2008 Canadian Intellectual Property Office WEB/E-Services Satisfaction Survey

Branch and Directorate

Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO)

Background

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), a special operating agency of Industry Canada, is responsible for administering Canada’s system on intellectual property (IP) rights, namely patents, trade-marks, copyrights, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies.

Specifically, CIPO receives and examines applications for IP rights; grants and registers IP rights; and administers their renewal, assignment and transfer. CIPO’s primary clients are applicants for IP protection, agents representing those applicants, users of the IP system and the Canadian business community

Anticipated Outcomes / Benefits

The purpose of this research was to measure current satisfaction levels among users of CIPO’s website, detect features of CIPO’s website that require improvement, and identify newly emerging needs. In trying to reach its objective of improving products, services and processes in areas of highest priority to clients, CIPO wanted to identify specific areas where improvements to the information available and the functionality of the website could be made.

Research Information

The web survey was launched in August 2008, was closed during the writ period, and resumed in November 2008. The survey was completed January 13, 2009. In total 3247 respondents completed the 10-minute survey. The questionnaire was designed in conjunction with quotas to ensure that the survey yielded a representative sample of CIPO’s website users. The survey was developed, designed and programmed in-house using Voxco survey software.

2008 CIPO Web/E-Services Satisfaction Survey

Summary of Findings: 2008 CIPO Web/E-Services Satisfaction Survey

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO)

March 19, 2009

Contents

• 1. Background information
• 2. Objective
• 3. Methodology and approach
• 3.1. Data analysis
  • 3.1.1 Cross tabulation
  • 3.1.2 Correlation analysis
  • 3.1.3 Cluster analysis
• 4. Website users and usage
  • 4.1 Information related tasks carried out via CIPO’s website
  • 4.2 Satisfaction with information related tasks
• 5. Website information
  • 5.1 Organization
  • 5.2 Functionality
  • 5.3 Overall look of the website
• 6. Databases
  • 6.1 Databases
  • 6.2 Database satisfaction summary
• 7. Online transactions
  • 7.1 Online transactions for product lines
  • 7.2 Evaluation of online services
  • 7.3 Satisfaction with online services
• 8. Online transactions with foreign IPOs
• 9. Trade-mark specific services
• 10. New services
  • 10.1 Online training
• 11. Evaluation of CIPO’s website
  • 11.1 CIPO compared to other businesses
  • 11.2 CIPO compared to other IPOs
  • 11.3 Overall Satisfaction with CIPO’s website
• 12. Additional analysis
  • 12.1 Correlation analysis
  • 12.2 Cluster analysis
• 13. Next steps
• Appendix A
  • Questionnaire

1. Background information

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO), a special operating agency of Industry Canada, is responsible for administering Canada’s system on intellectual property (IP) rights, namely patents, trade-marks, copyrights, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies.

Specifically, CIPO receives and examines applications for IP rights; grants and registers IP rights; and administers their renewal, assignment and transfer. CIPO’s primary clients are applicants for IP protection, agents representing those applicants, users of the IP system and the Canadian business community.

CIPO has adopted the following five strategic priorities for its renewed 2007-2012 Strategic Plan:

• To improve products, services and processes in areas of highest priority to clients, while supporting the greater public good;
• To ensure that a large proportion of Canadian creators and innovators understand IP and use it effectively to enhance their innovation capabilities and acquire competitive advantage in the marketplace;
• To improve IP (administrative) policy to benefit Canadians;
• To contribute to the improvement of the worldwide IP system and to benefit Canadians, through influencing international IP administrative policies and practices, and sharing and acquiring best practices business intelligence.

Previous surveys conducted by CIPO indicated that clients prefer to contact CIPO via the web and from year to year the number of clients who use CIPO’s web services is increasing. As a result, CIPO conducted an online survey to help understand clients’ online experience and improve its web-based information, products and electronic services.

2. Objective

The purpose of this research was to measure current satisfaction levels among users of CIPO’s website, detect features of CIPO’s website that require improvement, and identify newly emerging needs. In trying to reach its objective of improving products, services and processes in areas of highest priority to clients, CIPO wanted to identify specific areas where improvements to the information available and the functionality of the website could be made.

3. Methodology and approach

This survey was an adaptation of the 2005 web survey. To improve on the validity of the previous survey, this survey was made available to CIPO website users in the form of an interstitial page. In the previous survey, selected CIPO clients were sent an email invite to take the survey. The methodology for the 2008 survey insured that respondents had recently used the site, thus avoiding respondents having to recall their online interaction with CIPO months after they visited the website Further, almost half of the respondents in the 2005 survey were pre-screened and recruited. As a result, the survey was not representative of the CIPO client population. The survey methodology used in this survey was designed to address this problem.

The questionnaire was designed in conjunction with quotas to ensure that the survey yielded a representative sample of CIPO’s website users. The survey was developed, designed and programmed in-house using Voxco survey software. The survey was pre-tested for flow, structure and language

The web survey was launched in August 2008, was closed during the writ period, and resumed in November 2008. The survey was completed January 13, 2009. In total 3247 respondents completed the 10-minute survey.

3.1. Data analysis

Our analytical approach involved three phases to identify areas where potential service improvement may be required and to identify key drivers of overall website satisfaction. Our analysis also undertook a step to categorize unique groups of website users.

• Phase 1 – Cross tabulation
• Phase 2 – Cluster analysis
• Phase 3 – Correlation analysis

3.1.1 Cross tabulation

Cross tabulation of the sample was performed to identify possible differences across website user types, frequency of usage, and type of usage (i.e., search a database, download a form, file an application etc.). Although this method did identify a handful of variable differences, only user type provided any real differentiation between the variables. Overall cross tabulation was not very prolific — few significant statistical differences were observed. As a result of this initial analysis, further steps were taken to examine the data through different statistical procedures.

3.1.2 Correlation analysis

Correlational analysis was conducted to identify drivers of overall website satisfaction. Ideally a regression analysis would have been completed, but due to the nature of the data a regression analysis was not possible. A regression would have allowed us to add predicting capabilities to our analysis. Although, correlation does not allow for the identification of the independent and dependent variables, we were able to use correlations to identify relationships between variables and overall website satisfaction.

3.1.3 Cluster analysis

A k-means cluster analysis was performed to identify different groups of website users. This procedure attempts to identify relatively homogeneous groups of cases based on selected characteristics, using an algorithm that can handle large numbers of cases. Due to the data considerations of our sample this procedure was the best option to identify groups.

Cluster analysis produced three distinct groups of website users that we have defined as:

1. Novice – indifferent to levels of service, information and functionality
2. Experienced – dissatisfied – dissatisfied with levels of service, information and functionality
3. Experienced – satisfied – satisfied with levels of service, information and functionality

These groups will be examined and explained later in this paper.

4. Website users and usage

To get a sense of the type of users of CIPO’s website, respondents were asked to describe themselves. Most respondents were individuals (34%) followed by companies (33%) or agents/law firms (19%) (Table 1).

A majority of respondents (50%) visited the website at least once a month, with 27% visiting the website more than once a week in the twelve-month period preceding the survey. A comparison with the 2005 results indicates a decrease from 62% in 2005 to 50% in 2008 in the number of respondents who visited the website at least once a month; however, this is likely the result of the difference in methodology. Most respondents from the 2005 survey were recruited from a list of website users; as a result they were more likely to have visited the CIPO website more frequently.

Overall, the website visitation pattern of respondents varied from more than once a week (27%) to once a year (21%), Chart 1. Naturally, agents were likely to visit the website more frequently; 64% of agents reported visiting the website more than once a week (Table 2).

Chart 1: Frequency of website visits

Respondents tended to use CIPO’s website to search for information (87%) rather than to conduct a transaction (26%). Not surprisingly, agents (45%) and lawyers/law firms (38%) were more likely to use the website to conduct a transaction. All groups (individuals, companies, agents, lawyers, governments, educational institutions) were more or less highly likely to have used the website to search for information (Table 3).

4.1 Information related tasks carried out via CIPO’s website

Of the tasks performed on CIPO’s website, respondents were most likely to have searched a database (73%), consulted a publication (33%), downloaded a form (29%), visited the “Learn about IP” page (28%) or visited the “Other website links” page (13%), Chart 2. Results for 2005 are provided for information purposes only as the methodology differs too much to draw comparisons (Chart 2).

Chart 2: Website tasks

Respondents who stated that they consulted or downloaded a publication in the past twelve months were asked to identify which ones they had used. Individuals were more likely to have used IP guides (50%), the Trade-marks Journal (46%), the Canadian Patent Office Record (37%) or the Manual of Patent Office Practice (27%), Chart 3.

Chart 3: Publications downloaded or consulted

It is interesting to note that organizations (67%) and educational institutions (63%) were more likely to have consulted the IP guides. It appears that educational institutions were more likely to have consulted publications that provided general information such as “What’s in a name?” (27%) and IP tutorials (33%). Agents were more likely to consult publications that were more task specific such as the Trade-marks Journal (57%), the Canadian Patent Office Record (41%) and the Manual of Patent Office Practice (40%).

4.2 Satisfaction with information related tasks

Satisfaction levels with the various information related tasks range from high (75%) to moderate (61%), Table 4. Respondents were most likely to be satisfied with consulting/downloading a publication (75%), searching a database (72%) and downloading a form (70%). Respondents were likely to be moderately satisfied with the “News Room” page (61%), and the “Consultation and Discussion” page (61%).

Only groups with a sufficient sample size are identified, groups with a small sample size were not included in this chart (i.e., law firms, governments and organizations)

Comparisons made between the groups indicate that agents (83%) are more satisfied with the “Other websites links” page, while individuals (56%) are least satisfied with this page. Just over half of Individuals (56%) and companies (55%) are satisfied with the “Consultation and Discussion” page, however agents (70%) are more likely to be satisfied with this information task. Agents (68%) and individuals (67%) are least likely to be satisfied with searching a database than companies (75%) and educational institutions (75%), Table 3.

5. Website information

Those surveyed were asked a series of questions regarding the organization and functionality of CIPO’s website, along with their opinion on the overall look of CIPO’s website.

5.1 Organization

Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with a series of statements that related to the organization of website information. Individuals were asked to respond on a 5-point agreement scale where 1 means disagree and 5 means agree.

Chart 4: Organization and information

Although a majority agrees that the information is easy to understand (65%), accurate (65%) and organized consistently (63%) there is room for improvement. Only slight majorities agree that the information is complete (57%) and it is easy to find what they are looking for (55%). Again, 2005 numbers are provided for information purposes only, although some year after year comparisons look plausible, it is most likely due to coincidence.

Chart 5: Satisfaction with information

Overall satisfaction with the information available on CIPO’s website is moderate, 62% of respondents are satisfied (Chart 5). Companies (69%) and agents (66%) were more satisfied than individuals (54%).

5.2 Functionality

Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with a series of statements that related to website functionality. Agreement levels varied greatly between statements.

Chart 6: Functionality of website

Most respondents were likely to agree that web pages displayed in a reasonable amount of time (72%). Those surveyed were least likely to agree that communications for website interruptions were easy to understand (32%) and that communications for service interruptions were timely (28%), Chart 6.

With respect to service interruptions, agents seem to be somewhat more pleased with the communications for service interruptions than individuals. Agents were more likely to agree that the website interruptions were easier to understand (46%) than individuals (26%). Agents (40%) were also more likely to agree that communications for service interruptions were more timely than individuals (23%). Even though agents are somewhat more pleased with the communications for (40%) website interruptions than other groups, their ratings are still low.

Chart 7: Satisfaction with website functionality

Overall satisfaction with the functionality of CIPO’s website is moderate, 63% of respondents are satisfied (Chart 7). Law firms (75%) and companies (70%) were more satisfied than individuals (53%).

5.3 Overall look of the website

Almost 7 in 10 (69%) of respondents felt that the overall look of CIPO’s website was good, while only 7% felt that it was poor (Chart 8).

Chart 8: Look of CIPO’s website

Individuals (64%) were least likely to rate the look of CIPO’s website as good; Companies (75%) were most likely to rate the look of CIPO’s website as good. Companies were also slightly more likely to give a rating of excellent (21%) than the average (17%).

6. Databases

Respondents were asked to identify which database they had used in the past 12 months. Next, they were asked to rate the databases they had used against a series of questions, followed by their overall satisfaction with the database.

Most of the respondents had used the Trade-mark (67%) and Patent (59%) databases, followed at a distance by the Copyright (26%) and Industrial design databases (21%), Chart 9.

Chart 9: Database usage

6.1 Databases

At a glance, respondents appear relatively happy with CIPO’s online databases. Most database users are likely to agree with the statements regarding database attributes. Respondents who have used the Trade-marks database are more likely to agree with statements about database attributes compared to Industrial design database users.

In general, a strong majority agrees that they are able to find what they are looking for, this is especially true for trade-marks (77%), patents (71%), copyrights (70%), and to a lesser extent industrial designs (65%), Table 5.

Although, the database attributes received moderately high agreement scores, agents are least likely to agree with the statements — this is true across product lines.

6.2 Database satisfaction summary

Overall, respondents are most satisfied with the Trade-marks database. This is not surprising given that the Trade-marks database received the highest attribute ratings. Respondents are least satisfied with the Industrial designs database — again this corresponds with the low attribute ratings given to the Industrial designs database.

Just over two-thirds are satisfied with the Patent (68%) and Copyright (67%) databases (Chart 10).

Chart 10: Satisfaction summary

7. Online transactions

In this section of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the type of intellectual property they conducted an online transaction and the frequency.

Chart 11: Online transactions

A third (33%) of respondents had conducted a trade-mark transaction online, 21% a patent transaction, 13% a copyright transaction, 3% an industrial design transaction and only 1% conducted a transaction for an integrated circuit topography (Chart 11). Surprisingly, 30% of respondents did not know which type of intellectual property they last conducted a transaction for online. One possible explanation is that individuals are involved with more than one type of intellectual property and are unsure of which product they were in contact with last.

Individuals conducting transactions online for trade-marks did so more frequently compared to copyright and industrial design transactions. For instance, individuals were more likely to conduct more than one transaction a week for trade-marks (32%). Individuals conducting transactions for patents (17%), industrial designs (10%) and copyrights (0%) were least likely to conduct a transaction once a week. Industrial design (41%) and copyright (39%) transactions were mostly likely to be conducted on a yearly basis (Chart 12).

Chart 12: Frequency of online transactions.

Due to the small sample size on this question and subsequent large margin of error, group specific (agent, company, individual) analysis was not performed.

7.1 Online transactions for product lines

Respondents, who previously mentioned that they conducted an online transaction, were asked to identify which online service they had used.

The most commonly used online service was filing an application. Individuals were most likely to have filed for a trade-mark (74%) online followed by an industrial design (51%), a copyright (33%) and a patent (28%), Table 6.

The second most commonly used service varied between the product lines. Trade-mark and patent clients were likely to pay fees. Copyright and industrial design clients were likely to make a general enquiry or publication request.

Due to the small sample size on this question and subsequent large margin of error, a product line (patent, trade-mark, copyright, industrial design) by group specific (agent, company, individual) analysis was not performed.

7.2 Evaluation of online services

Respondents, who previously mentioned that they conducted an online transaction, were asked to identify which online service they had used.

In general, respondents are generally pleased with online registration and renewal, agent registration renewal, online payment, and online application filing. Respondents are likely to agree that these tasks can be performed easily, securely, with the necessary instruction and the transaction meets their needs. All of these tasks received high agreement scores ranging in the mid-seventies to low eighties (Table 7).

Tasks such as ordering IP documents, job application and general enquiries and publication requests received moderate agreement ratings.

Respondents are less pleased with avenues for communicating back to CIPO via the website. Submitting feedback and reporting technical problems received low agreement scores across all the attributes. In particular, respondents feel that when submitting feedback online the feature does not meet their needs (49%) — this is also the case for reporting technical problems (51%).

7.3 Satisfaction with online services

Next, respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the online transaction they performed on CIPO’s website.

Not surprisingly, respondents were more satisfied with IP registration renewal (76%), agent registration renewal (74%), fee payment (73%), and online filing (72%). These areas received higher attribute ratings in the previous section.

Conversely, areas that received lower attribute ratings, received low satisfaction scores such as submitting feedback (51%) and reporting a technical problem (49%). In fact these areas had the highest proportion of respondents being dissatisfied (Table 8).

Respondents were moderately satisfied with the online job application process (65%), and ordering IP documents (62%).

Only groups with a sufficient sample size are identified, groups with a small sample size were not included in this chart (i.e., law firms, governments, educational institutions and organizations)

When comparing satisfaction levels between groups some interesting items emerge. Individuals are less satisfied than agents and companies when paying a fee online and filing an application (Table 9). An argument could be made that agents and companies are more familiar with the undertaking and it is familiarity that leads to satisfaction.

However, individuals are slightly more satisfied than agents with ordering IP documents and making a general enquiry/publication request (Table 9). The case could be made that individuals are simply looking for general information and are pleased with what they receive. Whereas agents might be looking for specific documents and information and thus are not pleased with the information they received.

8. Online transactions with foreign IPOs

In this section of the survey, respondents were asked if they applied for IP protection with a foreign intellectual property office (IPO), the type of IP they applied for and the location of the filing.

Chart 13: Filed online for IP outside of Canada

Results indicate that three-quarters of respondents did not file online for IP outside of Canada. Only 14% of respondents have filed online for IP outside of Canada (Chart 13). This was made up of mainly agents (34%) and law firms (26%).

Organizations (89%) and individuals (83%) were least likely to apply online. It is important to note that this question only specifies if an online application was made. It is not to say that these groups are less likely to file for IP protection with a foreign IPO — they could have filed through other avenues rather than online.

Chart 14: Type of online application with a foreign IPO

Those 14% who did file online for IP protection outside of Canada were most likely to apply for a trade-mark (62%) and to a lesser degree a patent (44%). Another 13% filed for a copyright, and only 9% applied for IP protection for an industrial design (Chart 14).

With regards to the location, respondents whether filing for a trade-mark (85%), patent (82%), copyright (67%) or industrial design (64%) were most likely to have filed in the United States (Table 10).

After isolating online applications filed in the United States, intriguing divides appear between the product lines. Patents and trade-marks are most likely to be filed in Europe and Australia, while copyrights and industrial designs are most likely to be filed in Asia. In fact, for copyrights, Asia is the second most likely location of online filing after the United States.

9. Trade-mark specific services

Since a good proportion of CIPO’s clients are trade-mark filers, a section asking trade-mark specific questions was presented to respondents to gauge their awareness of available online options.

Over a majority of trade-mark filers (57%) were aware that they can respond online to an examiner’s report office action using the revised form. Of those who are aware, 87% are likely to respond this way (Chart 15).

Chart 15: Online examiners’ reports

Those respondents who were aware of the option to respond online to an examiner’s report office action, but who did not, cite the following reasons for not responding online:

• It’s their first application – 17%
• They get a confirmation using the paper form – 17%
• It’s simpler/easier to respond using paper form – 13%
• It’s less difficult and less confusing to use paper form – 7%

Most respondents were unable to explain why they had not responded online to the examiner’s report office action (43%).

10. New services

Respondents were asked to rate the importance of possible new services that CIPO could offer in the future.

Chart 16: New services

Most respondents believe online file access, including the ability to view status of applications or requests submitted, office actions and correspondence, due dates etc. (69%) as the most important potential new service. However, the majority of respondents rated all options provided as important, online self-service (58%), two-way electronic communication between client and CIPO (57%), online fee payments (57%), enhancement to electronic filing capability (56%), client notifications by email (54%) and electronic transmission of evidence for trademark oppositions and/or patent appeals (52%), Chart 16.

Only groups with a sufficient sample size are identified, groups with a small sample size were not included in this chart (i.e., law firms, governments, educational institutions and organizations).

Agents (84%) and companies (70%) are more likely than individuals (60%) to view online file access as an important potential new service. As well, agents (74%) and companies (63%) are more likely than individuals (51%) to feel that an online self-service for CIPO transaction would be an important potential new service (Table 11).

Further, agents (70%) are more likely to find an enhanced online payment process an important prospective new service.

10.1 Online training

In addition to asking respondents what new services they would like, this survey also asked what online training materials would be of interest to respondents.

Chart 17: Online training

More respondents (32%) are interested in webinars, followed by message boards/forms (26%), video/podcasts (24%), blogs (17%) and wikis (16%). Over a quarter (27%) said they don’t know what they would be interested in and 16% said they are not interested in any online training material (Chart 17).

Agents were more likely to find webinars (42%), message boards/forms (31%), and blogs (22%) useful. Individuals were more likely to find video/podcasts (27%) useful.

11. Evaluation of CIPO’s website

In this section respondents were asked to compare CIPO’s online services to those of other businesses and intellectual property offices. This comparison would help provide context to the overall satisfaction ratings given by respondents.

11.1 CIPO compared to other businesses

CIPO does not rate better than other institutions and business. When asked how CIPO’s online services compare to those of other institutions and businesses, CIPO did not fare well. In fact, only 22% of respondents felt that CIPO’s services were better than the online services of other institutions and businesses (Chart 18).

Of note, agents (28%) were more likely to say CIPO’s online services were worse than other online services they have used compared to companies (13%) and individuals (8%). In addition, respondents who reported they visited CIPO’s website at least once a week were more likely to say CIPO’s online services were worse (25%) than those of other businesses they have used.

Chart 18: CIPO compared to other businesses

Although CIPO does not appear to provide online services better than other institutions or business, there is room for optimism. Almost a quarter (23%) of respondents rated CIPO’s online services the same as other institutions and businesses. It is also interesting to note that a large number of respondents (44%) answered, “don’t know” when asked how CIPO compared to other institutions and businesses.

11.2 CIPO compared to other IPOs

CIPO did not fare much better when compared to other intellectual property offices (IPOs). Only a quarter (29%) said that CIPO’s online services were better than other IPOs. Another 37% said that CIPO’s online service was worse than those offered by other IPOs (Chart 19).

Chart 19: CIPO compared to other IPOs

Of note, agents (67%) were by far most likely to say CIPO’s online services were worse than other IPOs compared to companies (26%) and individuals (18%). In addition, respondents who reported they visited CIPO’s website at least once a week were more likely to say CIPO’s online services were worse (59%) than those of other IPOs they have used.

11.3 Overall Satisfaction with CIPO’s website

All respondents were asked to indicate their overall satisfaction with CIPO’s website on a five-point scale where 1 means very dissatisfied and five means very satisfied.

In general, overall satisfaction with CIPO’s website is low (49%). While19% were neutral, only 10% said they were dissatisfied. There were a sizeable proportion of respondents (22%) who said they did not know how satisfied they were with CIPO’s website (Chart 20).

Chart 20: Satisfaction with CIPO’s website

Agents (62%) and companies (58%) were more likely to be satisfied than individuals (41%).

It is not surprising that individuals who rated CIPO’s online services as better than other business were more likely to be satisfied with CIPO’s website (76%). As well, individuals who rated CIPO’s online services as better than other IPO’s were more likely to be satisfied with CIPO’s website (69%).

In addition, respondents who visited CIPO’s website more frequently were least likely to be satisfied (35%) compared to the average (49%).

12. Additional analysis

Additional analysis was performed to maximize the results and gain as much information as possible about the users of CIPO’s website.

12.1 Correlation analysis

A correlation analysis was performed to discover how elements of online service related to overall website satisfaction. Although, correlation does not allow for the identification of the independent and dependent variables, we were able to use correlations to identify relationships between variables and overall website satisfaction.

Chart 21: Correlational analysis

Analysis identified three variables that were highly correlated with overall website satisfaction:

• Satisfaction with website functionality
• Satisfaction with online application process, and
• Satisfaction with online enquiries and/or publication requests

Correlational analysis does not indicate whether these variables cause website satisfaction or if website satisfaction causes satisfaction with functionality, the application process, and online enquiries/publication requests. However, it is clear from the strength of the relationship that these variables play an important part in clients’ satisfaction with CIPO’s website.

12.2 Cluster analysis

A k-means cluster analysis was performed to identify different groups of website users. This procedure indicates that there were three distinct groups of CIPO clients that were visiting CIPO’s website and using online services:

• Novice – indifferent (n=1214)
• Experienced – dissatisfied (n=649), and
• Experienced – satisfied (n=1056)

The novice – indifferent group is a mix of respondents, both filers and those just looking for information. They have a limited degree of international filing experience mostly for trade-marks and to a lesser extent patents. Although they are likely to give slightly higher than the average satisfaction scores, they are the most likely of the three clusters to give the highest “middle” ratings or 3 on a scale of 1 to 5. The characteristics of this group are:

• Most likely to visit the website to search for information
• Likely to visit the website to search a database, and visit the “Learn about IP” page
• Have some international filing experience
• Moderately satisfied with the information available and the functionality of CIPO’s website. Most likely to give the highest “middle” ratings or 3 on a scale of 1 to 5.
• More likely to have used the trade-marks and patents databases, but not as much as the other two clusters
• Are almost as likely to say CIPO’s services are better or the same as other IPOs and businesses they have used

This group appears to be composed of mainly novice filers that have not yet had enough experience with CIPO and/or IP to draw a firm conclusion about CIPO’s website. Their lack of other IPOs for comparison, and less than frequent use of the website, could explain their higher than average rating of CIPO’s website.

The experienced – dissatisfied group appears to be comprised of individuals who are more than likely patent and trade-mark filers who are dissatisfied with all aspects of CIPO’s online services and website. Their dissatisfaction seems to be warranted as they interact with CIPO via the website (filing, ordering documents and paying fees). As well, they have international filing experience and are able to compare CIPO to international IPOs. However, this group is by far more likely to be comparing CIPO to the USPTO than other IPOs, i.e., UK, Australia, Europe, Asia. The characteristics of this group are:

• Very likely to be familiar with CIPO’s annual report and business plan
• Likely to be an international filer for patents and trade-marks in the USA
• More likely to have completed online transactions for patents and trademarks
• Least satisfied with the information available and the functionality of CIPO’s website. In particular they do not think it’s “easy to find the information they are looking for.” This is cause for concern because from their profile, they appear to be experienced filers and presumably know what they are looking for
• Most likely to have ordered IP documents and paid fees for patents and to a lesser extent trade-marks
• Do not think transactions of any type are “easy”
• Are more inclined to say that CIPO’s services are “worse” (59%) than other IPOs they have used, and other businesses (34%)

One could assume that this group is more knowledgeable about IP and CIPO based on some of its characteristics.

This group is more than likely comparing CIPO’s services to the USPTO for patents and trade-marks and CIPO is not measuring up. This comparison may have a role to play in its overall low satisfaction rating of CIPO’s website (17%).

The last cluster is defined as experienced – satisfied. This group consists mainly of intermediate to professional level trade-mark and copyright filers. A good proportion of this group are international filers (not including the USA). They are satisfied with all aspects of CIPO’s online services and website. The characteristics of this group are:

• Appear to be international filers for trade-marks and copyrights in the UK, Australia, and Europe
• Are very satisfied with the information available and the functionality of CIPO’s website
• Most likely to have filed an application, renewed agent registration, and made a publication request
• This group was very satisfied with all aspects of CIPO’s website (high 80’s to 90’s), however they were less likely to be satisfied with CIPO’s online feedback (75%)
• Are most likely to say that CIPO’s services are “better or the same” (76%) as other IPOs they have used, and “better or the same” (70%) as other businesses they have used

This cluster is more than likely comparing CIPO’s services to the UK, Australian and other European trade-mark and copyright offices and CIPO is providing similar or better products and services than their “European” counterparts. One could argue copyright filers are generally more satisfied (previous national surveys); however, due to the small numbers in this survey, we do not think this is influencing results. Generally, this group is the most satisfied (86%) with CIPO’s website.

The three groups labelled as “Novice - indifferent”, “Experienced - dissatisfied” and “Experienced - satisfied” have varying levels of satisfaction with CIPO’s website. For instance, the “Experienced - satisfied group” (86%) is the most satisfied, followed by the “Novice - indifferent group” (62%), and the “Experienced - dissatisfied group” (17%) is the least satisfied with CIPO’s website. Overall satisfaction with site is 49%.

These clusters provide insight into the differences of CIPO’s clients. When making improvements and changes to the website CIPO should be aware of the different groups of clients that will be making use of the service and create information with this in mind.

13. Next steps

Results from the research will be reviewed by CIPO. Priorities will be established based on a review of the survey results and discussions.

It is expected that new technology to be brought in through CIPO’s Enterprise Business Renewal (EBR) initiative will have an impact on the satisfaction with the transactional online services involving an IP application on CIPO’s website. EBR is a transformation exercise at CIPO to improve operational processes and enable e-business. CIPO’s approach is to maintain what already works well and use EBR to bridge the gap between our current state today with older technology and older processes to our future state with more efficient tools and e-services for both our staff and clients.

The first area of focus is the development and implementation of an Enterprise Portal. This will provide a modernized platform for e-service offerings and allow for a single point of access to products and services within a secure environment on our website. The other area of focus is an Integrated Client and Case Management Solution (ICCMS), which will enable improvements to CIPO’s management of client information, interactions and case files. Together, the Enterprise Portal and ICCMS provide the potential for a common front-end to all of our e-services and will allow for improved tracking of client interactions and correspondence. In turn, this will enhance CIPO’s ability to effectively manage client relationships and to respond more quickly to emerging client trends.

Lastly, an important aspect in all of this work on the Enterprise Portal and ICCMS is to effectively engage CIPO’s clients in the adoption of these new technologies by CIPO. This will be achieved by using change management approaches and best practices during the planning through to implementation stages in order to ensure clients’ needs and requirements are included. Some of these approaches will include soliciting clients for further input during key stages of work; working with clients to test prototypes and systems before release; and supporting clients to use the new technology by offering targeted learning and orientation techniques.