Consumer Complaints Review: Qualitative and quantitative research findings

An independent report written by Futuresight for Ofcom

Executive summary

As part of its Consumer Rights Review, Ofcom commissioned research to understand whether the complaints processes operated by telecommunications providers (fixed, mobile and internet) were effective and of value to consumers. The study investigated a number of issues relating to service provision in the industry, including levels of dissatisfaction with services, reasons for dissatisfaction and actions taken, as well as consumers’ experiences of making a complaint.

A staged approach, combining quantitative and qualitative methods, was used. Initial quantitative surveys provided an overview of consumers’ attitudes to service provision and complaints processes, as well as generating a sample for the second stage of qualitative interviews. The qualitative interviews then provided detailed insight into the different experiences of consumers who had made a complaint, and shed some light on why consumers who were dissatisfied did not make a complaint. It is important to note that the majority of respondents volunteered to take part in further research, and the findings suggest that many did so because the interview provided them with an opportunity to share their often unfortunate experiences with an impartial third party.

The difference in attitudes to service provision in general, compared with attitudes towards complaints handling specifically, was highlighted clearly in the quantitative data. The vast majority of consumers were satisfied with their telecoms services (86%), but when they had reason to be dissatisfied, and made a complaint, the majority were unsatisfied with they way their complaint was handled. Mobile operators appeared to do marginally better than their counterparts - 52% of consumers were unsatisfied with how mobile operators handled their complaint, compared with 65% who were unsatisfied with their internet provider’s complaint handling and 70% who were unsatisfied with their fixed line provider’s handling.

The qualitative findings indicated a big difference between consumers’ expectations of how their complaint would be handled and their experience. Consumers tended to think that their problem was commonplace and would be resolved quickly and efficiently, and so they were usually calm and optimistic before contacting their service provider. Their mood quickly changed when faced with long waiting times to get through and the problems commonly associated with customer services. Inefficiencies and mistakes on the part of the operators were often exacerbated by an inappropriate attitude from customer service staff and reluctance to accept responsibility for errors.

The quantitative and qualitative results were largely similar in the proportion of complaints resolved – an average of 42% and 54% respectively. Differences between the two data sets related to the time taken and the stage at which a complaint was resolved. While the average time taken to resolve a complaint in the qualitative interviews was over a month, the quantitative data revealed that just 22% of complaints were resolved after speaking to one person, and a further 16% after being transferred to a more senior person, leaving over 50% of complaints unresolved in the early stages of the process.

The proportion of complaints unresolved at this stage, combined with an average of 29% of people dropping out when their complaint was not resolved by the first, or more senior, person, implies that the initial engagement with customer services is the weakest part of the process. This is certainly supported by the qualitative findings; complainants consistently mentioned that the quality of the initial response from their provider varied considerably, ranging from informed and helpful to useless and sometimes rude. The consensus was that most call centre workers either lacked knowledge of how to deal with some of the most basic problems, or enforced their processes over-officiously. Overall, consumers felt that customer service staff were working within very tight parameters, without the flexibility or authority to resolve most of the complaints they encountered.

The interviews also revealed that customer service staff were not informing customers about complaints codes of practice, nor were they referring them to alternative organisations such as ADRs if customers remained unsatisfied. Less than one complainant in 50 was notified of these, even though over half of them had been engaged in the complaint process for more than a month.

For the vast majority in the qualitative sample, the impact of making a complaint was negative, both practically and emotionally, and in some cases, extremely negative. The result was that 16 had switched provider, five were waiting for the end of their contract before switching, four were considering switching and one was in the process of switching. In almost all of these cases, the way in which the complaint was handled that was the reason for switching, rather than the initial problem itself.

Overall, even when taking the bias in the qualitative sample into consideration, there is strong evidence to suggest that current processes for complaints handling across the three services are not as effective as they could be. The impression among the consumers we spoke to is that operators are ‘getting away with’ poor customer service; there is a growing sense of moral outrage from complainants at their perceived powerlessness against the machinery of large business. Consumers recommended an improvement in overall communication and a more honest, transparent and accountable approach if complaints processes are to become more effective and of value.

The full document is available below: