PHASE IV LONG-RANGE PLAN ACTION ITEMS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 16, 2008
• Sequence Number: 25
• Publication Date: September 8, 1983
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025 7
ROUTING AND RECORD SHEET
SUBJECT: (Optional)
Phase IV Long-Range Plan Action Items
FROM:
EXTENSION
NO.
ODP-83-1253
Chief, Management Staff, ODP
DATE
8 S
b
t
1983
ep
em
er
TO: (Officer designation, room number, and
building)
DATE
OFFICER'S
COMMENTS (Number each comment to show from whom
RECEIVED
FORWARDED
INITIALS
to whom. Draw a line across column after each comment.)
1.
DDA Plans Officer
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
FORM 1 O USE PREVIOUS
1-79 EDITIONS
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85BO1152R000901240025-7
uu/A Registry
STAT
SIAI
 DD/A Registry
dJ-f//5`U /,
ODP-83-1253
8 September 1983
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
Chief, Management Staff, ODP
SUBJECT: Phase IV Long-Range Plan Action Items
REFERENCES: A. Memorandum for D/ODP, frm DDA, dtd
26 January 1983, Same Subject,
(DD/A-83-0140/7) (ODP-83-155)
B. Memorandum for D/ODP, frm DDS&T (via
DDA), dtd 4 August 1983, Subj:
Recommendations for Improving ADP Service
to DDS&T, (DDS&T-640-83) (DD/A 83-1988)
(ODP-83-1160)
1. Reference A tasks ODP "to conduct a general review and
report on ... performance ... in response to customer
requests." This Office has chosen to perform a survey of user
satisfaction in response to the DDA's tasking. Due to time and
resource limitations, an abbreviated survey was performed. We
cannot, for certain, say that the results are fully
representative of our user base. A more extensive formal
survey would be required to ascertain user perceptions in a
scientifically valid fashion. Based on preliminary results, we
believe the approach is valuable and we plan such a large
survey in the near future. In the meantime, we wish to share
with you the user perceptions collected in our survey.
Fortuitously, we are also in receipt of the results of a
separate survey of DDS&T ADP Control Officers performed by the
DDS&T staff. The second half of this memorandum discusses this
DDS&T survey. Finally, in addition to the highlights of the
ODP survey presented in the memorandum, the attachment provides
a complete summary of the salient survey results. We think the
results of both the ODP and DDS&T surveys are very interesting
and address many of the concerns discussed in the DDA's
memorandum.
2. Our general conclusion from the ODP survey is that
user satisfaction is relatively high. We sent out 103
questionnaires and received 74 responses. The percent of
survey respondents satisfied was in the low 90's for our key
central services, VM and Batch. OCR services and GIMS scored
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
STAT
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
SUBJECT: Phase IV Long-Range Plan Action Items
less well, with an 81 percent and 60 percent overall
satisfaction level, respectively. Both, however, did
relatively well with respect to two key components of overall
satisfaction, response time and availability. OCR respondents
were over 90 percent satisfied in both categories, and GIMS
respondents' satisfaction level was in the high 80's. (The
attachment provides more precise definitions of
"satisfaction.") The follow-on survey will be used to learn
more about the OCR and GIMS shortfall in overall satisfaction.
3. Satisfaction with major ODP software packages was also
generally high. For example, overall satisfaction was in the
mid-90's (percent of respondents) for AIM, RAMIS, and SCRIPT,
which are, respectively, ODP's electronic mail, data base
management, and mainframe text editing/document preparation
system. Statistical packages, however, fared less well, with
overall satisfaction in the 55-70 percent range. We did not
obtain the detailed information in the preliminary survey that
would explain these lower rankings, but can speculate that the
inherent complexity of statistical packages is related to their
relatively lower satisfaction level.
4. The user survey also addressed ODP support in the
areas of consulting, documentation, trouble reporting, and
training. Over 85 percent of respondents found ODP consulting
support adequate or better. Similarly, 80 percent found ODP's
main vehicle for user communications, Tech Notes, "Usually" or
"Always" understandable. Overall, 90 percent of respondents
were "Generally Satisfied" with information published or made
available by ODP.
5. Almost 95 percent of survey respondents were
"Generally Satisfied" with Trouble Desk performance. Finally,
for Agency (not just ODP) ADP training, slightly over
75 percent of respondents were "Generally Satisfied." The
latter figure is clearly not high enough and we need
clarification on the sources of the user dissatisfaction.
6. In general, the Office is pleased with these
preliminary results. On the whole, they indicate a generally
positive user evaluation of our efforts, with only a few
exceptions. We plan on acquiring more detailed information in
future surveys to better understand the problem areas.
7. A second source of data providing a user evaluation of
ODP services is Reference B. In Reference B, Mr. Hineman, the
Deputy Director for Science and Technology, provided the
results of a survey by his staff of DDS&T ADP Control
ADMINISTRATIVE-INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
SUBJECT: Phase IV Long-Range Plan Action Items
Officers. The DDS&T survey surfaced two major concerns: delay
in applications development, and difficulty in "tracing
requirements within ODP." (An additional concern was
the DDS&T's desire to have ODP staff the ORD computer center,
but that is a unique resource problem.) Overall, however, the
DDS&T reported "frequent users of ODP services report excellent
service."
8. We are, of course, aware of and concerned about delays
in applications development for the DDS&T and other
components. In fact, one of this Office's strategic objectives
is to "Expedite Systems Development." We are looking for
solutions to this problem, but, frankly, do not expect any
quick or easy answers. New technology (e.g., the NOMAD2
database management system) will be helpful. Additional
resources will also be required. With respect to the DDS&T's
problem of requirements tracking, we plan to make improvements
in this area by establishing a Requirements Management
Organization in Applications at the start of FY 1984.
9. In summary, the preliminary feedback is encouraging.
I foresee using surveying as a source of data for our
continuing planning efforts. Our goal, of course, is to
improve user satisfaction through reallocation of resources and
management adjustments to mitigate any identified deficiencies
or areas of weak performance. /
Attachment: a/s
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
STAT
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85BO1152R000901240025-7
Attachment
Results of an ODP Survey on User Satisfaction
Introduction
1. In late May of 1983, ODP initiated a preliminary
survey of customer satisfaction. This inital effort was
admittedly unsophisticated, and the sample was not
scientifically chosen. The purpose of the effort was to get
some feedback on the utility of the survey technique to judge
customer views on office performance, and to get information
useful in designing a follow-on survey. This planned follow-on
will be a more sophisticated instrument, which will be sent to
a larger and more representative sample of ODP users.
2. ODP sent out 103 questionnaires as part of its
preliminary survey. Seventy-four responses were received. We
found the results very interesting. We do not claim they are
representative; they do, however, begin to give us a feel for
areas which our performance is well-thought-of by the user
community, and areas in which improvement is clearly needed.
3. This memorandum summarizes the most interesting
results of our survey. Again, this is the only Agency-wide
data we have, with all its limitations, on user perceptions.
User Survey Results
4. As mentioned above, 103 surveys were distributed to a
cross section of ODP systems users; 74 surveys were returned.
The number of respondents answering a specific question varied.
This variation is to be expected since, among other reasons,
not all ODP customers use all available services. The
respondents were from the following directorates/organizations:
Directorate/Organization
DCI
DDI
DDA
DDS&T
DDO
ICS (& OTHER)
No. of
Respondents (%)
7 (10%)
37 (52%)
15 (21%)
7 (10%)
2 (3%)
3 (4%)
71* (100%)
Approximate No.
of Users **
* 71 out of 74 respondents identified their components.
** July 1983 data.
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85BO1152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
5. Survey respondents fell into the following
self-identified job categories:
Job Category
No. of Respondents
Professional
41
(58%)
Technical
14
(20%)
Clerical/Secretarial
12
(17%)
Contractor
4
(6%)
71*
(100%)
* 71 out of 74 respondents identified their job category.
Comparable data are unfortunately not available for ODP users
as a group.
6. How do these ODP customers utilize ODP systems? The
table below provides the number of respondents who use ODP
systems, in the indicated manner, at least occasionally:
Use No. of Respondents
Data entry, correction or
verification 64 (87%)
Information query or retrieval 44 (60%)
Computer programming 42 (57%)
Production batch 35 (47%)
Word processing (SCRIPT or ETECS) 30 (41%)
Data computation or analysis 26 (35%)
AIM electronic mail 21 (28%)
Computer modeling or simulation 17 (23%)
7. The User Survey attempted to ascertain customer
satisfaction with ODP's ADP and support services through the
questionnaire approach. It is recognized that our sample was
not ideal and that the results presented below are open to
challenge. Notwithstanding this caveat, we believe the results
provide a general indicator of how well this Office is living
up to customer expectations.
8. The survey addressed the customer perceived quality of
an ADP service, as well as general satisfaction. Most services
were evaluated with respect to response time, availability, and
overall customer satisfaction. Response time refers to the
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
customer's perception as to whether the service provides the
required output in a timely fashion. Availability describes
the customer's impression with respect to whether the system is
generally functioning and able to provide useful output when
required. The last factor, overall satisfaction, undoubtedly
incorporates the two former factors, as well as concepts such
as usefulness, ease-of-use and other undefined concrete and
psychological criteria unique to individual users. From the
survey, data were obtained for three major services, GIMS, OCR
(Composite), and VM. These services are, respectively: the
generalized database management system service; a group of
Applications in support of the office of Central Reference, DDI
(including AEGIS, COLTS, OLDE, OLDE3, OLTA and RECON); and the
central timesharing service.
9. The following table summarizes survey results for the
three services discussed above:
Percent of "Satisfied" Survey Respondents*
Avg. No.
Respondents
Answering Response Overall
Question Time Availability Satisfaction
GIMS
24
87%
88%
60%
OCR (Composite)
35
91%
94%
81%
VM
65
98%
98%
92%
* A customer is defined as "Satisfied" vis-a-vis the various
criteria when the following responses were provided: Response
Time, either "Very Good" or "Adequate"; Availability, either
"Always" or "Usually"; Overall Satisfaction, either "Like Very
Much" or "Like."
10. For the Batch Service, the survey asked for customer
evaluations in a slightly different format. Batch was
evaluated with respect to turnaround time (i.e., response
time), and the service and tools provided:
No. of Respondents
Answering Question
Percent Satisfied
Turnaround Time
47
92%
Services/Tools
Provided
44
95%
ADMINISTRATIVE-INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
11. Due to limitations in the sample, usable data were
not collected on CAMS, TADS, or DDO services. The SAFE service
was also too new to collect user impressions at the time the
survey was taken in May 1983.
12. In addition to services, survey data were also
collected on several important software packages and tools
provided to ODP customers. These tools primarily run on the VM
timesharing service.
Percent of "Satisfied" Survey Respondents*
No. of
Tool
Brief
Description
Respondents
Answering
Question
Response
Time
Overall
Satisfaction
AIM
Electronic
20
81%
Mail
Database
Management
System
Statistical
10
90%
70%
Package
SCRIPT
Text Editing/
40
100%
95%
Document
Preparation
Software
SPSS (SCSS) Statistical
Package
TELAGRAF Graphing/ 22
Charting
System
* A customer is defined as "Satisfied" vis-a-vis the two
criteria indicated when the following responses were provided:
Response Time, either "Very Good" or "Adequate"; Overall
Satisfaction, either "Meets All My Needs" or "Meets Most of My
Needs."
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
ADMINISTRATIVE-INTERNAL USE ONLY
13. Besides the ADP services themselves, ODP provides
support to customers who utilize these services. This support
runs the gamut from providing consulting and system
administration services, documentation (vendor and in-house),
and training, to staffing a Trouble Desk that acts as a central
point for system status information and for reporting system or
remote terminal malfunctions. The User Survey asked ODP
customers their evaluation of office performance with respect
to support activities. Specifically, the survey evaluated the
performance of the Customer Services Staff, the ODP Processing
component tasked with customer liaison and documentation
support.
No. of
Respondents
Answering
Overall
Customer Support Functions
Questions
Satisfaction*
Consulting
42
86%
VM System Administration
49
100%
Batch System Administration
16
100%
Administering Technical Library
45
and Providing Vendor
Documentation
* Percent respondents rating support "Very Satisfactory" or
"Adequate."
14. ODP Tech Notes are published frequently to alert
users to system changes, new capabilities, and new and better
ways to use ODP systems and services. They are the main method
of ODP communication with its customers. Respondents were
asked if they found Tech Notes understandable, and if they were
able to locate information in prior publications. Out of 58
respondents, 81% found Tech Notes, "Always" or "Usually"
understandable. Sixty-three percent (63%) of 51 respondents
indicate they "Always" or "Usually" could locate old items in
Tech Notes.
15. Overall, 90% of 58 respondents are "Generally
Satisfied" with information published or made available by ODP.
16. Finally, users were queried on the performance of the
ODP Trouble Desk (staffed by Production Division, Processing),
and their evaluation of Agency (not just ODP) computer
training. Of the 66 respondents that evaluated the Trouble
Desk, 94% were "Generally Satisfied." Agency ADP training was
evaluated by 60 respondents. Of this group, 77% were, once
again, "Generally Satisfied" with available training.
ADMINISTRATIVE-INTERNAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
 Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7
Conclusion
17. ODP believes it would not be appropriate to draw
specific conclusions from this preliminary survey. We are,
however, quite encouraged by the results. Overall
"Satisfaction" appears high among the ODP customers surveyed.
Further in-depth surveying will be required to validate this
thesis, and to identify specifically services that are not
meeting customer needs and where they fall short.
Approved For Release 2008/06/23: CIA-RDP85B01152R000901240025-7