Summary taken from a white paper written by Mr P Ezzard, eg solutions plc.

Introduction

Research in the USA retail banking sector suggests that at the turn of the century, 70% of customer transactions were still undertaken by face-to-face contact in High Street branches. By 2005 this had reduced to 42% and it is predicted in 2010 it will account for only 30% of service transactions (Corporate Executive Board 2006 – Lean Manufacturing for Financial Services).

These face-to-face transactions have been replaced by telephone; internet and ATM entered requests routed to large Contact and Processing Centres. This pattern is being repeated in service organisations across the world.

This change has been driven in part by the development of technology but also by organisations wanting to reduce costs and improve service through centralisation, outsourcing and off-shoring of service support and processing.

In this context further research in the USA suggests that in service industries 40% of operational costs are wasteful even when the work is undertaken in dedicated centres (Corporate Executive Board 2006 – Lean Manufacturing for Financial Services). Similar research in the UK suggests that “failure demand” in Contact and Processing Centres can account for anything from 20 to 60% of all customer transactions in financial services, often higher in local authorities and utilities (Seddon 2003 and 2008). (Failure demands are customer contacts and subsequent processing activities caused by a failure to do something or do something right for the customer.)

It is therefore not surprising that service organisations are continuously looking at ways in which to improve performance.

Two key ways of doing this are through:

• Operational management improvements that result in the more effective utilisation of resources and processing systems available. For example, implementation of operational intelligence and improved operations management practice.

• Initiatives aimed at achieving improvement through re-engineering processes, structures and cultures. For example, “Lean” and “Six Sigma”.

The two approaches are separate but complementary. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of several of the more common improvement methodologies and then to show how eg operational intelligence® can be used alongside them to monitor success and maximise the benefits that can be achieved by organisations striving to meet customer and cost improvement requirements.

To request a copy of the full white paper please complete the form below.

Recently I have found myself attending an increasing number of webinars.  Some have been to help me learn new skills and keep up to date with Marketing tools, others have been hosted by analysts or industry experts to help with market research and some have been organised by potential suppliers to help me understand the products and services they have on offer.

I started to think about whether webinars are a positive or negative trend: yes they are convenient, ‘green’ in the sense you have immediate access to anyone/any company anywhere in the world without spending money or wasting energy on travel and you have the ability to quickly capture and share new information with your wider team.

But on the other hand, web meetings and web conferences are not suitable for all types of gatherings.  Human contact plays an import role in relationship building with customers and suppliers and should not be underestimated.  There is often no substitute for face-to-face contact, particularly at the start of an important business relationship and for the purpose of networking.  

Would you buy from a new supplier without meeting them in person, only via web contact?  Do we need to achieve a balance between face-to-face and web contact?  I would be really interested to know what you think.

Last time (“You can’t measure my work” versus “What get’s measured get’s managed”) I looked at the tension between measuring variable processes and the value if you persevere in doing this.  It looks like I stirred up a hornet’s nest of feedback – and thank you for it!

I also promised to feedback those views.  Some of these were posted direct to the blog.  But however you fed back to me – whether there on the blog, through e-mail, calls/text or when we met face to face at your office, our Focus Group or Software User Group – thank you one and all!

Let’s start with Debbie Strickland, as she explained about the desire people have in WANTING to achieve the goals you set them based on the measure.  As they strive towards these goals they show their colleagues, themselves and you, HOW they add value.  So make sure you think carefully about WHAT each target is when you set it!  And don’t “micro” manage as you use the measure, but make sure you look at consistent performance over a longer time.

Gary Stone points out the need to measure the right PEOPLE, delivering service in the right way with the correct result.

Even though we measure a process, Paul Cooper reminds us to involve the team.  PEOPLE bring different strengths – so make sure you recognise these strengths and those that deliver QUALITY steadfastly – as well as those who produce volume.

Next time, we will focus on team involvement to support ownership and engender belief in measures, what they show us and the potential to achieve a POSITIVE impact on REALISING tangible business benefits.  Contact me at andrewbaker@eguk.co.uk or sms +44 7785 29 03 46 if you have examples to share too!

On the way to work this morning I heard an interview on BBC Radio 4 with ‘Roy Mayall’, a Royal Mail worker who has decided to speak out in defence of the those workers who chose to strike a few weeks ago -  see http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n18/roy-mayall/diary. 

I could actually see parallels between some of the issues he was describing and the work we do to help our clients improve the efficiency of their businesses.

The first is around unit times for tasks.  ‘Roy’ spoke about a new system into which incorrect unit times were being used, resulting in some postal workers doing their rounds well within allocated times or having to work overtime for unit times which were too short.  The result?  A system where it is virtually impossible to measure, monitor and improve staff performance and have a true understanding of workloads or a fair and consistent working practice. 

As my colleague Teri Febery explained within her blog post ‘Should individuals be credited with additional times for reworking a task’ on October 13:

“In order to measure, manage and improve productivity we spend time at the outset of each project measuring how long it takes staff to complete tasks.  The unit times we record help us to assign standard times to tasks – taking into account skill level – and these times can then be entered onto our software and used to forecast how long it will take teams to finish work and analyse how well they are performing against standard times.  This is essential to help Managers and Team Leaders understand how staff are performing and helps them to identify and correct any issues – such as training needs or underperforming staff – swiftly to reduce any impact on the performance efficiency of the organisation.”

Paramount to the measurement and setting of standard times is communication with staff to manage their expectations and help them to understand why we do things in this way and how it will benefit them and the business.  This helps to obtain the buy-in from staff you need to engage to make an implementation a success.

This brings me to my second point.  In ‘Roy’s’ opinion, the management consultants and the management team at the Royal Mail brought in change from the top without consulting or involving the teams on the floor.  This, he says, has meant that unreal targets have been set, workers are unhappy and traditional values have been lost.

This, I believe, is the most important learning point for any company or any size in any sector. 

In order to integrate a new system or operational management practices into a business, engagement with staff and communication is key.  Sometimes it takes time for people to understand and accept change and the most effective approach is to gain buy in from the start and remove the barriers that may exist. 

Our Delivery team pride themselves on the relationships they foster with clients and during projects are seen as one of the team rather than an external consultant.  Their aim is to understand our clients’ organisations, share best practice and guide & support them through the process of improvement.  As one of clients said at the end of a project:

“The way eg integrated themselves into our business was certainly one of their strengths. They became trusted members of the team, which enabled them to get a better understanding of the way our people and our business worked. The training they provide isn’t just about how the system works, it’s about the way people should approach managing and improving the way they work – a mindset that really does give positive results.”

The workers on the front line, back office or in the contact centre are the ambassadors for your company.  If you get it right for them, they will get it right for your customers.

At our recent Focus Group at Think Tank, Birmingham, we discussed operational needs for now and the next 6-12 months with our customers.   With a range of operational responsibilities represented, these varied.  However, when it boiled down to it, the majority of delegates needed to understand their business (customers, processes and employees), forecast and then optimise their operation to ‘cope’ with the future.

That made me think, as a Team Manager or Customer Service Manager, what should my priorities be now in the current climate?  Have my needs really changed over the last 12 months?

I don’t think current needs are really any different from what most organisations have always tried to do (some just more effectively than others).  The current economic climate has just put the effectiveness of this process under the microscope.

So where should you start in improving your own organisations ability to manage now and in the future?  Paul Cooper from West Bromwich has already blogged about the challenges of a quantitative and qualitative dilemma.  If we add in the need to understand our customers’ journey, delivering on our promises, case ownership versus functional ownership and the business improvement projects that we have to deliver – oh by the way at a reduced cost -  what should we do?

Back to basics I say!  The old adages are the best – ‘If you cannot measure it you cannot manage it’.  Do you and all of your colleagues really understand your business?

Until you do, your ability to deliver is challenging.  So what pearls of wisdom do I offer I hear you shout?  Well how about these to start with:

• Make sure the information you collect adds value to your customers and your organisation.
• Make the collection of it as easy as possible – but make no mistake that collecting it is important by demonstrating the value of the output for those who have to collect it!
• Focus the measures on understanding your customers, the processes they have to follow and your co-workers who have to manage your processes.
• Engage all your staff in the importance and benefits of the Management Information for them and your customers – it is generally a self fulfilling process.  It then becomes an embedded part of your organisations DNA – the way we do things around here.
• Targets change – so change your focus but retain the balanced set of measures – it means you will be making fact based decisions.
• Make sure you share the information within your business – it’s amazing what impact sharing knowledge about your back office processes does for the front office and ultimately your customer.

The list could go on – but perhaps you could share some thoughts on what has worked best for you?  Leave a comment or email me: jamesblackhurst@eguk.co.uk.