“To become the experts in task and process data capture should the Planning team start by tracking and forecasting their own workloads?”

How long does it take to authorise a holiday, and how many holiday requests do you receive per day, per week, per month, etc? Do you receive more holiday requests at the start or end of each week? Do you receive more holiday requests in some months than others? When did you last review your holiday process and when the process last refined?

I’ve used annual leave/holidays as an example but these questions could be applied almost everything resource planning do.

For me the big question is: “Could Resource Planners plan their time, workload and schedule better by using the best practice principles they apply to their organisation?”

My response to the above: In my experience, having been involved with data capture for many years, I would agree that the best practice principles that resource planners apply across their organisation are absolutely applicable within their own teams. Any business area that receives work items that require any form of processing adds an operating cost – and it is foreseeing and controlling this cost that is the ultimate challenge.

The ‘holiday request’ example you have used illustrates the many associated factors that need to be considered when creating a resource plan – accurate data capture at key facets of this process would enable planners themselves to better understand the trend in these requests (volumes/date received), and armed with this information can seek to better plan their own workloads. The data also enables analysis of such processes as part of any process improvement initiatives – the outcomes of which may be to introduce service levels/cut off dates for holiday requests to add an element of ‘control’ and enable a better level of forecasting from which to plan.

The need to identify metrics/KPI’s to measure performance and better facilitate planning & forecasting is absolutely relevant across all teams and enables work optimisation, and collecting the right data at the right level requires intelligent operations management.

A number of eg’s clients have successfully implemented Back Office Optimisation software to capture and transform the detail of every activity and interaction with a process or customer into a three-dimensional view of their operation. It is through this data capture that they can plan their time, workload and schedules more effectively.

If anyone wants to know more about their approach to data capture please email me and I can put you in touch with these clients to share ideas – ask@eguk.co.uk

I have heard long is anything between 36-60 months and i’d be interested to get a poll going on what is the most common for all three terms – please let me know your thoughts?  Here were some of the responses:

1. We define long term as the point at which you can recruit staff and get them trained to complete the work, currently 8 weeks, although we often use the word strategic and then anything before that is short term or tactical. We have detailed plans for 18 months and only occasionally are required to go longer than that. We don’t have mid ter.
Rachel, this is a very interesting question where the answer depends on the processes and more importantly the culture of the organisation we are discussing. But let me see if I can share what we see across the entire Customer Contact Industry (Front Office, Back Office, Email, Field etc…)

2. Long term is very much around what Graham said earlier in this thread, it’s the part of the planning process where you set your stake in the ground to set your capacity requirements (staff, desks, lines, IT, licences etc.) This can be anything from 12 months through to 5 to 7 years out. I’m not convinced in the accuracy of ANY forecast 5 years out, but that isn’t the point of the plan, to be accurate, it’s about being representative.

This is the key point of the transition from Long term to Midterm forecasting. This is where the stake in the ground is then required to be more than representative of demand; it needs to become a robust reflection of anticipated demand, so scheduling, investment and operational decisions can be made with confidence. This is usually ALWAYS within year, sometime rolling 12 months or often just within the live financial year for the organisation. We need to start to manage not just the level of demand we receive but to begin to profile it (What, When, Who, How and Why) which is what makes forecasting a full time role. Understanding this historically and predicting the impacts of ALL operational activity is what makes this such a demanding and specialist role. (Also often tied into the finance RAF process)

And I suppose this is also a hint of when a forecast becomes short term. When is it “handed over” from the forecaster to the operation or the real time function? How far out is this? Well what is it being used for? If I use front office as an example, if we are looking to produce flexible schedules/rotas then a strong short term forecast is very important, can be considered short term as far as 12 weeks out (as THIS is one of the key uses for the forecast). If we have an environment where the shifts are fixed, it’s the planning of offline activity which we have in our arsenal to deliver the best service possible, so the short term can be anything from 6 weeks out to the day before!. I would always expect the level of demand for a customer contact environment to have been forecast up to 8 times for any single day before you actually get to the day it’s being used for
1. Longterm
2. Midterm
3. Midterm RAF
4. Midterm / shorter handover
5. Monthly reforecast
6. Weekly reforecast
7. 2 days out
8. 1 day out…..

So the answer is a set one, it’s about how you intend to use the forecast and where the planning process sits within your culture and environment, but hopefully you can see often what dictates the terms is the importance we put upon i.

3. Well, this is a question with several answers i guess. When we started using forecasting in Operational Intelligence we plan for three months. In our business the amount of work change from period to period and it could be a waste of time planning long term. We have made some plans for 12 months, in areas with more predictability, but mainly doing a three months plan. The long term planning is more linked up to the budged, and number of employees and than it’s mainly 12 months planning. We have no shorter planning than three months, but this could be more relevant in the future.

Some varied comments and much variance between how organisations view this.  I’ll be certain to make sure we touch on this at the forthcoming focus group in Birmingham.

What do you think? Why not join the back office optimisation linked in group too.

Read the Forecasting data sheet.

I’ve come across some interesting facts about coaching to share with you.

In a recent survey conducted by the Institute of Leadership and Management into coaching methodology across 250 large UK companies the following was noted:

• Coaching is widely used as a development tool. 80% of the organisations surveyed had used or were using coaching, with a further 9% likely to use coaching in the next three years.

• 83% use internally recruited/employed coaches and 65% use external coaches.

So who are the internal coaches?

• 53% of internal coaches are coachee’s line manager, 46% are ’senior staff members from within coachee’s own business area (technical specialists)

How were these coaches selected?

Internal coaches are selected on the basis that they are:

• Suitable individuals (54%)
• Line managers (53%)
• Senior staff members (46%)
• Members of HR staff (43%)

This led me to question if they have the right skills and how are they trained.  In the same survey two thirds of organisations (34%) offer some form of development, and one third encourage coaches to gain a qualification – but are the right people elected as a coach in the first place?

So can everyone be a coach?

Used well coaching is a powerful tool that can improve individual and company development.  However the coach needs to develop core skills, experience, knowledge and personal attributes to enable them to develop as a great coach.  You do not become a great coach just by being appointed one.  I’ve seen this many times and it takes a certain skills set to be effective.  A good coach knows there is always room for improvement – in themselves and the people they coach.

So over to you….

Do you see coaching as a proven way for managers to motivate people and improve individual and business performance – what works for you and what are the benefits?

Is coaching seen (evidenced) as a powerful tool in your organisation?

Leave a response and comment on what size organisation you are too please.  Thanks!

Janet Greenwood, Client Solutions at eg

He shared this insight to many through his books; most notably “The Goal” and “It’s Not Just Luck”.  Written in a compelling way, he ensured that the messages were both “received” and “understood”.  It is a mark of the man that he not only understood with such clarity issues at the heart of today’s challenges, when it comes to back office optimization, but that he knew how to communicate about them in the most effective way, to help others.  We owe much to the insight provided by Dr. Goldratt and we are saddened by his loss.

Users expect websites to work on their mobile phones and in two to three years, mobile support will become standard for any website.

So, as the biggest internet giants like Google and Yahoo are now saying the future of the internet is on mobile phones – will browsers be the new leader or will the i-phone/apps continue to dominate?  How should our website be designed to be accessible to the masses.

It’s a tough one to answer and I’d like your views so we can begin to shape how we approach this.   Leave your comments below please.  I’m sure there will be a difference of opinion or two!

eg operational intelligence® allows you to measure, manage and improve activities, whilst keeping and improving control through out the process.  Automatic data capture provides the information needed from desktops applications and mainframe systems for any attribute critical to you.

Linking this insight to loan values, customer segments or profiles, this intelligence lets you see and decide how best to focus, prioritise and where to match Customer demand with availability of your people’s skills knowledge and experience.

Meet eg at the forthcoming Credit Today event, “COLLECTIONS, DEBT SALE AND PURCHASE CONFERENCE” on 18 November 2010 at The Nottingham Belfry Hotel, Nottingham, UK.  We’ll be pleased to provide you with more information on how we can help you make a difference, with guaranteed results!  Also, with over 250 Senior Professionals attending this conference last year, don’t miss out on the hottest topics in the Sector.  For more details, go to:

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/conference/index.cfm

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.

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.

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!

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.