicapped/handicapped residence Residential homes for elderly people Child day-care

This study makes no judgement as to whether new or modified definition is required for the above terms. They have been included here, because they were identified as having caused or having the potential to cause, misunderstanding, by stakeholders in the CHESSS Feasibility Study. It is recommended that they be considered for consideration in a future services terminology project and for inclusion in the services glossary. .

256

Annex B: List of Standards reviewed for potential terminology conflict

Source Primary identifier TITLE comment AENOR PNE 185001 Timeshare Organizations. Service Delivery None Requirements AENOR PNE 186001 Spa Establishments. Service Delivery Requirements None AENOR PNE 188001 Golf Courses. Service Delivery Requirements None AENOR UNE158001:2000 Service management in care homes. Total None management AENOR UNE 158002:2000 Service management in care homes. Sites and None installations of a care home AENOR UNE 158003:2000 Service management in care homes. Equipment and None other needs AENOR UNE 158004:2000 Service management in care homes. Staff None qualification. Training AENOR UNE 158005:2000 Service management in care homes. Staff at rest None homes. Different job and jobs groups AENOR UNE 167004:2006 Restaurant services. Hygiene requirements None AENOR UNE 167005:2006 Restaurant services. Lounge requirements None AENOR UNE 167007:2006 Restaurant services. Requirements for transport None AENOR UNE 167008:2006 Restaurant services. Bar requirements None AENOR UNE 167009:2006 Restaurant services. Kitchen requirements None AENOR UNE 167010:2006 Restaurant service. Central kitchen requirements None AENOR UNE 167011:2006 Restaurant services. Vocabulary None AENOR UNE 175001-1:2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: General None requirements AENOR UNE 175001-2:2004 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 2. None Requirements for fishmonger‘s AENOR UNE 175001-3:2005 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 1: None Requirements for opticians AENOR UNE 175001-4:2005 Service quality for small retail trade. Part 4: None Requirements for butcher‘s and delicatessen AENOR UNE 175001-5:2005 Service Quality for small retail trade: Requirements for None flower shops AENOR UNE 167001: 2006 Restaurant services. Management requirements None AENOR UNE 167002: 2006 Restaurant services. Facilities and equipment None maintenance AENOR UNE 167003: 2006 Restaurant services. Provisioning and storage None requirements. AENOR UNE 189001: 2006 Intermediation tourism services. Service requirements None AENOR UNE 179001:2007 Quality in dental surgeries and dental services. None General requirements AENOR UNE 182001:2005 Hotels and tourist apartments. Service requirements None AENOR UNE 184001: 2007 Touring camps and holiday sites. Service None requirements. AFNOR BP X 50-890: 2005 Quality of service in hairdressing salons None AFNOR NF S52-501: 2005 Bungee jumping - Service commitments of None organisations providing the public with a bungee jumping activity.

AFNOR NF X 50 - 720:2004 Quality of services – Recommendations for conceiving None and improving the welcome - Guidelines

257

AFNOR NF X 50 - 820: 1992 Boating services - Specifications for service and None provision of service - Distribution of yachts and material - Ship maintenance repairing - Motor sale and repairing AFNOR NF X 50-007: 2000 Winter sports equipment hiring service - Definition of None the winter sports equipment hiring service AFNOR NF X 50-220: 2005 Service standard - School canteen catering service None AFNOR NF X 50-700: 2006 Service quality - Approach for improving service None quality - The Reference and service commitments – Recommendations AFNOR NF X 50-722: 2005 Quality of services - Measurement and monitoring for None improving the service quality AFNOR NF X 50-788: 2003 Direct selling - Service of direct selling enterprises None AFNOR NF X 50-809: 2004 Highways - Service quality of client welcome areas - None Service commitments AFNOR NF X 50-915: 2000 Hydropathic establishments (Spas) - Services to None patients - Requirements and recommendations AFNOR NF X 50-785: 2002 Services provided by electronic security systems None companies BSI BS 7373-3: 2005 Product specifications – Guide to identifying criteria for C-001 specifying a service offering BSI BS 8406-2:2003 Event stewarding and crowd safety services – Code of None Practice BSI BS 7499: 2002 Static site guarding and mobile patrol services - Code C-002 of practice BSI BS 7872: 2002 Manned security services - Cash-in-transit services C-003 (collection and delivery) - Code of practice BSI BS 7984:2001 Keyholding and response services - Code of practice C-004 BSI BS 8477: 2007 Code of practice for customer service None BSI BS 8600: 1999 Complaints management systems – Guide to design C-005 and implementation BSI BS PAS 51 Guide to industry best practice for organizing outdoor None events UK Royal college of Service standards for sexual health services None gynaecologists:2006 UNI UNI 11034 Early childhood services None UNI UNI 10600 Lodgement and management of complaints for public None services UNI UNI 10970 Funds endowment: process of projects initial None evaluation, monitoring and final evaluation. General requirements

UNI UNI 10971 Trade. Colors and paints, wallpapers, floor, lining and None fittings. Service requirements.

UNI UNI 11010 Residential and day services for disabled persons. None Service requirements.

UNI UNI 11031 Services - Services for addictes in therapeutic None communities and alcoholics - Service requirements UNI UNI 11032 Trade. Grocery and fruit and vegetable stores. None CEN EN 12522 – 2 Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for None private individuals. Part 2. Provision of service CEN EN 13549: 2001 Cleaning services - Basic requirements and None recommendations for quality measuring systems

258

CEN EN 13850: 2002 Postal services. Quality of service. Measurement of the transit time of end-to-end services for single piece C-021 priority mail and first class mail CEN EN 14153-3: 2003 Recreational diving services – safety related minimum None requirements for the training of recreational scuba divers – Part 3: Level 3 – Dive Leader CEN EN 14413-2: 2003 Recreational Diving Services - Safety related None minimum requirements for the training of scuba instructors – Part 1: Level 1 CEN EN 14467:2004 Recreational diving services – requirements for None recreational scuba diving service providers CEN EN 14804:2005 Language study tour providers – Requirements None CEN EN 14873-1:2005 Furniture Removal Activities – Storage of Furniture None and Personal Effects for private individuals. Part 1. Specification for the storage facility and related storage provision CEN EN 14873-2:2005 Furniture removal activities - Storage of furniture and None personal effects for private individuals - Part 2: Provision of the service CEN EN 15017:2005 Funeral Services – Requirement None CEN EN 15038:2006 Translation services – Service Requirements None CEN EN 15331:2005 CRITERIA FOR DESIGN, MANAGEMENT AND None CONTROL OF MAINTENANCE SERVICES FOR BUILDINGS CEN CEN/ TS 15511:2008 Postal services — Quality of service — Information C-022 available on postal services. CEN pr CEN/TS CSA Business support – Support services provided to 99001 micro and small enterprises – Quality and C-024 performance requirements CEN prEN 12522 – 1 Furniture Removal Activities. Furniture removal for None private individuals. Part 1. Service specification. CEN prEN 15565 Tourism services – Requirements for the provision of None professional training and qualification programmes of tourist guides CEN BTTF WD 049 Customer contact centres None CEN EN 15221-2 Facility management – Part 2: Guidance o how to None prepare Facility management agreements CEN CEN / TR 13200-2 Spectator facilities - Layout criteria of service area - None Part 2. Characteristics and national situations CEN CWA 13987-1:2003 Smart Card Systems: Interoperable Citizen services: None Extended User Related Information - Part 1: Definition of User Related Information and Implementation CEN CWA 14172-2:2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 2: C-009 Certification Authority services and processes CEN CWA 14172-8:2004 EESSI Conformity Assessment Guidance - Part 8. None Time-stamping Authority services and processes CEN CWA 14523:2002 Description for the types of business advice and None support services provided to small enterprises in Europe CEN CWA 14644:2003 Quality Assurance Standards (14365:2003) None CEN CWA 14921:2004 Web services: Technology and Standardization None aspects CEN CWA 15581:2006 Guidelines for e-invoicing service providers None CEN CWA 15660: 2007 Providing good practice for e-learning quality None approaches CEN CWA 14641: 2006 Security Management system for secure printing None ISO 9000: 2005 Quality management systems – fundamentals and C-006 vocabulary

259

ISO 10001: 2007 Quality management – customer satisfaction – C-007 Guidelines for codes of conduct for organizations ISO 10002: 2004 Quality management – customer satisfaction – C-008 Guidelines for complaints handling ISO 10003: 2007 Quality management – customer satisfaction – C-006 Guidelines for dispute resolution, external to C-008 organizations ISO CD.2 10004 Quality management – customer satisfaction – C-008 Guidelines for monitoring and measuring customer satisfaction ISO ISO 10160: 1997 Interlibrary loan application service definition None

ISO ISO 20000-1 Information technology -- Service management -- Part C-010 1: Specification

ISO ISO 20000-2 Information technology -- Service management -- Part C-010 2: Code of practice

ISO ISO 15928-2 Houses. Structural serviceability None

ISO ISO/DIS 17090-1 Health informatics None

ISO ISO 20252:2006 Market, opinion and social research -- Vocabulary and None service requirements

ISO ISO 22222:2005 Personal financial planning — Requirements for None personal financial planners

Note: Entries for which no comment has been identified, have been reviewed for potential conflict in relation to key terms. The documents may however include other terms in potential conflict and will require further work as part of a future terminology programme.

B2: Other sources

Source Title Comment European Commission Annex E: Directive 2006/123/EC of the See Annex F European Parliament and of the Council 12 December 2006 Services in the Internal Market Inra/ Deloitte for the Development of indicators on consumer See Annex G European Commission satisfaction and Pilot survey Directorate General on Health and Consumer Protection

260

Annex C: Terminology review –Terms extracted for comparison

C-001 BS 7373 2.1 business-to-business arrangements or trade between different businesses, rather than between businesses and the general public 2.2 Client person or entity that contracts services from the service provider (which may or may not be for their own use) 2.3 consumer organization or person purchasing or using goods, property or services for their own purposes 2.4 customer organization or person that receives a product (e.g. client, end-user, retainer, beneficiary or purchaser) [BS EN ISO 9000:2005] 2.9 service result of at least one activity, performed at the interface between the supplier and customer, which is generally intangible [adapted from BS EN ISO 9000:2005] 2.10 service offering nature of the service being provided 2.5 stakeholder organization or individual who needs to be considered, who is involved with, has an interest in or could be affected by a service NOTE An individual may be from inside or outside an organization.

C-002 BS 7499: 2002 customer: individual or body retaining the services of the sole or principle provider of specified services to that particular customer supplier: individual or company (and the persons employed, including all levels of subcontractor that supplies the organization [service provider] with equipment, material and / or labour which is used in providing the service to the customer

C-003 BS 7872: 2002 customer: individual or organization that employs a CIT company to carry out agreed services and is responsible for remunerating the company in accordance with an agreed price and contract

C-004 BS 7984: 2001 customer: individual or body retaining an organization to carry out services in accordance with a contract supplier individual or company (and the persons employed, including all levels of subcontractor by that individual or company) that supplies the organization [service provider] with equipment, material and / or labour which is used in providing the service to the customer

C-005 BS 8600 3.1 complaint any expression of dissatisfaction by a customer whether justified or not

261

C-006 ISO 9000: 2005 3.4.2 product result of a process (3.4.1)

NOTE 1 There are four generic product categories, as follows: — services (e.g. transport); — software (e.g. computer program, dictionary); — hardware (e.g. engine mechanical part); — Processed materials (e.g. lubricant)

Many products comprise elements belonging to different generic product categories. Whether the product is then called service, software, hardware or processed material depends on the dominant element. For example, the offered product ―automobile‖ consists of hardware (e.g. tyres), processed materials (e.g. fuel, cooling liquid), software (e.g. engine control software, driver's manual), and service (e.g. operating explanations given by the salesman).

NOTE 2 Service is the result of at least one activity necessarily performed at the interface between the supplier (3.3.6) and customer (3.3.5) and is generally intangible. Provision of a service can involve, for example, the following: — an activity performed on a customer-supplied tangible product (e.g. automobile to be repaired); — an activity performed on a customer-supplied intangible product (e.g. the income statement needed to prepare a tax return); — the delivery of an intangible product (e.g. the delivery of information in the context of knowledge transmission); — the creation of ambience for the customer (e.g. in hotels and restaurants). Software consists of information and is generally intangible and can be in the form of approaches, transactions or procedures (3.4.5). Hardware is generally tangible and its amount is a countable characteristic (3.5.1). Processed materials are generally tangible and their amount is a continuous characteristic. Hardware and processed materials often are referred to as goods.

NOTE 3 Quality assurance (3.2.11) is mainly focused on intended product.

C-007 ISO 10001 3.1 customer satisfaction code of conduct promises made to customers by an organization (3.6) concerning its behaviour that are aimed at enhanced customer satisfaction, and related provisions

NOTE 1 Related provisions can include objectives, conditions, limitations, contact information, and complaints handling procedures. Otherwise based on ISO 9000: 2005

C-008 ISO 10002 & 10004 3.1 complainant person, organization or its representative, making a complaint 3.2 complaint expression of dissatisfaction made to an organization, related to its products, or the complaints-handling process itself, where a response or resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected 3.3 customer organization or person that receives a product EXAMPLE Consumer, client, end-user, retainer, beneficiary and purchaser. [ISO 9000:2000, definition 3.3.5]

3.4 customer satisfaction customer's perception of the degree to which the customer's requirements have been fulfilled

262

NOTE Adapted from ISO 9000:2000, definition 3.1.4. The Notes have been deleted. 3.5 customer service interaction of the organization with the customer throughout the life cycle of a product 3.6 feedback opinions, comments and expressions of interest in the products or the complaints-handling process 3.7 interested party person or group having an interest in the performance or success of the organization NOTE Adapted from ISO 9000:2000, definition 3.3.7. The Example and Note have been deleted.

C-009 CWA 14172-2: 2004 Service: the carrying out of a function (or series of functions) that provides a definable benefit an end user

C-010 EN 14804: 2005 client: person or entity who contracts services from the language service provider

C-011 ISO/ IEC 20000-1: 2005 Service provider: the organization aiming to achieve ISO/ IEC 20000

C-012 AFNOR BP X50-890 Commitments to service: Actions or services guaranteed by the professionals to satisfy client expectation or need

Characteristics: Detail of action to be started to satisfy the commitments

C-013 AFNOR NF X50-790: 2004

2.1 Welcoming Relationship that allows preparing and accompanying the realisation of a service, receiving, listening, informing, orienting a person.

2.2 Service Result of a process, a service is the result of at least one face-to-face activity which is necessarily realised between the supplier and the client and is generally non-material.

2.3 Client Person who enters into a relation with the entity, regardless of the means of contact used.

2.4 Entity Moral person who provides the service (business, public company, public service, association..)

2.5 Satisfaction Opinion of a client resulting from the gap between his/her perception of the product or used service and his/her expectations

2.6 Criterion Dimension of the service to be measured.

263

C-014 AFNOR NF X50-220

3.2 Guests The guests represent the set of all beneficiaries of meals served within the framework of municipal school catering

3.3 Delegatee Public institution, local body or private business that receives a delegation of competences in the framework of a public market

3.4 Delegation of public service Contract by which a moral person in public law entrusts the managing of a public service for which he/she has responsibility, to a delegate in public law, or private, whose income is substantial linked to the results of the use of the service

3.5 Outsourcing Outsourcing is the delegation, over a multi-annual period, of one or more functions of the catering service of a local community to an external provider. This obligation, which is not assimilated to a partnership, implies an obligation of results from the external provider.

3.11 Extracurricular The extracurricular refers to the amount of time during which children take part to activities within the framework of the schooling day but before or after the schooling hours

3.13 Service project Translation of political objectives into operational objectives

3.16 Public service The notion of public service rests on the idea that certain social activities have to be exempt from the market rules in order to answer to the inalienable needs. This is put into practise according to specific criteria that allow notably the access for everyone to certain services helping the social stability.

C-015 AFNOR NF X50-700

2.1 Service Referent It is the operational translation of wanted service. It characterises the service that the body/institution wants to deliver to its clients, expressed in terms of achievable results.

2.2 Service commitment Promise of quality service expressed in terms of results verifiable by the clients.

2.3 Expected service Set of characteristics of a desired service by the client in response to the needs and expectations.

2.4 Wanted service Set of characteristics of the service decided by the body/ institution to respond to its strategy and the clients‘ expectations.

2.5 Realised service Set of characteristics of the service provided by the body/institution

2.6 Perceived service Set of characteristics of the service perceived by the client (with what subjectivity this implies)

2.7 Indicator

264

Chosen information, associated to a criterion. It is designated so that its evolutions are observed at defined intervals. Note: It is a measure quantified that allows to evaluate a realisation according to a given criterion

2.8 Client Organism or person receiving the service Note: Person is synonym of user, beneficiary

2.9 Organism Moral person (enterprise, community..) that realises the service Synonym: entity

2.10 Process Set of activities interlinked or interactive that transforms the entry and exit elements

2.11 Criterion Dimension of the service to be measured

2.12 Nominal service It characterises the situation in which the service given to a client is conform to the service wanted by the organism

2.13 Quality management system Management system that allows to orient and to control an organism in a quality subject matter.

C-016 AFNOR NF X 50-722 - July 2005

3.1 Client Organism or person receiving the service

3.2 Surveillance of the quality of the system Regular activity aiming at verifying that the quality of the services is conform to the specified demands Note: The surveillance of the quality of the services is endorsed on the checks and/ or on the results of the internal and external quality measurements

3.3 Entity Moral person realising the service

3.4 Mirror survey Method consisting in questioning the staff about its perception of the clients‘ expectations and their perception of the service, in order to ease an evolution of their habits and behaviours.

3.5 Mystery surveys Service evaluation method putting oneself into the client situation according to a pre- established scenario

3.6 Audit Independent and documented methodical process that allows to acquire proofs of audit and to evaluating them in an objective way in order to determine how the audit criteria are satisfied.

3.7 Criterion Dimension of the service to be measured

3.8 Expected service

265

Set of characteristics of a desired service by the client in response to his needs and expectations.

3.9 Wanted service Set of characteristics of the service decided by the organism to respond to its strategy and the clients‘ expectations.

3.10 Realised service Set of characteristics of the service provided by the entity

3.11 Perceived service Set of characteristics of the service perceived by the client (with what subjectivity this implies)

3.12 Qualitative study Study having the object of analysing the behaviours and deep motivations of the individuals and which produces non-statistical results NOTE the quality study has an exploratory vocation (exploring an unknown sector, identifying the main dimensions of a problem, formulating hypothesis, understanding the motivations). It is often based on a close cross-section of people who does not need to be representative and is based on an analysis in depth about the speech of the interviewees (in group or individually). It can be a preliminary phase to a quantitative study or be self-sufficient. The qualitative study allows better understanding the phenomena rather than measuring them.

3.13 Quantitative study Study having the object to analyse measurable phenomena thanks to statistical methods with reference to a population NOTE: The quantitative study generally has the vocation of quantify opinions and behaviours, measuring variables on which they are dependent, comparing, highlight the correlations…Most of the time, it is realised by polls on a cross-section that has to be representative so that the results can be generalised to the whole of the population in consideration. It needs the development of instruments of measuring instruments standardised and codifiable (structured questionnaires). The quantitative study allows better measuring the phenomena rather than understanding them.

3.14 Control Evaluation of conformity by observation and judgement together with, if necessary, measures, testing or grading.

3.15 Instrument table Tool of piloting and help to the decision, grouping a selection of indicators

3.16 Indicator Chosen information, associated to a criterion. It is designated so that its evolutions are observed at defined intervals. Note: It is a measure quantified that allows to evaluate a realisation according to a given criterion

3.17 Satisfaction enquiry Class of study that allows gathering from clients, in a rigorous and structured manner, their level of satisfaction NOTE1: It is based on different ways of gathering: Non guiding interview: it is a free and large approach of a subject. The interviewee leads the discussion in all freedom Semi-guiding interview: it is the interviewer who leads the discussion (he defines the broad lines of the interview). The questions are open and the answers are free Guiding interview: it picks up from a quantitative investigation, it takes the shape of a closed or semi-closed questionnaire NOTE 2: Within the same client survey, you can collect at the same time information on the customers‘ expectations, perception and satisfaction.

266

3.20 Complaint Expression of discontentment expressed by a client in respect to a provider NOTE A claim consists in the expression of discontentment addressed to an organism, relating its products or the process of claim handling itself, out which an answer is explicitly or implicitly expected

C-017 AFNOR NF X50-788 June 2003

2.2 Products With reference to this standard, this term includes goods and services

2.7 Consumer Physical person who is likely to buy without a direct relationship with the activities carried out within the framework of an agricultural, industrial, commercial, handcrafted business or any other profession.

2.8 Direct seller Person taking part to the commercial actions of a direct selling business with which he has a contract as an employee or as an independent professional (delegate or buying-selling) which trusts him the selling of the companies products. . C-018 AFNOR NF X 50-785 - December 2002

2.1 Risk analysis Identification and evaluation of threats likely to affect the goods, the worth and people NOTE The risk analysis provides a basis for a risk analysis, the treatment of the risk, determining the choice of the security system adapted

2.4 Business Provider specialised in electronic security systems on behalf of an applicant or a customer

C-019 UNI 10971 - February 2002

3.1 Client private, professional or retail dealer, who applies to the dealer to buy products and/ or services.

C-020 UNI 11031 - February 2003

3.1 User Person with problems connected to the use or to the addiction from drugs and/ or psicotrope substances with which the socio-therapeutic- educational service is explicated, the final receiver of the service.

3.2 Buyer Who buys the service. Note: the Buyer can coincide with the User.

3.3 Direction Area represented by the legal representative or by who manages the resources and/or has direct responsibility on the working group and users.

3.4 Results Change in relation to the initial with reference to the user/ customer, to his health, to his relation with the addicting substances, to his life quality against objectives specifically defined in the individual therapeutic project.

267

C-021 EN 13850 - 2002

3.57 service standard standard that specifies requirements to be fulfilled by a service, to establish its fitness for purpose

C-022 CEN/ TS 15511 2008

3.19 quality of service (QoS) totality of characteristics of a service that bear on its ability to satisfy stated and implied needs of the customer

3.20 QoS indicator measure for the quality of service

3.21 QoS result findings from quality of service measurements

3.22 complaint and redress procedure procedure for handling complaints

3.24 service commitments undertaking by the operator to fulfill the service

3.25 service requirement criteria to be fulfilled by the customer to avail of services

C-023 CEN BT/TF 167

3.12 customer service Interaction of the organization with the user throughout the lifecycle of a product or service.

C-024 pr CEN/TS CSA 99001

2.5 business support service any service provided by a third party (either private or public) external to the enterprise, which involves providing advice, services or support of any kind and for any duration of time.

Note 1: When services are provided within the framework of a policy initiated or supported by public authorities, these services may sometimes be funded fully or in part. In this case, services are often provided by public or parapublic structures (advisory committees, business start-up networks, for example).

Note 2. The support (or assistance) is primarily directed at issues faced by the manager in the exercise of his/her multiple business processes thus making it easier for him/ to take decisions based on improved control of the activities of the enterprise and its environment.

Note 3. Support may lead to specialized advisory service provision intended to meet the needs identified by the manager.

2.6 service provider (SP) Private or public enterprise, structure or organization which provides business support services

268

Annex D: Terminology references in the CHESSS World Café discussions This brief report illustrates the connections between Module 2 - Glossary of terms and definitions relevant to service standardization - and the other Modules, which have emerged from the World Cafés.

Although no specific discussion was held about Module 2 during the World Cafés, participants were provided with a form offering them the chance to express their views on a list of terms and definitions. A brief table summarising their findings is below. Furthermore, terminology emerged as a cross-modular theme. Participants mentioned terms and definitions in relation to questions asked about other modules.

It was suggested that terminology is one difficult pre-standardisation area. Moreover, terminology belongs to the contractual phase of the service provision and helps customers being assured about the safety of the service they are buying. Hence there is the need for common, clear terms and definitions that help customers understanding. As a matter of fact, the absence of a common terminology has been identified as an obstacle to a common billing format.

The comments received through the form can be summarised as follow:

Terms Comment Positive/Negative

Service Can not be defined as ‗product‘ as per ISO 9000 definition. Must be in accepted public/business domain. Need to include the crucial element of interaction. See all existing standards. It may be difficult to divide between services and products. Service beneficiary Use a more neutral term such as user. ‗Customer‘ is an accepted term so why not use it? Use of a glossary definition to include the references (i.e.: beneficiary, customer) and govern their usage Service customer Use of a glossary definition to include the references (i.e.: beneficiary, customer) and govern their usage Service evaluation Monitoring system taking parameters such as contract fulfillment and customer satisfaction and analysing them with regards to the level of achievement. Glossary

269

definition to nail down understanding. Service provider Acts as the receiver of payment within the service contract. Glossary definition to nail down understanding Service sector Glossary definition to nail down understanding Service beneficiary Factual specification of a service need provided Service beneficiary Subjective/ perceived specification expectation of a service provided Service beneficiary Discrepancy between the service dissatisfaction needs and/or the service expectation and the service provided

Other terms suggested are: service delivery, service contract

270

Annex E: Industry Classification Systems and the CHESSS Stakeholder Map

The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes frequently used in relation to standardization, are a type of controlled vocabulary used when searching for corporate and industry data for use in classifying businesses by the type of economic activity in which they are engaged. The classification provides a framework for the collection and analysis of data and its use promotes uniformity of approach. It is also used for administrative purposes and by non- government bodies as a convenient way of classifying industrial activities into a common structure. The system is Identical to the EUROSTAT System NACE at the four digit class level and the United Nations system ISIC at the two digit Divisional level.

Given the European focus of the project, the CHESSS team sought to make use of NACE in establishing a structure against which to map stakeholders as they engaged with the feasibility study. Our experience, however was that the system was not particularly helpful for mapping services, particularly in relation to standardization activity and we therefore created a customized structure for use throughout the project. Four primary categories were created, as follows:

Business to customer – Indirect delivery services (B2C-ID) Business to customer – Direct delivery services (B2C-DD) Business to business – Administration support services (B2B-AS) Business to business – Operations support services (B2B-OS)

These are thought to be self explanatory although perhaps B2C Indirect delivery justifies brief explanation. This category is intended to include services commissioned by an entity other than the beneficiary of the service activity e.g. as where a housing management body is responsible for the selection and specification of home help services which are then delivered directly to residents in sheltered accommodation or where a local authority commissions waste collection services from private contractors for the benefit of the community for which they are responsible.

These categories were determined on the basis that, once the process of standards development begins subsequent to the conclusion of the CHESSS Initiative, they offer the best potential for bringing together standards development groups with similar backgrounds and common goals. They are compatible with the NACE codes used elsewhere and this structure may be of use in future services standardization work.

In some cases, the service types identified are capable of further sub-division (e.g. financial services which is divisible into banking, Insurance; financial planning services etc).

271

Table E.1 The CHESSS Stakeholder Map

B2C-ID B2C-DD B2B-AS B2B-OS Advice & support Plant design svcs Care services* Catering services services Communication Communication Communication Communication services services services services Construction Construction Construction Construction services services services services Plant maintenance Educational services Delivery services Cleaning Services services Facilities Product design Social services Financial services* Management services Recreational Metrology/ Services Funeral services Financial Services calibration Hospitality/ Scrap/ waste Youth services* Recreation services Conferencing services Maintenance Exhibition/Trade Supply chain Waste collection services* Shows services Recycling/ Disposal Entertainment Tool making services services HR Services* services Healthcare services* Retail services* PR Services Certification/Testing Public area cleaning services Utility services* IT Services Security Services

Policing services Security services Security Services

Library services Healthcare services* Utility Services Professional Disability services services* Legal Services Environmental Management services Tourism services consultancy

Travel services Security Services Estate agency Environmental services services

Removals services Vehicle repair services

In practice, the map was populated, endeavouring to ensure that each stakeholder is placed in its most appropriate category and sector. Where a stakeholder engaged in multiple services and could merit more than one entry, only the primary service activity was included. Other governing principles for the inclusion of stakeholders were: a cross section of stakeholders of all sizes ( large corporates; SMEs sole traders) were included under each service type. Government (national and local) was included as (large) business where it was itself a user of services appearing in the B2B—AS category as a large beneficiary stakeholder and where its role was that of commissioning intermediary, it was included in the B2C-ID Category. Professional bodies and Trade Associations could figure in both B2B Categories but most likely in B2B-AS. Other regulators (e.g. Ombudsman services) were included in categories relevant to the service category under their jurisdiction.

272

Annex F: Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 12 December 2006 Services in the Internal Market

Article 4 Definitions For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply:

1) ‗service‘ means any self-employed economic activity, normally provided for remuneration, as referred to in Article 50 of the Treaty;

2) ‗provider‘ means any natural person who is a national of a Member State, or any legal person as referred to in Article 48 of the Treaty and established in a Member State, who offers or provides a service;

3) ‗recipient‘ means any natural person who is a national of a Member State or who benefits from rights conferred upon him by Community acts, or any legal person as referred to in Article 48 of the Treaty and established in a Member State, who, for professional or non-professional purposes, uses, or wishes to use, a service;

4) ‗Member State of establishment‘ means the Member State in whose territory the provider of the service concerned is established;

5) ‗establishment‘ means the actual pursuit of an economic activity, as referred to in Article 43 of the Treaty, by the provider for an indefinite period and through a stable infrastructure from where the business of providing services is actually carried out;

6) ‗authorisation scheme‘ means any procedure under which a provider or recipient is in effect required to take steps in order to obtain from a competent authority a formal decision, or an implied decision, concerning access to a service activity or the exercise thereof;

7) ‗requirement‘ means any obligation, prohibition, condition or limit provided for in the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the Member States or in consequence of case-law, administrative practice, the rules of professional bodies, or the collective rules of professional associations or other professional organisations, adopted in the exercise of their legal autonomy; rules laid down in collective agreements negotiated by the social partners shall not as such be seen as requirements within the meaning of this Directive;

8) ‗overriding reasons relating to the public interest‘ means reasons recognised as such in the case law of the Court of Justice, including the following grounds: public policy; public security; public safety; public health; preserving the financial equilibrium of the social security system; the protection of consumers, recipients of services and workers; fairness of trade transactions; combating fraud; the protection of the environment and the urban environment; the health of animals; intellectual property; the

273

conservation of the national historic and artistic heritage; social policy objectives and cultural policy objectives;

9) ‗competent authority‘ means any body or authority which has a supervisory or regulatory role in a Member State in relation to service activities, including, in particular, administrative authorities, including courts acting as such, professional bodies, and those professional associations or other professional organisations which, in the exercise of their legal autonomy, regulate in a collective manner access to service activities or the exercise thereof;

10) ‗Member State where the service is provided‘ means the Member State where the service is supplied by a provider established in another Member State;

11) ‗regulated profession‘ means a professional activity or a group of professional activities as referred to in Article 3(1)(a) of Directive 2005/36/EC;

12) ‗commercial communication‘ means any form of communication designed to promote, directly or indirectly, the goods, services or image of an undertaking, organisation or person engaged in commercial, industrial or craft activity or practising a regulated profession. The following do not in themselves constitute commercial communications: (a) information enabling direct access to the activity of the undertaking, organisation or person, including in particular a domain name or an electronic-mailing address; (b) communications relating to the goods, services or image of the undertaking, organisation or person, compiled in an independent manner, particularly when provided for no financial consideration.

274

Annex G: Extract from Development of indicators on consumer satisfaction and Pilot survey. Project for the European Commission Directorate General on Health and Consumer Protection - Development of indicators on consumer satisfaction and Pilot survey.

2.2 Concepts and definitions

2.2.1 Consumers The concepts of ‗consumers‘ and ‗customers‘ are related. In some languages, hardly any distinction exists between these two terms. Even in English the terms are often used interchangeably.

For instance, the term ‗customer satisfaction‘ is widely used, but a closer look would reveal that in most cases a more precise term would be ‗consumer satisfaction‘.

Some experts make the following distinction between a consumer and a customer: The consumer is the one who uses a product or service, Whereas a customer pays for the product/service, but may not be the consumer.

Simply stated, the consumer is the ‗user‘; the customer is the ‗buyer‘. Another dividing line is that organisations (e.g. companies) can be customers, whilst consumer as a concept is reserved for individuals.

These differences may be important when modelling a consumer satisfaction indicator. Indeed, satisfaction requires experience and use of a product or service. Individuals who pay for a product or service but do not use it do not assess the product or service in the same way as consumers.

In inra/ Deloitte report, the term ‗consumer‘ is used systematically, other than where reference is made to other documents or existing indicators. However the report also stresses that the model and methodology it reports, will also allow for analysis of the satisfaction of ‗customers‘ when they are end-users and not any kind of business intermediary.

2.2.2 Consumer satisfaction A widely accepted definition of ‗satisfaction‘ is: ‗Satisfaction is the consumer‘s fulfilment response. It is a judgment that a product or service feature, or the product of service itself, provided (or is providing) a pleasurable level of consumption-related fulfilment, including levels of under-or-over fulfilment.‘ (Oliver, 1997)

In less ‗technical‘ terms: satisfaction is the consumer‘s assessment of a product or service in terms of the extent to which that product or service has met his/her needs or expectations. Failure to meet needs and expectations is assumed to result in dissatisfaction with the product or service.

275

Depending on the context, the meaning of ‗consumer satisfaction‘ may differ:

Consumer satisfaction may relate to a particular feature or characteristic of a product or service (e.g. the accuracy of the information provided by a bank), or alternatively it may relate to the product/service as a whole. In general, it is the satisfaction about the product/service as a whole that merits attention, since this satisfaction influences the consumers‘ future buying and consuming behaviour.

Yet it is also important to understand the factors that contribute to (dis)satisfaction. Often, dissatisfaction about one particular feature of a service (e.g. the unfriendliness of staff) leads to dissatisfaction about the service as a whole, even if the satisfaction about the other features is high.

Another conceptual distinction within measures of consumer satisfaction is whether they relate to satisfaction about a single ‗service encounter‘ (e.g. your most recent experience with a bank) or rather reflect ‗cumulative satisfaction‘ (e.g. in relation to all your experiences with banks). It is possible to be quite satisfied about one particular transaction in the post office, but be dissatisfied about the quality of the postal services overall (or vice-versa).

Most existing national customer satisfaction indexes are based on the measurement of cumulative satisfaction. This implies that different elements are part of the consumer‘s assessment, from their pre-purchase intentions up to their loyalty towards a particular provider.

276

Annex H: References to Terminology and Classification in M/ 371 project reports

H.1 Introduction The CHESSS project is just one of eleven studies undertaken under the remit of Mandate M/ 371 and it is recognised that any or all of the other ten studies may reach conclusions with regard to terminology that impact on the CHESSS generic approach.

This annex contains extracts relating to ‗terminology‘ taken from the other ten projects, both for ease of comparison and to facilitate assessment as to whether collectively or individually, they for have implications for the outcomes of the CHESSS Terminology study. Definitions carried forward to this annex are those provided for terms that could be applied to services generally. Service specific terms have been noted but are not referred to here.

Table H1 - Service specific projects included in M/ 371 Project Subject 2 Accessibility criteria for tourist services 3 Consultancy engineering services 4 Services for resident people 5 Residential homes for elderly people 6 Welcome/ reception services 7 Recruitment services 8 Maintenance and location services for sailing and motor boats 9 IT Outsourcing 10 Outsourcing 11 Smart house services

H.2 Project M/ 371-2 Accessibility criteria for tourist services Stakeholders support the position that the development of terminology and classification standards is necessary in these areas as a pre-requisite for any future initiatives on access to tourism services. Any such work should take into account the existing standards, guidelines, regulations or other measures. The process of developing best practice guidance must be preceded by work to agree terminology; until terminology can be agreed by all stakeholders the project should not be progressed.

H.3 Project M/ 371-3 Consultancy engineering services Harmonisation of various practices, and in particular the development of common terminology and scope of works, may be an appropriate way to remove obstacles to cross-border operations.

277

H.4 Project M/ 371-4: Services for resident people 3.3.1 Terminology The seminar participants have pointed out that home services are not always referring exactly to the same thing everywhere in Europe and that it would be useful to share a common language. Those services are complex to define. For instance, participants have noted that: Home services should not be restricted to services delivered at home. Some are personal services that are not always delivered at home as shows the example given of child-minding in shops (ORSEU). The inclusion of ―personal/relational‖ services‖ in those services and the adapted wording should be discussed: do we have to restrict to home? Concerning older person for instance, it could be important to remember that there are services that help people to live in their homes, as opposite to ―Institution‖ (Alzheimer Foundation) and could include, for instance, respite care. This absence of common definitions of services to resident persons in the European countries, already underscored by stakeholders in the interim report, leads to the conclusion that standardization work on terminology would be very helpful for the further development of the European market of services.

The objective of such a document would be to facilitate agreement between experts on terms to be used within the framework of the drafting of any document. It would also allow sharing a common vocabulary between customers and providers, notably in a contractual framework. A terminology document should be a very useful document that could be accompanied by a classification document (see below).

H.5 Project M/ 371-5: Residential homes for elderly people Terminology and classification are fundamental standardisation activities that were very positively assessed by stakeholders. For instance, the representative of BSI-consumer underscored the need for a document providing clarification with regard to the diversity and type range of residential homes for older persons (residential care, nursing homes, sheltered housing, etc.) and their services through Europe. The document could include definitions of the terms and concepts, how they are related, the contexts of use. It has been suggested that such a document could be based on OECD definitions. This document would offer a good basis for further discussions on residential homes services for older persons in Europe. The objective of such a document would be to help in reaching an agreement between experts on terms to be used within the framework of the drafting of any document. It would also allow sharing a common vocabulary between customers and providers, particularly for use in a contractual framework.

278

H.6 Project M/ 371-6: Welcome/ reception services Services providers express a need to clarify scope and level of service, the appropriate terminology to be used, the training and professional profile required in order to ensure quality, lawfulness and safety to both clients and employees. First of all, the word hostesses has different meaning depending of the country…. Service providers all expressed their willingness to enhance recognition of the sector, through a more visible, professional approach to the client, recruitment of good staff candidates and attention to price justification and service value all of which will help to distinguish quality companies from others.

H.7 Project M/ 371-7: Recruitment services The absence of common definitions concerning recruitment services and activities (placement, staffing, outplacement, interim, coaching, assessments…) and the differences in the understanding of many terms used in the European countries could lead to the conclusion that standardization work on terminology would be very helpful for the further development of the European market of services. The document would include definitions of terms and concepts, how they are related, the contexts of use: The objective of such a document would be to facilitate agreement between experts on terms to be used within the framework of the drafting of any document. It would also allow to share a common vocabulary between clients and providers.

H.8 Project M/ 371-8: Maintenance and location services for sailing and motor boats Even if some countries disapprove services standardization, they recognise the real need for the development of a European standard on terminology. The terminology standard could be based on the ICOMIA 's definitions. It is the first step necessary to compare services in different countries as they use different terms.

H.9 Project M/ 371-9: IT Outsourcing (from interim report)

A.4.1 The relationship between the standards is often hard to define as they overlap on certain issues and many use different terminology. These two factors together make the entire picture a complex one.

A.6.1 Quite rightly addresses definitions for project research and report preparation purposes including those for the core phases of outsourcing. These include:

279

4. „Service provision‟ phase In the service provision phase the main task is the creation of maximized value, all parties focus on improvement of service quality and delivery. The main question that accompanies this phase is therefore: ―how to optimize the situation according to the goals set?‖

The main goal of this phase is the continuous improvement of the service and value creation. The focus of this phase is on the outsourcing design. During the service provision phase it is difficult to change contracts or service providers. However changing the service levels agreements is possible.

H.10 Project M/ 371-10: Outsourcing (from interim report)

In 2.2 Decision making In reporting on responses to interviews, the project records that respondents conveyed the opinion that ―standards can be helpful in the decision making phase in the following ways‖, one of which reads:

―A standardized terminology allows for a better understanding between the involved parties. It improves the communication between the outsourcing clients and their service providers as well as communications within these organizations.‖

In 2.5 Service provision

The report confirms participants views as:

―A terminology standard for outsourcing allows a better understanding between the involved parties. It improves the communication between the outsourcing parties and their service providers as well as communications within these organizations‖

In 4. Conclusions on the research Includes ―A terminology standard for outsourcing allows a better understanding between the involved parties‖ . Which is also reflected in the recommendations.

The report also has numerous references to the importance of definitions at many stages of the outsourcing process but unlike many of the other comments relating to terminology, made during the course of our investigations, gives preference to a service specific approach.

―Definitions on services should be laid down in a standard for each sector. This prevents mistakes of misinterpretations which can lead to wrong expectations‖

280

The report also makes reference to definitions for Standards and the standardization process as extensively described by De Vries (1999) and includes some extracts from his work..

H.11 Project M/ 371-11: Smart house services The report includes the following statement:

―In this clause some definitions will be given to clarify the context of the project and ensure that the terminology is interpreted as intended. However, the different visions on the term and the subject make clear that a common language would be beneficial for future development of the Smart House sector.‖

Annex B of the report includes Definitions from the Smart House Code of Practice, CWA 50487, including the following terms which could be applied to services generally.

Consumer Any natural person who uses, requests and purchases products and services for purposes which are outside his or her trade, business or profession. Consumers differ in their abilities and the different requirements need to be recognised by standardization. For the purposes of this document the ―consumer‖ is considered to be the end user of Smart House technology, this would encompass the occupant of a Smart House and any visitors

Customer A person or organization that contracts with any entity in order [to design, install or maintain a Smart House system or] to use any service or application provided by a service provider to the end user or consumer [in the smart House.]

End user The ultimate user of Services and of the Smart House or has a Smart House system installed in their home. See also Consumer, Customer, and Subscriber.

Quality of service Performance specification of a communications channel or system or the rating of telephone communications quality in which listeners judge transmissions by qualifiers, such as excellent, good, fair, poor, or unsatisfactory. A general term that incorporates band width, latency, and jitter to describe a network‘s ability to customize the treatment of specific classes of data. For example, QoS can be used to prioritize video transmissions over web-browsing traffic. Advanced networks can offer greater control over how data traffic is classified into classes and greater flexibility as to how the treatment of that traffic is differentiated from other traffic

281

Service supply chain Those entities that are necessary to deliver the service. The Application Home Initiative has identified 11 such entities that span the creator of the service, the service aggregator, service provider, service operator, network operator, service distributor, subscriber and the end user. The European Application Home Alliance has further subdivided the end user entity into customer and consumer. Each Entity must have an overall contractual relationship with the service provider and will have back to back contracts with the adjacent entity in the service supply chain. These contracts will each ensure that the Service level requirements of the service are fulfilled and that each entity obtains a benefit from the service supply.

Usability Usability addresses the relationship between tools and their users. In order for a tool to be effective, it must allow intended users to accomplish their tasks in the best way possible. Usability depends on a number of factors including: – how well the functionality fits user needs, – how well the flow through the application fits user tasks, – and how well the response of the application fits user expectations.

H. 12 Conclusions with regard to terminology drawn from service specific reports

The sectoral analysis shows recognition of a need for standardized definitions although many suggest that it will be difficult to identify common terminology between different service areas.

Usually, the content of a terminology clause or standard is focused on specific terms needed to clarify understanding of a particular standard or group of standards and is focused on their specific requirements. The priority for many stakeholders is therefore to provide for their own immediate terminology requirements and they often do not consider generic terms as a necessity.

However the proposed work on the structure content and application of generic terminology would be useful for standardization project leaders, providing a basis for a coordinated approach to the development of future service standards that should help to avoid ambiguity and misunderstanding in future.

The extracts recorded above are not in conflict with the Module 2 proposal for the initiation of a services terminology group to plan and implement a work programme developing structure and coordination for the terminology work undertaken by groups developing both generic and service specific standards. Reference to concerns with regard to the absence of an appropriate classification system for services is noted, and this too is in line with the conclusions reached in module 2.

282

Annex I: Examples of user friendly presentations of terminology information I.1 Example of a useful glossary of generic service related terms with explanations.

The following glossary prepared and published by the Institute of Customer Service (ICS in the United Kingdom), is an example of a helpful explanatory format that can be of particular assistance to those unfamiliar with formal terminology

It is stressed that such a glossary would not be intended to replace a formal presentation of terms with definitions but their presentation in a parallel could make access to the available information more user friendly and acceptable.

This glossary may be accessed directly via the institute‘s web-site (http://www.instituteofcustomerservice.com/default.asp). located under information centre/ glossary of terms from the left hand site navigation list.

Note: The ICS is planning to fully revise this glossary during the coming year and has expressed interest in participation in any ongoing CEN Services terminology project.

283

I.2 Example of a service specific glossary providing tourism related terms with definitions, in English French and German,

Standardized Dictionary of Tourism by Holger Muhlbauer Published by DIN Deutsches Institut fur Normung e.V. 2004

Based on EN 13809: 2003 and EN ISO 18513 2003, this dictionary is claimed to include terms commonly used in the tourism industry with the intention of facilitating UNDERSTANDING between users and providers of tourism services.

The introduction refers to the principle that ‘assisting consumers (customers) to make informed choice of tourism services increases the likelihood of expectations being met and of satisfaction being enhanced.

Concepts and Terms are addressed by type in the main body of the text and alphabetically, in three language related annexes.

284