About the Accenture Citizen Experience Study -- Full Text

Welcome
Recognizing that every geography has unique cultural, socioeconomic and other characteristics, we did not design the survey instrument to compare and contrast performance by country or by region, and the results are not intended for such purposes. 

About the Accenture Citizen Experience Study
Polls routinely capture voters' opinions of individual politicians. Private-sector surveys often gauge customers' satisfaction with products and services. But until now, there was no single instrument to measure citizens' perceptions of government.

The Accenture Institute for Public Service Value has created the Citizen Experience Study to fill that void. The Accenture Citizen Experience Study measures the level of connection and engagement that citizens in 13 geographies feel with their governments. More specifically, the study captures citizens’ perspectives on the importance of 16 government actions—and their opinions on how well government is currently performing each of those actions.

We have used that data about importance and performance to characterize citizens' perceptions of their government's relative strengths and weaknesses.

As part of our research, we also gathered citizens’ perspectives on how government is performing around key social and economic outcomes—including cost of living, immigration control, security in retirement, learning and education, and employment. And we asked citizens to describe their level of trust in government to help improve the quality of their lives.

The Accenture Citizen Experience Study provides actionable insight into how citizens currently perceive government while giving government and public service managers valuable input for improving the quality of public services and the outcomes such services support.

Our Research Approach
To help yield the results for this year’s Accenture Citizen Experience Study, the Accenture Institute for Public Service Value (working with Harris Interactive) surveyed members of the general adult populations of 13 geographies: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Singapore, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.

We asked respondents to think about 16 government actions that would help improve social and economic conditions in their geographies. We also asked respondents to rate importance—how critical each action is—and performance—how well government is currently delivering in that area. We then created a visual representation of respondents' ratings— illustrating each government's relative strengths and weaknesses.

In addition, we asked respondents for their perspectives on some other specific public service areas and issues—including top-of-mind social and economic conditions, trust in government to improve quality of life and personal involvement in public services.

Recognizing that every geography has unique cultural, socioeconomic and other characteristics, we did not design the survey instrument to compare and contrast performance by country or by region, and the results are not intended for such purposes.

About the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework
The Accenture Citizen Experience Study builds on the foundation of the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework— a new model for more publicly engaged governance. The Accenture Institute for Public Service Value developed this framework as part of the Accenture Global Cities Forum—an ongoing public engagement study into individuals’ perspectives on the role of government.  

Through the first phase of this study—a series of highly interactive citizen panels in eight cities—Accenture explored individuals’ perspectives from three points of view: that of citizen, service user and taxpayer. Through our analysis of participants’ input, we developed the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework to help public service organizations build deeper, richer, more collaborative relationships with the people they serve.
we present the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework. We also delineate specific actions government can take to bolster performance around the framework's core components of Outcomes, Balance, Engagement and Accountability.

To yield this year’s scores for the Accenture Citizen Experience Study, we asked citizens in 13 geographies to rate the importance of 16 specific actions, as well as their government’s performance in each of those areas.

Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework

Government
Any government or public service organization at the local, state/provincial or national level.

Public Service Value
The outcomes and results that government and public service organizations produce for the people they serve; the public-sector equivalent of shareholder value.

Citizen, Service User, Taxpayer
The three roles through which individuals interact with government and public service organizations.

Outcomes
Focusing on improved social and economic outcomes by addressing the actual, everyday problems faced by citizens and by integrating and collaborating with businesses and nonprofit organizations to address people’s holistic needs.

High-performing governments improve outcomes by:

• Focusing on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
  
  
• Coordinating the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
  
  
• Targeting public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
  
  
• Working to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
  
  

Accountability
Clarifying accountability and facilitating public recourse and providing mechanisms for public recourse. High-performing governments clarify accountability by:

• Providing clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
  
  
• Taking prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
  
  
• Providing citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
  
  
• Creating regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
  
  

Balance
Balancing choice and flexibility with fairness and common good by being customer-focused and offering services that are flexible and easily available. High-performing governments balance choice and flexibility with fairness and common good by:

• Providing fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
  
  
• Making public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
  
  
• Helping those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
  
  
• Providing people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
  
  

Engagement
Engaging, educating and enrolling the public as co-producers of public value and encouraging more active citizen participation. High-performing governments educate and enroll the public by:

• Providing clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
  
  
• Taking prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
  
  
• Providing citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
  
  
• Creating regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
  
  
• Seeking citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
  
  
• Providing reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
  
  
• Providing a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
  
  
• Encouraging people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
  
  

Australia
Many survey respondents in Australia have a positive view of their country’s social and economic conditions. Forty-eight percent rate these conditions as very satisfactory or satisfactory; only 22 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents view employment, learning and education, and public safety as areas where government is doing a good job addressing specific areas of need. Conversely, respondents indicated that cost of living, government sponsored or subsidized housing and transportation are areas of relative weakness. Forty-one percent of Australian citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Australia, there is just one area with a significant gap between importance and performance: focusing on societal issues.

Forty-eight percent of respondents in Australia rate overall social and economic conditions as very satisfactory or satisfactory.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. Australian citizens identified making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person, as an area with a small gap between importance and performance.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Australia:

• Australian citizens between age 18 and 29 gave the highest marks, while those age 60 or older gave lower marks.
  
  
• Individuals who are single and never married provided higher marks than those who are married or living with a partner.
  
  
• Citizens with a Bachelor’s degree or higher gave higher marks than those who completed Year 11 or less.
  
  
• In terms of household income, scores were fairly consistent among those with annual incomes above $25,000. However, those who make less than $25,000 per year gave the lowest scores.
  
  
• Residents of South Australia gave relatively high marks compared to those in Western Australia.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the components of the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Australian respondents indicated that government is relatively strong in the "Balance" component but relatively weak at "Accountability."

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

In Canada, respondents identified public safety and learning and education as areas where government is strong.

Canada
A majority of survey respondents in Canada have a positive view of their country’s social and economic conditions. Fifty-four percent rate these conditions as very satisfactory or satisfactory, while just 19 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents identified public safety and learning and education as two areas where government is strong. Conversely, respondents indicated that cost of living, immigration control and government-sponsored or subsidized housing are areas of relative weakness. In Canada, 43 percent of citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Canada, those actions include providing clear explanations of spending priority determination, focusing on societal issues, coordinating services so that individual needs are met, providing prompt and effective problem resolution and seeking citizens’ views when prioritizing services.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. In Canada, citizens indicated that government is relatively strong in making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Canada:

• Canadian citizens between age 18 and 29 gave the highest marks, while those age 50 to 59 or older gave lower marks.
  
  
• Citizens with postgraduate and Bachelor’s degrees gave higher marks than those with less education.
  
  
• Scores were fairly consistent across household-income levels. Those who make $50,000 to $99,000 gave the highest score, while those with an income of $100,000 gave a slightly lower score. The lowest scores came from the bottom two income categories—suggesting that the most discontent lies with those at the lower end of the economic scale.
  
  
• Residents of the Atlantic region gave relatively high marks compared with those in British Columbia
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the components of the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Canadian respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component, but comparatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Thirty-eight percent of French citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

France
Fifteen percent of survey respondents in France have a positive view of their country’s social and economic conditions—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Meanwhile, 57 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents expressed particular concern over citizens’ short-term and long-term personal financial situations. French citizens indicated that they view cost of living, employment and security in retirement as weaknesses and health, public safety and transportation as strengths. Thirtyeight percent of French citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In France, those areas include focusing on societal issues, seeking citizens’ views when prioritizing services and providing prompt and effective problem resolution related to public services.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are those where government is strongest. In France, respondents indicated that government is doing a relatively good job at making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in France:

• French citizens between age 40 and 59—and particularly those between 50 and 59—gave relatively low scores.
  
  
• People who are single or never married gave relatively high scores compared to other French citizens.
  
  
• In France, respondents who do not have a degree and those who are still studying gave relatively high marks. Those at the doctorate level gave lower scores.
  
  
• Respondents with an annual household income of €40,000 or more gave higher marks than those with lower incomes.
  
  
• Residents of Bourgogne gave higher scores compared to other regions.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, French respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but comparatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Respondents in Germany praised the government for public safety, protection of the environment and transportation.

Germany
Twenty-two percent of respondents have a positive perception of overall social and economic conditions in Germany—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Meanwhile, 45 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents praised the government for public safety, protection of the environment and transportation. They also identified cost of living, security in retirement and immigration control as areas of relative weakness. Twenty-eight percent of German citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Germany, there is just one action with such a gap: focusing on societal issues.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to German respondents, those areas include encouraging more personal responsibility, making services available through different methods (such as telephone, the Internet and in person), and improving delivery of services by collaborating with nongovernment organizations.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Germany:

• The youngest German citizens (age 18 to 29) and the oldest German citizens (age 60 or older) gave the highest marks. Those 50 to 59 years old gave lower scores.
  
  
• Individuals who are single or never married gave higher marks than those who are married or living with a partner and especially higher than those who are divorced, separated or widowed.
  
  
• German citizens with the highest education level—comparable to a Ph.D.—gave the highest marks. Those who have not completed any specific education—Keine abgeschlossene qualifikation in German—gave the second-highest marks. People who are studying and completing a professional internship—abgeschlossene lehre in German—gave relatively low marks while those who cannot proceed to college-level studies—mittlere reife in German—gave the lowest.
  
  
• Scores were fairly consistent across income levels. However, those who make €30,000 to €39,999 gave the highest.
  
  
• Residents of the Brandenberg region gave relatively high marks compared to those in Thueringen and Hesse.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, German respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

A majority of citizens in Hong Kong have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

Hong Kong
Twenty-nine percent of respondents rate overall social and economic conditions in Hong Kong as very satisfactory or satisfactory, while 25 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents gave the government relatively high marks for public safety and transportation but identified cost of living and security in retirement as areas where the government performance is less favorable. A majority of citizens in Hong Kong (56 percent) have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Hong Kong, the action with the greatest disparity between importance and performance is focusing on societal issues.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. In Hong Kong, government is doing well in making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Hong Kong:

• Scores are lower for Hong Kong citizens who are between age 30 and 39 and higher for individuals who are age 50 to 59 and those who are 60+ years old.
  
  
• Individuals who are divorced, separated or widowed gave relatively higher scores than other Hong Kong citizens.
  
  
• Hong Kong citizens with less education gave higher scores than those with higher levels of education.
  
  
• Respondents with annual household income of $20,000 or more gave slightly higher marks than those with lower incomes.
  
  
• Residents of Hong Kong Island gave higher scores compared to other regions, especially the New Territories.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, respondents in Hong Kong indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Engagement” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Forty-one percent of respondents in India have a favorable opinion of overall social and economic conditions—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory.

India
Note: Respondents in India represent only those who are online—a small fraction of the country’s entire population. Forty-one percent of respondents in India have a favorable opinion of overall social and economic conditions—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Twenty-one percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents gave the government relatively high marks for learning and education and transportation, but noted protection of the environment and cost of living as areas of relative weakness. A majority of online citizens in India (68 percent) have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. According to online respondents in India, those actions include providing fair and equal access to services for all, focusing on societal issues, providing prompt and effective problem resolution related to public services, coordinating services so that individual needs are met, providing evidence of results of public services, providing good information about services, seeking citizens’ views when prioritizing services, targeting public services to help those most in need, and providing easier access to information and services.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to online respondents in India, the government is doing a comparatively good job at providing a wider choice of tailored services to meet people’s individual needs.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among online respondents in India:

• Scores are higher for the youngest and oldest online Indian citizens.
  
  
• Individuals who are divorced, separated or widowed gave higher scores than other online Indian citizens, especially those who are married or living with a partner.
  
  
• Online Indian citizens at the primary and middle levels of education gave higher marks than those with other levels of education—especially those at the matriculation level.
  
  
• Indian citizens who use the Internet and have lower household incomes gave higher marks than those with greater incomes. Those with an annual household income of less than Rs 44,999 gave the highest marks, while those who make Rs 90,000 or more gave the lowest. Those with an annual income of Rs 45,000 to Rs 89,999 fall in the middle.
  
  
• Online residents of the Gujarat, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh regions gave the highest scores among the regions of India.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Indian respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Thirty-four percent of Italian citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

Italy
In general, survey respondents in Italy have a less-than-positive view of their government. Six percent of Italian citizens rate overall social and economic conditions in their country as very satisfactory or satisfactory, while 67 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. In fact, in nine of 10 social and economic areas, respondents indicated that they are unsatisfied or very unsatisfied. They noted cost of living and government-sponsored or subsidized housing as areas of particular weakness. Even so, 34 percent of Italian citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Italy, the action with the greatest disparity is focusing on societal issues.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to Italian respondents, those actions include improving delivery of services by collaborating with nongovernment organizations and creating regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Italy:

• Among Italian citizens, the youngest (age 18 to 39) and oldest (age 60 or older) gave the highest marks—while those age 40 to 59 gave lower scores.
  
  
• Individuals who are single or never married gave higher marks than those who are married or living with a partner and those who are divorced, separated or widowed.
  
  
• Citizens with postgraduate/doctorate degrees gave better marks to the government than those of all other educational levels, including those who are still studying.
  
  
• In Italy, the highest income groups yielded the highest scores.
  
  
• Residents of the Puglia and Emilia- Romanga regions gave relatively high scores compared to all other regions— especially respondents in Sicilia.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Italian respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Outcomes” and “Balance” components but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Respondents in Japan identified transportation and public safety as two areas where government is strong.

Japan
Fifteen percent of respondents in Japan have a positive view of overall social and economic conditions—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Fifty-seven percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents identified transportation and public safety as two areas where government is strong. Conversely, respondents indicated that cost of living and security in retirement are areas of relative weakness. More than a quarter of respondents in Japan (28 percent) have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Japan, those actions include providing clear explanations of spending priority determination, focusing on societal issues, providing prompt and effective problem resolution related to public services, seeking citizens’ views when prioritizing services, and providing good information about services.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. In Japan, citizens indicated that government is relatively strong in providing a wider choice of tailored services, coordinating services so that individual needs are met, making services available through different methods (such as telephone, the Internet and in person), targeting public services to help those most in need, creating opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions on service quality, and encouraging more personal responsibility.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Japan:

• Japanese citizens between age 30 and 39 and age 40 and 49 gave comparatively low marks. The youngest and oldest citizens gave higher scores.
  
  
• Those who are single or never married gave higher scores than other Japanese citizens—especially those who are divorced, separated or widowed.
  
  
• Respondents with the lowest level of education—less than high school— gave higher marks than those with higher levels of education, especially those at the junior college level.
  
  
• Japanese citizens with annual household income of 10,000,000 yen or more gave higher marks than those with lower incomes—particularly those who make between 5,000,000 and 9,999,999 yen each year.
  
  
• Residents of the Kinki region gave higher marks compared to other regions—Kanto, in particular.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the components of the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Japanese respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” and “Outcomes” components but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Thirty-eight percent of respondents have a favorable opinion of overall social and economic conditions in Mexico—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory.

Mexico
Thirty-eight percent of respondents have a favorable opinion of overall social and economic conditions in Mexico—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Meanwhile, 35 percent of citizens have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents indicated that government is doing a relatively good job in learning and education, as well as health. They identified public safety, cost of living and employment as areas where the government is doing a comparatively poor job. A majority of respondents in Mexico (67 percent) have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with relatively large gaps between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Mexico, those actions include targeting public services to help those most in need, providing fair and equal access to services for all, and focusing on societal issues.

Actions with relatively small gaps between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to the Mexican respondents, those areas include seeking citizens' views when determining priorities for public services and making public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Mexico:

• Mexican citizens between age 18 and 29 gave the highest scores, while those 60 and older gave comparatively low scores.
  
  
• There were no significant differences by marital status.
  
  
• Mexican citizens with the highest and lowest levels of education— Diplomado, Maestria, Doctorado and Secundaria completa or less—provided the highest marks. Preperatoria and licienciatura, as well as Carrera commercial or technica, provided comparatively low scores.
  
  
• Scores varied somewhat by household income. Those at the middle-income level gave the highest scores.
  
  
• Residents of the Federal District gave relatively high scores, while those outside the State of Mexico, Jalisco, Puebla and Veracruz provided lower scores.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, differences were negligible in Mexico, with nearly equal ratings for the four components of “Accountability,” “Balance,” “Engagement” and “Outcomes.” Similarly, Mexican respondents gave similar scores across all the actions that map to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework.

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Respondents indicated that government is doing a good job addressing nine out of 10 specific areas of need.

Singapore
In Singapore, a majority of respondents have a positive view of their country’s social and economic conditions. In fact, 65 percent rate these conditions as very satisfactory or satisfactory; only 8 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents indicated that government is doing a good job addressing nine out of 10 specific areas of need. Cost of living is the only area that Singaporeans identified as relatively weak. Most respondents in Singapore (77 percent) have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives. In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Singapore, there is just one area with a great disparity: seeking citizens’ views when prioritizing services. Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. Citizens of Singapore identified those areas as making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person, and encouraging more personal responsibility.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Singapore:

• In Singapore, scores are highest for the oldest citizens. Those age 50 to 59 and age 60 or older gave higher marks than their younger peers—especially those who are 30 to 39 years old.
  
  
• Individuals who are divorced, separated or widowed gave higher marks than others. However, the differences by marital status are not large.
  
  
• Respondents with the least education—below secondary—gave higher marks than those with higher levels of education, and especially those at the secondary level.
  
  
• Citizens of Singapore with the highest and lowest household incomes gave higher scores than those in middle income ranges.
  
  
• Urban residents of Singapore gave higher marks than those in rural and suburban areas.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the components of the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Singaporean respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Respondents cited health care, transportation and public safety as areas where government is doing a comparatively good job.

Spain
While 12 percent of Spanish respondents rate overall social and economic conditions as very satisfactory or satisfactory, 62 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Respondents cited health care, transportation and public safety as areas where government is doing a comparatively good job. They noted cost of living, immigration control and employment as areas of particular weakness. Thirty-seven percent of Spanish citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In Spain, those actions include focusing on societal issues, coordinating the services of different government departments, providing clear explanations for determining spending priorities and taking prompt and effective action to resolve problems.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to Spanish respondents, those actions include making services available through different methods (such as telephone, the Internet and in person), providing a wider choice of tailored services, targeting public services to help those most in need, and improving delivery of services by collaborating with nongovernment organizations.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in Spain:

• Spanish respondents between the ages of 50 and 59 gave the highest marks, while those who are age 40 to 49 gave the lowest.
  
  
• Individuals who are single or have never married, along with those who are married or living with a partner, gave slightly higher marks than those who are divorced, separated or widowed.
  
  
• Respondents with degrees equivalent to Master’s or Ph.D. gave higher marks than those with all other levels of education. The lowest scores came from those with no formal qualifications.
  
  
• In Spain, the highest income groups yielded the highest scores.
  
  
• Residents of Sevilla gave relatively high scores compared to all other regions of Spain.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, Spanish respondents indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Fourteen percent of respondents have an upbeat view of overall social and economic conditions in the United Kingdom—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory.

United Kingdom
Fourteen percent of respondents have an upbeat view of overall social and economic conditions in the United Kingdom—rating them as very satisfactory or satisfactory. However, the majority (57 percent) have a more pessimistic outlook. Although respondents in the United Kingdom did not identify any areas of relative strength, they noted cost of living, immigration and security in retirement as particular weaknesses. In the United Kingdom, a limited number of respondents—19 percent, to be exact—have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In the United Kingdom, those actions include the focus government places on general societal issues and prompt and effective problem resolution related to public services.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are areas where government is strongest. Those include creating opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions on service quality, providing a wider choice of tailored services, improving delivery of services by collaborating with nongovernment organizations and making services available through different methods, such as telephone, the Internet and in person.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in the United Kingdom:

• UK citizens under age 50 gave higher marks to the government than those over age 50.
  
  
• Individuals who have never married and those who are divorced, separated or widowed gave higher marks than those who are married or living with a partner.
  
  
• Citizens who are still studying or who have just completed their mandatory education gave relatively high scores.
  
  
• People with annual household income of £20,000 to £39,999 gave higher scores than those with an annual income of less than £20,000.
  
  
• Respondents in the Southwest region gave higher scores than those in the Northeast or in Wales and the West.
  
  

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, respondents in the United Kingdom indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

9. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
10. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
    
    
11. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
    
    
12. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
    
    

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Respondents indicated that public safety is a relative strength in the United States.

United States
As one might expect in the current environment, survey respondents in the United States have a less-than-positive view of their government. Fewer than one in five (17 percent) rate the overall social and economic conditions of the country as very satisfactory or satisfactory—and 62 percent have a more pessimistic outlook. Although respondents indicated that public safety is a relative strength in the United States, they noted cost of living, security in retirement and immigration control as areas of relative weakness. Thirty percent of United States citizens have at least some trust in the government to improve the quality of their lives.

In the survey, we asked respondents to rate the importance of each of 16 government actions and to rate the government’s performance on each of those actions. Actions with the largest gap between importance and performance are the areas where the government has the greatest opportunity for improvement. In the United States, those actions include the focus government places on general societal issues, how government explains its spending on public services and whether government encourages people to take personal responsibility.

Actions with the smallest gap between importance and performance are the areas where government is strongest. According to respondents in the United States, those actions include providing a choice of services, fostering discussions on service quality, providing easier access to services and improving delivery of public services.

Interesting Patterns
Some interesting patterns emerged among respondents in the United States:

• US citizens under age 40 gave higher marks to the government than those over age 40.
  
  
• Individuals who have never married gave higher marks than those who are divorced, separated or widowed.
  
  
• Citizens with a graduate-level education or higher gave better marks to the government than those who completed college or are less educated.
  
  
• People with household incomes of $100,000 or more gave higher marks than those with lower household incomes.
  
  
• African-American citizens provided the lowest marks; Hispanics gave the highest.
  
  

Respondents indicated that public safety is a relative strength in the United States.

Government Actions
In relation to the Accenture Public Service Value Governance Framework, respondents in the United States indicated that government is relatively strong at the “Balance” component but relatively weak at “Accountability.”

Outcomes

1. Focus on actual societal issues that affect citizens, such as health, learning and education, cost of living and public safety.
   
   
2. Coordinate the services of different government departments to ensure that the complex needs of individuals are met.
   
   
3. Target public services to help individuals with the highest levels of need.
   
   
4. Work to improve delivery of public services through collaboration with nongovernment organizations such as private businesses and nonprofit organizations.
   
   

Balance

5. Provide fair and equal access to government services for all citizens.
   
   
6. Make public services easily available to people through a variety of different methods, such as telephone and Internet, as well as in person.
   
   
7. Help those who may have difficulties using public services to gain easier access.
   
   
8. Provide people with a wider choice of services that are tailored to meet their individual needs.
   
   

Engagement

1. Seek citizens’ views when determining priorities for public services.
   
   
2. Provide reliable and trustworthy information about public services.
   
   
3. Provide a clear and easy way by which individuals can access government information and services quickly and easily.
   
   
4. Encourage people to take more personal responsibility for improving the quality of life for themselves and their communities.
   
   

Accountability

13. Provide clear explanations of how spending priorities on public services are determined.
    
    
14. Take prompt and effective action to resolve problems or difficulties that citizens experience with public services.
    
    
15. Provide citizens with clear evidence of actual results of public service policies in improving people’s lives.
    
    
16. Create regular opportunities for citizens to engage in discussions about the quality of public services.
    
    

Accenture is a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company. Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and business functions, and extensive research on the world’s most successful companies, Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. With more than 186,000 people serving clients in over 120 countries, the company generated net revenues of US$23.39 billion for the fiscal year ended Aug. 31, 2008. Its home page is www.accenture.com.