tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-62034813257392949002024-03-13T02:27:45.080+00:00Better For EveryoneThe blog of Alison J Widdup, Managing Director of Better for Everyone, the call centre with intelligence, integrity and initiative.Chrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14128745577045705281noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-49382558791516602142010-04-28T13:52:00.002+01:002010-04-28T13:55:15.229+01:00Telling the politicians how to make the NHS better<span style="font-family:arial;">This morning, I went head to head with Labour MP John Healey on BBC Look North's news bulletin on the matter of NHS targets. Last night he admitted in a TV debate “We overdid the targets to start with” – sounds good? But unfortunately, Mr Healey qualified this and it all went square… “…but in my opinion, you’ve got to have something … if you want to guarantee patients the treatment”.<br /><br />Unfortunately, John Healey has got it all wrong. Quite simply there is no good way for the NHS (or any other organisation for that matter!) to set a target, nor is there such a thing as a necessary or good target. No targets will help the patient, and they will almost certainly result in cheating, waste, duplication of effort and demoralized staff… ironically, right at a time when we need public services to be doing more with less!<br /><br />For example, targets in the NHS represent a whole management factory of internal and external structures undertaking work specifying what needs to be done, as well as monitoring and reporting against targets and explaining any deviation from what has been specified – all this activity is waste which does nothing to improve the health of the nation, but devours resources and demoralises the front line staff delivering the service. <br /><br />This is because when people know they are going to be judged against meeting of targets, they use their ingenuity and creativity to do whatever it takes to be seen to meet them (and so survive in the system). This can mean cheating, for example by distorting or misreporting data. Let’s look at a couple of examples in maternity services…<br /><br />So for example, by the end of 2009 there was a government target for all prospective mums to be offered a choice in where their baby was to be born – with home being one of these choices. In reality this doesn’t happen where I live – I was offered a choice of 4 hospitals, and when I asked for a home birth, I was told I “probably wouldn’t be allowed one as they’re only for women who are really low risk” – although there was no medical reason to make me anything other than low risk. Similarly, other mums have reported spurious, emotive, non-evidence based reasons are given to strongly discourage them from home birth (“you’re brave”; “it’s your first birth” “you’re 7 days overdue” etc). When mums to be have dug their heels in, they’ll be lucky to get it - reported stats show that at my local hospital, the homebirth service was withdrawn 42 times between January 2008 & December 2009; midwives are not fully trained in, and are not fully confident in, supporting home deliveries; and there is only provision for one woman in the area to have a homebirth on any one day of the year!<br /><br />However, if you were to ask the senior managers at the local NHS trusts, they’d probably tell you everyone gets the option to have a home birth. Someone’s not telling the truth, and I imagine it’s not the mums… to me it looks like the frontline staff have to offer a home birth service they’re unable to fulfil due to the way the local maternity care is currently run, so they do what they can to be seen to be offering homebirths.<br /><br />Another example of cheating is with the target the NHS has to increase the percentage of women who have seen a midwife or a maternity healthcare professional for a health and social care assessment of needs, risks and choices by 12 completed weeks of pregnancy – digging a bit deeper, this seems to be borne out of a desire to get women seen as early as possible in pregnancy so they can access advice to give their babies the best start possible. A sensible target one might think… but what actually happens…?<br /><br />As I knew I was pregnant ,I rang my local NHS midwives as I wanted to speak to a midwife (as per NHS website advice) ASAP to ensure I did everything I should to give my baby the best start I could. The midwife I spoke to told me they didn’t need to see me for a few weeks as they prefer not to see everyone for their booking appointment until about 10 weeks so they could exceed the government target of 12 weeks. She went on to explain that often babies die in the first few weeks (“it’s heartbreaking really” she said), so it was better to wait a bit longer. Hmmm – so they’d meet their target by seeing me within 12 weeks, and may be saving some time not seeing mums of babies that won’t make it until 12 weeks, but in reality, what they said was against the spirit of the target (see mums as early in pregnancy as you can) and left the patient feeling very upset & without the early advice the target was designed to ensure…<br /><br />But the staff in the NHS aren’t bad people – they’re just stuck working in a very bad system. Knowing they’re cheating but feeling it is their only option must be awful – no wonder there’s high levels of staff absence, turnover & shortages!!<br /><br />This is not modernization of the NHS – this is wholesale dismantling of the system we British hold so dear. Moreover, all public services are victims of the same target driven mentality. And what’s frightening is that not one of the political parties seems to understand the best way to make things better!<br /><br />So what to do? The right thing to do is to abandon all the current targets. Every single one of them! But that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t measure anything – but we need to change the system, design the service against patient needs and measure what really matters to the public: patients, families and relatives! This will lead to a better quality service, systemic improvement of the NHS (rather than its systemic failure), better staff morale, and lower costs – it’s obvious to anyone that it’s in everyone’s interest to do things this way.<br /><br />In the run up to the election, it’s very easy for politicians of all parties to make promises based on what they think the public want to hear. In the case of the NHS, though, we don’t just want empty promises and the creation of yet more targets and bureaucracy – what we need is a commitment to fundamentally overhaul how health services are designed, delivered and managed. <br /><br />Politicians and NHS executives need to get close to the work being done on the front line so they can experience first hand the day to day problems encountered by both patients and their carers as well as the things that are going well and not so well. <br /><br />Patients & frontline NHS staff are the very people that know how to fix the NHS – and the only way politicians can deliver an excellent and cost effective health care service that’s the envy of the rest of the world, is to harness that knowledge. But is anyone willing to listen…? This blogger remains sceptical…</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-77074697442627613542010-02-16T12:46:00.001+00:002010-02-16T12:48:57.371+00:00What's happening in charity fundraising is what's happening in many call centres - and it needs to stop!<span style="font-family:arial;">Last Sunday, the </span><a href="http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/727531/SHOCKING-CHARITY-CALL-CENTRE-HARD-SELL-TACTICS.html"><span style="font-family:arial;">News of the World</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;"> ran an exposé on the “shocking hard sell tactics” used by call centre company Pell & Bales to raise money for some of the UK's biggest charities.<br /><br />The story told of lowly paid workers being put under massive pressure by commission driven bosses to meet their targets. The tactics reported by the News of the World as employed by Pell & Bales are unfortunately the same as those you’d find in a majority of the call centres you might deal with in your day to day lives: heavily scripted conversations, monitored constantly by managers giving “feedback” on how better the call centre worker might have handled the call in order to achieve the desired outcome (in the case of Pell & Bales getting someone’s bank details for a charity donation).<br /><br />Maybe the charities concerned should look at a different way of working…. Perhaps using a call centre with a different approach, and look at paying a daily rate rather than £60 per donation. Whilst it needs to stack up financially for the charity and the call centre operator, it needs to be a sustainable approach in the long term for all concerned too.<br /><br />As for the call centres, they should actually trust their staff to get on and do their work –Don’t get me wrong, I’m not having a go at Pell & Bales here – I only know what I read about them in the News of the World and what their former employees commented on the story. Rather, I’m having a pop at call centres in general!<br /><br />This is because how staff do their work is decided by senior management that aren’t close enough to the front-line and team leaders monitor and control their staff, and measure individuals’ performance against arbitrary targets that have been derived from what the company needs to deliver in its financial plan (in the case of Pell & Bales, this is probably the number of £60 commissions it needs to get for each man day). But whilst that’s useful for the bean counters to know how profitable the work they do is, it really doesn’t help operationally at all.<br /><br />Since call centre companies like Pell & Bales manage people in this way, they spend a lot of management time ensuring staff to meet their targets and follow scripts (the News of the World reports a former employee as saying “But one boss, who monitored nearly all the calls, said I should have asked her for money at least three times”). Unfortunately, since meeting targets is often outside of staff members’ control (after all, they can’t influence who they call next – for example, if they have no money, don’t support charities, if it’s convenient time to talk to them and so on), so achieving targets becomes more of a lottery. Moreover, constant monitoring and management pressure to perform better puts staff under stress, de-motivates them and has an adverse effect on staff turnover, sickness and absenteeism. A quick read of the comments at the bottom of the News of the World story gives a real insight into how call centre workers often feel - hating the work, listening to heartbreaking stories, staying because they need the money and so on.<br /><br />To survive in such an environment, call centre workers need to do something – if they don’t leave the situation (which of course in the current economic climate isn’t so easy), they have to either fight (a dangerous strategy whereby you could lose your job)or submit to the system in which they’re operating. In submitting, however, the unfortunate worker (and their line managers or team leaders who are often subject to the same pressures) becomes desperate and often has to lie, cheat or bully. And when the client (in this case Cancer research) comes to listen in to calls “to ensure that our strict supporter care criteria are met at all times”, everything will be done differently. That’s not because the line managers or front line staff are bad people – they are simply operating in a very bad system. Precisely what the News of the World describes in its article.<br /><br />As the News of the World says – this IS shocking! However, it is not unusual.</span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">We need to see a bit more common sense in call centre management to improve this situation – for charity fundraising as well as every other sector: surely it’s better to trust people and allow them to take the time to just get on and do their jobs properly, allowing them to have the conversation that’s right for the person they’re talking to with the purpose of generating the best they can for the charity?<br /><br />And if then it doesn’t stack up financially for the charities, then everyone involved should simply admit that an outbound call centre approach doesn’t work in this case, and revert to more cost-effective approaches. Surely that would be </span><a href="http://www.betterforeveryone.com/"><span style="font-family:arial;">Better for Everyone</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">?</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-24733247662077218742010-02-08T13:12:00.002+00:002010-02-08T13:18:53.410+00:00Toyota – once hailed as the right way to work – but is it any more….?<span style="font-family:arial;">Oh dear – it’s all gone square in Toyota… The company is currently recalling millions of cars due to concerns about a sticking accelerator pedal. A bit of digging behind the scenes of this story, and I’m reaching the conclusion that Toyota have foolishly changed their management focus from quality to growth and are now paying the price… a predicted $2 billion, not withstanding the cost to the Toyota brand!!!<br /><br />In 2002, the president of Toyota (Fujio Cho) declared Toyota’s intention to be the world’s No. 1 carmaker by 2010 with a 15% share of the global car market.<br /><br />In striving for this vision, they lost everything that they stood for as a business, and became the same as everyone else in the industry.<br /><br />Unfortunately, Toyota forgot what it was good at (being the best through its work culture) and focused on growth (just like everyone else) – then suddenly, just like any other car manufacturer, they found themselves looking for ways to cut costs – including a move to common components in multiple vehicle models and outsourcing to and sharing global manufacturing and production.<br /><br />Toyota always bought all its parts from long term partners - a small group of Japanese suppliers. However, like almost all car manufacturers, Toyota more recently has outsourced much of its manufacturing and production. The recalled accelerator pedals were produced a factory in the Czech Republic - pedals made by Toyota’s original manufacturer in Japan have not had any problems at all.<br /><br />What is particularly worrying is that the issues caused by the change in direction were raised in 2008 by former Toyota president, Katsuaki Watanabe (now vice chairman), in his speech to Japan’s National Press Club, when he is quoted as stating that Toyota was becoming infected with “big company disease” – arrogance and complacency due to its own success. According to the Associated Press, Mr. Watanabe commented, “The fact that Toyota is growing globally suddenly shouldn’t be used as an excuse [for problems].”<br /><br />It’s obvious to anyone with eyes that this is all about the basics in management thinking in Toyota. Quite simply, Toyota became the best because of how the company worked – their work culture, operating model and management focus. They had no problems until that focus changed to ambitious growth.<br /><br />The jungle drums say Toyota once again is being led by someone committed to the traditional Toyota Production System model concepts and who will focus on taking the company back to the fundamentals – that can only be good news for Toyota… even if it does cost them $2 billion to work out that focusing on quality takes you where you want to be, rather then chasing the dollars….</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-5840561061182336792010-02-02T13:20:00.000+00:002010-02-02T13:22:06.815+00:00Doing more with less - meeting the management challenge of 2010<span style="font-family:arial;">This week, FT columnist Stefan Stern wrote an interesting piece entitled “</span><a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/78912fca-0f4d-11df-8a19-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1"><span style="font-family:arial;">Your task for today is doing more with less</span></a><span style="font-family:arial;">”.<br /><br />Predicting “more with less” as the new management mantra for Stern cites worrying trends in recent research from both Roffey Park (the number of managers that felt performance management was handled badly in their organisation had doubled since last year) and Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development (reported UK job satisfaction at record lows). </span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;"></span><br /><span style="font-family:arial;">Ouch!<br /><br />The upshot of the article is that the management challenge of these times is for business leaders to get their teams to work smarter & harder by delivering efficiency savings and increased productivity. Stern has really hit the nail on the head with this, which applies equally to leaders in both public, private & third sector organisations– but unfortunately the article failed to offer the answer of how this might be achieved…<br /><br />Ironically, Stern did allude to the reality that rather than bashing fewer employees to do more of everything they do, doing “more with less” may simply mean taking a proper look at what organisations do, and choosing what to stop doing, and what to do more of.<br /><br />But in order to do that, your typical business leader will really need to change how they think – they need to stop focusing on the necessity to reduce costs, instead seeking to look at their organisations as systems. <br /><br />Firstly, and without judgement, leaders need to work with front line staff to understand what they do now and why they do things that way: consider their purpose (what do they exist to do as an organisation?); look at the efficiency & effectiveness of their processes from their customers point of view; and things that get in the way (e.g. traditional performance management, legislation, interpretation and attempts to prevent potential problems).<br /><br />Only when they have a clear picture of their organisation as a system in this way, can leaders see what needs to change in their organisations – what they can stop doing to improve the work they do to enable them to do more with less.<br /><br />This isn’t easy though, and it’s certainly not a quick fix – it involves leaders’ commitment and understanding to make a successful change. They need to change the principles they follow in terms of, for example, customers’ experience, job design and how they’ll use measures to continue to improve the work they do in the longer term.<br /><br />In 2010, these can no longer be leadership choices – they are fundamental to survival of our economy. They are leadership necessities… let’s hope government and business leaders work this out before it’s too late… unfortunately this blogger isn’t too optimistic…</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-67538911996797835832010-01-23T12:19:00.002+00:002010-01-23T12:23:52.823+00:00Mother knows best – a bizarre tale of variation…<span style="font-family:arial;">As those of you who know me are already aware, I’m now just over 28 weeks pregnant! This is a brand new and exciting experience for me, and has exposed me to a whole raft of strange stories I can share with you all, primarily around the bizarre way I’ve seen management practices in the NHS seek to industrialise this very natural process.<br /><br />In this blog, I’m going to look at due dates – how they’re calculated and managed…. For those of you not familiar, when a woman finds out she’s pregnant, the due date (the date we’d expect baby to arrive) is estimated using a calculation which is roughly along the lines of 40 weeks (280 days) after their last period.<br /><br />It doesn’t take a world renowned obstetrician to explain that there are several factors that might influence the accuracy of this date which is known as the estimated date of delivery or EDD, for example, women’s menstrual cycles vary, dates may be inaccurate and also the length of gestation (the length of time it take an embryo to develop into a baby ready to be born).<br /><br />So to get round this “problem”, a lot of women are sent for a dating scan when they think they are around 12 weeks pregnant to literally “date” the pregnancy. Now this ultrasound EDD, coupled with the original EDD, and monitoring at different stages during pregnancy does seem to give a good indication of timely development of the baby at any moment in time. However, this amateur medic has noticed that all children vary in their development, with growth spurts and plateaus, and understands this variation also applies in babies before they are born too.<br /><br />This variation isn’t some wild phenomenon that just applies to pregnancy and childbirth… Imagine you catch the bus to work… the timetable says it leaves your stop at 8am. Even if it comes on time, you’re not pleased – because you’ve probably learned that although the 8 o’clock bus always gets you to work in time, it can arrive any time between ten to and ten past eight, so to guarantee you catch it, you need to be at the stop by 7.50am, meaning when it’s on time, you’ve still had to wait 10 minutes, and if it’s late, you’re getting pretty grumpy because you’ve been standing in all weathers for 20 minutes! But you know what to expect unless something out of the ordinary happens.<br /><br />I drive to work – even if I set off at exactly the same time every day, it can take me between 45 minutes and 70 minutes to arrive at the car park at work. There are many things that influence the time it takes to vary so much – everything from if it’s sunny or raining (so if people walk, get the bus or drive), roadworks or accidents en route, whether I hit the many sets of traffic lights on red or green, through to the time other drivers set off that day. However, earlier this month it took me 3 ½ hours to get to work – not because of any of these “common causes”, but because of something very unusual – really bad snow and ice had closed many routes “over the tops” to Bradford, and the main roads were still pretty treacherous, resulting in a huge volume of traffic and massive delays for everyone – a “special cause”.<br /><br />So going back to the birth of babies – this is precisely what is happening with due dates - only 5% of babies arrive on their due date, with typically 95% of babies being born between approximately 265 and 300 days, with the average roughly around the EDD or 280 days. So in reality, it may be smarter to suggest a baby might be expected in a particular month, rather than on a particular date, and only be concerned if a baby arrives before 265 days or after 300 days….<br /><br />I wish someone would explain variation to some of the maternity service providers – then they might stop treating women whose pregnancies go "post term" (beyond their EDD) as special cases requiring medical intervention.<br /><br />Once a mum gets to her EDD, the maternity services start paying attention to her – they want to get her monitored on a daily basis (often above and beyond government guidelines), and want to get her booked in for an induction whether or not there is any real medical reason. I’ve heard of a number of cases where mothers have been bullied and pressured by midwives and obstetricians using emotive language rather than evidence based information as they go beyond the EDD. I know of people that have been threatened with still born babies, have been offered mental health services and had implications that made them feel like social services might be involved further down the line because they’d prefer to adopt a “wait and see” approach, providing everything was ok with their baby.<br /><br />Ironically, this whole exercise causes stress for the woman concerned, which in itself can delay labour! But more worryingly, the induction of a baby that’s simply not ready to be born would result in birthing an immature baby and can mean further medical intervention and an increased possibility of a caesarian being required. It’s obvious that this is no good for mum and baby. But there is also a real, adverse impact on the NHS in terms of the additional costs associated with premature baby care, surgery and after care for mum.<br /><br />So why, you might ask, is the NHS doing something that on the face of it to the lay man seems so crazy! The straight answer is that I’m not sure – there seem to be a number of issues at play which might include a fear of litigation (so everyone is treated as a special case rather than those that need it, “just in case”); how the PCTs are funded for maternity services; or meeting the dreaded targets.<br /><br />However, whatever the problem, something needs to be done to bring our maternity services back to basics - delivering their true purpose, not covering their backs and following policies and guidelines. But the NHS really needs to take steps to understand & accept the common causes of variation in arrival dates, and the difference between them and special situations that actually do require their help and intervention!<br /><br />Unfortunately, this blogger knows that won’t happen before her baby arrives “some time in April”…</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-2970190560676221502010-01-14T11:07:00.003+00:002010-01-14T11:09:43.479+00:00Orange cuts 300 call centre jobs in order to "improve, grow & evolve the company"<div class="Section1"><p style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Yesterday, mobile phone giant <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:city st="on">Orange</st1:city> announced its plans to close its call centre in <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Bristol</st1:city></st1:place>, resulting in the loss of 300 jobs. An anonymous spokesman for <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Orange</st1:city></st1:place> commented “As part of our strategy to improve, grow and evolve the company, we are continually looking at ways to ensure we are operating in the most efficient way.”<br /><br />OK – so let me translate – in order to cut costs (perhaps something to do with their impending merger with T Mobile who operate their call centres overseas??), <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Orange</st1:city></st1:place> have sacked 300 customer facing staff.<br /><br />But is that really the smartest thing to do…? Many of the internet sites that published this story had comments posted that not only sympathised with the displaced workers, but also were critical of <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Orange</st1:city></st1:place>’s management and customer service. If the company is facing financial challenges, customer service isn’t good enough, then to simply slash jobs in customer service is downright foolish!<br /><br />I’m not advocating that <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Orange</st1:city></st1:place> simply soldier on regardless – that would be commercial suicide. However, I do think they must</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"> change the way they work so they are able to deliver better quality more efficiently.<br /><br />As I’ve said before, this is possible – not through some magical, mystical approach, but through applying a bit of common sense! Instead of focusing on productivity, the management at Orange need to measure what matters to their customers: focus on quality, and trusting and empowering their staff to do what customers ask them to and taking the time to do it right first time, every time. Then their efficiency will be better as a direct consequence.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Delivering a better</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"> quality service means lower operating costs, lower prices, improved market share and company growth – which sounds a bit to me like what <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Orange</st1:place></st1:city> said they wanted…<br /><br />So come on <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Orange</st1:place></st1:city> – be a bit smarter in your thinking and do something different from the norm in your industry so you can save money and offer a better service to your customers!!!</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-13967282331415124032009-12-11T14:32:00.002+00:002009-12-11T14:35:45.162+00:00Things can only get better in the Student Loans call centre.... or can they?<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The media this week have been awash with stories of the review by </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Professor Sir Deian Hopkin </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">of the Student Loans Company and its inability to meet the demands placed on the call centre. There were incredible statistics being banded about, such as</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> the company answering only 5 per cent of attempted calls at one stage!</span></span></p><p class="Default"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The crux of the problem is no surprise to this blogger, and is highlighted early in the 49 page report - <i><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">“</span></i></span></span><i><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic;font-family:Arial;" >the Company insufficiently prioritised the customer experience and remained inward-looking and process-driven. The impact of failing to achieve this cultural change lies behind the more specific and technical failures identified throughout this report.” </span></span></i><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">I’ve got to admit I was impressed – the professor seemed to have it sussed! Then I continued to read the report, and was woefully disappointed.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The professor makes 14 key recommendations – all of which are pretty wordy, relatively predictable and focusing on, for example, resource planning, contingency arrangements and training. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">But knowing that the internal focus and conformance to processes at Student Loans Company was at the root of all the problems, I was surprised to find I had to read as far as recommendation 11 before this fundamental issue was addressed.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">And then I couldn’t believe my eyes!!</span></span></p><p class="Default"><i><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic;font-family:Arial;" >“11. The Company’s leadership must place the customer experience at the heart of the organisation, reflected in the personal objectives of all employees. Targets and performance measures should reflect the customer experience and ensure the delivery of a significantly improved level of customer service.”</span></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">NO!!!!!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Personal objectives and targets will only exacerbate the problem – I wondered if the professor was simply trying to dress up common sense in language that government would understand, so I continued to read the detailed issues about performance measurement… </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">OK. I was wrong – I’m sorry. The professor doesn’t have a clue how to run a call centre effectively… </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">But before I tell you what he recommended, let me tell you that </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Professor Sir Deian Hopkin has a background as an educationalist, whose expertise lies in the labour history and the history of computing. More recently, the professor has got involved in educational policy and the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place> skills agenda. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE THAT CAN EXPLAIN TO ME HOW ON EARTH THAT QUALIFIES THIS MAN TO ADVISE ON HOW A CALL CENTRE SHOULD BE RUN????</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The professor suggested that the company’s SLAs weren’t typical (i.e. their “minimum standards” were too low), and suggested </span></span><i><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic;font-family:Arial;" >“a much simpler and more widely used metric to measure contact centre performance is to set a target for answering 90 per cent of calls attempted at all times.”</span></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Oh dear – here we go again!!! </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Whilst it’s important that as many calls get answered as possible and it’s useful to </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">understand how many callers hang up, this shouldn’t be a target, nor should it be the key metric used to measure and improve the service.</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Measures like this can help call centre managers the means to manage resource in response to volume. But they overlook the most critical aspect of performance measurement: they fail to address why people call and how well (or otherwise) the call centre responds to that call. More worryingly, such measures do not demonstrate calls that could have been prevented by getting things right first time!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">So unfortunately for students (and workers in the Student Loans Company call centre), this blogger thinks that things can only get worse in future years because the management of the Student Loans Company have embraced the report and has committed to implementing the professor’s recommendations. This means that both call centre agents and their managers will need to work hard to meet this new target – and in “making the numbers”, they will simply focus on getting the calls answered….</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-85429492994597335862009-11-16T12:08:00.003+00:002009-11-16T12:10:37.365+00:00Police call centre hits targets - should we cheer or be worried?<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Last week, the Edinburgh Evening News reported that figures have been published to say that the police call centre at Bilston Glen has exceeded national targets (for example in terms of time to answer and the number of calls abandoned by the caller) for answering 999 calls.<br /><br />Oh dear – they clearly don’t understand how dangerous having targets like this might be….<br /><br />In a nutshell, whilst we’d all agree that emergency calls need to be answered quickly, the target that is in place (to answer 90% of emergency calls within 10 seconds) is at best arbitrary and at worst life threatening!<br /><br />This is because setting targets like these changes the purpose of the people doing the work - effectively the focus of their work is moved from ‘do the job well’ to ‘meet the target’.<br /><br />If the target is difficult to achieve, then the emergency call handlers may only be able to reach it by ‘cheating’. And they will; they will do all they can to avoid failing to meet work targets – especially if, like the call centre at Bilston Glen, they’ve been heavily criticized in the media since they opened! Don’t get me wrong, though - this isn’t because of the people – I’m sure everyone working on the phones at Bilston Glen just want to serve the public well. They just need to be allowed to!<br /><br />It is imperative to a caller to 999 that their call is dealt with properly and completely, with the appropriate follow up activity delivered by the right people at the right time – not just that their call is answered quickly! After all – someone’s life could depend on it!!<br /><br />On balance, whilst it’s important to understand how long callers are having to wait and how many callers hang up (after all, they are calling in an emergency, so in an ideal world we’d really like to answer all calls immediately!), they shouldn’t be a target, nor should they be the key metrics used to measure the service.<br /><br />Measures like this (and others such as call volumes – offered and answered, and calls answered per call handler) help call centre managers the means to manage resource in response to volume. But they miss the most crucial aspect of service measurement: they fail to address why people call and how well (or otherwise) the call centre (or in this case the call centre and other emergency service providers) responds to that call. More worryingly, such measures do not demonstrate calls that could have been prevented.<br /><br />The managers at Bilston Glen need to start </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">listening to what their callers say, and measuring what matters to them and how well they respond to what callers say.</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"> </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Then and only then, will Bilston Glen become a call centre worthy of public acclaim in its local newspaper!<br /><br />But will that ever happen? – This blogger remains skeptical….<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-74870213000209763852009-10-19T14:25:00.003+01:002009-10-19T14:29:48.995+01:00The BBC - being top of the TV Ratings or measuring what matters?<div class="Section1"><p style="mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">The BBC along with all the other media recently received a press release from Foundation for the Study of Infant Deaths (FSID) that told them "Latest findings by researchers from <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:place st="on"><st1:placename st="on">Bristol</st1:placename> <st1:placetype st="on">University</st1:placetype></st1:place> . . . confirm that 'the safest place for a baby to sleep is in its own cot'. This four-year study . . . found that in half of all unexpected deaths of children in the south-west of England, babies had died sleeping with a parent or carer."<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">Of major concern to FSID, the release continued, was that 25% of mothers in a survey "were not persuaded that bedsharing can increase the risk of cot death”. Had the BBC actually dug a bit deeper, perhaps reviewing the research findings or speaking to medical experts that were involved in the study, they too may have not been convinced either!<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">However, the BBC did not do this, rather they whipped the story up into a frenzy, reporting on its Breakfast programme that half of cot deaths are linked to bed-sharing but many parents are sceptical about the risk.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Yet within hours, Peter Fleming, one of the eminent authors of the <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Bristol</st1:place></st1:city> research, was blasting the media for their misrepresentation of his research. He is reported in Friday’s Guardian as saying </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;"><br /><br />"My view is that the positive message of this study is that it says don't drink or take drugs and don't smoke, particularly for breastfeeding mothers. We did not find any increased risk from bedsharing. It is a very different message from the one the media picked up. You can say that half the deaths occurred while babies slept with their parents. You could also say that half the deaths occurred while babies were alone in their cots, but I don't see anybody saying, 'Don't put your baby in a cot.'"<br /><br />Y</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">es – you read this right!! The <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Bristol</st1:place></st1:city> study found that 54% of cot deaths occurred while the baby was co-sleeping with a parent. However, although the risk was very high if the parent had fallen asleep on the sofa, it was actually only significant among those in a bed if the parent had drunk more than two units of alcohol or had been taking drugs.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">FSID defended their position arguing that this was too complicated and a simple message was needed (I suspect if they only had a small amount of media coverage there may be some mileage in this argument). However, the Department of Health, co-writers of the release, it could be argued, have the opportunity to spend time with mums to be and new mums, in which they could give fair and accurate information.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">So why, might you ask, would the BBC, whose mission statement is “</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">To enrich people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain”, and has its first corporate value stated as “Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest”, seek to mislead their viewers and online readers in such a way?<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Whilst their stated purpose may be to inform in an independent, impartial and honest way, clearly there is something else at play…<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">I wonder how the BBC manages its performance against its purpose, because from the outside looking in (and being sick to death of “Strictly Come Dancing” being rammed down my throat morning, noon & night), it would appear that they measure something very different… perhaps TV ratings are the key measure being focused on here. But the BBC needs to be careful – if they focus too much on being top of the TV ratings, arguably something largely unrelated to their purpose, they are in danger of creating a ‘de facto’ purpose ( for example “to be number one in TV ratings”).<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Before the problem gets too far out of control, the BBC needs to find out how its employees understand their purpose and how that understanding is driving their behaviour and, hence, affecting the performance of the BBC in enriching people's lives with programmes and services that inform, educate and entertain.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Whilst the press release was flawed in the key message it pushed forward, the media, particularly the BBC were negligent in their reporting. The BBC must learn to measure what matters to its viewers so it can really be considered to be “independent, impartial and honest” – but until then, this blogger remains sceptical about everything she sees in the media due to the same old issues of confusing correlation with cause, together with selective attention....</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-56656282487388974272009-09-10T10:07:00.002+01:002009-09-10T10:09:26.694+01:00Making outsourcing work by measuring what matters.<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:100%;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:12;"><span style="font-size:100%;">The Telegraph Business Club this week published research by payroll & HR outsourcers HR Access that argues that </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">outsourcing specific skills and services carries a risk and therefore demands the business decision maker takes their time, does due-diligence, appoints the ‘right’ supplier and ensure they undertake regular performance reviews.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">You might think that this appears to be sound advice – but when you dig a bit deeper, what they’re recommending could really harm the client company. For when you look closely, you find that the research doesn’t recommend developing and implementing and effective mechanism whereby the two companies work together. Rather, the research recommends that the outsourced operation is managed from a distance by senior people under the terms of a contract (with </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">regularly reviews of a set of relevant service indicators </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">or KPIs). <br /><br />I guess the thinking behind these KPIs is well intended - it would seem sensible for companies planning to outsource parts of their business to document at length what is required of the outsourced provider so that there is a contractual obligation to deliver a clearly-understood minimum acceptable level of service for the company within defined and agreed cost parameters.<br /><br />Unfortunately, though, it is rare that KPIs achieve what they set out to. For example, in my sector, the call centre industry, complaints can be rife, even when an outsourcer is meeting their KPIs: it doesn’t take a genius to work out that this can result in an adverse impact on the bottom line, as well as lots of unhappy customers (whether those customers are internal staff members or paying customers of the business)!<br /><br />This is ironically because the problem lies with the very KPIs that are put in place by the company to ensure their outsourced provider delivers a quality, efficient service on their behalf! Regrettably, the KPIs aren’t linked to the needs or wants of the customer (internal or external) which the outsourced operation exists to serve. KPIs measure things that are of little consequence to the individual customer, (for example in a call centre environment, this could be call durations or average abandoned rates), and force the managers and team leaders of the outsourced provider to focus on productivity – to demonstrate to their client that they’re delivering a quality service and value for money. <br /><br />Before taking steps to put in place KPIs, companies should pause to think, take stock and consider how they can develop a longer term, more customer centric approach to their outsourced relationships. By encouraging their outsourced provider to create and use measures that help them understand customer needs and how to improve meeting them, a company can really make a difference –in fact they can enable their outsourced provider to deliver world class service on their behalf!<br /><br />In summary, companies may feel they need the security afforded by KPIs to protect them against ineffective outsourced providers. Unfortunately, such KPIs tend to achieve the reverse of the desired outcome, and the natural response by many companies is to fight their outsourced provider contractually.<br /><br />However, there is a better way: company and outsourced provider working together as partners, to deliver an optimal quality service, is the most cost-effective and sensible way to run an outsourced relationship. Furthermore, by listening to what their customers say, and measuring what matters to them, an outsourced service provider won’t go far wrong!<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:100%;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:12;"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10;"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-11752035397305350952009-07-16T14:44:00.004+01:002009-07-16T14:51:03.761+01:00Who thinks National Rail Enquiries needs a new call centre outsourcer?<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">On the same day that we hear that BT are bringing back over 2000 jobs from India, Ventura have announced that more than 100 posts at its National Rail <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:personname st="on">Enquiries</st1:personname> centre in Yorkshire would be transferred to India for "financial reasons".</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">It’s so bizarre, it beggars belief – in December 2003, Ventura announced they were moving the National Rail Enquires service from Yorkshire to Bombay in the summer of 2004, amid public fury and demands for the then Transport Secretary Alistair Darling to intervene. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">From that time, we all heard (and some of us even experienced) crazy stories about duff advice given by well meaning and long suffering call centre agents in the Indian Subcontinent who simply didn’t have the local knowledge a UK based adviser would have… I wonder how much additional, unnecessary demand that generated for a busy helpline?</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">This continued and came to a head in autumn 2007, when consumer group Which reported their findings of a mystery shopping exercise they did which demonstrated that misinformation & poor advice meant that customers could be paying well over the odds for their tickets! By the time we got to spring 2008, the media was reporting that the tide in outsourcing was turning back onshore – with Lloyds TSB and National Rail <st1:personname st="on">Enquiries</st1:personname> cited as having reduced their customer-contact presence in <st1:country-region st="on"><st1:place st="on">India.</st1:place></st1:country-region></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">It is now beyond comprehension that a little over a year on, <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">Ventura</st1:place></st1:city> would be doing yet another u-turn on the very day that even BT is bringing jobs back to the UK.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">On their “Facebook” page, National Rail <st1:personname st="on">Enquiries</st1:personname> state that their telephone service is one of the busiest telephone numbers in the <st1:country-region st="on"><st1:place st="on">United Kingdom</st1:place></st1:country-region>. They quote all manner of interesting statistics, including the following:</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Number of calls offered: 16,058,777<br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Number of calls answered: 15,153,487<br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Percentage of calls answered (PCA): 94.4% (meaning they missed nearly a million calls!)<br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Average time to answer calls (ATTA): 21 seconds<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">They also say that they monitor quality using mystery shopping (99.29% of calls answered “correctly”) and customer satisfaction surveys (90% customers would recommend National Rail <st1:personname st="on">Enquiries</st1:personname> to family and friends). </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Blimey! Look at that last statistic a different way, and what they’re really saying is that 10% of people wouldn’t recommend them!!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">This can’t be good for anyone, so the challenge to National Rail <st1:personname st="on">Enquiries</st1:personname> is find a call centre outsourcer that has a better way of doing things - delivering quality more efficiently to compete with offshore locations. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">This blogger knows one – do you?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-42844907556029299202009-07-13T19:18:00.004+01:002009-07-13T19:23:45.457+01:00Beating boredom at work - why the role of managers must change!!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">This month’s edition of the Chartered Management Institute’s publication, Professional Manager includes an article on boredom in the workplace (<a href="http://www.managers.org.uk/client_files/PM%20July%2009%20boredom.pdf">http://www.managers.org.uk/client_files/PM%20July%2009%20boredom.pdf</a>). </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">In the article, Dr Sandi Mann discusses how changes in the world of work, such as the introduction of new working practices like call centres have increased employee boredom – citing that repetition, restricted autonomy & a lack of job control due to “robotisation” and scripting are major factors in the high levels of staff turnover in the industry.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Mann notes the irony that as companies strive more and more to control staff output in order to drive down costs, in spite of the fact that this can severely damage the organisation financially and reputationally because it causes poor work performance, absenteeism, stress-related health problems and job dissatisfaction.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The article goes on to suggest various solutions, including empowerment of staff and elimination of standardisation in the work, arguing sensibly that the cost savings to be made could balance any training needs.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">However, this blogger thinks the solution needs to go much deeper, to really get to the heart of the purpose of management.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The current operating model in most organisations (and that which is so prevalent in the dreaded call centre!) is that managers exist to police the work that staff do – ensuring they achieve their set (numerical) targets and conform to procedures & scripts… </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Yet what managers really need to do is to optimise </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">their team’s efforts to achieve business aims whilst recognising and understanding individual differences, strengths and interests</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> & </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">the benefits of co-operation and losses of competition. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Instead of encouraging a culture of blame, where everyone conforms, managers need to create trust and an environment in which freedom & innovation flourish. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Then and only then can organisations become truly successful (and have staff that are empowered, with high job control, and doing an effective job)!!</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-90708462223165902932009-06-30T11:49:00.003+01:002009-06-30T11:52:35.366+01:00Customer service - arrogance or ignorance? You choose.<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">BT, British Gas, Sky, Virginmedia & Vodafone were named and shamed this week in the findings of a survey of 5000 people across the UK into their views about 30 companies with call centres. </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">Other major corporates featuring in the survey report include HSBC, AOL, Barclays, O2 and HMRC.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">There are no real surprises when it comes to what people complained about - "the language barrier" and "call centres based abroad" were identified as one of the most infuriating aspects of call centres. And consumers said they hated the use of automated systems and having to answer numerous security questions as well as being passed from pillar to post and needing to repeat themselves.<br /><br /><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">There were no good guys coming out of the survey, either – banks and retailers seemed to come out just as bad as the communications and utility companies! But BT really took the top prize – the survey found that BT was almost twice as bad as second place British Gas when dealing with issues and complaints, even being accused of leaving callers on hold or struggling to get through its automated system to make complaints. And BT came top for longest holding times, with 18% of people complaining about the company!!.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">managing director of BT's consumer division was quick to dismiss the findings of the survey as “twaddle”, explaining that BT’s</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> own “extensive surveys” demonstrated customers were far more satisfied! He even went on to brag that "the time it takes BT customers to get through to an adviser has dropped by 65 per cent over the last year and is now 32 seconds on average.” And that "customer complaints have reduced by over 40 per cent in the last year.”<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Blimey – if they think that’s good, how bad was their service last year!<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Unfortunately, however, as we can see from this survey, BT is not in isolation in the customer service hall of shame…<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Maybe it’s time the senior people in responsible for the dire state of service offered by call centres became aware of what really matters to their customers’ and encouraged their call centre managers to focus on serving the customers they exist to look after instead of managing staff targets, using fantastic new technology to deflect their calls or sending calls to offshore call centres just to save a few quid.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">But such a fundamental mindshift would take a strong, confident and magnanimous leader – after all, they’d have to admit they got it wrong, before they could improve things.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">So, this blogger wonders if the repeated denial of any problem is a sign of corporate arrogance or corporate ignorance… or even worse, a bit of both?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-66985330193032747002009-06-15T10:47:00.006+01:002009-06-15T14:38:54.024+01:00The Observer needs Caulking!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">After 16 years this week's column in The Observer by Management Editor Simon Caulkin was the last. I understand this is a decision made by management at The Observer as a cost-cutting measure…</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">If you’ve never read Simon’s brilliant yet appropriate and relevant column, then you really don’t know what you’ve been missing! Simon has written about ideas this blogger holds dear – indeed his column has been a must for anyone who understands that traditional management ways of thinking have largely created the mess the economy is in! His column has always been a refreshing and insightful read that appealed yet was relevant across the political spectrum, both public and private sectors, as well as different industries.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">I am dismayed and disappointed by The Observer's bizarre decision to axe this column. And I’m not alone in my thinking… over the last weekend, over 50 distinguished signatories (including little old me!) gathered to produce </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">not just a letter of protest to the powers that be at The Observer, but also an earnest recommendation that they reinstate Simon’s column as a matter of urgency!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">The letter, signed by a diverse group - ranging from entrepreneurs, SMEs, management consultancies, large corporations, academia and renowned authors across the globe was sent to the editorial team at The Observer this morning and we await their response.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">In the meantime, we’ve set up groups named “</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The Observer needs Caulking!” on both <a href="http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=105193121024&ref=mf">Facebook</a> and <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=2026229&trk=hb_side_g">LinkedIn</a>.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">This column must continue. Please show your support by joining these groups and posting your comments for all to see!</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-49578287600102747212009-06-11T15:59:00.004+01:002009-06-11T16:15:12.937+01:00Q - Do call centres face increasing competition from the web? A - Only if they're not very good...<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">In a recorded message played to attendees to the Call North West conference this week, Beverly Hughes MP said that call centres face increasing competition from the web.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">At first glance, this observation might seem a bit left field, but on reflection I think she could have a point…</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">I was talking recently to a contact of mine about call centres, specifically a well known UK bank. This company is one people used to always recommend (yes, you can probably guess who it was). I probed a bit deeper when she said their service was always excellent… After all, having seen a fly on the wall documentary on TV that featured that bank not so long ago, I figured that their new increased focus on individual staff achieving sales targets and throwing squidgy toys at colleagues on the phone to a complaining customer to improve staff morale might not be conducive to a fantastic customer experience…</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">I was disappointed, but not surprised, then, when the lady explained that she mostly dealt with them over the internet…. I guess then, there’s nothing that can go wrong - if you do it yourself, you do it right first time…</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">On that basis, then, I can understand where call centres could face competition from the web… Computers can replace transactional relationships (and save the companies money), but they can’t replace everything. Sometimes as customers we need to talk to someone, have a dialogue – after all business is about people, how they interact with you, how well they respond to the demands you place on them and the value they create in serving you… if we get to the stage where we only stick with businesses because their online capability works for us, then there is no longer any customer loyalty or value in our brands.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Yet ironically, that’s where the call centre can come into its own – by creating value and building long term and sustainable customer relationships and brand loyalty. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Unfortunately, so many companies miss this trick… they spend so much time in call centres focusing on targets and silly games to motivate their teams, that they forget the very customers they exist to serve. What businesses need to do is to start looking at the world through their customers eyes, design their processes to meet the demands their customers place on them, whilst encouraging their staff to take the time to do things right first time. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">If they did this, then they’d find they could really make a difference to their reputation and the loyalty of their customers…. Now does that sound like a good idea, or what? </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-22221018015725162792009-05-27T13:56:00.002+01:002009-05-27T13:57:56.538+01:00Observations on the importance of customer service...<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Chey Garland speaking at the IoD recently talked about offshoring and how some work will always be done abroad to reduce cost. She also commented about getting things right first time and the importance in a recession of a quality service, retention of existing customers and doing things to a higher standard. All fantastic points I would agree with, but unfortunately, Chey’s subsequent observations about call centres needing to “do things rapidly” because time is what’s most important to customers these days let her rhetoric down.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">We all know that from a customer’s perspective it’s most important for things to be done right than to be done quickly.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Instead of focusing on speed (or how many customers can be processed during the course of a shift), call centre managers need to learn to focus on responding to their customers demand, and empowering call centre staff to take the time to do things “right first time”, and creating a work environment in which service excellence can flourish.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">If all call centre managers did that, then they could reduce complaints and repeat calls: ironically taking the cost out and improving service…. Hmm – perhaps there could be a better way of working?? This blogger thinks so...</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-30720264208597243682009-05-20T14:06:00.003+01:002009-05-20T14:10:26.049+01:00Well done, Carphone Warehouse!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Carphone Warehouse has this week announced it's scrapping commission in its stores having completed a successful pilot of a new pay scheme!<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Hurrah for common sense!! We all know that commission drives the wrong behaviours in people, encouraging them to do whatever it takes to get the sale at the expense of customer needs.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Carphone Warehouse’s UK Sales & Customer Director, Steve Blan said of the pilot ‘We’ve seen that the selling techniques people were once protective of are now being shared. Great salespeople understand it is in their interest to share knowledge and skills.’</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">In addition, because everyone working in a store gets 2% of profits each quarter, if a customer decides to cancel or return, the store profit decreases, so it’s now in their interest to sell the correct product to meet the customer’s needs.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Andrew Harrison, Carphone Warehouse's <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region> Chief Executive said that staff retention in <st1:city st="on"><st1:place st="on">London</st1:place></st1:city> had gone up since it introduced the scheme, helped by a rise in basic salaries from £11,000 to £17,000 – yet ironically, some staff are angry… Probably the ones that learned how to cheat and lie to achieve excellent sales figures - they’re saying things like “if there’s someone bad in your team you are handicapped”…. </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Full of team spirit, those boys, eh? </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">They should push off and work for someone else – if Carphone Warehouse is genuinely committed to its customers and giving them impartial advice, they’re best rid of commission driven numpties out to make a sale at any price!!!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">It’s not complicated, but it’s certainly a new phenomenon in mobile phone sales.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Well done Carphone Warehouse for turning your back on the traditional image of the mobile phone salesman – this blogger is watching with interest to see whether you really mean it...</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:10;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-12356292073815526332009-05-15T11:04:00.001+01:002009-05-15T11:04:16.352+01:00Come on, Suralan! Don't you think it's time you set a better example?<div class=Section1> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN style='font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'>OK. To be quite frank, this has gone far enough!!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN style='font-size:10.0pt; font-family:Arial'>Commenting on Debra’s ham-fisted, obvious endeavours to lie her way out of bother this week, Suralan observed, “Thinking on your feet is good, but sometimes you’ve got to tell the truth!”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>To my mind that’s tantamount to saying “Lying is usually best…”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>To use a phrase coined in the same episode by the eloquent James, that’s cods**t!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>If senior business leaders like Suralan are giving out that message, is it any wonder that call centre workers tell the occasional fib (or even bare faced lie) in order to meet their performance standards …<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Call centre managers set targets and keep watch over agents’ performance against them. If the target is high and therefore difficult to achieve, agents may only be able to achieve it by telling the odd porkie (after all Suralan says that’s OK….)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>And they do – I’m sure you’ll have experienced it as a customer… agents will do everything they can to avoid missing work targets or standards. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>These aren’t bad people, they’re just managed using a bad system…. a system that is perpetuated by the likes of Sir Alan Sugar. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Come on, Suralan! Don’t you think it’s time you set a better example?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p> <p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size: 10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>This blogger does…</span></font><font face=Arial><span lang=EN-GB style='font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p> </div> Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-87295572291364710312009-05-09T12:20:00.001+01:002009-05-09T12:22:53.032+01:00The Apprentice - Get real, Suralan!!<span style="font-family:arial;">Watching my regular fix of “The Apprentice” did make me chuckle this week!! It just reinforced some of the crazy management beliefs that are out there, yet ironically demonstrated why the thinking behind them is so nuts!<br /><br />The wannabe executives needed to make appointments with retailers in order to sell their wares. Unfortunately, they didn’t make as many appointments as project manager, Lorraine expected: “Only one appointment – I’ve lost my job for that before now!” she criticised.<br /><br />Clearly Lorraine had in mind a target number of appointments which her team should achieve. As in all telesales environments, the members of Lorraine’s team wanted to do well. They wanted to make appointments - they weren’t bad or lazy. And Lorraine went on to give us a fine demonstration of how managers demoralise their teams when they don’t achieve their targets…<br /><br />Originally, I wasn’t keen on James, but he did explain his side of things quite eloquently when he compared the responses to his calls to opening a funeral parlour and people stopping dying! James was smart enough to understand that the call outcomes weren’t entirely down to him: “I had a bit of bad luck in that no-one I rang was interested,” he lamented.<br /><br />Then, as if the guys that had been doing the calling didn’t feel bad enough after their verbal bashing from Lorraine, “Suralan” swaggered in with “My people rang six people and got in!”<br /><br />Yeah right!!! That’s a fair comparison, isn’t it? Let’s just look at these two opening lines from a telesales operative:<br /><br />A - “Good morning, I’m calling on behalf of Sir Alan Sugar and we’re filming The Apprentice at the moment. May I make an appointment to come and see you tomorrow?”<br /><br />B – “Good morning, I’m calling from a company you’ve never heard of. We’ve got some great products that are really different from those of the hundreds of people like me that ring you each day. May I make an appointment to come and see you tomorrow?”<br /><br />I wonder which appointment you’d arrange?<br /><br />What business owners need to learn from this week’s bout of public humiliation if that if people are set an unrealistic target, they may only be able to achieve it by “cheating” (e.g. booking bogus appointments, lying to or pressurising people into taking appointments and so on). Alternatively, workers will become increasingly demotivated as they believe their managers’ accusations it’s their fault. <br /><br />Perhaps if Suralan used his programme to demonstrate how businesses should really operate, then things might improve in British industry. But then I guess that wouldn’t make good television…</span>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-5714818765986537162009-05-05T14:49:00.004+01:002009-05-05T14:53:45.822+01:00I agree - it's definitely time to get rid of all IVRs!!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 1cm; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; mso-list: skip"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Hurrah!!! <?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 1cm; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; mso-list: skip"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Finally some research that shows what we already knew - that customers are very unhappy with IVR systems (where you press 1 for this, 2 for that, 3 for something else, and there's never an option for what you want!)…. (<a href="http://www.callcentrehelper.com/time-to-get-rid-of-your-ivr-2854.htm">http://www.callcentrehelper.com/time-to-get-rid-of-your-ivr-2854.htm</a>)<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 1cm; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; mso-list: skip"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">When this technology first came along, call centre managers argued that it was just resistance to change - customers would eventually adapt, and accept IVR when they got used to the technology. Unfortunately, customers still find IVRs frustrating, confusing and downright annoying – and as this research shows, they’re not adding much value for the organisations that have implemented them either…<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 1cm; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; mso-list: skip"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Maybe it’s time call centre managers wised up and focused on what really matters to the customers they exist to look after instead of trying to deflect their calls or prevent them from speaking to a member of staff in order to save a bit of money.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 1cm; TEXT-ALIGN: justify; mso-list: skip"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">If they actually looked at the world in their customers eyes, designed their processes against the demands their customers place on them, and trusted and empowered their staff to take the time to do things right first time, then they’d find they could really minimise the costs of transactions with customers, whilst giving customers what they want.</span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-64899971466164296402009-04-27T11:09:00.003+01:002009-04-27T11:12:27.873+01:00The FSA could really make a difference to the quality of service we get from the banks... but could it ever really happen...?<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">Currently, the Banking Code Standards Board (BCSB) monitors and enforces voluntary Banking Codes which govern banks’ day to day relationships with their customers. From November, these arrangements will be replaced by new FSA rules which all banks, building societies and credit unions must follow. <?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">The FSA claims that through regulation, they will also ensure that the quality of customer service is maintained long after becoming a new customer. Apparently, there will be a new rule to make sure service remains prompt, efficient and fair for the duration of the relationship with the customer. And it looks like the FSA may fine firms if they fail to comply with the new rules to the detriment of their customers.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">I dug a bit deeper and read the policy statement (</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Financial Services Authority Regulating retail banking conduct of business - <a href="http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps09_06.pdf">http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps09_06.pdf</a>), and was amazed to find that a few respondents to the consultation requested guidance on what is a prompt, efficient and fair level of service!!! </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The policy statement did not address this.</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">It’s a sad fact, but I really don’t think the banks know how to do this. They’ll probably respond to the rules by agreeing wholeheartedly that they need to care about their customers, and arguing that well-trained staff who are following the appropriate procedures are best placed to deliver excellent service. I should imagine then, that they’ll set in train a number of initiatives such as customer care programmes, training staff, and changing procedures to avoid the fines. </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">Well that should improve service, eh?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Unfortunately, whilst approaches like these might seem initially to be the answer to improving service quality, none of these lines of attack will be effective in the long run, because they simply don’t address the root cause of the matter. This is because an integral part of the problem lies with the targets that are put in place by the banks to ensure they deliver a </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">prompt, efficient and fair level of service.</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"> <span lang="EN-GB"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Regrettably, these targets aren’t linked to the needs or wants of the banks’ customers, usually measuring things that are of little consequence to the individual customer, like call durations or average abandoned rates, time taken for each aspect of work activity and force the managers and team leaders to focus on productivity – to demonstrate they are delivering a quality service (and now we all own many of them, value for money)!<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Before taking steps to using regulation and fines as a stick with which to beat the banks, the FSA needs to think about the impact of such action on customer service. They should pause to think, take stock and consider how they might encourage the banks to develop a longer term, more customer centric approach to their relationships and dealings with customers.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">By encouraging the banks to work to understand what customers are saying when they contact them, customer needs and how best to meet them, and assessing aspects of service delivery that are of importance to customers, the FSA could really make a difference to the quality of service we get from the banks… but could it ever really happen…? </span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="BACKGROUND: white"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"><o:p>Unfortunately, this blogger isn't optimistic....</o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-87327457673244514872009-04-24T12:36:00.004+01:002009-04-24T18:27:18.889+01:00T Mobile should try to save money and offer a better service to their customers!!!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">So, T Mobile is thinking about sacking call centre workers in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:country-region st="on">Scotland</st1:country-region> and outsourcing over 400 jobs to the <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">Philippines</st1:country-region></st1:place>. It doesn’t take a genius to work out the financial attractiveness of the <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">Philippines</st1:country-region></st1:place> with its lower cost base. And suppliers argue their case by talking about better quality and improved processes, flexible work practices and pools of well-educated staff as well as exploitation of different time zones. But is it really as good as it sounds?<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The benefits<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">Philippines</st1:country-region></st1:place> is an up and coming location for call centre outsourcing and has a workforce with many English-speaking graduates. As a general rule, large savings on salary costs are reported. For example, a call centre worker in the <st1:country-region st="on">Philippines</st1:country-region> might earn 50% less than their counterpart in the <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place>. The Philippines are 7 hours ahead of GMT, which is excellent for back office processing, analysis and programming as turnaround time can be reduced in the UK as work is done ’during the night’.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Excellent financial incentives are offered by the governments of offshore locations keen to attract <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place> business. For example, </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:Arial;">the Philippine government is offering significant fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to attract foreign direct investment in these industries as part of the 2006 Investment Priorities Plan (IPP).</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The disadvantages<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Political instability in many offshore locations results in a need for special provisions for disaster recovery and force majeure events. For example, plans may need to be in place for electronically moving all data and staff out of the country to a ‘safer’ location with the same connectivity capability.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The legal systems of offshore locations are not the same as ours: for example, whilst <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">India</st1:country-region></st1:place> has contract law and copyright protection in place, the legal processes are very long and drawn-out. Furthermore, it can be difficult to comply with <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place> requirements.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Whilst the costs of salaries are lower than at home, total labour cost savings are much more modest. Deloitte and Touche have suggested savings are as low as 10%. This is due to ‘hidden costs’ associated with doing business in, for example, the <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">Philippines</st1:country-region></st1:place> that consume the bulk of the savings. Such costs might include travel, communications, equipment, and management of the offshore operation as well as costs of redundancies in <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place></span></span><span lang="EN-GB"> </span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">managerial oversight are some of these. Furthermore, pay is increasing due to increased demand which is in turn driving costs up.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Public perception of offshoring is not good: </span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">DTI research shows that <st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">UK</st1:country-region></st1:place> consumers have a negative attitude towards offshoring, with “a significant minority” that have either moved or plan to move suppliers away from those organisations which provide offshore customer service.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Many problems encountered lie with the service level agreements companies put in place to ensure they get what they’ve paid for! SLAs force the managers of the outsourcer to focus on productivity - and quality goes out of the window. Furthermore, c</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">ultural and language differences are cited by many as a major challenge for dealing with offshore locations. If work needs to be undertaken during UK working hours, this might be the night in the Philippines, which causes issues for getting staff: hot climates make sleeping during the day less straightforward than at home!<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">Finally, the impact of job losses on the Scottish economy should not be forgotten.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">So what should T <st1:place st="on"><st1:city st="on">Mobile</st1:city></st1:place> do?<o:p></o:p></span></span></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">In the light of a smaller than anticipated cost saving and increasing salaries, it seems sensible to suggest that increasing productivity at home would offset the cost saving advantages afforded by the Philippines and similar offshore locations. Not only that, but the issues associated with offshoring would be avoided.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">So the challenge is to change the way they work… They need to find a call centre outsourcer that has a better way of doing things - delivering quality more efficiently to compete with offshore locations. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;">The answer is not something new – it lies in what happened in the Japanese automotive manufacturing industry over 50 years ago. Instead of focusing on productivity, T Mobile need to find an outsourcer that will focus on quality, and doing exactly what’s needed first time, every time, then their productivity will be better as a natural result. <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Better quality means lower operating costs, lower prices, improved market share and company growth – without having to offshore! <o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Come on T Mobile – save money and offer a better service to your customers!!!</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-77626064338403006492009-04-08T17:09:00.003+01:002009-04-08T17:11:44.643+01:00Come on RBS - rise to the challenge!<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:arial;"><span lang="EN-GB">The Financial Times today has reported that </span><span lang="EN">Royal Bank of <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:place st="on"><st1:country-region st="on">Scotland</st1:country-region></st1:place> is cutting up to 9,000 jobs in areas such as call centres as a means of reducing costs.<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN" style="font-family:arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><span style="font-family:arial;"><span lang="EN">If only the top brass at RBS realised that b</span><span lang="EN-GB">y having a different management perspective, measuring what matters to customers, and empowering call centre staff to take the time to do things “right first time”, they could reduce complaints and repeat calls. Not only would this improve service, but morale would improve, as would productivity.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p style="MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:arial;">Blimey! That would mean RBS could save money on recruitment, training and covering sickness absence and only make redundant the additional and unnecessary headcount they’re carrying. And while they’re doing that, they could c</span><span lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:arial;">law back market share by being the best, which, let’s face it, wouldn’t be too arduous!</span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:arial;">If RBS did that, it would really shake up the market and address the issues faced by the financial services industry, whilst improving the experience of end customers… come on RBS – rise to the challenge!!!<o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-13858354219522979152009-03-14T16:24:00.004+00:002009-03-14T16:27:41.459+00:00Sunday Times best companies to work for? I don't think so....<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Each spring, the Sunday Times churns out its definitive list of the best companies to work for. The winners all promote their flexible benefits packages and having fun at work. Or how they offer a great work-life balance and how well they motivate staff.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">But how many of the winners have actually taken the time to go back to basics: how many really engage staff and are supportive? Furthermore, how many actually trust their staff to get on and do their work, take their input to improve performance and appreciate them when they do a good job?</span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;"><br /><br />In my opinion, the answer to this is very few – organisations tend to be secretive and hierarchical in their design, and staff are rarely valued. Managers monitor and control their staff, and measure individuals’ performance against arbitrary targets that have been derived from the annual financial plan, paying attention to “poor performance”, but ignoring genuinely good work and effort.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">An interesting insight in the Sunday Times best companies to work for this year is that the ‘best in class’ in some categories, just aren’t very good.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">It is worrying to read that in the category “how many staff feel that their managers are supportive”, the <b><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">best</span></b> result is almost 16% of the workforce feel that their managers just don’t support them. Moreover, when looking at how well managers motivate staff to give their best”, the company with the <b><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">best</span></b> result has almost 30% of its workforce thinking that managers simply don’t motivate them. And when considering how many managers express appreciation for a job well done, we find that the best performer has almost a fifth of its staff saying that their boss <b><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">doesn’t say thank you</span></b>! In terms of allowing the people that know how to improve things to do so, the best companies don’t fare well either… 15% is the <b><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">lowest</span></b> proportion of workers that have indicated that they don’t feel able to make a difference at work. What a sorry state of affairs in our “best companies to work for”!<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">We need to see a bit more common sense in operations management to improve these numbers: surely it’s better to measure what matters to customers and to trust staff and allow them to take the time to work together to improve the work they do and do things “right first time” every time and then thank them when they do?<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;"><span style="font-family:Arial;">Then maybe the Sunday Times will be able to produce a list of companies that <b><span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">really</span></b> are great places to work!</span></span><span style="font-family:Times New Roman;"><?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6203481325739294900.post-23269110766985477742009-03-01T16:43:00.004+00:002009-03-01T16:49:07.112+00:00BBC Money Box - Have Your Say: Call centres<div class="Section1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">The BBC Money Box programme this week tells the story of the problems Gordon Love of Stirling had with Barclaycard’s call centre, and on their website, the Beeb is asking for people to tell their experiences of call centre complaints, both as customers and as call centre employees… here’s what I say…<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Often, solutions such as delivering customer care programmes, training people, or changing procedures are used to tackle issues of increasing levels of customer dissatisfaction. On the face of it this sounds sensible - after all, organisations need to care about their customers, and well-trained staff who are following the appropriate procedures are best placed to deliver excellent service.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">Regrettably, whilst approaches like these to dealing with the problem of customer complaints might appear to improve service quality for a short period of time, none are effective in the long run, in view of the fact that they don’t address the root cause of the matter.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">This is because a fundamental part of the problem lies with the targets by which the call centre manages its staff.<br /><br />Unfortunately, targets in call centres aren’t related to what customers want – instead they focus on productivity measures like call length, sales made or average abandoned rates.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">All call centres need to take more customer centric approach to people management and work with their staff to understand what customers are saying when they contact them, what customers need and how to deliver it, and assessing what is important to their customers.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;"><span style="font-family:Arial;color:black;">If they do this, a call centre can really make a difference and deliver world class service!<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p></span></span></p></div>Alison J Widduphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04629473461918299992noreply@blogger.com