Telecom industry grievance redressal system: a study of ombudsman approach in selected countries

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to explore the telecom regulations and telecom reforms of different countries in the context of consumer complaints and grievance handling. The telecom dispute resolution mechanisms of countries such as Australia, the USA, the UK and India are studied. This qualitative research is carried out for the three major telecom markets: Australia, the USA and India. Design/methodology/approach Here, research is conducted in two stages. In the first stage, the telecom policies of the major telecom markets, their ombudsman policies and consumer grievance redressal mechanisms are studied. In the second stage, the qualitative analysis of the three telecom markets, Australia, the USA and India, is conducted through in-depth interviews, the questionnaire method for telecom customers and secondary research. Findings Telecom customer satisfaction is significantly higher in countries with the telecom ombudsman as a system of telecom governance redressal. This study dedicates significant importance to the distinctiveness of the grievance resolution systems in different countries and suggests recommendations for improving the mechanisms. The recommendations given in the research study emerge as the output of interviewing telecom experts, academicians and researchers and court judges. Research limitations/implications This study has partial limitations as primary research was carried out only in selected countries with limited participants. Practical implications This study is useful for policymakers, regulators and think tanks in the telecommunications sector. Social implications The resolution of individual customer grievances is significant to the telecom industry and all participants. A well-oiled grievance redressal system enhances the trust among the service users and aids in the industry’s growth. Further practical assessment of redressal offered by different telecom operators can be used for benchmarking, and it can create an onus on telecom operators for timely and adequate redressal of consumer complaints. In certain countries with a well-developed alternate dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism, the service offerings of telecom operators and the quality of services are deemed to be better than those without such an ADR. The research aims to bring in the positives of ADR systems from specific telecom markets and suggest the effectiveness of such ADR for countries such as India, which has over 1.17billion active subscribers. This research aims to aid responsive communication with telecom consumers in the overall telecom industry, which can bolster telecom consumers’ confidence and help the industry grow sustainably. Discussing perspectives on telecom dispute resolution in various conferences and discussing use-cases of innovative dispute settlements can act as stimuli in this space. As ADR procedures are conducted in the shadow of the law, a dispute resolution framework must have a buy-in from the government, telecom experts, the judiciary and private telecom stakeholders. This can only help achieve a framework that can reap the benefits of various ADR/ODR processes facilitating better access to justice, including cost-effectiveness, swiftness, a broader reach for dispute resolution and improved efficiency of dispute resolution. Originality/value Previous studies have focused on the study of telecom reforms and mechanisms in a particular country and there was a limited comparison with other countries’ mechanisms. Also, there has been minimal research in this area in recent years. This paper contributes to analyzing the effectiveness of the telecom ombudsman framework in Australia, the USA, the UK and India. It also studies the reforms and consumer grievance-handling mechanisms in a few other countries. It also gives well-researched recommendations for improving the consumer grievance resolution system.