ER- 0484/1/00

February 2008GfK Group Ad Hoc Research

OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007

ER- 0484/1/00

OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY

2007

February 2008

2

GfK Group Ad Hoc Research

OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007 OHIM USER SATISFACTION SURVEY 2007 February 2008

OBJECTIVES

For the third consecutive year, the OFFICE FOR HARMONIZATION IN THE INTERNAL MARKET (OHIM) has commissioned GfK to conduct a satisfaction survey of its users, the design and measurement system for which were established in 2005 and whose main objective is to measure the level of satisfaction among users regarding the various services the OHIM provides.

MAIN OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY …

OBJECTIVES

MEASURE THE LEVEL OF

PERCEIVED QUALITY of the services

that the OHIM offers its

users.

MEASURE AND RANK

THE CONTRIBUTIO

N of each aspect in

overall user satisfaction.

ESTABLISH OBJECTIVES

AND PRIORITIES

FOR IMPROVEMEN

T

EVALUATE THE

EFFICIENCY OF THE

ACTIONS that are

undertaken

11 22 4433

3



13.3909.859

13.171

9.239

26.561

19.098

3.821

Undeliverable mail

RESPONDENTS

1.227

RESPONSE RATE:8,0% of net mailing

addresses

TOTAL OHIMUsers

AGENTS

PROPRIETORS (*)

(*) INCLUDING EMPLOYEES (“type 5 “ agents)

(in the last year)

TARGET GROUP AND FINAL SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION

E-MAIL

518 709



RESULTSUser-Satisfaction -

Index (USI)

5



AGENTS WHO HAVE NOT COMPLAINED

AGENTS WHO HAVE COMPLAINED

68,6

USI

67,0

USI AGENT

59,0

USI

RESULTSUser-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006 / 2007User-Satisfaction -Index (USI) 2005 / 2006 / 2007

PROPRIETORS WHO HAVE NOT COMPLAINED

PROPRIETORS WHO HAVE COMPLAINED

62,5

USI

61,9

USI PROPRIETO

R

55,0

USI

+3,8

+5,7

2005

68,3

USI

66,2

USI AGENT

59,5

USI

63,5

USI

62,8

USI PROPRIETO

R

57,3

USI

2006

-0,8

+0,9

70,9

USI

70,0

USI AGENT

64,7

USI

69,9

USI

68,5

USI PROPRIETO

R

59,7

USI

2007

6



RESULTSRESULTSLEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATIONLEVEL1: CORE BUSINESS, IMAGE, INFORMATION

PROPRIETORSAGENTS

58%

41%

53%

55%(minimum)

Every user satisfied

No users satisfied TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709) TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

57%57%

67%62%

59%65%

53%

68% 69%

CORE BUSINESS IMAGE INFORMATION

50%

59%

49%

57% 58%

41%

65% 67%58%

CORE BUSINESS IMAGE INFORMATION

200520062007

2005

2006

2007

68%

+ 9 + 4 + 15 + 8 + 9

+ 17

7



swiftness

transparency

RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of Strengths and WeaknessesLEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGELEVEL2: OVERALL IMAGE

PROPRIETORSAGENTS

INFLU

EN

CE

SATISFACTION

+

-

STRATEGICWEAKNESSES

STRATEGICSTRENGTHS

STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES

+

2005 2006 2007

swiftness

transparency

modernity

prestige

conscientiousness

professionalism

quality of service

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

-

2005 2006 2007

modernity

prestige

conscientiousness

professionalism

quality of service

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

+

-

+-

TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518)

INFLU

EN

CE

SATISFACTION

STRATEGICWEAKNESSES

STRATEGICSTRENGTHS

STRENGTHSWEAKNESSES

TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709)

8



PROPRIETORS

Over the last year, in which of the following areas have you personally had contact with the OHIM?

Application for a CTM

Application for an international trade mark

designating the ECApplication for an

international trade mark based on a CTM

Opposition

CTM invalidity request

Application RCD

RCD invalidity request

CTM appeal

RCD appeal

Register

93%

27%

24%

70%

20%

52%

4%

31%

2%

68%

94%

35%

31%

72%

21%

53%

3%

29%

2%

68%

91%

37%

32%

64%

21%

49%

5%

27%

2%

61%

79%

14%

9%

32%

5%

29%

1%

10%

1%

56%

80%

15%

10%

25%

4%

31%

1%

8%

0%

60%

82%

13%

12%

25%

3%

26%

1%

6%

1%

51%

AGENTS

200520062007

20052006

2007

9



RESULTSRESULTSLEVEL2: CORE BUSINESS

PROPRIETORSAGENTSEvery user satisfied

No users satisfied

55%(minimum)

60%

70%

46%50%

60%

67%

51%

59%

71%77%

44%

68%

CTM RCD APPEAL REGISTER

57%60%

45%

37%

60%

67%

52% 53%

63%72%

39%

68%

CTM RCD APPEAL REGISTER

TOTAL PROPRIETORS (No: 518) TOTAL AGENTS (No: 709)

200520062007

2005

2006

2007

(*)

(*) No :33

+ 11 + 10

+ 9 + 5

+ 15

No :193 No :657 No :344 No :431 No :443 No :133 No :266

10



PROPRIETORSAGENTS

RESULTS:RESULTS: CTM

USI (Users Satisfaction Index) USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

Every user satisfied

No users satisfied

55%(minimum)

57%

38%

28%

58%

39%43%

71%

56% 60%

CTM APPLICATIONS OPPOSITIONS CTM INVALIDITY

50%

26%31%

52%

40%

61%

64%59%

55%

CTM APPLICATIONS OPPOSITIONS CTM INVALIDITY

PROPRIETORS (No: 447)

(No: 657)

200520062007

(*)

(*) No : 14

+ 13

+ 13 + 23

+ 12 + 19

2005

2006

2007

(No: 451) (No: 147) (No: 447) (No: 131)


11



… that the OHIM sets time standards for the examination, publication and registration of CTMs?

… that the OHIM sets quality standards for the classification of CTM applications and the absolute grounds examination?

80%

IMPORTANT (7-10)IMPORTANT (7-10)

For CTMs, the OHIM is currently finalizing the examination of more than two-thirds (70%) of applications where no objections are raised within 8 weeks.

85%

79%

SATISFIED (7-10)SATISFIED (7-10) POSITIVE POSITIVE CHANGECHANGE

77% 75%

71%

More than three-quarters (77%) of CTMs are being published within 31 weeks of receipt.

For over 60% of CTM applications where no opposition has been filed, publication takes place within 13 months of receipt.

More than 90% of decisions comply with OHIM’s defined quality standards.

Almost all OHIM decisions on absolute grounds (98%) comply with the pre-set quality standards.

38% 19%

57% 48% 34% 15%

50% 40% 30% 13%

66% 61% 18% 13%

68% 62% 16% 11%

AGENTS PROPRIETORS

How important is it to you…

SUMMARYSUMMARY: CTM APPLICATIONS

12



SUMMARYSUMMARY: CTM OPPOSITION

… that the OHIM sets time standards for the admissibility phase of proceedings and for the

notification of the decisions?

…For CTM oppositions, that OHIM sets quality standards for its decisions?

80%


For more than two-thirds of opposition files, the admissibility phase is finalised within 2 months of

receiving the opposition

80%

83%


63% 68%

76%

For around one-third of opposition files, the decision is notified within 4 months of finalising the

adversarial part of the proceedings.

Well over 80% of opposition decisions comply with the OHIM’s quality standards

24% 13%

50% 52% 17% 11%

58% 60% 14% 10%

AGENTS


PROPRIETORS

13



RESULTS:RESULTS: RCD

USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

CORE BUSINESS

RCD

INVALI-DITY

EMPLO-YEES

APPLICA-TIONS


No users satisfied

71%

62%

70%67%

52%

RCD APPLICATIONS (No: 344)

RCD INVALIDITY (No:35)*

67%

44%

67% 67%

100%

RCD APPLICATIONS (No:133)

RCD INVALIDITY (No:2)*

55%(minimum)

200520062007

2005

2006

2007

77%

+ 10 84%

+ 14

No minimum

sample

(*)

14



SUMMARYSUMMARY: RCD

… that the OHIM sets time standards for acknowledgement of receipt and publication of

RCDs?

… that the OHIM sets quality standards for the registration of RCD applications?

74%


For more than two-thirds of design applications, acknowledgement of receipt is

sent within 5 days of receiving the application

81%

85%


76% 82%

77%

For more than eight out of ten design applications, registration of the RCD is

published within 8 weeks

Over 90% of RCD publications comply with the OHIM quality standards.

27% 15%

83% 71% 31% 14%

76% 74% 21% 12%

AGENTS PROPRIETORS


15



RESULTSRESULTSIdentification of needs for action: REGISTER

USI (Users Satisfaction Index) USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

CORE BUSINESS

REGISTER


No users satisfied

51%

63% 62%

Swiftness Accuracy Quality

45%

59%54%

Swiftness Accuracy Quality

55%(minimum)

PROPRIETORS (No: 266) AGENTS (No: 431)

20062007

2006

2007

63%

+ 12 71%

+ 8

70%

+ 8

61%

+ 16 71%

+ 12

71%

+ 17

16



SUMMARYSUMMARY: REGISTER

How important is it to you that the OHIM sets time standards to register recordals or to

produce documents requested?79%


More than 90% of CTM and RCD certified copies and certificates are issued within 14

days of receiving the request

84%


65% 66%

More than 90% of CTM and RCD transfers are recorded within 14 days of the request

27% 13%

77% 63% 34% 13%

AGENTS PROPRIETORS

17



USI (Users Satisfaction Index)

INFORMAT. & COMMUNIC.

RESULTSRESULTSINFORMATION & COMMUNICATION

Regarding answering time to both phone calls and emails, the OHIM’s objective is to answer most phone calls (currently 90%) to its general number within 20 seconds and

most e-mails (currently 90%) to its general mailbox within two days.

1% 1% 1%

4%

6%

10%

16%

23%

17%

11%

8%

2%1%

2%

4% 4%

10%

13%

20%

17%

12%

10%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

AGENTS

PROPRIETORS

PROPIETORS 60%

AGENTS: 59%

SATISFIED (7-10)SATISFIED (7-10)

Are you satisfied with the performance?

(0) = “not satisfied” ------------ (10 )= “very satisfied”

Have you noticed any CHANGE in performance over the past

year?

6%

67% 80%

27% 19%

2%

BETTER

NO CHANGE

WORSE

AGENTS (No:709)PROPRIETORS (No:518)

How would you describe this objective?

5% 6%

88% 89%

7% 5%TOO AMBITIOUS

ADEQUATE

POOR

AGENTS (No:709)PROPRIETORS (No:518)

18



SUMMARY: E – BUSINESSSUMMARY: E – BUSINESS

% USE (REGULARLY +

SOMETIMES

AGENTS

E-OPPOSITION 31% 64 53 61 70

SATISFIED (%)SATISFIED (%)

SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES

RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM

SPEED OF THE SYSTEM

EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM

RCD-ONLINE 59% 64 (=) 58 ( 10) 59 ( 4) 67 ( 3)

63%CTM-ONLINE 93% 76 ( 2) 64 ( 12) 66 ( 9) 73 ( 9)

E-FILING CTM 74% 59 ( 5) 51 ( 11) 53 (=) 70 (=)

E-FILING RCD 42% 57 (=) 47 ( 10) 52 (=) 65 (=)

MYPAGE 37% 60 ( 2) 49 ( 18) 55 ( 9) 67 (=)

19



% USE (REGULARLY + SOMETIMES)

PROPIETORS

SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF PROCESSES

RELIABILITY OF SYSTEM

SPEED OF THE SYSTEM

EASE OF USE OF THE SYSTEM

E-OPPOSITION

67 58 57 7614%

67%CTM-ONLINE 65 (=) 63 ( 5) 64 ( 3) 68 ( 3)

RCD-ONLINE 62 ( 2) 62 (=) 64 ( 3) 65 ( 2)26%

E-FILING CTM 60 ( 3) 59 ( 3) 58 ( 2) 68 (=)60%

MYPAGE 54( 10) 55( 8) 54( 12) 61( 15)24%

E-FILING RCD 61 ( 3) 56 (=) 56 ( 3) 69 ( 2)26%

SATISFIED (%)SATISFIED (%)SUMMARY: E – BUSINESSSUMMARY: E – BUSINESS

20



AGENTS PROPRIETORS

If yes, did you find it useful?

In March 2007, the OHIM launched Online Access to Files to facilitate users’ access to all available (non-confidential) information on CTM files.

Have you used the service?

1% 0%1% 0%

1% 1%

4%6%

13%

18%17%

40%

1% 0% 1% 0%1%

3%

8%6%

18%

13%

16%

32%

PROPIETORS: 79%AGENTS:

87%

VERY USEFUL (7-10)VERY USEFUL (7-10)

DONT KNOW(0) “not useful” ------- “very useful” (10)

RESULTSRESULTS: e-business

YES42%

NO 58%

NO 72%

YES28%

21



How would you describe this objective? Have you ever used the service?

POOR2%

ADEQUATE

89%

ADEQUATE

89%

TOO AMBITIOUS9%

TOO AMBITIOUS8%

AGENTS PROPRIETORS

POOR3%

In November 2006, the OHIM launched an e-business hotline. The objective is for 90% of phone calls to be answered within 20 seconds.

YES21%

NO 79%

NO 81%

YES19%

(0) “not satisfied” ------- “very satisfied” (10 )

Are you satisfied with the reply you

received?

5%4%

1%0%

4%

2%

8%

10%

23%

19%

16%

7%

3%4%

2%1%

3%4% 4%

10%

13%

26%

9%

20%

AGENTS

PROPRIETORS

DONT KNOW

PROPIETORS: 68%

AGENTS: 65%


RESULTSRESULTS: e-business

22



Are you aware of these sessions?

RESULTSRESULTS: e-business Since the end of 2006, the OHIM has organised regular training sessions for paralegals on search

tools and e-filing that have been publicised on the OHIM website and in Alicante News.

AGENTS

NO 76%

PROPRIETORS

NO 90%

YES, AND PARTICIPATE

D6%

YES, BUT NO PARTICIPATED

18% YES, BUT NO PARTICIPATED

8%

YES, AND PARTICIPATED

2%

If participated, what was the level of satisfaction with the training received?

8%

0% 0% 0% 0%3%

5%

15%

26%28%

8% 8%9%

0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

18%

9%

27%

9%

27%

DONT

KNOW

(0) “not satisfied” ------- “very satisfied” (10)

PROPIETORS: 73%

AGENTS: 69%




CONCLUSIONS

24



RESULTSRESULTSPERCEIVED EVOLUTION OF THE OHIM

Generally speaking, do you feel that the OHIM has performed better than, the same as or worse than last

year? 2007

36%

43%

18%

4%

34%

24%

41%

1%

2006

41%

35%

17%

7%

31%16%

50%3%

The same

Better

Don’t know

Worse The same

Better

Don’t know

Worse

The same

Better

Don’t know

Worse

The sameBetter

Don’t know

Worse

AGENTS

PROPRIETORS





20072006

25



CONCLUSIONS: IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEEDS FOR ACTION

As a summary of everything presented here, main conclusions drawn from the research are:

A significant increase in the overall satisfaction of both types of users (agents and proprietors)

A decrease in the distance between the Propietors’ evaluacions and the Agents’ evaluations.

Number of complaints has decreased while the efficiency of resolving them has increased.

Significant improvements in satisfaction in all the areas of the core business (with the exception of the area of Appeals), in both groups of users.

Improvement in the more negative perception of last year: accessibility of Office employees.

A general decrease in the satisfaction with e-business tools, even more in Agents and remarkably regarding the system speed.

An overall perception of improvement in the functioning of the OHIM compared to one year ago.



Responsable del Proyecto e Informe en GfK Emer Ad-Hoc Research:

Ángeles Bacete; e-mail: [email protected]

Documents

ER- 0484/1/00