MyOcean2 First Annual Meeting – 16-17 April 2013 Answer to users’ needs in service definition...
15
an2 First Annual Meeting – 16-17 April 2013 Answer to users’ needs in service definition and evolution Dominique Obaton, Vincent Claverie WP2 MyOcean2 First Annual Meeting – Cork /16-17 April 2013
-
Upload
richard-antony-stafford -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
3
Transcript of MyOcean2 First Annual Meeting – 16-17 April 2013 Answer to users’ needs in service definition...
MyOcean2 First Annual Meeting – 16-17 April 2013
Answer to users’ needs in service definition and evolution
Dominique Obaton, Vincent ClaverieWP2
MyOcean2 First Annual Meeting – Cork /16-17 April 2013
WP2 organisation and partnership
WP2.3Service
Engineering
WP2 – WP2.1 leadService Evolution, management and support
WP2.2Service
Definition
WP2.4Service
transition
WP2.5Service operation,
Service Desk
WP2.6Service
monitoring
Overall managementDaily management
Mercator OcéanWP2 leader& service managers
Users’ needs (requirements & feedback)
Inputs from
WP3 partners : ROOS users via URD –user requirement document- and UAR –user assessment report
User workshops (Stockholm 2009, Copenhagen 2013) Surveys –4 weeks after registration, at end of validation phase
of each release from standard (registered & external users) users
Spontaneous feedback to service desk from users or potential
users via the service desk, via you through the service desk
Users’ needs (requirements & feedback)
September 2009, Reference intermediate user group meeting, Athens reliability, long term sustainibility and quality requested for the
service
March 2011, from survey 3 months after service release. Answers from 23% of registered users (60 users)
Navigation of the web site not easy Difficult to use scripts
April 2011: user workshop, Stockholm reliability, long term sustainibility and quality requested for the
service Users want a simplification of the registration form Access to the catalogue of products not easy Navigation of the web site not easy One stop shop service is a good point As well as the open and free service
MyOcean answer
reliability Robustness of download mechanisms (producers and central
level) and web portal. Monitoring done. Network organisation of local service desks Central service desk communicates to users and on website
long term sustainability Better explanation given on web portal in catalogue of service Preparation of MyOcean follow-up: ECOMF. Communication on
this.
and quality requested for the service Addition of document to nearly each product of catalogue, QUID.
Available from catalogue. Quaterly report on NRT products planned end 2013
MyOcean answer
Navigation of the web site not easy Upgrade done in
July 2012
Users want a simplification of the registration form & would like an online registration form Online registration
from January 2012, 2nd main upgrade of service
MyOcean answer Access of the catalogue
of products not easy
1st part planned on 23 April 2013 Reorganisation of
catalogue, with reduction of number of products 107 vs 201
Better focus possibility on web search
2nd part planned for spring 2014 Advanced web
search planned in April 2014
MyOcean answer
Difficulty to use scripts FAQ proposed Generation of scripts after user refined his/her request, with a
« click » Training with online demonstration (as last week) Still need be improved (tutorials planned)
Analysis of all requests and feedbacks
over the period July 2011- May 2012 (11 months) from 90 users Altogether 274 requests or feedbacks
through surveys, user validation test, spontaneous feedback, different project meeting with users, user requirement and assessment
Record of all requests and feedbacks in a table “record of user feedback” with date, author, category of remarks, description of remark
MyOcean organisation & process
WP2 organisation and partnership
WP2.3Service
Engineering
WP2 – WP2.1 leadService Evolution, management and support
WP2.2Service
Definition
WP2.4Service
transition
WP2.5Service operation,
Service Desk
WP2.6Service
monitoring
• Record and synthesis of users’ needs• FTSS• Catalogue definition
Mercator Océan HCMR
main conclusion : users do not require new services, but the improvement of current service
Main positive feedback : wide range of products with at the same time observation/modeling
products no more complaints after registration process has been improved Users value the one stop shop. like the subsetting functionality that allow them to download a part of a
product. main feeling that comes out about the service desk is really good.
Users appreciate that the Service Desk provides an answer to any request quickly.
Users’ needs (requirements & feedback)
Main requests or negative feedbacks considered : products could cover a longer period of time than the one currently proposed. some requests about new products which mainly concern atmospheric
forcings. still difficult for some users to be able to find products in the catalogue. to have a better overview of the catalogue and to have search criteria
expanded to better target the products available in the catalogue. MyOcean doesn’t manage properly the download of large volume of
products. In some cases, inconsistency between the information about the product
(notably regarding the time coverage) and the product itself all datasets can’t be visualized Visualization of a dataset is too slow.
Comm’ messsages concerning incidents/maintenance sent to users are too numerous. Since February 2012 : messages recorded in “News Flash” + sent to users who chose the opt-in option. No more negative feedbacks after March 2012.
Users’ needs (requirements & feedback)
Users’ needs (requirements & feedback)
April 2013: user workshop, Copenhagen, last week
Needs of Marine Strategy Framework Directive expressed . Dialogue opened
MyOcean service very useful Biologists were present
Some of the needs mentionned by users Difficult to read nedcf for a GIS user and to read the MyOcean
data (netcdf) Difficult to download large volume of products Needs of very long time series: 50 years, 100 years Needs of higher horizontal resolution in modelling and up to the
coast Difficulty to choose a product among other (many temperatiure,
several reanalysis)
Service improvement
Continuous service improvement. Next analysis of user feedback planned for end of this year –will
include outputs of Copenhagen users’ workshop
Improvement come from users, providers and GMES forum
We try to have an analysis as objective as possible using rules
WP2 organisation and partnership
WP2.3Service
Engineering
WP2 – WP2.1 leadService Evolution, management and support
WP2.2Service
Definition
WP2.4Service
transition
WP2.5Service operation,
Service Desk
WP2.6Service
monitoring
• Record and synthesis of users’ needs• FTSS• Catalogue definition
Mercator Ocean WP2 leaderservice managercatalogue manager
Overall definition of service and of products
