A report by In Association with
Comprehensively Parameterized, Indicative ReportFor Upcoming Distribution Franchisee Areas in Madhya Pradesh SATISFACTION AND PREFERENCES OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS 2011
August 2011 Series Snapshot
Bhind Gwalior
Datia Satna
Sagar Narsinghpur
2
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
STUDY OVERVIEW Most recent, independent, “indicative, land based, face-to-face” survey providing estimates
of customer’s perspective on local electricity utility performance The study executed in August 2011 provides the most latest customer insights across upcoming Power
Distribution Franchisee areas in Madhya Pradesh, India including Bhind, Satna, Shajapur, Gwalior, Sagar, Dewas, Datia, Narsinghpur & Ujjain
The reports in this series attempts to raise the customers voice to, better able the distribution franchisee & utility stakeholders to monitor the local situation, identify key priority actions and plan investments & roadmaps accordingly.
Most comprehensively parameterized, customer centric “indicator” of the effectiveness of utility performance on 28 well-chosen attributes that appropriately represent key areas like power quality, reliability, metering, billing, payments, information systems, customer services and privatization perception
The study attempts to help the local utilities understand their customer and know whether their performance is effective enough to meet the needs of the current and potential customers. Especially in the case of distribution franchisees where a complete new management will be handed over the operations of the local distribution system, it is imperative to measure the existing effectiveness of performance from all different perspectives - of which the customer perspective is a significant one.
Additional independent primary and secondary research for Local Electricity Utility stakeholders specifically Distribution Franchisee bidders and licensees.
Socio Economic Parameters impacting load growth Distribution Franchisee RFP Data Analysis (Read our blog on
Distribution Franchisee Attractiveness on the 9 districts which compares the districts in detail on multiple parameters)
8/8/2011
3
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
CUSTOMER PERCEPTION MEASUREMENT MODEL
CS
Power Quality & Reliability
Customer Service
CommunicationMeter
Billing and Payment
Price
Information Access & Record
Handling
Company Image
1. Unplanned Outages2. Planned Outages3. Voltage Stability4. Safety & Maintenance5. Local Electricity Infrastructure6. Breakdown Restoration
7. Ease of New Meter8. Resolution Meter Complaints9. Resolution Billing Complaints10. Customer Service Response Time11. Staff Behavior12. Access to customer service
13. Advance notice about disruption14. Advance notice about public work15. Awareness- Energy Efficiency16. Awareness- Customer Rights17. Communication Modes
18. Meter Accuracy19. Bill Receipt on Time20. Billing Accuracy21. Easy bill understanding22. Modes of Payment
23. Fairness of Price24. Value for money
25. Complaints Traceability26. Online Accessibility of
Records
27. Capability28. Community Engagement
Consumption Profiling Electricity consumption Profession & Education level Economic status Meter type, backup devices etc.
Satisfaction questions on 7 Factors ‘Forced Choice’ 5 point Likert scale – VS, S, DS, VDS, NA Order of Importance for all Attributes 7 Factors – total 28 Attributes
Opinion Questions 5 point Likert scale – SA, A, N, DA, SDA Validation
8/8/2011
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
4
KEY FINDINGSGwalior – Datia - Bhind
8/8/2011
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
5
8/8/2011
• In the overall scheme of things, • Bhind district scored a dismal 26.96• Gwalior district scored 52.41 & • Datia district scored 58.22
• Specifically in Datia, the increased score can be attributed to the respondents in the Commercial category who indicated satisfaction on most major factors under consideration especially their comfort with the current Pricing available to them and also their satisfaction with the Power Quality and Reliability.
• While, long hours of load shedding (6-10 hours), frequent unplanned outages, poor infrastructure and maintenance and poor customer services in Bhind specifically constitute its low score.
REGIONAL TRAITS LIKE URBAN/ RURAL DEVELOPMENT DIFFERENTIATION ARE STRIKINGLY CLEAR; CUSTOMER SATISFACTION LOWEST IN BHIND
Bhind
Datia
Gwalior
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Customer Satisfaction Scores
Best score is 100 computed when all respondent are ‘very satisfied‘, and the worst score is 0 computed when all respondents are ‘very dissatisfied’ on all 28+ questions in the study.
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
6
8/8/2011
When asked if they agree that “A lot needs to be done to improve the current systems and make me fully satisfied” comparatively least respondents agreed in Datia (55%) than Gwalior (58%) followed by Bhind (91%) where most respondents agreed they are expecting a lot to be done before they get satisfied with the utility services.
Regions where customer’s believed more needs to be done to make them satisfied scored low on customer satisfaction.
SATISFACTION OF CUSTOMERS IS ALSO RELATIVE AND CONSISTENT TO THE LEVEL OF CUSTOMER’S EXPECTATIONS IN DIFFERENT REGIONS
Bhind
Datia
Gwalior
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Customer Agreement level on the statement that
“A lot needs to be done to improve the current sys-tems and make me fully
satisfied”
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
7
8/8/2011
When asked if ““Service levels will improve if a private company manages electricity distribution” In Gwalior 51% respondents agreed In Datia 36% respondents agreed In Bhind 83% respondents agreed
Over 70% of respondents from Commercial Category in both Datia & Gwalior disagreed that privatization would help improve service levels.
Over 80% of respondents in Bhind, both in Residential and Commercial categories, agreed that Privatization will help improve the current situation.
MIXED REACTIONS TOWARDS PRIVATIZATION OF POWER DISTRIBUTION THROUGH FRANCHISEE MODEL IN GWALIOR, DATIA AND BHIND.
Bhind
Datia
Gwalior
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Customer Agreement level on the statement that “Service levels will im-
prove if a private company manages electricity distri-
bution”
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
8
ANNOTATED EXCERPTS FROM GWALIOR DISTRICT REPORTTo provide snapshot of report contents
8/8/2011
9
RESIDENTIAL8/8/2011
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
Sampling: Population size (No. of Commercial
connections): 32433 (as in 2011) Sample size: 55
Consumption:
For Residential category CAGR growth (2006-2011)
Number of consumers 2.51%
Connected Load 9.70%
Electricity Sales (LUs) -3.52%
Revenue Billed 10.12%
Revenue Realized 13.69%
Avg. Billed Tariff rates 14.14%
Collection Efficiency 3.24%
5
5
1
5
Inverter GeneratorOther None
Type of Meter Backup EquipmentOnline AccessSegment Type
46
9
Independent FlatEM ElectronicToD H.P.
11
737
Computer Internet None
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
7000
7500
8000
8500
9000
9500
1000
010
000+
0
10
20
30
40
50
Avg. Monthly Electricity Bill (Rs.)
Freq
uenc
y
Segment wise, profiling of customers on the
following parameters is reported,
Profession
Consumer category (LT or HT)
Avg. electricity consumption
Avg. Bill
Avg. Turnover
Meter type
Backup Equipments
Online access
Segment wise, Customer specified details are
provided
Report contains 5 such slides for each location
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
10
n= 55 n= 15 n= 15 n= 15
n= 100
Dissatisfied customers across different customer segments for each attribute
Satisfaction level across different attributes of Factor
Relative Order of Importance
HIGH LOW
OVERALL FACTOR I: POWER QUALITY & RELIABILITY8/8/2011
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
27% 31%44%
60%
45%
24%
60%
80%
53%47%
40%
27%
7% 7%
33%
60% 60%
33%27%
33%
100%
80%
33%
67%
Residential Commercial Industrial Agri
Relative more dissatisfaction among ‘Agri’ Customers across Attributes ‘Voltage Stability’, ‘Safety & Maintenance’ & ‘Breakdown Restoration’
Relative less dissatisfaction among ‘Industrial’ Customers across Attributes ‘Unplanned Outages’, ‘Planned Outages’ & ‘Voltage Stability’
‘Safety & Maintenance’ has more dissatisfaction followed by ‘Voltage Stability’ for all responses
‘Unplanned Outages’ has High Order of Importance followed by ‘Planned Outages’ & ‘Breakdown Restoration’
Unplanned Outages
Planned Outgaes
Voltage Stability
Safety & Maintenance
Local Electricity Infrastructure
Breakdown Restoration
0%10%
20%30%
40%50%
60%70%
80%90%
100%
VS S DS VDS NA
0
00
0
0
0
Segment wise, Customer perception is
aggregated and reported across each of 7
broad factors which comprise of customer
satisfaction (e.g. this slide shows details
reported for “Power Quality and Reliability”
Key Observations per attribute are reported
Visualization of satisfaction on GIS map for
indicating potential localities which need
immediate attention
Segment wise, Customer specified relative
Order of Importance given to each attribute
Report contains 7 such slides for each location
Satisfaction Level
11
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
Key Observations
n= 100
Order of Importance
HIGH LOW
Residential Commercial Industrial Agri
FACTOR I: POWER QUALITY & RELIABILITY8/8/2011
A1: Unplanned outages - How satisfied are you with frequency and duration of unplanned outages?
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
Agri
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
VS S DS VDS NA
Over 60% respondents from ‘Commercial’ category are dissatisfied with ‘Unplanned Outages’ with high proportion of ‘very dissatisfaction’
Over 70% respondents from ‘Residential’, ‘Industrial’ & ‘Agri’ categories are satisfied with ‘Unplanned Outages’
‘Unplanned Outages’ has High Order of Importance for all categories
Segment wise, Customer perception is
measured and reported across each of the 28
broad factors which roll up into the 7 factors
which comprise of customer satisfaction (e.g.
this slide shows details reported for “How
satisfied are you with frequency and duration
of unplanned outages?”
Key Observations per attribute are reported
Visualization of satisfaction on GIS map for
indicating potential localities which need
immediate attention
Segment wise, Customer specified relative
Order of Importance given to each attribute
Report contains 28 such slides for each location
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
12
n= 55 n= 15 n= 15 n= 15
n= 100
Dissatisfied customers across different customer segments for each attribute
Satisfaction level across different attributes of Factor
Relative Order of Importance
HIGH LOW
OVERALL SATISFACTION LEVEL8/8/2011
Customer Service Price Information Access & Rec Handling
Power, Quality & Reliability
Company Image Meter, Billing & Payment
Communication 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
36% 36%40%
45% 45% 47%
29%
73%
60%53%
67%
47% 47%40%
7% 7%13% 13%
60%
73%
33%40%
73%
40%
67%
27%
60%
20%
Residential Commercial Industrial Agri
Relative more dissatisfaction among ‘Commercial’ Customers across all Attributes
Relative more dissatisfaction among ‘Agri’ Customers with Attributes ‘Price’ & ‘Power, Quality & Reliability’
‘Communication’ has less dissatisfaction followed by ‘Information Access & Record Handling’ across all responses
‘Customer Service’ has High Order of Importance followed by ‘Meter, Billing & Payment’ and ‘Communication’
Customer Service
Price
Information Access & Rec Handling
Power, Quality & Reliability
Company Image
Meter, Billing & Payment
Communication
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
VS S DS VDS NA0
0
0 0
00
0
Overall, Customer perception is aggregated
and reported by rolling up customer
responses across each of the 28 broad factors
which roll up into the 7 factors which
comprise of customer satisfaction.
Key Observations per factor are reported
Comparative dissatisfaction levels and overall
distribution of customers by customer
segment on the satisfaction scale is reported.
Overall, Customer specified relative Order of
Importance is aggregated and given to each
broad factor and reported
Report contains 1 such slide for each location
13
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
By Category: Industrial Customers indicating
better customer services than other Customers
Only Industrial respondents are satisfied with 4 attributes (Green Dots)
Commercial respondents are dissatisfied with most of attributes
Most Dissatisfaction (Factors)
Information Systems Customer Service Communications Power Quality & Reliability Company Image
Most Dissatisfaction (Attributes)
Safety & Maintenance Resolution Meter Complaints Resolution Billing Complaints Online Accessibility to records Voltage Stability Awareness Customer Rights Complaints Records Handling
8/8/2011
CSI ATTRIBUTE SCORES –CUSTOMER SERVICE HAS CRITICAL DISSATISFACTION ACROSS ALMOST ALL CATEGORIES
Factors Attributes Residential Commercial Industrial AgriUnplanned Outages 56.97 35.56 73.33 55.56Planned Outgaes 56.36 31.11 71.11 51.11Voltage Stability 50.30 38.10 60.00 28.89Safety & Maintenance 40.00 38.89 48.89 35.56Local Electricity Infrastructure 49.70 45.45 44.44 51.11Breakdown Restoration 61.82 51.28 62.22 40.00
Average 52.53 40.06 60.00 43.70Ease of New Meter 57.89 55.56 53.33 47.62Resolution Meter Complaints 45.51 40.48 26.67 48.89Resolution Billing Complaints 45.28 42.22 53.33 28.89Service Response Time 35.26 33.33 55.56 35.56Staff Behavior 50.30 44.44 62.22 53.33Access to customer service 55.76 51.28 66.67 60.00
Average 48.33 44.55 52.96 45.71Advance notice about disruption 60.26 47.22 71.43 55.56Advance notice about public work 58.79 60.00 62.22 60.00Awareness- Energy Efficiency 34.59 37.78 64.29 53.33Awareness- Consumer Rights 45.68 41.67 46.67 53.33Communication Modes 52.56 57.58 52.38 60.00
Average 50.38 48.85 59.40 56.44Meter Accuracy 56.86 42.86 60.00 51.11Bill Receipt on Time 58.79 51.11 64.44 53.33Billing Accuracy 51.23 35.71 45.24 53.33Easy bill understanding 46.30 52.78 37.78 42.22Modes of Payment 57.41 66.67 47.62 57.78
Average 54.12 49.83 51.02 51.56Fairness of Price 54.55 46.67 46.67 51.11
Value for money 64.85 37.78 86.67 51.11Average 59.70 42.22 66.67 51.11
Complaints Records handling 38.79 37.78 28.89 51.11Online Accessibility to records 32.08 47.22 26.67 40.48
Average 35.43 42.50 27.78 45.79Capability 41.36 33.33 62.22 55.56Community Engagement 41.21 41.03 55.56 53.33
Average 41.29 37.18 58.89 54.44
Company Image
Communications
Customer Service
Power Quality & Reliability
Information Systems
Price
Meter, Billing & Payments
Overall, Customer perception
is scored with a specially
designed scale and reported
on a simple red, green and
orange dashboard
Scores are reported across
each of the 28 attributes
which roll up into the 7
factors which comprise of
customer satisfaction.
Key comparative
Observations per attribute
are reported
14
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00 55.00 60.00 65.00
1.39
1.29
1.11
0.81
0.83
1.19
0.46
0.95
0.97
0.82
1.03
1.161.18
Advance notice aboutpublic work
0.80
0.85 0.87
1.19
1.25
1.05
0.99
1.10
1.21
1.34
1.08
Online Accessibility to records
1.16
0.92
KEY OVERALL PRIORITIES (ATTRIBUTE LEVEL) – SATISFACTION ON ALL ATTRIBUTES LIES IN THE RED-ORANGE ZONE. NO ATTRIBUTE IN GREEN ZONE.
Satisfaction scores range between 1 to 100. Some parts of the scale may not be shown in the view above for better visualization. Refer detailed Attribute level information in the detailed supplementary report.
8/8/2011
Importance HIGHSatisfaction LOW
Satisfaction HIGH
Importance LOW
Attributes are mapped on a matrix of satisfaction and
importance so as to identify key areas which customers
expect attention from the utility.
These are indicative of the key actions that are/will be
needed by the utility operator to improve customer
satisfaction and hence performance. Potentially useful for
planning and modeling capex and opex requirements.
Report contains 5 such slide for each location
15
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
INFORMATION COVERAGE FOR EACH SITE LOCATION(OVER 100+ SLIDES FOR EACH SITE LOCATION)
Top level Customer Satisfaction Survey Results Satisfaction Ranking across consumer categories Satisfaction matrix
7 Factors x 4 consumer categories 28 Attributes x 4 consumer categories
Overall Priority matrix – Satisfaction vs. Order of Importance Factor wise (7) Attribute wise (28) Identification of top priority factors/attributes for quick customer satisfaction win Identification of consumer category which needs priority intervention Identification of factors and attributes with most dissatisfaction
Consumer category wise Priority Matrix - Satisfaction vs. Order of Importance Residential Priority Factor Matrix Commercial Priority Factor Matrix Industrial Priority Factor Matrix Agri Priority Factor Matrix
Customer Opinion and Expectations Customer’s preferred payment modes Customer’s preferred Communication modes Customer’s perception on Distribution Privatization Customer’s Expectation from Utility
Key Recommendations Radar plot – Customer Expectation vs. Perception
Top priority areas identification which has high weightage in overall ECSI and big gap between Expectation and measured perception
Executive summary of top actionable items across consumer categories
8/8/2011
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
16
REPORT DETAILS
8/8/2011
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
17
8/8/2011
The Madhya Pradesh Electricity Customer Satisfaction Study Reports for the 9 districts are available as PDF documents with findings presented as tables / graphs / charts
Separate Reports in this series for Locations (districts) with delivery dates:
Bhind (10th Aug) Gwalior (10th Aug) Datia (10th Aug) Satna (15th Aug) Sagar (15th Aug) Narsinghpur (15th Aug) Shajapur (20th Aug) Dewas (20th Aug) Ujjain (20th Aug)
For each site location, there are two overall level documents: Customer Satisfaction – Top Results (30+ slides)
includes top level findings with attribute and factor level comparisons and recommendations.
Customer Satisfaction – Detailed Results (65+ slides) includes findings with GIS visualizations and individual
factor level aggregated responses at overall level and for each customer segments – residential, commercial, industrial and agriculture.
For each location the following additional supplements are also provided, Socio Economic Parameters impacting load growth Distribution Franchisee RFP Data Analysis
REPORTING
18
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
PRICING8/8/2011
* Each report is accompanied with, 2 additional location-wise supplements –
• Socio Economic Parameters impacting load growth• Distribution Franchisee RFP Data Analysis
Product Price (inc. taxes) BenefitsSingle Site Report (Detailed) Rs. 25,000 Individual Site Report of each location includes, (95+ slides)
Survey Design & Framework Survey Plan and Demographics Customer Priority Matrix for 28 different attributes Customer Opinion & Expectations Segment and Attribute-wise Customer Satisfaction
Results Key Recommendations+Free Expert Assistance: Buyers get additional research support from the pManifold Team at no additional cost
Pack of 3 Site Reports (Detailed) Rs. 60,000
Pack of all 9 Site Reports (Detailed) Rs. 1,57,500
Consolidated Top Level Report forGwalior-Sagar-Ujjain
Rs. 25,000 Consolidated Report includes, (30+ slides) Survey Plan – Survey Areas and Consumer
Segmentation Customer Expectations v/s Utility Performance Satisfaction v/s Order of Importance Matrix Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) Customer Opinions and Expectations+Free Expert Assistance: Buyers get additional research support from the pManifold Team at no additional cost
Consolidated Top Level Report for all 9 districts
Rs. 75,000
19
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
PAYMENT TERMS AND DELIVERY8/8/2011
Payment Terms 50% advance, 50% after delivery of all reports
Delivery Timeline For Site Locations Gwalior-Dhatia-BhindAvailable immediately
For Site Locations Satna-Sagar-NarsinghpurAvailable immediately
For Site Locations Shajapur-Dewas-UjjainAvailable immediately
Key Findings Comparative Report for 9 districtsDelivered 1 week from placement of order
Reporting Format Portable Document Format (PDF)
20
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
OUR MOTIVATION – WHY THIS STUDY IS NEEDED? WHY NOW? The Forum of Regulators Report on Standardization of the Distribution Franchisee model(September 2010)
mentions that the objectives of appointing a distribution franchisee, inter alia,are:i. To minimise Aggregate Distribution and Commercial lossesii. To bring improvement in Metering, Billing and Revenue Collectioniii. To minimise Current Assets on account of arrearsiv. To enhance customer satisfaction level by improving quality of service
Placing focus on the fourth point, we find that while much information is shared in the Distribution Franchisee RFPs, they hardly provide any information on the current customer satisfaction levels nor the customer's perspective of the network infrastructure, current quality of services etc. This is a stark thing to miss considering all CERC, CEA, State ERCs and State Discom's mandate Improving Customer Satisfaction as one of the 4 objectives of a Power Distribution Franchisee.
However, while all utilities, licensees and potential or current distribution franchisee operators try to improve quality of service; could efforts to understand the customer's perception and expectations from the utility help the utility make more quality decisions to improve the services and have a happy, paying customer?
The answer probably is a big "Yes". Measuring customer satisfaction - using a structured methodology that relates the customer responses with consumer demographics and key factors/attributes affecting business performance - is probably the only way of independently & periodically benchmarking effectiveness of utilities operating in same or different zones. No doubt a number of such mechanisms have evolved and established themselves in the western countries where multiple state / private companies operate in the same locality. The reports in this series attempts to raise the customers voice to, better able the distribution franchisee & utility stakeholders to monitor the local situation, identify key priority actions and plan investments accordingly.
But how really could measuring customer satisfaction or proactively identifying customer preferences help? Read more here to learn how we think it does.
8/8/2011
21
8/8/2011Copyright (c) pM
anifold. Electric Utility/CSAT/M
PSeries
Bidders participating in the Distribution Franchisee tenders to raise/address relevant issues with the licensee and also to better estimate investments in appropriate areas.
Distribution Franchisee operating in the region to establish a comprehensive model and identify drivers of customer satisfaction and loyalty in order to establish long/short term marketing plans, investment priorities & satisfied customers.
Policy makers to improve RFP Design, policies and benchmarks for distribution franchisee performance based on stakeholder engagement and perception.
State Distribution Licensee Companies to monitor Distribution Franchisee performance and establish sound vendor management
Distribution Franchisees operating in other regions to benchmark their performance.
Consultants, Professionals, Public Panels and NGOs advising, tracking, monitoring and interfacing with distribution utilities.
Generally, the report helps to , Get an independent, customer centric view on the local electricity distribution situation Validate and add to information provided in RFP for improved Capex roll out plan Prioritize system investments and account customer expectations earlier in the game – managing
both PERFORMANCE and PERCEPTION, very critical to success of Distribution Franchisees Understand site’s ethnography – socio-economic etc.
WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM THESE REPORTS?
22
METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW A 9 district “indicative, land survey” was conducted to profile and measure satisfaction & key
preferences of the electricity customers through “face-to-face” personal interviews. The survey covered urban and rural areas of all population strata in the 9 districts of Madhya Pradesh – Gwalior, Bhind, Datia, Sagar, Satna, Narsinghpur, Ujjain, Dewas and Shajapur. The key objective of the survey was to capture and present, fairly and timely, perception and opinion of customers about the local utility on well-chosen performance indicators so as to reliably identify which areas do customers give higher importance to, which would be of help to the utilities, and distribution franchisee stakeholders.
The selection of “survey regions” was “Purposive” based upon the coverage of allotted Divisions to Distribution Franchisee in those districts. The sampling was done on “Stratified Random” basis with 4 different electricity consumer types – Residential, Commercial, Industrial and Agri. Regional clusters/grids with dominant or high density of one of these consumer categories was chosen. Then a random selection of survey respondent was done in defined clusters.
More clusters/grids were allocated in urban areas compared to rural based upon connected load. However attempt was to spread grids across the district to cover all electrical divisions. The grids and random samples chosen within were kept distant to allow capture of different localities responses to their local power infrastructure. A comprehensive GIS model was used for survey planning and visualization of the sample grids to avoid any sampling mistakes during data collection. The approximate locations of sample respondent was coded in GIS to add additional layer of validation to tie digitized data to the location.
Secondary research and local intelligence was employed to identify clusters. Previous experience in electoral surveys, census surveys and NREGA in same regions was leveraged.
8/8/2011Copyright (c) pM
anifold. Electric Utility/CSAT/M
PSeries
23
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
METHODOLOGY ADDENDUM The decision to do an “indicative-land-based-face-to-face” survey with a fair sample of total 900
sample points across 9 districts, instead of deploying a larger sampling online or offline, was chosen to capture customer’s perspective on current performance of local utility in a timely and fair manner.
A target confidence level of 95% with ±10% confidence interval was identified good (based on existing literature survey) to make the findings fairly representative of all electricity customer segments in that district (and not just of those surveyed). Segment wise figures may also be fairly representative of the independent population based on the stratified distribution considered in the survey plan.
The fair sample size has confidence for existing number of electrical connections. The total 100 samples were divided between 4 consumer categories almost proportional to the number of connections in that category.
The survey plan, methodology and design were drawn from recent study done at Nagpur with 1200 sample point land-survey for the same.
A more pragmatic way of looking at the survey results would be to use the results as an indicator of the customers perspective of the local utility and its performance on different business areas.
8/8/2011
24
QUICK CONTACT
Rahul Bagdia
+91 95610-94490
Blog
http://blog.pmanifold.com/
Global Group connecting Power Distribution Franchisee Stakeholders
http://tinyurl.com/PowerDFgroup
8/8/2011Copyright (c) pM
anifold. Electric Utility/CSAT/M
PSeries
Copyright (c) pManifold. Electric U
tility/CSAT/MPSeries
25
GET IN TOUCH WITH US….
CleanTech PracticeRahul Bagdia+91 [email protected]
Faiz Wahid+91 [email protected]
India (Main office)Crystal Plaza, Level 2276 Central Bazaar Road,RamdaspethNagpur - 440010Maharashtra, INDIA http://www.pmanifold.com
USA (Liaison Office)2020 Calamos Ct.,Suite 209 Naperville,IL 60653, USA
Mr. Dinesh Jain+1 630-853-3520 [email protected]
DISCLAIMER pManifold Business Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (“pManifold”) and its
partners prepared this report. All rights reserved. All copyright in this presentation and related
works is solely and exclusively owned by pManifold. The same may not be reproduced, wholly or in part in any material form (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic means and whether or not transiently or incidentally to some other use of this presentation), modified or in any manner communicated to any third party except with the written approval of pManifold.
This presentation is for information purposes only. While due care has been taken during the compilation of this presentation to ensure that the information is accurate to the best of pManifold and its partner’s knowledge and belief, the content is not to be construed in any manner whatsoever as a substitute for professional advice.
pManifold and its partner’s neither recommend nor endorse any specific products or services that may have been mentioned in this presentation and nor do they assume any liability or responsibility for the outcome of decisions taken as a result of any reliance placed on this presentation.
Neither pManifold nor its partners shall be liable for any direct or indirect damages that may arise due to any act or omission on the part of the user due to any reliance placed or guidance taken from any portion of this presentation.
Logo’s and pictures are properties of their respective owners. With no existing benchmarks, the information presented may not
be comprehensive, but is a first attempt to create a baseline and provide real customer perspective to other electricity distribution stakeholders.
8/8/2011