1、BSI Standards PublicationPD CEN/TR 16706:2014Postal Services Quality ofService Measurement ofincorrect delivery FeasibilityReportPD CEN/TR 16706:2014 PUBLISHED DOCUMENTNational forewordThis Published Document is the UK implementation of CEN/TR16706:2014.The UK participation in its preparation was en
2、trusted to TechnicalCommittee SVS/4, Postal services.A list of organizations represented on this committee can beobtained on request to its secretary.This publication does not purport to include all the necessaryprovisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correctapplication. The British
3、Standards Institution 2014. Published by BSI StandardsLimited 2014ISBN 978 0 580 85163 6ICS 03.240Compliance with a British Standard cannot confer immunity fromlegal obligations.This Published Document was published under the authority of theStandards Policy and Strategy Committee on 31 July 2014.Am
4、endments issued since publicationDate Text affectedPD CEN/TR 16706:2014TECHNICAL REPORT RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT CEN/TR 16706 July 2014 ICS 03.240 English Version Postal Services - Quality of Service - Measurement of incorrect delivery - Feasibility Report Services postaux - Qualit de s
5、ervice - Mesure de la livraison errone - Rapport de faisabilit Messung fehlerhafter Zustellung - Machbarkeitsstudie This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 7 June 2014. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 331. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium,
6、 Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerlan
7、d, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels 2014 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Mem
8、bers. Ref. No. CEN/TR 16706:2014 EPD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 2 Contents Page Foreword 3 1 Scope 4 2 Normative References .4 3 Summary of Feasibility Study 4 4 Feasibility Study 5 4.1 Introduction 5 4.2 Clarification of ToR and Rationale from the Project 6 4.3 Set up our Working Plan a
9、ccording the ToR and Rationale .7 4.4 Results of previous research about measurement incorrect delivery .8 4.5 Some initial definitions about basic terms and process .9 4.5.1 Introduction 9 4.5.2 What is incorrect delivery? .9 4.5.3 What is delivery of registered postal item? 9 4.5.4 Who is the reci
10、pient (addressee)? 10 4.5.5 Who can be an authorized person? 10 4.5.6 What is the role (and influence) of address and addressing on correct delivery? 10 4.5.7 How should one correct process of delivery look like? . 10 4.6 Main issues which arise from our research . 12 4.6.1 Introduction . 12 4.6.2 T
11、echnical view . 12 4.6.3 Legal view 12 4.6.4 Economic view 13 4.7 Conclusion 13 4.7.1 General . 13 4.7.2 Merging PT-E and PT-F 13 4.7.3 Recommendations for future research. 14 4.8 Literature . 14 Annex A (informative) Measurement of wrong delivery and correct notification 16 A.1 Background . 16 A.2
12、Project features . 16 PD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 3 Foreword This document (CEN/TR 16706:2014) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 331 “Postal services”, the secretariat of which is held by NEN. Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this documen
13、t may be the subject of patent rights. CEN and/or CENELEC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. PD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 4 1 Scope This Technical Report provides the results of a feasibility study to determine whether a European Standard for th
14、e measurement of incorrect delivery could be developed. CEN/TC331 decided a European Standard was not feasible but that the results should be kept and the report transferred into this Technical Report. NOTE 1 At the end of 2011, TC/331/WG1 established Project Team F to research the measurement of in
15、correct delivery in accordance with the tender “RENEWED open call for project team experts for the execution of the work called for in the grant agreement SA/CEN/ENTR/EFTA/428/2009-06 Postal Services - Elaboration and adoption of standards documents in the EU and EFTA”. The Working Plan of PT F was
16、approved at the plenary meeting of CEN/TC 331 in December 2011. NOTE 2 According to the Working plan, PT-F presented to the TC/331/WG1 a first report at the meeting in Belgrade in March 2012. PT-F expressed the opinion that the development of a standard was not feasible and that they suspected that
17、a standardization document would not produce the expected results, that is a reduction in the number of incorrectly delivered postal items. PT-F highlighted that such a measurement system had no capability to recognize and record when a real event occurred (only when the sender and/or the receiver s
18、ubmitted a complaint), and therefore it will be unreliable. PT-F also mentioned the difficulty in finding existing and feasible measurement methods which would reliably measure such rare events. NOTE 3 In an open discussion with WG1 members at the March 2012 meeting, PT-F also mentioned a previous F
19、easibility Study and other research which came to the same conclusion that such a measurement is not feasible. PT-F and WG1 proposed to TC331 to adopt the feasibility study on “Measurement of incorrect delivery” at the Plenary Meeting in Ljubljana in May 2012. 2 Normative References None. 3 Summary
20、of Feasibility Study The task has been to produce a feasibility study for measurement of incorrect delivery. PT-F focused on the following two issues: how to find an appropriate measurement system and a measurement method; and how to find a unambiguous and clear definition for incorrect delivery whi
21、ch will be unanimously accepted. An appropriate measurement system is very difficult to establish as it shall be able to recognize incorrect deliveries in amongst mail that has been correctly delivered. Use of customer complaint data would not provide a reliable estimate as the intended recipient ma
22、y not be aware an item has been incorrectly delivered. A method by which it would be feasible to measure the number of incorrect deliveries is almost impossible to define, because these are rare events. Some indicators suggest that incorrect delivery occurs once in 100000, or more, correct deliverie
23、s (according to available data from EN 14012). Although a number of approaches were discussed, with those which are currently used in the postal measurements (test mail and real mail); telephone studies, field studies and others in social research, PT-F concluded that there is no one feasible method
24、 to measure such rare events. The definition of incorrect delivery is directly related to any deviation from the correct delivery. Because the definitions and procedures for correct delivery vary by country PT-F was faced with many differences when they tried to propose a common definition for the t
25、erm “incorrect delivery”. Incorrect delivery may have two aspects: delivery to an unauthorized person, which is usually regulated by national postal legislation, and the improper procedure of confirmation, which postal operators usually define with product and service manuals. Who can be the authori
26、zed person is difficult to define and may differ for every country due to different legal systems and numerous national legislations. A further complication is that PD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 5 it is often difficult to determine who has been responsible for an incorrectly delivery. Fo
27、r example, if the sender wrongly addressed the postal item, and the postman delivers that item as addressed, is it a correct or an incorrect delivery? When an unwanted event happens there is an obligation to determine who was responsible for the incorrect delivery; the sender or the postman or even
28、an objective circumstance. However, this means that it is necessary to separately assess each event before it can be determined that it is an incorrect delivery. To conclude, if it is impossible to build a measurement system that will identify each unwanted event when it happens, if it is impossible
29、 to find an acceptable method by which such rare event can be measured, if it is impossible to determine at the time of the event who is responsible for the incorrect delivery, if it is impossible to find a common definition of who can be authorized person in numerous postal legislative acts,., then
30、 this is why it was concluded that the measurement of incorrect delivery was not an appropriate topic for a standard. In accordance with the conclusion, it should be noted that the previous feasibility studies all rejected the possibility of developing a standards for the measurement of incorrect de
31、livery. In this sense, we wish to note that we reviewed a lot of postal studies, legal acts and standards where we found direct and indirect support for that conclusion. Finally, lets look at the reasons why its impossible to continue this project from technical, legislative and economic points of v
32、iew. From a technical point of view, it is difficult to find an adequate method for measuring the number of incorrect deliveries because it is a very rare event. Also, it is very hard to set up a recognizing system which would be responsible for detection of all unwanted events. Now, systems count o
33、nly events when the sender or the addressee complain about incorrect delivery, which NPO collects using EN 14012, and where he determinates the responsibility and yearly publishes the cumulative results. From a legal point of view, it is not possible to provide a common definition for the event of i
34、ncorrect delivery due to different legislative systems and the large number of different postal legislative solutions. Neither is it possible to standardize who could be the authorized persons for all countries or how the procedure of notification for all postal operators be consistently performed?
35、Therefore, how can we measure events that we do not know for sure have occurred? From an economic point of view any solution, which includes standardization documents, would be very expensive without clear benefits for customers, regulators or operators. Also, our consideration suggests that quality
36、 postal inspection or supervision could be a better solution for resolving rare cases of incorrect delivery than measurement. Therefore, our final conclusion based on technical, legal, economic and other aspects is that a continuation of the project “measurement of incorrect delivery” is not feasibl
37、e. 4 Feasibility Study 4.1 Introduction The main task of when preparing a feasibility study (FS) is to investigate the positive and negative results of a planned project before it starts. In other words, for developing the FS it is necessary to review legal, economic, technical and other factors, ac
38、cording to a projects Terms of Reference (ToR), in order to objectively identify the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed investment and the prospects for success. Therefore in the FS we first tried to explain most important parts of project “ToR and Rationale” which we received with the Agreeme
39、nt and basic concept of our Work Plans, which are adopted in official meetings. Then we will present postal literature, standardization documents and other documents about this subject and what we found during research as well as provide some definitions and explanations of basic issues, which are n
40、ecessary for understanding this subject. At the end we will analyse the prescribed project task from a technical, economic and legal view and give conclusions and recommendations. Figure 1 shows the concept of the FS. PD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 6 Figure 1 Concept of the feasibility st
41、udy 4.2 Clarification of ToR and Rationale from the Project According to the Terms of Reference (ToR) of the Project, the objective of Project Team F (PT-F) is to study the feasibility of a standard in its 1st phase and, if appropriate, to provide a draft standard for the Measurement of incorrect de
42、livery in its 2nd phase. The deadline for the 1st phase was set at 14 months (2 months for Working Plan and 12 months for the Feasibility Study) and, if TC/331 agreed to start the 2nd phase, a further 18 months. However, in collaboration with WG1, members of PT-F propose that TC/331 should accept th
43、e recommendation that it is not feasible to develop a standard for the “measurement of incorrect delivery” and therefore to end the project after the first phase. Here are some explanations for such a decision. The rationale of the ToR states that: “Registered postal items contain by nature importan
44、t messages or goods. Any of such items, which may be delivered to a person not being authorized to receive them may cause substantial problems, even if the correct addressee receives it afterwards. The knowledge of the quality performed by the operator would therefore give the customer an indication
45、, to which extent registered postal items are delivered.” A registered postal item according to the Postal Directive, is a postal service of “providing a flat-rate guarantee against risks of loss, theft or damage and supplying the sender, where appropriate upon request, with proof of the handing in
46、of the postal item and/or of its delivery to the addressee“. Also, it is similarly described in the Universal Postal Convention. So, based on above it is one of the key tasks to give a clear answer on who is authorized to receive a postal item because this event “may cause substantial problems, even
47、 if the correct addressee receives it afterwards”. Therefore, special attention was paid to this issue, which we will explain later. PD CEN/TR 16706:2014CEN/TR 16706:2014 (E) 7 The part of the ToR that states: “The knowledge of the quality performed by the operator would therefore give the customer
48、an indication, to which extend registered postal items are delivered” we find to be redundant because, according the standard EN 14012:2008, postal operators already have an obligation to collect the number of complaints about domestic and cross-border mail (see EN 14012:2008, Tables I.3.2 and I.3.4
49、) in three separate columns: the total number of complaints for all postal items, of which are “justified complaints” (differentiation from non-justified complaints) and of which are complaints with compensation (what basically means how many complaints have for registered items) as well as according 12 different rows (criteria), including “misdelivery” (definition in EN 14012 is: 3.20 misdelivery - complaint about postal item delivered to the wrong address or the wrong addressee), what basically could be “an indication, to which extent registered postal items ar
