Turning a deaf ear to citizen or how to translate citizen feedback into continuous improvement: recent best practices. Alessandro Minelli* and Renato Ruffini 1

Centro di Ricerca sulla Pubblica Amministrazione ­ LIUC Università Carlo Cattaneo Listening to citizen is a relevant issue for politicians, much less for public managers. This is due to several reasons, which can derive from citizen lack of competence or comprehension of the general and specific background in

which Public Managers work to the inability of Public Managers to even partly get advices from citizen. It looks like a common language, an esperanto between citizen and public managers has not yet been developed, but signs

of it can be traced back to more than 30 years ago, mainly relating to scholars works devoted to identifying grounded experiences and making them The Input to planning accordingly to feedback.

Several good practices have been proposed by scholars showing that listening and acting according to citizen

remarks can be a win­win situation (So, 2012; Thomas, 2012), and can be a tool to learn “about and from citizen”. Sometimes “blame­rich and credit­poor” public managers have to face the risk of “excess of democracy” (Crozier,

Huntington and Watanuki, 1975), deriving from an imperfect or partial knowledge by citizens of the Public Administration dynamics and framework in which they can act. 30 years separate the first scholars interested in

learning from citizen feedback (Fitzgerald and Durant, 1980; Parks, 1984) from long time scholars recent production (Nalbandian, 2013; Sanderson, 2001 only to cite a few).

This paper intends to propose different approaches to the issue of learning from citizen feedback, deriving from a literature review which evolved from the early 1980s to now, while being influenced by New Public Administration,

New Public Management, and co­production theories.

At the same time 2 brand new best practices and two examples of planning accordingly to citizen feedback will be analyzed.

Conclusions will provide new perspectives for understanding whether complaints are an adequate tool for planning or if they need to be better tailored in order to work in the Public Sector. Contribution to existing research stands in

the direction of providing new evidence of best practices for improvement according to citizen feedback, in a panorama of research that normally limits itself to the logical schemes of cataloging complaints and making them available easily instead of showing evidence of learning deriving from it. The paper concludes with contributions and suggestions for further research and policy challenges: complaints can be improved in their positive input

valence or are they part of a larger concept of transparency strategies to create active and well informed citizens? Keywords: complaints handling, Public Sector, Continuous improvement, transparency, citizen feedback

INTRODUCTION Legitimizing choices in the Public Administration (PA) assumes complex contours in concomitance of an ongoing financial crisis, which forces public institutions to maintain current service level while facing a reduction of economic and human resources.

1 Corresponding author. Email address: aminelli@liuc.it

Citizen participation has been in this sense the subject of different studies as the Arnstein ladder of participation (1969) composed by three degrees and eight steps. The three degrees are non participation (manipulation and therapy), tokenism (Informing, consultation, placation) and citizen power (partnership, delegated power and citizen control). Several scholars have adapted this scale to their reasoning and after 45 years the ladder is still useful if we consider tokenism as a basis for interpreting the citizen feedback nowadays and ask questions about the correctness of feedback use. Acting consistently respect to expectations and needs declared by users can encourage the development of an imaginary that sees in PA a transparent actor and careful listener of citizen’s desires and needs, in particular when these derive from inconveniences or Personal or collective harmed interests, conveyed by way of complaints. Without exceeding in recognizing to the PA a more and more privatistic nature involved in services production or contracting ­ out to present vogue of co ­ production we have to consider the passage of PA in the span of around thirty years from New Public Administration (NPA) to New Public Management (NPM), resulting in changes of perspective in the way scholars deal with the thematic, and it is not easy subsequently to resume pros and cons of each approach on the specific theme of 'learning from complaints and from listening to citizens (eg. conflict intensification, increased costs, non professional influence connected to uninformed or not qualified Individuals). The distinction between citizen ­ voters ­ taxpayer ­ User should be kept in mind in order to evaluate which of these components is preponderant while Listening, and can direct to a classification of active citizens,which includes the bad ­ citizen, the professional ­ citizen and the citizen aware both of its own sphere of interests and of that of other Individuals or groups present in Society. Varying the perspective of observation from citizens to bureaucrats to politicians can help distinguish people who are already part of the majority (frontbenchers) and that use poorly the feedback input, and the ones that entered recently in politics or are not part of the majority (the so­called backbenchers) and have a high need of information from citizens. It is therefore relevant the interpretative capacity of input from part of politicians (Askim and Hanseen, 2008). Between the listening tools borrowed from the Private Sector in order to be used by administrators and public managers, the complaint is a not conveyed or stimulated signal. The logic on which are based the complaints taxonomy proposals up to today has to be interpreted on the basis of modern theories of public management. Koontz (1999), stresses as already in 1972 there was awareness of the negative side effects of citizen involvement (conflict intensification, further costs, non professional influence connected to Individuals uninformed or not qualified). Koontz poses questions on how to measure the 'impact of citizen input on public policies through interviews to public officials distinguishing between ones that consider it a training opportunity, and those who instead believe it as a possibility to promote the local body’s policies and then protect it from possible future reductions of size; a third typology of reply is moral obligation disconnected from instrumental benefits as in first two types. Consequently, the context in which The public manager is to act is a regime "Blame ­ rich and credit ­ poor " in which to overcome this trust gap one risks to allow an "Excess of democracy " (Crozier, Huntington and Watanuki, 1975).

Customer orientation is now a basis for both ISO 9001, ISO 9004, and CAF 2013. The perspective for the review of ISO 9001 pending for 2015 foresees continuous improvement bound to customer expectations as a fundamental planning element. The present paper aims at contributing to this debate, offering an explorative look at the way in which complaints are used by public managers in order to improve the overall and specific performance of public services. In the selected cases which come from initiatives found on the web and new Italian case studies, it is clearly stated that it is perceived a limited use of the feedback that citizens feedback can offer. The focus of the study is on how complaints are treated by the PA, including corrective and preventive actions deriving directly from complaining and anticipating criticalities. The research question is therefore: is complaint analysis a correct tool for planning nowadays? Empirical results of this study suggest that public administrators and managers are reluctant to use feedback from citizens in an “automatized” way. The findings from the two new case studies are then abstracted to a catalogation model for the understanding and explanation of planning inputs from citizen feedback. The methodological approach is qualitative, analysing case studies (Yin, 1994) The paper concludes with contributions and suggestions for further research and policy challenges. Results of this case studies will help to provide new evidence of best practices for improvement according to citizen feedback (ex. Human Resources Management), in a panorama of research that normally limits itself to the logical schemes of cataloging complaints and making them available easily instead of showing evidence of learning deriving from it. The structure of the paper is as follows. The first section of this article will briefly review literature concerning citizen complaining vs Public Administration by reasoning on concepts and scholars research on that. The second section of this article will discuss the research methods used (research design, data collection and data analysis). The third section will present web found case studies and the analyses conducted on the Italian North Western case studies, where theoretical insights are derived from data and discussed. The paper concludes by discussing the contributions and future developments of the present study, together with directions for further research: Is complaint a consistent and efficient planning tool, or a NPM tool not already specifically calibrated for PA classical aspects? Complaints management can be improved in its positive input valence or is a part of a larger concept of transparency, included in strategies to create informed citizens (Ruffini, 2013)?

DEFINITIONS

Feedback

According to Hattie & Timperley, H., (2007), feedback can concern a task, how it is performed, the self ­ regulation and the person who performs the task. Feedback can be immediate or delayed, positive or negative.

The results of a feedback can also concern: how I am behaving, where I am going, which are my future perspectives. Feedback can or cannot be routinary, can be direct (ie a complaint, an appreciation, a remark), indirect (non directly proposed by the original provider, but reproposed by the press), anonymous (if the provider assumes that identifying himself could be risky) or mediated (through an interview, for instance with agreed questions), positive (in the sense of proactive) and sustainable (grounded, applicable, long term oriented).

Feedbacks are normally considered as originating from outside of the institution they are directed to. This happens most of the times, but valuable feedback can derive from internal resources, by means of audits, performance assessments, interviews, specific online forums or newsgroups.

Citizen

As stated in the introduction different levels of citizen involvement, voice and defection (Arnstein, 1969; Hirschmann, 1970) have to be taken into consideration. Ruffini (1999) distinguishes several profiles of being citizen: beneficiary, a person in need, who bases his rights on a legal framework; consumer, allowing a choice between public and private services providers; producer/consumer, when the citizen receives a service, and at the same time collaborates to similar ones (ie parents performing external control roles in a kindergarten organization); user, when there are no alternatives, the utilization of the service is limited and not customized (for instance, public gardens); customer, when there is a direct or indirect fee for a service and the provider operates in a monopolistic regime; taxpayers, assuming a compensation between taxes paid and services received; passive citizen, where capacity to act is very limited and citizen trust is a lever of goal achievement. To this taxonomy two more variables can be added: the professional citizens, the ones that as a consequence of their competence or specific/community interests preservation can produce complex and proactive feedback to particular challenges (Solomon, 2005) to be handled, in a governmental framework “in which crucial elements of public authority are shared with a host of non governmental or other­governmental actors, frequently in complex collaborative systems that sometimes defy comprehension, let alone effective management and control” (p.9); or difficult citizens which “(...) often take good government for granted and pay more attention to insufficient performance” (Yang and Holzer, 2006). Trust gaps risk to allow an "Excess of democracy " (Crozier, Huntington and Watanuki, 1975). In general, this 1975 definition is still valid in the actual context where the normative framework’s ignorance is not deterrent to critics which sometimes can be not grounded. Finally, on defection, a paper by Spreng & Page (2003) on disconfirmation provides different formulas of measurement related to approaches like the Different score Measures of disconfirmation (DIFF), the direct effects model (DEM), the better than / worse than (BTWT), the Standard ­ percept disparity (SPD), Additive difference model (ADM). Spreng & Page also cite the "Dissonance Theory” which considers the discrepancy between two cognitions as psychologically non positive so that the person experiencing them try to change one of the two cognitions to reduce the discrepancy.

Complaints and Performance

Pulling complaints near the concept of Performance is an attempt that several scholars proposed, mostly while talking about service quality, design or provision (and can focus on topics like red tape and corruption). This is made possible by evaluating and assessing services, on the basis of expectations and perceptions. Kang & James, (2004) offer an interesting paper considerable for the dimensions of service quality. The dimensions of service provision are useful to assess the service perception and There are at least two perspectives on that topic, the European (Grönroos in three dimensions ­ technical, functional and corporate image) and the American (Parasuraman). Dimitrov (2014) studied complaints in Communist Bulgaria showing a particular use of complaints, allowing to check popularity, level of corruption and of trust in the communist regime. In particular relevant were the complaints help to track corruption to the lower profile officials, those more difficult to control, but in charge to handle resources and make decisions that impacted on Central government. the levels of bureaucracy that received the complaint, the territorial distribution, the Anonymous complaints on total received, the employment level of claimant, the system used to present the complaint, the reasons for complaining, the capacity to manage the complaint, the number of complaints that carried to a confirmation of discomfort of the complainant were all fundamental aspects to be taken into consideration. Junginger & Sangiorgi (2011) in a Handbook on Design Management propose interesting cues on the consideration that designing services consists in an exercise of social consistency, more than cohesion and welfare. Citizens have to represent themselves a la Goffman as an intelligent actor that fully understand their own role in Societies and act accordingly. Even Brewer (2007) distinguishes clearly between Self interest and community interest, emphasizing that consumeristic approach promoted from NPM are not robust enough to supplant the citizen oriented traditional approaches proposed by NPR (National Partnership for Reinventing Government, in origin National Performance Review proposed by the Clinton ­ Gore administration) and its "Wal – Mart” approach risks to focus attention on not being compliant to a specific procedure rather than on policy correctness. “A citizenship perspective has greater potential to develop problem­solving strategies based on systemic pattern theory, which emphasizes paying attention to organizational policies, processes and outcomes, rather than, as with organizational aberration theory, regarding complaints as the product of specific problems to be addressed without systemic modifications.” (p. 554)

Yang and Holzer (2006) noted that measuring and improving citizen perceptions of service provision by means of citizens participation in public sector activity evaluation is a relevant issue for new performance measurement perspectives. Citizens expectations can vary on the same service, and most of the time performance is not the key for evaluation: instead, it is the gap between expectations and performance that forms the perception. As every subjective measure, perception is a blend of expectations and interests preservation.

Learning from feedback

Relevant works on organizational change focused on listening to the “discontented” inside and outside the public organization as an initial sparkle of improvement, where positive feedback leads to sustainable success (Kelman, 2005)

Longbottom & Hilton (2011) focus on approaches to improvement that take into account "Hard" (process,technicalities, function), and "Soft" (customers, values, culture d'enterprise) factors. Other cited literature regards the Human Emotional Scales, useful in phase of definition of dimensions of expectations and perception.

Particularly useful results come from the work of So (2012) and Lewis & Triantafillou (2012). The first paper provided several directions on more evolved management systems of Asian Public Sector, always challenged by "Targetology". Accountability involves more control and this risks to lead to a reduction of innovativeness, and to recognize in performance growth a contextual increase of risks in traditional activity.

Lewis and Triantafillou (2012) start from an opposite approach to 'learning from information provided by performance evaluation, which is believed to represent a further overload of requests of data to services which does not lead to real improvement, but risks to further flood the public machine. Moreover they add a third level of accountability apart from a level addressed to external (democratic) audience and to an internal one for continuous improvement (learning), i.e. the level that allows to prevent and / or identify the abuse (constitutional). The risk here, according to the two academics is that the "Learning" hides in itself a new paradox, that of change for change,and not for growth.

Argyris and Schon (1998) distinguish between competitive and collaborative organizational learning. In the first case civil servants learn to correct errors, beat competitors and have impacts on effectiveness. In the second case, the deutero – learning, Learning is meant for growing as an individual and as an organization, providing then a values framework that goes beyond effectiveness. Learning is at the same time a product and a process, and in particular a fruit of an investigation (inquiry), as Dewey would describe, that starts from a problematic situation, to obtain a "Surprise", the plot of thought and action that proceeds from doubt to its dissolution through change. The output of investigation is organizational knowledge. This not always can be productive, because sometimes leads to traps of competence or worse to get used to the status quo (with consequent appeal unilateral control and appeal to taboos that subtract crucial problems to discussion).

METHODOLOGY The research design of this study relies on a case study approach (Yin, 2003), according to which several methods and empirical sources contribute to offer a holistic understanding of the phenomenon of interest (Eisenhardt, 1989). The overall design of the research is longitudinal

(Pettigrew, 1979), from 2011 to 2013, for it provides a transparent look at the formation and development of the complaints management over a 3 years time. This study relies upon extensive, qualitative research of the CRM phenomenon. The data collection began in 2011 and ended in 2014. Retrospective data collection (from 2011 to 2013) was mainly based on documentary sources, including previous studies, local databases (accessed directly from local bodies and institutions) and press archives, online archives of local and national newspapers, and PA databases. Primary data originated also from in­depth semi­structured open­ended interviews to quality management experts, lasting from one to more than 3 h each. The aim of processing data was twofold: (a) defining a minimal dataset, made homogeneous through a new cataloging model; (b) verifying the areas of improvement more keen to be activated and the ones which are underestimated. The underlying logic of data analysis was grounded theory building, which involves inducting insights from field­based case data (Miles & Huberman, 1984). Grounded theory building was chosen because of the aim to generate novel insights into a rarely explored phenomenon. The major results from this study are theoretical insights on whether citizen complaining feedback is an appropriate tool for the PA.

CASE STUDIES This section of the paper will provide two relevant case studies, Hong Kong Government and Scottish Community Services Agency, whose information come from direct interviews and from documentation made available. Hong Kong and Scotland Governments are to be considered among the most innovative and customer oriented Public Administration in the world. Then two Italian case studies are taken into consideration, using a catalogation model which permits to homogenize results and facilitate data interpretation.

Efficiency Unit of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

Using complaints to improve service delivery was not in 2008 a common activity: few departments analysed their complaints to identify areas for improvement or to prevent/minimise similar complaints in future. Guidelines were proposed starting in 2009 to help staff use complaints data to highlight areas where service delivery improvement may be necessary. They also advised staff on the importance of robustly monitoring their department’s own internal systems to identify where improvement could be made. Finally, they underlined the importance of being transparent and communicating the lessons learnt from complaints handling to other departments and to the public. The Efficiency Unit idea is that Complaints provide important intelligence to departments on where there may be improvement areas and systemic weaknesses.

Departments should make the best use of this free information to identify any underlying problems and improve their services because a perfect complaints handling system is useless if

PA keeps on repeating the same mistakes. A performing system in fact should also provide powerful analytics and reporting capability to help the department perform trend analysis and identify recurring problems for further analysis. Using complaints to identify areas where service improvements are needed should be a key responsibility of both middle and senior management. Departments were encouraged to be open and transparent in communicating both their performance in handling complaints and the service delivery improvements implemented as a result of complaints made, and senior management advised to consider and learn from best practices identified in other departments.

This effort gave interesting results as over half of the departments captured and shared the experience/lessons learnt in complaints (61%) handling. Even though, only 1% of the departments declared publicly that there were policy changes/service delivery improvements implemented as a result of complaints made. In general, as many as 71% of the departments did not make public their complaints handling information, be it complaints statistics, performance in complaints handling, or policy changes/service delivery improvements implemented as a result of complaints made.

Scottish Community Services Agency (SCSA) The Scottish public sector complaints handling landscape has been subject to significant review in recent years. The Crerar Review (report of the independent review of regulation, audit, inspection and complaints handling of public services in Scotland) published in 2007 and the Sinclair report (Fit For Purpose Complaints System Action Group) published in 2008, provide much of the background and context for SCSA work. The Crerar Review found that public sector complaints handling processes in Scotland were not fit–for­purpose. They were not always accessible or easy to use, they were inconsistent (across and sometimes within sectors) and were often complicated for organisations and for individuals to use. As a result of the findings of the Crerar Review, the Scottish Government established a Fit­for­Purpose Complaints System Action Group, led by Mr Douglas Sinclair who was at that time the Chair of the Scottish Consumer Council. Sinclair’s group was asked to develop proposals for simplifying public service complaints handling processes and streamlining the complaints handling landscape. Sinclair’s report made a number of recommendations including new roles or responsibilities for the SPSO; one of the main ones being to simplify and improve complaints handling by working with public bodies to develop standard complaints handling procedures. Sinclair also recommended that the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) co­ordinate a range of activities to help public bodies adopt best practice in complaint handling through supporting training for complaints handlers, assisting in the development of a complaints handling network, and issuing guidance. The Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010 (‘the PSR Act’) gave the SPSO new responsibilities and powers in relation to complaints handling, specifically a new role to oversee the development of standardised model complaints handling procedures (CHPs) for each sector (local authority, housing, National Health Service, Further and Higher Education, the Scottish

Government, Scottish Parliament and Associated Public Authorities in Scotland) and to promote and monitor best practice in complaints handling. These new duties are being undertaken by the Complaints Standards Authority (CSA) which was established by the SPSO in October 2010. The CHPs models have been developed in line with the recommendations of the Sinclair report and within the framework of the SPSO Statement of Complaints Handling Principles (approved by the Scottish Parliament) and the Guidance on a Model Complaints Handling Procedure. The emphasis in the CHPs is on quicker and simpler complaints handling with local, early resolution by empowered and well trained staff. While there is a different model for each sector, they are in fact the same procedure, which essentially is a two stage procedure within clear and transparent timescales. There is also an emphasis on valuing complaints by recording all complaints, reporting key information and using the lessons learned to improve service delivery. To support the introduction of the Model CHPs developed for each sector, including a suite of sector specific e­learning training courses to support staff awareness of the Frontline Resolution stage of the model CHP and good practice in complaint handling in general. This training is available to all public sector organisations in Scotland and is free. SCSA is now moving towards the next stage of work which will focus on identifying, developing evaluating and sharing best practice, developing key performance indicators and supporting complaints handling practitioners across the public sector in Scotland. One way of doing this is through our Complaints Handler Network groups. There is a requirement for each organisation to publish its complaints performance on a quarterly basis and publicise its performance annually. Organisations are also required to use complaints data to learn from complaints and to drive up standards of service delivery. A new cataloging model As the previous case studies show, there is still no “planning from feedback” culture even in the more civilized and innovative public administrations. Sensibility to citizen input in planning looks like utopia, tough efforts to contrast this stillness are evident. AMPLIARE In the following case studies from Italian North Western Public administration realities, a necessity to homogenize the spectrum of analysis was identified and a new cataloging model has been proposed. This model was intended to create a parallel between two local bodies which are different in size, mission, complexity, but are in the same territory, have several front office facilities and have the same potential target population. The model has been partly influenced by Parasuraman’s SERVQUAL, the ISO 9001, and the Common Assessment Framework approaches, stressing in different ways technical compliance and customer orientation. Issues like safety and performance are also part of these approaches, and have been considered separately for the paper convenience. Longbottom & Hilton (2011)’s work on Hard vs. Soft dimensions of service quality also influenced the model.

A Performance Technical Content Includes: technical compliance, readiness and timeliness, time and space consistency/homogeneity

B Performance Transparency and accessibility Includes: communication, information, system of signals, guides to services C Performance Availability and amplitude

Includes: Services amplitude, Performance completeness, effectiveness and utility of Services

D Consumer orientation

Includes: responsiveness, competence, courtesy, fairness, reassurance, empathy, capacity to identify customized solutions

E Infrastructures Includes: cleanliness, comfort and safety dedicated to welcoming consumers

Table 1: Complaints cataloging model Below are presented two Italian case studies: the first one is a public agency providing transportation services, the second one is a big size local body. Italian North West is an industrial area that is moving its workforce and missions to service production areas. Its total population stands near the 5 million range, and many important firms are still in there, including FIAT, FERRERO, MARTINI, LAVAZZA Case study 1: ITALIAN NW PUBLIC AGENCY (CS1) In CS1 there are no particularly refined systems for complaints management, both for the reduced number of reports, and for the small dimensions of the local body. According to the quality officer many complaints start from incorrect assumptions (the service for which one complains may not be in the competence of a public manager or that specific local body manager, or there is poor knowledge of procedures or equipment needed to operate, or the normative framework is not clearly evident or known). Complaints can then be considered unfounded. Other complaints relate to a subjective (negative) evaluation of a service received. For example, the waiting time of some service can be perceived as excessive, but the complaint deals with

timeliness which is in line with sector standards, and the negative judgment has to be returned to users. Some complaints can report staff offensive behaviour or some services inefficiency. In these cases, if the complaint appears founded an appropriate insight follows, reports are sent to responsibles for the identification of appropriate corrective / disciplinary measures. The planning of corrective actions is mostly linked to complaints concerning the malfunction of some infrastructure. In some cases the reported problem is not yet known and, therefore, an intervention has to be activated to solve the problem (for example, a lift malfunctioning or a damaged directions sign). While analysing Received complaints in the period 2010­2013 three aspects in particular brought to corrective/preventive actions. Complaints are of different nature, and may derive from dissatisfaction for a service received, from the consideration that a certain service Is missing, or they can also suggest improvements of already existing services. Considering that in many cases complaints are unfounded or require shared liability with external actors, therefore not only involves the local agency will, table 2 schematically summarize the situation of last three years.

YEAR No. COMPLAINTS PA/CA

2011 44 5 (2 C; 2D; 1 E)

2012 45 3 (1 C; 2D)

2013 31 3 (2 C; 1D)

Table 2: Complaints handling for CS1 in the 2011­2013 period Case study 2: ITALIAN NW LOCAL BODY (CS2) CS2 experienced the development of a quality management system starting from 2007, with ISO 9001 certification for 14 directional areas. The project now is widespread in large part of frontline services and from November 2011 an online Complaints reception system is active and aims to foster an organic method to receive and manage traditional complaints. 2

CS2’s trend with regard to complaints management according to the data from the last three years shows an increase in last year (2013) which is the result of an augmented attention to technical compliance as well as to the introduction of several new services which are replicated in different geographical areas of the local body.

2 Online complaints management is timidly spreading in the Italian Public Administration panorama, and not included in citizen participation online tools (Reggi et al., 2014).

YEAR No. COMPLAINTS PA/CA

2011 165 40 (19A; 3B; 10C; 4D; 4E) over 182 total

2012 219 41 (27A; 9B; 4D; 1E) over 145

2013 194 91 (55A; 6B; 21C; 4D; 5E) over 169

Table 3: Complaints handling for CS2 in the 2011­2013 period The corrective and preventive actions following to complaints are concentrated on a few types of service and concern the waiting time, hygiene and Technical ­ legislation compliance of provided service, then relate to A and E. Results from the D area could suggest that little interest is posed on the interaction with citizens, Human Resources Development and in general on Human Resources Management. Further, the percentage of PA/CA on complaints jumped from 21,97% to 28,27% to 53,84% and cannot be only motivated by spreading continuous improvement culture as several technical services have been included in the quality management system in 2013, and technical compliance is relevant in their provision. Despite repeatedly emphasized both in training moments and with official high direction documents and emails, the importance that to a founded complaint follows a preventive or Corrective action is averse to a Common managerial culture of CS2, while it is evident in the CS1. The Public Agency lies on citizens which are 100% customers, and this explains why on the total PA/CA the subarea D is always present. Looks like in both institutions safety and hygiene are not a priority, while technical compliance is the most common subject of PA/CA. A greater impact could have underlying clear objectives and performance rewarding as a consequence of preventive actions related to listening citizens feedback. Lacking this input, Leadership is either hesitant and lazy in dealing with citizen feedback, surpassing the logic of hic et nunc and going on prospects at least of medium term. PA leaders have clear ideas on the potential of this tool, but to them it is not clear the level of action and political impact that the complaint can imply.

CONCLUSIONS Complaining is yet a powerful tool, but not precisely calibrated for a PA reality. Even if we consider complaints joint with appreciation we would not obtain an automatic mechanism to translate feedback into planning input.

Media, irrationality, partisanship, collective or more often individual interests have always affected citizens expectations and evaluation of the Public Sector activity. Further, citizens tend to mistrust the whole organization while addressing to just a part of it. Even if we agree on the fact that “the integration of participation and performance measurement can greatly improve citizens' trust” (Yang and Holzer, 2006), we cannot underestimate the fact that complaints management has a distorted use, for lack of interest in using it, but above all because the organizational mandate is missing, or worst top managers accept "Laziness", in order to avoid contagious risky aspects like political responsiveness or social equity and their pandemic public opinion effects. As a transparency issue, complaints management would work only if transparency offer from the Public Sector and transparency demand from citizens were even (Ruffini, 2013). This trend leads sometimes to administrative burdens that “can be implemented via less visible administrative processes, requiring lower political consultation and less need to acknowledge their purpose.” (Moynihan, 2014), undermining trust, transparency, citizen participation and exacerbating inequality. Burdens can then become a tool for refining (creaming) the feedback provider and obtaining quick tips for planning? Should Public Sector always reduce or avoid enforcing burdens, or they can be a tool for noise reduction? Civil servants have in general a negative approach to transparency motivation (Ruffini, 2013) and feedback reuse, while being solicited to innovate during crisis and being more and more the “unit of analysis” (Kelman, 2006) where innovation is not the fruit of “necessity”, but an individual and institutional growth path deriving from a transparent approach to services planning and provision, pointed out also by citizens. These two tensions (vs. change and vs. private sectors) can be managed in a unique, productive and enriching way, where solving problems together is a win­win strategy. Future developments for the present study should not forget the identification of “noisy” complaints (the ones which are not completely founded, are relevant in numbers and tend to be influenced by specific actors or worst by the media i.e. education or taxation issues). Concerns on the statistical value of data from “multiple” complaints (same complaints proposed by a great number of different citizens) or of the “serial” complainers cannot be considered in a traditional way. This could lead to the definition of a ladder of civic involvement, that “grades” complaints according to citizens’ interest in Public Administration. A new measurement method were civil servants are not the only people assessed is advisable. There should be also the citizens, for their skills in input production. Financial as well as political issues could be essential to foresee negative picks and therefore there could be tests in order to reduce the impact of these picks and favour a trend analysis as underlined in the Efficiency Unit case study. Last, but not least, if “laziness” is a real issue in public management shyness on continuous improvement which are the characters of a “bad” manager?

REFERENCES Andreassen, T. W., Streukens, S., (2013), Online complaining: Understanding the adoption process and the role of individual and situational characteristics, Managing Service Quality, 23 (1) pp. 4 ­ 24 Arnstein, S. R., (1969), A Ladder Of Citizen Participation, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35 (4), pp 216­224 Askim, J., Hanseen, G. S., (2008), Councillors’ receipt and use of citizen input: experience from Norwegian Local Government, Public Administration, 86 (2), pp 387­409 Bose, R. (2004), Knowledge management metrics, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104 (6), pp 457­468 CFPS and LGO, (2011), “Aiming for the best. Using lessons from complaints to improve public services”, London Comune di Milano, (2013), “Sportello Reclami: Aperto”, Milano Crozier, M., Huntington, S., Watanuki, J., 1975, “The Crisis of Democracy”, accessed on 20/09/2013 http://www.trilateral.org/download/doc/crisis_of_democracy.pdf DeHoog, R. H., Lowery, D., Lyons, W, E., (1990) Citizen Satisfaction With Local Government Services: A Test of Individual, Jurisdictional, and City Specific Explanations, Journal of Politics 52, pp 807­837. DeMoranville, C. W., Bienstock, C.C., Judson, K. (2008), Using question order for predictive service quality measures, Journal of Services Marketing, 22 (3), pp 255­262 DESA, (2013), “Citizen Engagement Practices by Supreme Audit Institutions”, New York City Efficiency Unit of Hong Kong Government, (2011), “Survey on Complaints and Non­emergency Public Enquiries Handling Mechanisms”, Hong Kong Efficiency Unit of Hong Kong Government, (2009), “Complaints Handling”, Hong Kong GAO, (2000), “Internet: Federal Web­based Complaint Handling”, Washington, DC

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high­velocity environments. Academy of Management journal, 32(3), 543­576.

Fitzgerald, M.R., and Durant, R.F., 1980, Citizen Evaluations and Urban Management: Service Delivery in an Era of Protest, Public Administration Review, 40 (6), pp 585­594

Hattie, J., Timperley, H., (2007), The power of feedback, Review of Educational Research, 77 (1), pp 81­112

Hirschmann, A. O., (1970), “Exit, Voice, and Loyalty. Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States”, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

Holzer, M., & Kim, S. T. (2007). Digital governance in municipalities worldwide (2007): A longitudinal assessment of municipal websites throughout the world, National Center for Public Performance

Kang, G., James, J., (2004), Service quality dimensions: an examination of Gronroos’s service quality model, Managing Service Quality, 14 (4), pp 266­277

Kelman, S. (2006). Downsizing, competition, and organizational change in government: Is necessity the mother of invention?. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 25(4), 875­895. Kelman, S. (2005). Unleashing change: A study of organizational renewal in government. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Koontz, T. M., (1999), Administrators and Citizens: Measuring Agency Officials’ Efforts to Foster and Use Public Input in Forest Policy, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9 (2), pp 251­280

Kroll, A. (2013), The Other Type of Performance Information: Nonroutine Feedback, Its Relevance and Use. Public Administration Review, 73 (2) pp 265–276

Lewis, J.M. & Triantafillou, P., (2012). From performance measurement to learning: a new source of government overload? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 78(4), pp.597–614. Longbottom, D., Hilton, J., (2011), Service improvement: lessons from the UK financial services sector, International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 3 (1), pp 39­59 Manoharan, A., Holzer, M. (2012). Active Citizen Participation in E­government: A Global Perspective. Information Science Reference.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. In Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods; Qualitative data analysis: a sourcebook of new methods. Sage publications. Moynihan, D., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2014). Administrative Burden: Learning, Psychological, and Compliance Costs in Citizen­State Interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, forthcoming Nalbandian, J., (2013), Contemporary Challenges in Local Government: Evolving Roles and Responsibilities, Structures, and Processes, Public Administration Review, 73 (4), pages 567–574 NAO, (2008), “Handling Customers Complaints”, London OECD, (2001), “Citizens as partners. Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy­Making”, Paris Parks, R., (1984), Linking Objective and Subjective Measures of Performance, Public Administration Review, 44 (2), pp 118­127 Pettigrew, A. M. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic management journal, 13(S2), 163­182. Queensland Ombudsman, (2010), “Complaints matter. A review of the complaints management systems of local councils in Queensland”, Brisbane Reggi, L., Arduini, D., Biagetti, M., & Zanfei, A. (2014). How advanced are Italian regions in terms of public e­services? The construction of a composite indicator to analyze patterns of innovation diffusion in the public sector. Telecommunications Policy, in press Ruffini, R., (2013), Transparency Policies in Italy: the case of Venice Municipality, Journal of US­China Public Administration, 10 (6), pp 577­588 Ruffini, R., (1999), “La carta dei servizi.Valutazione e miglioramento della qualità nella pubblica amministrazione”, Guerini e associati Salamon, L. M. (2005). Training professional citizens: Getting beyond the right answer to the wrong question in public affairs education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11 (1), pp 7­19. Sanderson, I., 2001, Performance management, evaluation and learning in 'modern' local government, Public Administration, 79 (2), pp 297­313

Simon , H . A . 1947 . Administrative Behavior. A Study of Decision­making in Administrative Organizations. New York : Macmillan Soss, J., & Moynihan, D. P. (2014). Policy Feedback and the Politics of Administration. Public Administration Review. 74 (3), pp 320–332,

Thomas, J. C., (2012), “Citizen, Customer, Partner: Engaging the Public in Public Management”, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY Wai Yip So, B. (2012), Learning as a Key to Citizen­centred Performance Improvement: A Comparison between the Health Service Centre and the Household Registration Office in Taipei City, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 71, pp 201–210 Yang, K., & Holzer, M. (2006). The performance–trust link: Implications for performance measurement. Public Administration Review, 66(1), 114­126. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage.