Notify Acas about making a claim to the employment tribunal beta assessment

Service Standard assessment report Notify Acas about making a claim to the employment tribunal 07/02/2023

From:
Central Digital and Data Office
Published
28 November 2023
Assessment date:
7 February 2023
Result:
Not met
Stage:
Beta

Service Standard assessment report

Notify Acas about making a claim to the employment tribunal

From: Central Digital & Data Office (CDDO)
Assessment date: 07/02/2023
Stage: Beta assessment
Result: Not met
Service provider: ACAS

Previous assessment reports

Service description

This service allows claimants or their representatives to notify Acas of a workplace dispute and choose whether they want early conciliation or to get a certificate to the employment tribunal for a judge to decide. It is a statutory service, and claimants cannot access the employment tribunal without first making a notification to Acas. Acas receives up to 120,000 notifications a year.

Early conciliation is a largely telephone-based service that involves speaking with individuals and organisations in the dispute. Highly trained conciliators help parties understand relevant legal principles and assist them to reach a resolution.

If a resolution cannot be found, or the claimant does not want conciliation, then Acas provides a certificate that allows parties to take their dispute to the employment tribunal.

Service users

  • claimants – individuals with a workplace dispute.
  • representatives – solicitors, legal advisors, trades’ union representatives or family members/friends who speak to Acas on behalf of a claimant.

Covering advisory note

The team provided a very comprehensive view of the new service. Because this is a beta assessment there is no leeway to provide an overall ‘met’ where some of the standards have received a ‘not met’ decision. The team needs to resolve some key elements to receive a ‘met’ decision, the main one being the cookie consent issue. The team have proven they have a problem to solve and have completed comprehensive user research to build a great service.

1. Understand users and their needs

Decision

The service met point 1 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team has addressed the recommendations from their Alpha assessment and have carried out research with users who are not familiar with the ACAS tribunal certification process. As a result of their findings, they have made several recommendations for how these users could be better supported in their journey and these are going through the approvals process for implementation
  • the service has been tested with a good range of users with accessibility needs, including those with visual impairments and neurodiversity
  • the team have been able to capture real life journeys by using Hotjar recordings and have used insights from this analysis to feed into their interviews and usability testing
  • there were multiple examples shared of how user research had positively impacted the design of the service
  • the team have a comprehensive plan for research in private beta, which includes a wide range of users with different needs, including assisted digital

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • refine their user needs. Those provided were created, where a user has to do something because it is required by the service, as opposed to a high level or explicit need and it needs to be made clear that’s what they are. The team should also present the high-level needs of the user in relation to the service. These were referenced at times, but need to be clearly presented and easy to reference to make sure the whole team is united on ensuring these key overarching needs are met
  • develop some case studies or personas to bring to life the different types of journeys. Beyond awareness of ACAS and the basic user groups, there was little to differentiate between motivations and behaviours, e.g., reasons for applying, occupations/industry. This will allow the team to gain a greater depth of understanding around how different types of users could be impacted and design and iterate accordingly
  • do more to understand users with low digital skills. Most service users are those in non-professional roles, so there is likely to be a mix of digital competency
  • the panel recommends using the digital inclusion scale to capture this information when users take part in research and subsequently using it in recruitment if there are gaps in representation across the scale
  • the team should do some testing with those using the assisted digital route to ensure that this journey is meeting the needs of this user group

2. Solve a whole problem for users

Decision

The service met point 2 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • contextual guidance is used to help users answer the question and explain their options. For example, the team identified some users were unfamiliar with the benefits of starting with Early Conciliation, over opting for a tribunal and present the benefits to users early in the journey.
  • two applications were consolidated into a single application process
  • data on the frequency of different reasons for a claim were analysed and the options ordered, leading with the most frequent reason first in the list

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • continue to work on the application for multiple claimants and how the team will help users select the appropriate form to meet their needs. A clear user need was articulated by the team, to make a single claim on behalf of multiple employees

3. Provide a joined-up experience across all channels

Decision

The service met point 3 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • research was conducted with participants who knew nothing of making a claim, identified search terms and mapped the user journey to reaching the form through third parties such as GOV.UK and the Citizens Advice Bureau
  • the team have analysed content on third party websites and are using the data to drive consistency in how Early Conciliation is presented to the user as an alternative to a tribunal

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • test the assumption that including more information on the confirmation email improves the users understanding of next steps, rather than displaying it on the confirmation page

4. Make the service simple to use

Decision

The service did not meet point 4 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • content about the importance of timelines is prioritised on the Start page. The team identified users had difficulty understand the time limits governing when a submission can be made and responded by including summary guidance on the Start page which is supported by more detail on a separate ‘Employment tribunal time limits’ page
  • the team have considered the needs of regular users of the old form, such as legal representatives who bookmarked the old form, and are redirecting them to the new form to aid findability
  • the team have adopted the ‘one thing per page’ methodology
  • the team worked with conciliators to define the questions that they ask on the form, removing questions that weren’t used in the decision process

What the team needs to explore

Before public beta, the team needs to:

  • review button text at the start of the form. ‘Save and continue’ is used from the first question on the form before the proposition of a save and return option is given. Consider asking the user if they’d like to save and return, before asking for a memorable word, which would remove the need for an optional question and create an opportunity to explain the benefits of doing so
  • review how the Task list page is used with ‘Details about the dispute’. Currently the page displays every question relating to a reason. When multiple reasons are selected it’s unclear which question relates to which reason. The Task list page is useful for simplifying longer transactions with multiple tasks. Consider what the task is and how to group multiple questions relating to that task together. Resolving the use of optional questions will help significantly with how the task list can be simplified
  • consider a design critique with other government departments particularly where the team have deviated from government design patterns. There is a cross government Get feedback session every Wednesday 11:00-12:00. You can sign up using Trello or by email. These sessions would be useful in picking up some of the recommendations made in this report, prior to going to assessment

When in public beta, the team needs to:

  • explore alternatives to marking questions as ‘optional’ throughout the form, consider using questions which allow the user to state whether they wish to answer the question or not, and engage with Legal on making the process simpler to use.

5. Make sure everyone can use the service

Decision

The service met point 5 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team has conducted research with a good range of users with accessibility needs, including those with visual impairments and neurodiversity
  • two Digital Accessibility Centre (DAC) accessibility audits were commissioned for the service at the start and end of Private Beta. The team have responded to the recommendations by fixing issues raised by the reports
  • the service was tested with users who have access needs
  • alternatives to the digital form are provided for users and a paper form is available for users who need it

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • do more to understand users with low digital skills. Most service users are those in non-professional roles, so there is likely to be a mix of digital competency (see point 1 for more detail)
  • consider alternatives to the use of a secondary button for the ‘Change’ link on the Check Answers page. The team articulate well the need to limit the number of elements on the page and introduce space on the page responding to insight from users who need to pinch and zoom in. Use of a secondary button on Check Answers adds height to the page, which is duplicated for each item
  • continue testing the service with users who have access needs using different devices and viewports

6. Have a multidisciplinary team

Decision

The service met point 6 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team filled the product manager skills gap for beta ensuring a link between technical, product and delivery management and providing a better product to users
  • the service owner is clearly embedded in the team and is a strong supporter of them
  • the team conduct ‘scrum of scrum’ discussions with other workstreams in Acas, learn lessons and use feedback to make their service better

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • ensure that disagreements are discussed at retrospectives and professions, other than service owners and delivery managers, can review and help resolve these

7. Use agile ways of working

Decision

The service met point 7 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • show and tells are being well attended by the conciliators at ACAS who are a key user group
  • the team could provide an example of how disputes are resolved within the team
  • the team have reviewed the legal requirements as well as user needs to provide a service which can improve the user experience and allow users to complete the journey within the legal timescales required

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • review how other government departments and agencies use missions; this approach may help focus the service team to continually meet user stories
  • continue to challenge the internal processes to provide the best user journey through the service

8. Iterate and improve frequently

Decision

The service met point 8 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team have completed a randomised control trial of the current service and the future service to understand the benefits of the new service compared to the existing service
  • the team were able to speed up the approvals process, allowing them to move quicker and release value sooner
  • the team have completed user research which confirms that 97% of users pick only four reasons for dispute (jurisdictions)

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • utilise design hypotheses to drive out key metrics to measure the improvements and impact of each assessment
  • review the outcomes of the randomised control trial and create user stories and action any gaps in upcoming sprints
  • review the design of the confirmation page if more than four jurisdictions are selected to ensure it is still easy to use and covers all user needs

9. Create a secure service which protects users’ privacy

Decision

The service did not meet point 9 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team explained which data they would be storing and for what purpose
  • the team demonstrated that their data retention policy complied with GDPR regulations
  • the necessary IT Health Checks and security vulnerability testing had been carried out for the service
  • the service had been deployed using best practices to protect sensitive data in their cloud infrastructure

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • put a cookies mechanism in place for the Acas website which is compliant with the 2020 Information Commissioner’s Office guidance (see here: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/cookies-and-similar-technologies/#compliance)
  • ensure that any changes to the integration between the Beta Forms Service in AWS and the Management Service in Azure do not adversely affect the security of the service.  Changes to the technical design of the service may require an updated IT Health Check

10. Define what success looks like and publish performance data

Decision

The service did not meet point 10 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team has defined service specific KPIs as a team, linked to specific measures, data sources and baselines/targets
  • the team has explored further key measures linked to the success of the service, also linked with data sources
  • the team has understood the limitations of data sources, such as Google Analytics, and used the Performance Framework to drive the creation of other data sources

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • put a cookies mechanism in place for the Acas website which is compliant with the 2020 Information Commissioner’s Office guidance (see here: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/cookies-and-similar-technologies/#compliance)
    • “The basic rule is that you must:
      • tell people the cookies are there;
      • explain what the cookies are doing and why; and
      • get the person’s consent to store a cookie on their device.”
    • all Google Analytics, HotJar and any other non-essential tracking should be paused until a compliant cookies mechanism is put in place
  • enhance the performance framework using the core user needs as a starting point, to ensure the performance framework is comprehensive of all areas of the service. Start with a key user need and then examine how would you know if the service was meeting or failing that need. Then turn those success and failure points into metrics with measures and data sources
  • document and capture data and insight from the legacy Notify ACAS service, including using the IFF research, so the team can fully understand where the new service has improved outcomes for citizens and ACAS
  • put an evaluation process in place, in order understand measurement requirements ahead of iterations going in. Use this mechanism to report back on changes made to understand their impact. Use the design hypotheses of the iterations to drive out these metrics

11. Choose the right tools and technology

Decision

The service met point 11 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team migrated their frontend technology from Drupal to Symfony to provide flexibility for future development of the service
  • the infrastructure uses cloud best practice and the appropriate cloud managed services for the Forms Service
  • the GOV.UK Frontend has been incorporated into the Forms service to maintain accessibility requirements and provide some consistency with other GOV.UK  services

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • investigate how development environments can be run more efficiently within sustainability guidelines
  • continue to upskill Acas staff so that the service can be maintained in-house and reduce reliance on any third-party support

12. Make new source code open

Decision

The service met point 12 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

13. Use and contribute to open standards, common components and patterns

Decision

The service met point 13 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the service uses GOV.UK Notify for email notifications
  • the GOV.UK Frontend has been incorporated into the service

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • investigate using the Ordnance Survey Places API (https://developer.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/os-places-api) for postcode lookup instead of the commercial AFD Software product
  • explore alternatives for users to manually confirm their employer address as new services could fill this need

14. Operate a reliable service

Decision

The service met point 14 of the Standard.

What the team has done well

The panel was impressed that:

  • the team will be running the Forms Service on a fully managed cloud platform (AWS UK) to provide a reliable service
  • the team were taking advantage of the monitoring features that the managed AWS platform provides.
  • the team has provided a submission queueing mechanism to provide reliability tools for the support team

What the team needs to explore

Before the next assessment, the team needs to:

  • provide more detailed documentation regarding disaster recovery, service level agreements and non-functional requirements for the Forms service
  • consider scenarios where the digital service is not available
  • provide more information regarding performance testing

Next Steps

The service must undergo a partial re-assessment against the points of the Standard that were not met (4, 9 and 10). The recommendations for the ‘met’ points are looking ahead to the public beta phase. The panel recommends the team sits the re-assessment in around two months’ time when the outstanding issues are resolved.

Updates to this page

Published 28 November 2023
Contents