SEPTEMBER - DECEMBER 2021
STAGE 2 - Establishing preferences and willingness to pay.
This stage quantifies how much customers are willing to pay for experiences they want and provides more detail on topics of interest
It aims to understand how much customers are prepared to pay for different experiences.
METHODS
• Bill simulator
6 focus groups
Online survey
• Alliance survey
• Major customer survey
OUTPUTS
Quantitative data and report that equips customer panel in Stage 3.
STAGE 2 Outcomes
We analysed the feedback to give us six key topics or ideas to delve into further with our communities as part of our second stage of engagement. We then asked people to share their preferences for additional investment on those six topics:
1. GVW to play a leadership role in the region.
2. Pressure to be increased in towns
3. An improved experience by leveraging digital technologies
4. Providing support to customers in need (vulnerable customers)
5. Carbon abatement options that deliver value to the region
6. Incorporating community amenities in the Fryers St accommodation upgrade.
In this stage we:
• established how much customers are willing to pay for the experiences they want, and
• determined how customers would like those experiences to be delivered.
We did this via our ‘Build-a-Bill’ tool. It showed how selecting different levels of investment impacted on bills for customer groups over one year and for the full five-year pricing period. Not all aspects of our pricing submission were represented in the tool – just those that we heard were valued as we were keen to know more.
Customers were also asked about their references for how experiences are delivered through our annual Water Alliance survey, that was run by Insync in October/November 2021. The Water Alliance survey canvassed the six topics above, plus customer service levels.
• six ‘Build-a-bill’ focus groups with different customer cohorts who could be impacted upon in different ways financially
• online survey – 1044 responses, 92% residential, 8% either non-residential (business) or both, not far off overall customer percentage breakdown of 90% residential, 10% non-residential
• alliance survey – additional questions included to explore preferences under each idea with 400 customers. but no distinction between residential and non-residential customers
• major customer survey – 16 customers attended an online session about the survey, 17 customers completed an online survey about following topics, identified from Stage 1 interviews: regional leadership, carbon, tradewaste, strategic partnerships, engagement
• eight phone interviews with business customers recommended by GVW staff to discuss bill simulator preferences and willingness to pay.
Who did we hear from?
We heard from customers from all walks of life; pensioners (older residents), renters, concession card holders, family homeowners, single homeowners at our focus groups. We received a fantastic response to the ‘Build-a-Bill’ survey. The balance was pretty even between men and women, and many age groups were represented. It was also great to get feedback from a range of business customers, big and small.
What did people say?
Regional leadership:
• There was no clear consensus on investment on this topic.
• Some people thought “it’s council’s job”. Others said “future is important and we all have a responsibility. We don’t want to go too far too soon, we want to dip our toe in the water”.
• Alliance survey showed that if it doesn’t cost anything, there is endorsement of GVW’s involvement in regional leadership.
• ‘Build-a-Bill’ results say three in ten don’t support or support at current level of investment, and the other seven in ten do support it – this is consistent with Stage 1 engagement findings.
Decision: Take topic to the Customer panel.
Increasing pressure in towns:
• There was strong support for this. Four in five people wanted to pay for improvements.
• Support was regardless of people’s ability to pay.
• Alliance survey showed 40% support for fixing the town with lowest water pressure first.
Decision: Progress without further deliberation.
Investment in digital technologies:
• The average survey result was between maintain and a slight improvement. It’s not very convincing.
• Focus groups revealed generational differences in preferences. Younger people agreed they could do more things from home and they “don’t want to go in the office”. Older people loved personal service, as did people who had issues to resolve.
• Overall, did not generate lots of excitement.
Decision: Do not progress at this stage. Option further in the pricing submission to decide if we want to slow it down. A good way to slow down our expenses and save some money.
Support for customers in need:
• 40% respondents didn’t want to do anything extra. But 60% of people wanted to do more.
• Concession card holder focus group was in support of this. The older group was the only group who didn’t feel we should support this. Younger families also supported doing more. There was argument that other government agencies already out there provide support.
Decision: Take topic to the customer panel.
Carbon emissions abatement project options:
• Even when confronted with costs, 78% of people said yes when asked about support for investment in projects that created local benefits in the ‘Build-a-Bill’ survey. When there were no costs (in the Alliance survey) the support was well over 78%.
• Many focus group participants wanted to see local benefits - jobs, regional support. Focus groups said that this “obviously comes with a cost, but we can’t NOT do this”. But there were also people who said that customers should not have to pay for more for these projects.
Decision: Take topic to the customer panel.
Office upgrade:
• 53% said no to community amenities in survey.
• If 53% of people don’t want it, do we have a right to charge them for it anyway?
• Focus groups were divided over this. Education was important, but do we need to deliver this at the office in Shepparton?
• There are other ways we can support community by using existing resources and facilities e.g. La Trobe community hub.
Decision: Do not progress - we shouldn’t be asking customers to pay for this.