The competitor quality indices were set in 2002 and updated in 2005. The CRTC has been pretty clear about its expectations for the ILECs to exceed these standards, not view them simply as targets:
The Commission reiterates that the Q of S standards are not performance targets; they are the minimum acceptable performance levels. The RRP is not intended to provide the ILECs with a choice between paying rate rebates or meeting the Q of S standards.
[Decision 2005-20, p. 67]
Competitors order ILEC services in order to meet end user requirements, not for their own sake. When an ILEC messes up, both the competitor and its customers are losers. When the competitor is dependent on ILEC facilities and services, it is not in a position to defend its own reputation. As a result, frequently the end user simply gives up and returns to the ILEC for service.
It is precisely for this reason that the CRTC has repeatedly tried to get ILECs to pay attention to competitor quality of service metrics. Read the tone of Decision 2005-20 and Section VI of Decision 2002-34 to get a sense of the frustration of the Commission and competitors.
There is an alternate approach available to the ILECs: just meet the quality standards that are supposed to be delivered and exceeded.
And if there is a message for the CLECs at the same time, it is that customers are looking for more than just pricing advantages. CLECs and ILECs alike should be promoting quality, overcoming the challenges of delivering increasingly complex network services.
Let’s see carriers deliver better, clearer, smarter, friendlier, easier to use services.
That would be a high-quality competitive advantage.