Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Intellectual Capital

John Dumay and Jim Rooney
Taking <strong>the</strong> strategic goal <strong>of</strong> improving customer satisfaction as a primary example, fur<strong>the</strong>r scrutiny <strong>of</strong>
customer satisfaction measures shows it is never explicitly achieved, as <strong>the</strong> original metric, “%
improvement in customer satisfaction”, does not appear in any IC Statement. However, over time, <strong>the</strong>
emerging role <strong>of</strong> measuring customer-oriented IC can be shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Customer based measures in Lands IC statements 2005-9
IC Statement Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Land title transactions registered x x x x
Plans registered x x x x
Copies <strong>of</strong> land title related documents supplied to customers x x x x
Boundary determinations x x x x
Survey enquiries x x x x
Number <strong>of</strong> formal customer complaints
New Soil Conservation Services clients:
x x x x
■ Consult x x x x
■ Works x x x x
■ Operations x x x x
% <strong>of</strong> all eligible perpetual leases converted to freehold x x x x
No. <strong>of</strong> major regional reserves established x x x x
Total recreational trails and tracks established on Crown land x x x
New land valuations issued to Office <strong>of</strong> State Revenue x
New land valuations issued for rating purposes x
Supplementary valuations issued x
Land valuation objections received x
Land valuation objections processed x
Percentage <strong>of</strong> land valuations changed as a result <strong>of</strong> objection x
Percentage <strong>of</strong> enclosure permits granted x
Number <strong>of</strong> Community Trust Boards x
New State Parks established x
No. <strong>of</strong> internet feedback requests x x
No. <strong>of</strong> hits on website x x
O<strong>the</strong>r customer based measures 2 22 12 12 12
The 2005 IC Statement reports only two measures, expanding to 22 in 2006 and stabilising to 12 in
subsequent years. However, a proxy measure such as “Number <strong>of</strong> formal customer complaints”
exists. But when examining <strong>the</strong> measure as summarised in Table 2, a 200% increase in complaints is
disclosed. A rejoinder to <strong>the</strong> increase in 2008 is disclosed in <strong>the</strong> 2009 IC Statement with a change in
recording <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> measure, now based on <strong>the</strong> ISO9001:2000 quality standard. This implies ei<strong>the</strong>r a
tightening <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> definition, causing an increase in formal complaints, or simply an increase in
complaints. Ei<strong>the</strong>r way, we cannot argue increasing customer satisfaction based on <strong>the</strong> disclosed
measures. More specifically, proxy measures are required, as a Lands wide customer survey was
never undertaken as originally intended.
Table 2: Formal customer complaints 2005-9
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %Change
Number <strong>of</strong> formal customer complaints 4 3 3 9 12 200%
Hence, we have a conundrum. How can Lands continue to advocate improvement in customer
satisfaction when <strong>the</strong> metrics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> IC report do not support <strong>the</strong> rhetoric? To answer, we outline <strong>the</strong>
method Lands employs to communicate developing IC via <strong>the</strong>ir IC Statements. In <strong>the</strong> 2008/9 IC
Statement Lands links <strong>the</strong> strategic priority <strong>of</strong> servicing client needs to service quality by actively
communicating and consulting with customers.
126