# Presentation: 374462

## 2000PatentCustomer Satisfaction Survey

***Executive Summary***
*Prepared by:*
- Westat
- 1650 Research Blvd.
- Rockville, MD 20850
- USPTO Center for Quality Services
- Crystal Park 1, Suite 812

## Demographic Profile – In Summary

**Over two-thirds of the respondents are affiliated with law firms and 18% represented large businesses.  Individual inventors made up 6% of the survey population, down slightly from the 1999 level.**
**Over three-quarters of the respondents contacted the USPTO often during the year.  Contact frequency is similar to 1999 results.**
**Close to 90% of the respondents said they are continuous customers.  There was a 4 percentage-point increase in the number of continuous customers from 1999 to 2000.**
**Most of the respondents completing the survey identified themselves as patent agents/attorneys.**

## Most and Least Satisfied Questions

- P-

## What Respondents Are Most Satisfied With 

- B1.  	Treat with courtesy each timeyou contact us
- C1AP2. 	Clarity of application instructions
- C1AP3.	Use of telephone for examinationissues
- C1AP1.	Amount of time needed to submitrequired information
- C1OP1. 	Outcome met your objectives
- C4c.	Overall courteousness(handling of problems)

**Survey **
_**Item #**_

_**Satisfied**_

## What Respondents Are Most Satisfied With (cont.) 

***What Respondents Are Most Satisfied With ******(cont.)****** ***

- B14.  	Respond to amendments within 4 months of receipt
- B2.	Direct you promptly to the properoffice or person
- C1OP2.	Fairness of the final decision
- B6.	Widely disseminate informationon changes in practices beforeeffective date
- C1SR1.	Assistance at a time convenientto you

**Respondents reported they are most satisfied with staff courtesy, the application process, the use of telephone for examination issues, and the outcome of the process.**

**Survey **
_**Item #**_

_**Satisfied**_

## What Respondents Are Least Satisfied With 

- C4a.  	Handling of delays
- C4b. 	Handling of mistakes
- C4d.	The way your problem or difficulty was handled
- B5.	Respond to status letterswithin 30 days of receipt
- B8.	Match properly addressed faxes ofFormal Amendments with file anddeliver to examiner within 3 days
- C1AP4.	Consistency of examinations
- B10.	Mail filing notices within30 days of receipt

**Survey **
_**Item #**_

_**Satisfied**_

## What Respondents Are Least Satisfied With (cont.) 

***What Respondents Are Least Satisfied With ******(cont.)****** ***

- B7. 	Deliver “Informal” faxes to examinerswithin 1 business day of receipt
- C1P1.	USPTO fees for patent applications
- C1P2.	Good value for the amountof fees paid

**Survey **
_**Item #**_

**Respondents are least satisfied with the handling of problems and the consistency of examinations, as well as certain process time standards ****(status letters, faxes, and filing notices).**

_**Satisfied**_

## Comparison with1999 Results

- P-

## Major Improvements from 1999 (6 percentage points or more) Ranked by % Change

- B6.	Widely disseminate informationon changes in practices beforeeffective date
- C7.	Overall satisfaction with patentprocess
- C1OP1.	Outcome met your objectives
- B2.	Direct you promptly to theproper office or person
- B7.	Deliver faxes to examiners markedinformal/draft within 1 business day

**Change in****% Satisfied**_**from 1999**_
**+10***
**+7***
**+7***
**+6***
**+6***

**Survey **
_**Item #**_

- __________________
** ***** Change in percent satisfied from 1999 to 2000 is statistically significant.**

**Statistically significant improvements are seen in the dissemination of information on changes before effective date, overall customer satisfaction, patent process outcome, directing customers promptly, and fax delivery.**

## Trends 1998 to 1999 (29 comparable items - differences in % satisfied)

**Declined**

**Improved**

**Responses to 27 of 29 items improved from 1998 to 1999.  Only one item declined and one remained the same.  The majority of improvements are in the 6-10 percentage-point range.**

**>10**

**6 - 10**

**1 - 5**

**6 - 10**

**>10**

**1 -  5**

**0**

**Percentage-Point Change**

## Trends 1999 to 2000 (27 comparable items - differences in % satisfied)

***Trends 1999 to 2000 ******(27 comparable items - differences in % satisfied)***

**Declined**

**Improved**

**Responses to 21 of the 27 comparable items improved from 1999 to 2000.  **

**Percentage-Point Change**

## Problem Resolution

- P-

## Problem Resolution

**	****	****	****	****	****Change in %**
**	****	****	**_**2000**_**	**_**1999**__**	**__**from 1999**_
**C2.****	****Have you experienced any problems with****	****USPTO services over the past year?**
**	****	****Yes, and I contacted someone at the USPTO****	****55%****	****61%****	****-6***
**	****	****Yes, but I did not contact the USPTO****	****10%****	****10%****	****0**
**	****	****No, I did not experience a problem****	****35%****	****29%****	****+6***
**C3.****	****Was your problem resolved?**
**	****	****Yes, and it was handled quickly****	****24%****	****24%****	****0**
**	****	****Yes, but it was not handled quickly****	****46%****	****45%****	****1**
**	****	****No, problem was not resolved****	****30%****	****31%****	****-1**

**About two-thirds of the respondents had problems with USPTO services  over the past year, down significantly from 1999.  However, 30% continue to indicate that their problems were not resolved.**

**________________**
*** The change in percent from 1999 to 2000 is statistically significant.**

## Questions Pertaining to the Overall Patent Process

***(Overall Questions)***

- P-

## Overall Questions

**C7****	****Overall satisfaction**
**C1P1****	****USPTO fees for patent application**
**C1P2****	****Good value for USPTO fees paid**

_**Survey Item #**_

## Overall Question - Overall Satisfaction

**C7.****	****Considering all of your experiences with the USPTO **
**	****patent process, how satisfied are you OVERALL?**

**Change in %****from 1999**_**to 2000**_
**+7***
**-3**
**-4***

**Overall satisfaction increased significantly compared to 1999.  Only 13% of the respondents are dissatisfied, down significantly from 1999.**

**________________**
***  Change in percent from 1999 to 2000 is statistically significant.**

## Overall Questions - Fees and Value 

***Overall Questions - Fees and Value****** ***

**C1P1.  USPTO fees for patent application****

**C1P2.  Good value for the amount of USPTO fees paid****

**There were improvements in satisfaction levels.  There were also statistically significant reductions in dissatisfaction levels for fees paid **
**and good value for the amount of fees paid compared to 1999 levels.**

**________________**
*** Change in percent from 1999 to 2000 is statistically significant.****** In 1999 and 2000, the term “fees” was used instead of “costs” which was used in 1998.**

**Change in % from**_**1999 to 2000**_
**+2**
**+3**
**-5***

**Change in % from**_**1999 to 2000**_
**+3**
**+3***
**-6***

## Key Drivers:

***Questions That Have the Strongest Relationship with Overall Satisfaction***

- P-

## Key Drivers of Overall Satisfaction – By Service Standards and Patent Process*(Excluding Problem Handling Item)

_**	**__**	**_
_**Service Standards**_**	**_**Satisfied**_
**B2.****	****Direct you promptly to****	****69%****	****proper office or person**
**B3.****	****Return phone calls within****	****61%****	****one business day**
**B4.****	****Clear written communications****	****63%****	****of position of examiners**
**B9.****	****Mail accurate filing notices******	****52%**
**B11.****	****Conduct a thorough search****	****61%****	****during patent examination****	****process**
**B16.****	****Provide patent grant within****	****36 months******	****58%**

_**	**__**	**_
_**Patent Process**_**	**_**Satisfied**_
**C1AP4.****	****Consistency of examinations****	****44%**
**C1OP1.****	****Outcome met your objectives****	****74%**
**C1OP3.****	****Efficiency of the examination****	****53%****	****process**
**C1SC2.****	****Genuinely committed to****	****53%****	****providing the best possible****	****service**
**C1SR2.****	****Prompt and helpful service****	****59%**
**C1SR3.****	****Flexibility in trying to****	****53%****	****address your needs**

**Search quality, telephone service, filing receipts, outcome of the process, and commitment to customer service represent areas strongly related to customer satisfaction.**

**________________**
***   Respondents who did not experience problems during the past year did not answer survey items****    on problem handling.  Therefore, these problem handling items are not included in this analysis.**
**** Not asked in 1999 and is a new key driver in 2000.**

## Key Drivers of Overall Satisfaction –  By Service Standards and Patent Process/Problem Resolution*

**	****Service**
**	****Standards****	****Sat.**
**B2.****	****Direct you promptly****	****to the proper office/****	****person****	****69%**
**B3.****	****Return phone calls****	****within 1 business****	****day****	****61%**
**B4.****	****Clearly written ****	****position of ****	****examiner****	****63%**
**B11.****	****Conduct a thorough****	****search****	****61%**
**B12.****	****Respond within 30****	****days to papers****	****filed after ****	****application allowed****	****55%**
**B15.****	****Provide patent grant****	****within 4 months of****	****issue fee payment****	****58%**

**	****Patent**
**	****Process****	****Sat.**
**C1AP4.****	****Consistency****	****of examinations****	****44%**
**C1OP1.****	****Outcome met****	****your objectives****	****74%**
**C1OP3.****	****Efficiency of the****	****examination****	****process****	****53%**
**C1SC2.****	****Genuinely ****	****committed to****	****best possible****	****service****	****53%**
**C1SR1.****	****Assistance at****	****time convenient****	****to you****	****65%**
**C1SR2.****	****Prompt and****	****helpful service****	****59%**

**	****Problem**
**	****Resolution****	****Sat.**
**C4a.****	****Handling of ****	****delays****	****21%**
**C4d.****	****The way your****	****problem/****	****difficulty was****	****handled****	****32%**

**__________________**
*** Covers those respondents experiencing problems during the past year.**

**Quite similar to the first set of key drivers.  Additional items include responding within 30 days to papers filed after application allowed, assistance at a time convenient to you, and the handling of delays/problems.**

## Moving Customers From Neutral to Satisfied in Overall Satisfaction

- P-

## Comparing Neutral and Satisfied Groups (% Difference)*

**	****	****                                 **_**% Satisfied**_
**	****	****Satisfied****	****Neutral****	**
**	****	****Overall****	****Overall****	****Difference in**_**Question**_**	****	**_**(C7)**_**	**_**(C7)**_**	**_**Satisfaction**_
**C1OP3.****	****Efficiency of the examination process****	****70****	****24****	****46**
**C1SC2.****	****Genuinely committed to providing ****	****the best possible service****	****71****	****26****	****45**
**C1SR2.****	****Prompt and helpful service****	****78****	****33****	****45**
**C1SR3.****	****Flexibility in trying to address****	****your needs****	****71****	****28****	****43**
**C1AP4.****	****Consistency of examinations****	****60****	****20****	****40**
**C1OP1.****	****Outcome met your objectives****	****90****	****50****	****40**
**B11.****	****Conduct a thorough search****	****76****	****37****	****39**
**B4.****	****Clear written position of examiners****	****78****	****41****	****37**

**Examination quality, efficiency, and responsive customer service are key areas to increasing overall satisfaction. **

**________________**
*** Shows largest differences.**

## Experiencing Problems by Overall Satisfaction

**	****	****C2****	****C4d**
**	****	****Experienced****	****Satisfied with way **
**	****	**_**a problem**_**	**_**problem was handled**_
**C7.****	****Neutral Overall****	****80%****	****14%**
**C7.****	****Satisfied Overall****	****53%****	****52%**

**Of those responding neutral to C7, 80% experienced a problem.  Only 14% were satisfied with the way the problem was handled.**

## Results by Technology Area

- P-

## Differences in Overall Satisfaction by Technology Area(Ranked by % Satisfied)

- Designs (2900)
- Transportation, Construction, Agriculture, and Security (3600)
- Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products (3700)
- Chemical and Materials Engineering (1700)
- Communications and Information Processing (2700)
- Physics, Optics, Semiconductors, and  Electrical Engineering (2800)
- Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry (1600)

**C7.****	****Considering all of your experiences with the USPTO patent **
**	****process, how satisfied are you overall?**

**Five of the technology areas show an improvement of 6 percentage points or more compared to 1999 levels.  Designs and Physics show statistically significant improvements.**

**Change in****% Satisfied**_**from 1999**_
**+8***
**+6**
**+6**
**+4**
**+9**
**+12***
**-1**

*** Change in percent satisfied from 1999 to 2000 is statistically significant.**

## Conclusions

- P-

## Conclusions

**The results of the 2000 Patent Customer Survey are quite encouraging.**
**Overall satisfaction with Patent services has improved by 12 percentage points in the last two years, increasing from 52% in 1998 to 64% in 2000.  Dissatisfaction is now 13%, down from 17% in 1999 and 22% in 1998.**
**Responses to 21 of the 27 comparable items improved from 1999 to 2000.  Seven of these items improved significantly.**
**All of the Customer Service items improved or remained the same, especially directing customers promptly to the proper office/person and prompt/helpful service.**
**The number of respondents believing service has improved compared to previous filings far outnumber those believing it is worse (except for accurate filing receipts).**
**A growing number of respondents are commenting about the proactive and individualized service, as well as the helpfulness, of examiners in pointing out appropriate changes and working out issues over the telephone.  Close to 80% are satisfied with the use of the telephone for examination issues.**

## Conclusions (cont.)

**Important areas with acceptable levels of satisfaction include courtesy, telephone service, examination quality, the application submission process, and outcome/fairness of the final decision.**
_**Why Did Overall Satisfaction Improve?**_
**The reasons for the increase of 7 percentage points in overall satisfaction from 1999 to 2000 may include the following improvements:**
**A decline in the percent of respondents experiencing problems/difficulties**
**An  improvement in the key driver of directing customers promptly to the proper office/person**
**An improvement in the key driver of returning calls within one business day**
**An improvement in the key driver of outcome meeting customer objectives**
**An improvement in the key driver of the efficiency of the examination process**
**An improvement in the key drivers of prompt and helpful service and  flexibility**

## Conclusions (cont.)

**However, there remain areas that, while showing improvement, still have low levels of satisfaction:**
**Meeting standards for responding to status letters, mailing patent grant within 4 months of issue fee payment, and mailing accurate filing receipts.**
**	****The handling of problems (about two-thirds of the respondents experienced some type of problem or difficulty this past year).**
**Inconsistency of examination, asked for the first time on this year’s survey, also has a low level of satisfaction.**
**Survey results show a decline of three percentage points in satisfaction from 1999 in conducting a thorough search, and a clear written position of examining attorneys showed no improvement.  Some key customer service items, such as flexibility, ability to provide accurate answers, and prompt/helpful service, remain below 60% in satisfaction.**
**Those who are either neutral or dissatisfied have a much less positive view about examination quality and responsive customer service.  In addition, over 80% of the respondents who are either neutral or dissatisfied overall indicate that they have experienced problems during the year.**

## Opportunities for Improvement - The Vital Few
From the write-in comments and the results of the survey data analysis, the 
following “vital few” opportunities for improvement have been identified:
(1)	Address through additional training of examiners the perceived inconsistency in the quality of rejections:
35 USC 102 and 103 – Patentability over prior art
Section 112 – Description, enablement, and clarity requirements
Application of drawing requirements
	In addition, analyze complaints about the quality of searches and inconsistency of decisions to determine patterns and potential actions, including focused training.
(2)	Respondents recognize that problems, errors, and misplaced documents will occur given the large workload.  However, needed changes include a simple customer-friendly process for quickly correcting administrative errors and better procedures for tracking lost documents. Full implementation of Customer Service Centers can significantly improve performance here.

**From the write-in comments and the results of the survey data analysis, the **
**following “vital few” opportunities for improvement have been identified:**
**(1)****	****Address through additional training of examiners the perceived inconsistency in the quality of rejections:**
**35 USC 102 and 103 – Patentability over prior art**
**Section 112 – Description, enablement, and clarity requirements**
**Application of drawing requirements**
**	****In addition, analyze complaints about the quality of searches and inconsistency of decisions to determine patterns and potential actions, including focused training.**
**(2)****	****Respondents recognize that problems, errors, and misplaced documents will occur given the large workload.  However, needed changes include a simple customer-friendly process for quickly correcting administrative errors and better procedures for tracking lost documents. Full implementation of Customer Service Centers can significantly improve performance here.**

***Conclusions ******(cont.)***

## Opportunities for Improvement - The Vital Few (cont.)
(3)	Given the continuing low satisfaction ratings for responding to status requests, publicize the use of the PAIR system for tracking status.  First,  though, ensure that access problems reported by customers have been resolved.
(4)	Analyze the causes of delays after issue fee payment and take appropriate action.
(5)	There is a growing demand for the use of e-mail in correspondingwith examiners.  Provide an update to customers about this potential action.
(6)	Explore the possibility of a process for follow-up on complaints about poor search quality and inconsistency of decisions.  Provide feedback to the applicant about findings and corrective action.  Most of the respondents who rated overall satisfaction as either neutral or dissatisfied appear to be dissatisfied with search quality and the service provided in following up on their problems and complaints.
(7)	Continue to work on a problem management and resolution system.  Emphasis should be placed on the timeliness of feedback and problem resolution. Implementation of a Customer Complaint Resolution System, including widespread deployment of a database for capturing, tracking, and analyzing complaints, is needed to attack this important driver of overall customer satisfaction.

**(3)****	****Given the continuing low satisfaction ratings for responding to status requests, publicize the use of the PAIR system for tracking status.  First,  though, ensure that access problems reported by customers have been resolved.**
**(4)****	****Analyze the causes of delays after issue fee payment and take appropriate action.**
**(5)****	****There is a growing demand for the use of e-mail in corresponding****with examiners.  Provide an update to customers about this potential action.**
**(6)****	****Explore the possibility of a process for follow-up on complaints about poor search quality and inconsistency of decisions.  Provide feedback to the applicant about findings and corrective action.  Most of the respondents who rated overall satisfaction as either neutral or dissatisfied appear to be dissatisfied with search quality and the service provided in following up on their problems and complaints.**
**(7)****	****Continue to work on a problem management and resolution system.  ****Emphasis should be placed on the timeliness of feedback and problem resolution. Implementation of a Customer Complaint Resolution System, including widespread deployment of a database for capturing, tracking, and analyzing complaints, is needed to attack this important driver of overall customer satisfaction.**

***Conclusions ******(cont.)***