Add a 'satisfaction' question to the questionnaire (simply to prevent support mail)

[Deborah-mySoc]

Approx. 1-2 users/ week email to ask WTT to add some sort of 'were you happy with your reply' question to the questionnaire (which is currently 'did you get a reply?' Yes/No). There are a number of issues with implementing this, from trying to minimise confusion (some find the current questionnaire confusing) to avoiding abuse (especially, one would imagine, from those who receive a well-researched response which fundamentally disagrees with the original query, or those receiving stock replies). However, it should certainly be considered.

[Deborah-mySoc]

Suggestion from user that instead of a super-subjective 'was it satisfactory? y/n' question we could ask people to rate their response.

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback: "With respect I believe that you should have three clearly defined links. One for Yes I have had a reply. One for No reply/response. One for an Acknowledgement only. That way there are clear cut responses and there is nothing left in the air."

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback: "I would maybe suggest that you not only allow people to reply to a yes or no my MP did reply, I think you should query as whether the response was satisfactory or not and allow them to give further comments if needed."

[jacksonj04]

This is difficult to survey, since there's no way of defining "satisfactory" without a lot of words. A well thought out response saying there's nothing that can be done might be satisfactory to one person, but unsatisfactory to another as it doesn't actually resolve the issue. Something like "Did your representative solve your problem?" unfairly marks down those who happen to get a higher portion of unresolvable issues.

I'd also be concerned that a further comments option would open up a whole set of horrors about people talking about the original (possibly sensitive) issue in the belief that the comments are a further reply to their representative.

[MyfanwyNixon]

You are right, of course, Nick. We get a lot of mail from people who simply didn't like their MP's response.

However, I agree with Debbi, who originally handled support and who opened this ticket, that this is a major source of support mail. I don't know how long we've been replying to people to say 'we'll be looking at this soon', but that is one of the responses I inherited from her!

So, what people are contacting us about is that they feel the questionnaire gives them two options, neither of which fit their circumstances.

I suppose a third option might be worded something like "I received a response but it did not address my original issue". But one must also consider whether that's a useful addition to our own statistics, always assuming we run/publish them again (and if we don't intend to, maybe the correct action is to get rid of the questionnaire all together).

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback: "Rather than yes/no, I would prefer to pick from something like a)No response, b)Acknowledgement only, c) Form letter d) Specific response".

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback: "If the last option, ["If you feel that neither link is suitable, then please do not answer the questionnaire"] how then do you know what our thoughts really are? In my case, I got a reply from my MP but it was no reply because it was obviously just a standard form reply. I know this from other constituents who wrote to her on the same issue and got exactly the same "reply". Only the third option in my case is therefore suitable, but if I do not answer the questionnaire, how do know what my situation was. I think you should tell MPs to STOP SENDING OUT IDENTIKIT ANSWERS. This only diminishes further the public's respect for MPs and the parliamentary process."

[jacksonj04]

How about:

• Yes.
• Yes, but I don't think my question was answered.
• No, but I don't need a reply.
• No, and I expected a reply.

[MyfanwyNixon]

That seems to cover most, if not all, of the bases above. I'd expect to still get a few emails but I think this would help cut the numbers dramatically.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Add the option to give your rep a gold star:

"there was nowhere on your survey to say how good an MP can be if like mine. "

[MyfanwyNixon]

I'm adding the suggestion that we look a bit more at the wording and design of the questionnaire email. We receive a fairly large number of personal responses to this email (ie people reply to say 'no I didn't' or 'yes my MP is very good' instead of clicking the link to respond to the questionnaire).

I suggest that an email with branding and buttons rather than plain text would look more like an 'official' mail and less like one you can respond to.

I also think the more we can cut down the wording, the more people will actually read it.

Also also: hint somewhere that we don't want to see the actual reply they received.

[mhl]

This came up in IRC again just now - my suggestion was to replace "If you HAVE NOT had any reply at all, OR you have only had an acknowledgement" with two questions:

• Have you had any reply at all?
• If you did get a reply, was it just an acknowledgement?

(Presumably, since this is an email, this should be a form with checkboxes and a submit button in the HTML alternative part and the text alternative having a link to a page with the same for..)

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment: Whilst I have had a response it would be a wholly inadequate response (by email direct to me) in which I would say I have not had much more than an acknowledgement. But it was a little more than that. [...] He also said he was interested in furthering the debate. So, taking him at his word I wrote a further letter to which I have received no response whatsoever.

Your “click link” response check does not allow me to elaborate like this therefore I thought it best to email you this."

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment: "On occasions I write to my MP with a comment – not expecting a reply. I suppose you may expect a “comment noted” but as I usually get a response by post which seems a bit OTT.

So should you have an option “response not expected”?"

[MyfanwyNixon]

I just received three of these user comments in the last two days, so I went back through my recent emails to see how frequent it is. These represent all comments back to Nov '13:

"Yes, I did receive a reply from my MP, but like a good politician she never answered my question, all I got was a standard response. In cases such as these, there is no other way to inform you."

and:

"Although I received a reply from my MP, he unfortunately neither understood nor answered the actual request. Therefore it may be useful to add a question such as, "Was you reply satisfactory?""

and:

"Since there was a reply of sorts [...], but in effect was to transfer my request up the line to other functionaries, who, I have to admit, have not acknowledged receipt or interest in the matter, I am at odds to decide whether it was an acknowledgement from the Councillor, or just a nudge up the line and have done with the pest, type of reply. I will leave you to judge."

and:

"I - do - think your Questionnaire was a little vague and open to misinterpretation."

and:

"It would have been more useful whether the response from my MP was any use rather than just collect data data data ?"

and:

"I have a suggestion – when you ask us if we received a reply, please also ask us if we were satisfied or dissatisfied with the reply. If the latter, perhaps give us up to, say, 20 words / 80 characters to express why not, which you can also forward to the MP. They’ll probably read a succinct critique of that length."

and:

"I replied to your email as I did get a response from my MP. I was hoping to be asked a further question such as ‘were you satisfied with the answer’ or ‘did your MP answer the question’.

The reply I received was not related directly to my question so I was not satisfied with the response. Please do not add my response to your data base."

and:

" I just replied in the affirmative as there were only two choices on your e-mail, but given the chance I would have added that what I got back was clearly a standard letter on the subject and he hadn't really read or bothered to think about my letter individually."

and:

" The last time I sent a comment, it was one to which I did not expect reply, and it did not need one; but when I'm directed to your questionnaire to say I did not get one, I was looking for a way to say that a reply was not expected, because it was not needed.

Would be it sensible to add something along those line that so your statistics do not give a false impression?"

etc

[MyfanwyNixon]

And another one just in: "I recently sent an Information Only message to my MP, which did not require her to waste time replying. [...] You have recently, asked me if she replied. She didn’t of course, but then I didn’t need a reply. Your feedback and scoring system should reflect this."

[MyfanwyNixon]

Also in reference to #61:

Zarino has redesigned the confirmation email, and we've refined the wording together. We haven't, however, added any more options to the questionnaire, as we don't feel we can make a decision that will potentially muddy the data collected for the responsiveness survey.

I will keep a careful eye on user support mail over the next month or so to see whether the common issues with this email (eg, answering it with an email; saying that the options aren't suitable; saying they've clicked one option when the other was true) are in any way affected.

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback: "[My MP] learnt to play the system - he sends out empty responses ( or rather his staff do) because he knows that will count as having responded. However , he DOES nothing in response, just uses his free stationery, postage and secretarial help to make himself look good. So I think you need a way of finding out which MPs do exactly the same - I bet he's not the only one - and recording the fact that they may look responsive but are actually useless and determined to remain so . Sites like this help his sort and shouldn't."

[MyfanwyNixon]

" maybe you would consider putting an 'unsatisfactory response' option on your follow up questionnaire? I think it is important to know the representatives that, for instance, wilfully ignore questions or pass them off to civil servants to give you copy-paste answers of little significance. It seems that this kind of 'political' answers is putting people off as much as being ignored."

[MyfanwyNixon]

"My MP doesn't share my views or values but she always respond to any communication, even if she just toes her party line . So I would love it if there was an option to only report back if my MP DIDN'T respond to communication, which so far has never happened."

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment: "It's all well and good having the ability to write to them - but surely you could capture more information about the type of response they give - seriously non-committal in the case of mine on a range of issue -[...]

Is there any work being done to improve not just whether they reply - but to some how capture the value of their replies - otherwise it's just a polite way to tell you to **\ off to be honest - disheartening and not worth the time."

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment: "I had assumed when you said 'questionnaire' I would have some way of voicing my deep discontent in other questions. My MP did reply, but she did not address a single one of my points or comments. She basically ignored everything I said and said that if I had any concerns I could go into her office, and she had a local office for this reason. Ignoring the fact I told her I was disabled and virtually house bound. I DO NOT want such a shoddy response to appear as something in her favour. Yes I received a reply, no it was not a satisfactory response. If you can, please amend this stat to reflect the negativity I feel about the response. It would perhaps help if you added a second question as to degree of satisfaction?"

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment: "I did use your service and was pleased with it. However, the reply I received from my MP was erudite BUT it did not in anyway answer the two points that I raised with him. [..] In your satisfaction survey perhaps you could ask " has your query/questions been answered? Yes or No". This would be a good indicator if there is any life left in our democracy."

[MyfanwyNixon]

"All though I did get a reply from my MP it has so much 'spin' that it is, at best, highly misleading. Outside of politics it would be called lying through your teeth, refusing to accept responsibility for ones own actions and an attempt to re-write history! The main point was ignored but there was a side of A4 touching on peripheral matters.

 As your form stands I have to tick the box saying I got a
 reply. Unfortunately the reply was actually a waste of tax
 payers money, as explained above.

 While opinions on political matters are always going to be
 somewhat personal and therefore difficult to quantify, I wonder
 if there's some way to ask if the reply is considered as being
 an honest attempt at explanation (even if the questioner
 disagrees with what's said) or an irrelevant fudging just to
 get a reputation of replying.

 My reply from Julian Smith MP is worthy of framing and starring
 in a 'bullshit' exhibition, yet he gets a tick for 'replying'."

[MyfanwyNixon]

eventually I received an response from what i assume was a secretary who [...] says [my MP] will write to me soon [not holding my breath].

YOu might want to add a box to your survey to cover such eventualities - i think it might be very revealing!

How many people are clicking link "A" or not clicking at all when they have encountered a similar situation?

Its just a suggestion, but i do think it could be useful to you and "informatve" of the Mps

[MyfanwyNixon]

"Her reply consisted of a slice of Hansard, and she has not responded to my supplementary questions. Her response compares unfavourably to her predecessor who was prompt and pertinent. My clicking of the button "Did they reply" needs this qualification."

[MyfanwyNixon]

"I DID get a reply, but the MP basically dismissed my letter and said he didnt believe it was in the public interest to do what I was requesting.

It would be useful to have another category "did the MPs reply basically dismiss your point of view" - as otherwise, it may appear that MPs are being receptive - when they are just being arrogant ar\ holes !!!!

[MyfanwyNixon]

User feedback:

When I read your email, my first response was that I didn't need to respond as I have had no answer from the organisation that I asked my representative about. Then I reread your email and realised that you were asking only about a response from my representative. Your email, when read properly, is correct but you might give my initial thought a little consideration.

My issue is complex and if my representative is unable to get a response from the organisation, I have only one option to take: a sort of "nuclear option". Thus my first reading of your email was "coloured" by that thought. I do not think I would be unique in that.

Bear in mind that your efforts are to be lauded but really people like me just want a response from the organisation that we have an issue with; you are not primary to that.

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment:

I did receive a reply but it was from someone who works for [an organisation] not from him. The letter only contained Conservative Party policy and was impersonal and very unsatisfactory. I replied to this letter with a follow up but have received neither acknowledgement nor reply to that letter. I am writing this email as neither of the my responses fit the bill.

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment:

I always get a longish reply, but recently I get the impression that his replies are general (Syria ? Oh ! send reply 2C) replies and do not specifically answer my points. Therefore, I do acknowledge his reply in your follow-up e-mails; but there's no room to tell you if I think he specifically answered my points.

[MyfanwyNixon]

User suggestion:

How about this option for the questionnaire that might keep things simple?

Did you get a response? Yes No Were you happy with the response? Yes No

If no, please expand (15 words) max...

Or, instead of a brief reason, offer a few choices like 'useless MP' (lol)......... 'Other' reason, (I have such a dim view of our system that I can only think of this one!) So the results would still be collatable ? and we could start an MP fail chart :)

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment:

The MP replied to my e-mail, BUT NOT TO MY QUESTION ! No doubt he will go down in your database as a GOOD MP who replies to a constituents question. Whereas he DID NOT reply, he sent a standardised advertisement for the promotion of Fracking in the UK, as an answer to all Energy needs. Typical MP behaviour of NEVER answering a question. It would make more sense if instead of simply asking "Did you get a reply" you ask " Did he answer your query" ?

[MyfanwyNixon]

User comment:

I just wanted to say that although i've just clicked on your link to say my mp didnt reply to my letter re bombing syria, he did keep his constituents fully informed of his thinking during the debate and his decision via twitter and facebook and that i was quite happy with that. Maybe you should have a third option for not having a letter back but being kept informed via social media?

[MyfanwyNixon]

Your survey of which MP's are Google at replying to letters doesn't really a good guide. For example, my MP Just Tomlinsonmp is very high in the list. A recent reply from him to my wife didn't a dress the real issues raised. All she got was a paternising reply and why he can't do anything and list useless Web sites to get answers or to join a FI group. Just waste of time and he even didn't know the subject as he is also a minister of disabled but didn't even how the procedure or who to contact in the local con administrated council.

I suggest you need additional column to say how good their reply.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Have you ever considered also asking whether you were happy with the response? I feel this could be useful in tracking how well our representatives are representing our views.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I clicked the link to show I had received a reply from my MP, but would have liked a box to say whether or not I was happy with the response. The reality is I am not happy as he didn't answer the question and the legislation he quoted me is incorrect and does not apply to the issue I wrote to him about.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Your follow up email requesting if my MP had responded to my email doesn't have enough options. Yes, he sent me a letter, but it didn't answer my question. It was just a stock response that must have been written by the department involved. I don't want my MP to get good marks in your performance table for replying in this way.

[MyfanwyNixon]

My MP Maria Caulfield has a website with a page responding all the writing campaigns giving her position and an update on the current state of that. It is a very helpful way of treating a campaign, above all cost effective. The cost of writing back to everyone who writes in a campaign really was a concern to me, especially if a letter was preceded by a holding acknowledgment.

So, I could not reply to either of your requests for feedback, as this method does not fit in with either, but for me is the best way to deal with a mass campaign. That leaves the MP free to respond personally to one-off issue letters, which Maria has done to me on two occasions now, concerning medical/NHS issues which I have raised with her as nurse-to-nurse.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I didn't answer your latest survey about a letter I sent to my MP because the survey didn't offer the option "I have had a reply to the letter but not to any of the points I made in it".

[struan]

So, I could do with some copy wrangling on this. My starter for ten efforts are here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pWmWLvc4tLp2qdloB7FXnl8GrORJBNUzpWYr7sn1fLc/edit#

I am sure people can do better. ( @MyfanwyNixon / @abimysoc )

We probably also want to consider how this will effect the responsiveness stats but I would suggest that is a separate ticket.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Here's a slight variation on the usual suggestions:

I would like to make a suggestion that in your email to collect feedback after I have written to my MP, you add a third option.

Currently you ask if the MP sent a reply or only acknowledged receipt of my letter. A third option, which was the case in my situation could distinguish between a personal reply and a form letter with no salutation (i.e. no Dear ..., Hello, etc. )

I can see that we could discuss this infinitely though, if we try to encompass every single scenario. At the moment I think 'did the reply answer your question' is an adequate measure.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I note that you asked whether we had a reply from out MP but I was extremely dissatisfied in the way the whole matter was handled. [...] His answer completely ignored all my evidence and he just "rolled over " and dropped the whole thing when the council refused to acknowledge my complaints. I found this insulting and unsupportive. You do not give a "Are you Satisfied with the Result?" Button bit you should! The whole thing was a farce and my evidence was ignored.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I have noticed that when I write to my MP, I get a quick acknowledgement followed by a "canned response"- often in the form of a bland party policy statement- a few days later. If I challenge that and press my particular point I get no further response. So telling writetothem team that I had a response does not give an accurate picture. A better method would be to find out if the MP actually addressed the issue properly. A stock answer that MPs send out is no more valuable than the acknowledgement.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I wrote to my MP and confirmed he replied - from this you assume he's doing his job!!!

The fact that my MP's reply was wholly unsatisfactory and totally failed to answer any my questions seems to be irrelevant to you - it appears to you that he is doing his job??? I don't think so!

Why not include some qualitative analysis - ask me to rate the reply I received between 1 an 10 so it can be established if our representatives are actually doing more than just paying lip-service when answering questions

[MyfanwyNixon]

In the spirit of assessing whether we've 'fixed' the user support issue of people writing to say the questionnaire doesn't fit their needs, I'm just recording a user's comment.

Yes he always replies but sometimes just the party line never any action

[MyfanwyNixon]

The reply questions do not cover the case when the MP refers one's query to a minister for a better/full answer. Effectively, the MP has answered but until the minister replies a full response has not been obtained.

I suppose this is an argument for a further option: 'not yet but I'm awaiting further action'

[MyfanwyNixon]

Your questionnaire is too simplistic: My MP replied using his weekly e.mail to all consituents which is very detailed.

My response:

The core question is really whether your MP replied in a satisfactory manner for you - if you feel that he did (via whatever means) then I would click 'yes'.

[MyfanwyNixon]

I have just completed one in relation to Maria Caulfield, lewes MP, and the 'writeto them' about stopping the bombing of Alleppo.

However ticking the 'acknowledgement only' box di not convey the full nature of her responses to the wider issue of the safety of civilians affected by the Syrian conflict. it seemed to me you needed an 'other info' box to give this opportunity to the respondent.

if there had been I would have said that a week or so later she responded to individuals regarding the refugee children in Calais and pledged to work with the Local Aunthority and citizens groups to ensure all the children get here and find a place of safety.

This is to be commended in my view.

My reply as follows, but I'm recording this to show that the new questionnaire has not stopped people from writing in to query the questionnaire's suitability for their situation :(

As you may be aware, we've recently changed the questionnaire from a straight yes/no choice, in an attempt to cover more eventualities. Note that, as before, you can always return to our questionnaire email to change your vote, eg 'acknowledgement only' can be changed to 'full reply' should that come in later: the last input will always override any previous ones.

From our point of view the important thing is to be able to collect clear consistent data that informs us a) whether our service is working and b) which MPs are responding to constituents. Although it's always interesting/instructive to hear the details of individual cases, on a bulk level we need the data to be really consistent for us to be able to pull those data out.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Further to your request for information relating to whether my MP responded to my request through yourselves in relation to the cancer treatment I wish to confirm that I did indeed receive a very timely response. I would also point out that the response was very touching and personal - nothing generic about it. I hope this helps with your understanding of MP responses.

[MyfanwyNixon]

Matthew via IRC:

update the contact page to a) not ask for feedback on receiving a response...? b) add radio icon to check if they're writing about response, and say don't bother if so