KVI Change Management Survey Feedback July 2020 KVI

KVI Change Management Survey Feedback July 2020

KVI Change Management Survey – April 2020 • 10 responses received by customers. • July 2020 - achieved a KVI of 97. 1% against our target of 90% rated as ‘Always’ or ‘Usually’ • April 2020 - achieved a KVI of 97. 1% against our target of 90% rated as ‘Always’ or ‘Usually’. YTD 97. 1% • 5 reviewers provided further comments on the Change management process in July –see following slides

KVI Survey Results July 20 Costs associated with changes that Xoserve deliver are clear and accurate Xoserve reacts quickly and effectively to gas industry changes to affect my organisation I trust Xoserve to deliver changes to agreed costs, timescales and quality * Xoserve supports the ability for me to fully engage me in the change process, should I choose to * I trust Xoserve to identify solutions that benefit the whole Industry where possible * Xoserve presents a range of solution options for each change to enable choice * I receive timely and fit for purpose information to enable me to manage new changes that impact my organisation * 0 Always Usually 1 Rarely 2 Never 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

You said – We did – July 2020 You Said The support that is provided by the teams at Xoserve is outstanding, they are quick to react to requests made and regularly meet the needs of our business. However, there is still improvments needed with the delivery of changes, lessons learnt and the speed at which issues are communicated. This information has already been fedback. There has been much improvement from Xoserve with engagement an support relating to change. Issues with XRN 4850 were unfortunate to allow implementation from June; both with data sent to CDSP to make service functional and the GDPR issues delaying implementation. Some of the questions have been answered 'rarely' or 'usually, when in fact our view may be in-between the two. The ongoing VAT issue has been a source of frustration. I feeling that Xoserve do not understand the impact on DNs of the regular AQ issues. Delay in implementation of XRN 4850. Xoserve have made improvement to DSG sessions, structure of the meeting is much better than before. Content is well organised and transparent and Paul Orsler (chair) is doing a sterling job in presenting it. Many Thanks We Did

You said – We did – July 2020 You Said Our comments and ratings are based on this deliverable - we have provided some comments below to support our position and potential improvements in the future. Analysis/Design - Could've Gone Better There were inputs needed or clarified by XOSERVE, which were not available at the start. For example the file format specifications are approached in a different way for the Confirmation (CNF) and Customer Amendment (CNC) files. This has led to confusion. . . Specifically, in the CNF file space for more contact (S 66) records were made within each of the top level (S 38, S 42) meter point records – whereas for CNC, no such modifications were made. Overall it could help to clarify or explain the Business rules in the requirements documents. And if these details if shared early could've helped avoid re-work & wrong assumptions, leading to adjustments to plan/scope etc. Recommendations: Early reach out by XOSERVE, workshops, file formats in the documents. Capacity Planning/ Ops resource - Could've Gone Better The volume impact, daily limits, managing bulk uploads were not clearly shared in the requirements and also this could be shared much earlier by XOSERVE. In fact the capacity upgrade is something that's still in progress and the new EON daily limits are not confirmed yet. This is also causing timeline extensions on EON end also a cost impact. Recommendations: XOSERVE to share migration approach, timelines & plan early along with initial XRN requirements. (compared to carrying out this as a second or separate phase of project). Communications (Internal/External) - Worked well The project team discussions with XOSERVE once we reached out proactively were helpful. Especially the weekly calls in place now, the sample test files review earlier were all supported by the team. Thank you Surfaraz, Simon, Mithun & team. Testing (System/UAT) - Could've Gone Better With no end to end environment or connected systems, it's not possible to validate changes until they go live. We proactively shared sample test files for validation as next possible action For example the record level rejections seen post implementation and fixed by XOSERVE could be identified earlier via Sandbox or an integration test. Recommendation(s): Linked Test environments linked if possible, Sand box? We Did