Understanding postal access differences across countries
On 1st April 2012 in the UK, Post Office Ltd separated from the Royal Mail Group. Members will recall that this separation had been enabled by the Postal Services Act passed in the summer of 2011. The Act recognised the need for separation, in order to allow each company to develop in the changing and different markets that they operate within. Post Office Ltd will stay in public ownership, whereas Royal Mail will, in the future, be able to seek private investment. A long term commercial agreement has been secured to ensure that both companies continue to work closely together for the benefit of customers. Royal Mail has stated that Post Office Ltd will continue to be its retail arm. Royal Mail describes this agreement as providing them with unrivalled access to customers through the Post Office’s network of branches.
Royal Mail states that customers should see no change or difference to the way they obtain postal services and products via Post Office branches. Whilst there is the security of a long term relationship and the commitment to work together, the separation allows each business to develop their own strategies, and we understand both will continue to build on their valued role in British life.
It will be interesting to see how, following this change, the two business strategies develop to meet their stakeholder requirements and work individually or together to provide a range of accessible products and services to meet the needs and expectations of current and future consumers and small to medium sized business within the UK.
The last week has seen union calls to restart the campaign to “Keep the Post Public” so coming months will see more debate as plans emerge
In looking at how things evolve in UK this will make us particularly conscious of the changes to the context and how the separation and changes linked to ownership and infrastructure came about.
All too often it’s easy to assume that the baseline of and for Posts around the world is common, when in fact often subtle variations in history, culture and economy, amongst other factors, can obscure fundamental differences.
By way of example let’s just take a brief sample look at consumer expectations as to the role and requirement of “post office branches” in some western economies.
In Sweden and Denmark the public outcry often seen elsewhere in the world regarding changes to post office branch networks is inconceivable and not understood within Nordic cultures. Public perception of Post in these countries is clear; that it is all about access to the core mail business, which can be carried out on a transactional basis by third party agents or other convenient means anywhere.
As a further example of this more pragmatic attitude, Norway Post recently announced that it is expecting to be freed from its statutory duty to provide banking services across the country. We have mentioned in meetings with members how this just isn’t part of “core business”. The future plans include the intent to introduce a new simpler post office concept focusing on online shopping and packages.
Contrast this with the hotly debated public opposition in the USA to changes proposed to its post offices. Most recently there have been calls for the provision of powers to the USPS, to enable it to offer an extended range of government and other products and services that would mitigate the need for change.
Back again then to the UK, the government recently re-affirmed that the Post Office is a core part of the country’s economic and social infrastructure, and backed this up by a £1.34bn investment and support programme for modernisation.
In other parts of the world the core social role is even more pronounced. Post offices are regarded as a key governmental instrument to support social inclusion and wider economic development. India, South Africa and Brazil are just three examples of this.
All Posts are increasingly aware of the challenge in meeting growing customer expectations of choice and options as to what, where, when and how they decide to access the increasingly wide range of products and services in some way intrinsically linked to and with postal products.
Whilst I seem here today to have focussed on ‘post offices’, I am conscious that even the use of this term will conjure up some image and that this will differ in the mind of each reader. The same can be said for the use of the term ‘retail’, which may set boundaries or limit the consideration of the total customer requirement for service.
The generic term ‘Postal Access’ has become the title for our Forum, to ensure that the information we seek out and provide to you is not constrained by the many and various powers and organisational infrastructures, differing titles roles and responsibilities found in Posts around the world. The scope of access extends beyond the physical constraints of retail shops and the associated infrastructure, to include self-service, m-commerce and web channel development, as well as working with third-party partners.
In identifying and providing you with information and understanding about strategies, change programmes, partnerships, new developments, products, services, campaigns, different formats and ways of working, we aim to provide you with some insight into what is emerging and occurring around the globe.
However I would just finish with my thought for the month, which would be that in understanding best practise and translating action and activity from elsewhere, it’s important to check carefully and be assured that any differences in context linked to your locality, customer perception or need are understood, so as to ensure success.
