Customer service and the planning system: a research study

5 Improving Customer Service in the Planning System

5.1 Achieving greater consistency

Planning authorities and stakeholders share concerns that there is a lack of consistency in processes, enforcement and quality of service across Scotland, making the point that agents working across multiple geographical areas are most sensitive to this. It is recognised as a cause of frustration as it can lead to a lack of predictability for customers.

"There are different ways of calculating housing land supply and some planning authorities charge for pre-application advice whereas others don't."

Stakeholder

There are several reasons given for the lack of consistency. Firstly, there is an acknowledgement that differences in geography across Scotland are likely to influence local priorities, along with the need to be accountable to local managers and differences in resource levels. However, whilst planning authorities all work to the same legislation, they admit to not always interpreting specific elements in the same way.

Planning authorities feel that clearer national guidance on implementing legislation would help to improve consistency across the Scottish planning system. This would apply not only to Scottish Government-issued guidance for planning authorities, but guidance which sets out the rights and responsibilities of customers. As an example, one authority praised work that has been done already to create commonality through the 'validation standards', reducing the extent to which planning authorities can make their own interpretations.

5.2 Improving customer service delivery

There is general agreement among planning authorities and stakeholders that more could be done to share best practice between authorities, for example via forums and capacity building events. The Heads of Planning network is praised as an effective facilitator although stakeholders question the extent to which planning authorities collaborate as effectively as they could. Specific mention was made of the Improvement Service which could arguably be utilised more effectively to improve service standards.

Several planning authorities feel that customer perceptions of the planning system would be enhanced through better awareness and understanding of the positive benefits that result from the planning system. They suggest this could be achieved through a clearer customer charter and more proactive promotion of the beneficial community outcomes from planning. At present they feel that the general public often engage with the system from a negative standpoint, for example when raising objections, which could impact on their overall perceptions.

Planning authorities are concerned that current resourcing levels mean there is limited capacity for extensive proactive customer engagement. They feel that statutory fees could potentially be raised and would ideally like to see the system move towards full cost recovery.

Other suggestions for improvement include developing a national customer journey for the planning system, potentially following a similar format to that recently created for building standards. This could offer a one-stop-shop for information, a step-by-step guide to the planning process and links to additional resources. One planning authority advocated making more use of interactive online 'live chat' sessions to make the best possible use of digital technologies.

5.3 Measuring customer service in the future

Planning authorities agree that measuring customer service is important and indicated that there could be a place for a specific key performance measure to directly address customer engagement within the performance framework.

Planning authorities and stakeholders are generally warm to the idea of introducing an annual national customer survey for planning in Scotland. Given that a variety of approaches are currently used, it is felt this could bring consistency and comparability to how customer feedback is gathered, collated and reported. Of use would be reporting at national and local ( i.e. planning authority) levels, as well as benchmarking group reports, to aid best practice discussions.

However, some planning authorities have expressed a preference for a more flexible local approach and maintaining ownership of customer feedback. This, it is argued, would allow them to ask their own questions, conduct customer engagement research using mechanisms that suit them, and follow up directly with customers on any issues raised. The risk of 'survey fatigue' is another potential barrier raised, and whether a national survey might be too generic unless planning authorities had the opportunity to contribute their own questions each year.