Disgruntlement with EV charging services

I could not resist this blog post I was so charmed by the concept of user disgruntlement as a quantitative measure of service quality. Disgruntlement is measured as the difference between scores for the expectation of a service provision and the actual delivery scores. For example, do users of EV charging points expect the ability to buy refreshments while they are waiting for their car to charge? If refreshments are important to them and lacking, then it would probably be worthwhile to provide such things. However if this service is not important or costly to provide then probably not. The underlying scores for importance and delivery are given on a likert scale (1-5). If delivery score exceeds expectation then users are well satisfied and the disgruntlement is negative whereas if expectation exceeds delivery score then disgruntlement is positive (i.e. users are disgruntled)).

This post is based on an article in the Journal of Transport Geography [2]

	Good service	Poor service
Important	No change needed	Worth fixing (depending on cost)
Not important	No change needed	No change needed

The study compared charging services in three locations: Oxford, West London (Fulham) and Banbury (close to the M40). These locations are different in many respects. London has the greatest population density and also number of charging stations while Banbury has the lowest population density. More than 80% of the users at Banbury came from outside the county and were on a long trip compared to only 22% in London and 60% in Oxford.

The UK Department of Transport (DfT) has a target that 80% of new cars should be zero emission vehicles by 2030 increasing to 100% by 2035 [1]. This target will be hard to achieve if users are disgruntled (marked ‘D’).

Based on questionnaires for the station users, the source article for this post [2] lists these aspects as among the most important for EV charging services:

• Vacant charger available
• And functioning (!)
• Also the charger has to ‘fit’ the vehicle with the right connectors and a long enough cable. Charging port locations on some cars may require longer cables.
• The station is clean and hygenic
• The charger is easy to use (D)
• Using an app to use it and/or pay requires some digital literacy which can be a challenge for some elderly potential customers
• Good value for money
• Weather protection for waiting drivers and passengers
• Clarity in the charging fees
• On site assistance from staff (although remote help can also work if it is prompt) (D)
• Up to date advance information on service availability and waiting times (D)
• Accessible location (D)
• A stations' proximity to major highways and intersections enhances the accessibility to long-distance travellers. Otherwise, retail centres, workplaces, highways, or park-and-ride sites are perceived as accessible and convenient.
• Facility to reserve a charging point in advance

Other less critical aspects

• Wi-Fi availability
• Some 20% of users like to use their phone or laptop for social purposes while waiting.
• Retail and Entertainment facilities nearby

The expectation is that the service provided will be adequate in all of these aspects. This is best viewed on a spider chart. This chart, for London, is taken from the source paper [2] using an average of all three locations. 

 

Spider chart indicating expectation and realised (actual) scores for different aspects. The numbers index a key in [2]. and the codes are for different categories of aspect: IN for instrumental i.e. functional or practical; AF for Affective, i.e. it affects mood. (There is only one of these; feeling safe and secure) AT for Attitudinal. 

Disgruntlement is positive (users are disgruntled) where the actual (green) scores are inside (less than) the expected scores. The largest differences are for 11 (having an on-site assistant) or possibly 21 (having a unique and inspiring architectural design). In both cases the actual score was better than the expected score meaning the users were satisfied. Overall, there was disgruntlement for:

• Remote assistance
• mobile app usability 
• clarity in data sharing and costs
• service information provision

Conclusions:

Given that take-up of EVs is critical for meeting our GHG emissions objectives, service provision quality at EV charging points is also critical. Policy makers would do well to seek improvement in the aspects listed above where services are currently falling short.

References

[1] Pathway for zero emission vehicle transition by 2035 becomes law

[2] Labib Azzouz, Christian Brand, Tina Fawcett, Zhaoqi Zhou, Maryam Altaf (2026), Journal of Transport Geography Beyond the plug: Enhancing the user experience at public electric vehicle (EV) charging hubs. Insights from a multi-site UK study