The term innovation can be defined as something original and new. Has the way we deliver customer service changed in the last 50 years? Delivering service with a smile and a positive attitude hasn’t changed but what about the data used to improve service? Many organizations have numerous reports and data but lack the innovation to make simple changes to affect results. Survey results are a great tool but what are you doing with them? Are you using the results to create an action plan? What metrics do you use to help build your case for positive change? In this session Eddie will share with you useful methods to improve the quality of your service delivery on a continual basis. Key takeaways include; survey questions, actions based on results, metrics and templates.
TRANSCRIPT
Continual Service Innovation: Using Surveys and Metrics to Improve Service
Session 203 Eddie Vidal – University of Miami
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Session 203: Continual Service Innovation: Using Surveys and Metrics to Improve Service Delivery Wednesday, April 02 at 11:30 AM View schedule Has the way we deliver customer service changed over the past fifty years? What about the data used to improve the way we deliver that service? Most organizations collect data on service delivery, but many are unable to innovate, to take action and make simple changes that can have a dramatic effect. In this session, Eddie Vidal will share some useful methods—surveys, metrics, action plans based on real data—for achieving continual service innovation. (Intermediate) Continual Service Innovation – Using Surveys & Metrics to improve Service Delivery The term innovation can be defined as something original and new. Has the way we deliver customer service changed in the last 50 years? Delivering service with a smile and a positive attitude hasn’t changed but what about the data used to improve service? Many organizations have numerous reports and data but lack the innovation to make simple changes to affect results. Survey results are a great tool but what are you doing with them? Are you using the results to create an action plan? What metrics do you use to help build your case for positive change? In this session Eddie will share with you useful methods to improve the quality of your service delivery on a continual basis. Key takeaways include; survey questions, actions based on results, metrics and templates.
Eddie Vidal Manager, UMIT Service Desk�University of Miami��Eddie Vidal has over twenty years’ experience in information technology, where he focuses primarily on service delivery and support for IT infrastructures. In his current position as the manager of enterprise support services for the information technology department at the University of Miami, Eddie supports over 35,000 faculty, staff, and students. In addition to higher education, Eddie’s experience includes the hospitality and travel industries.��Eddie currently serves as the president of the HDI South Florida local chapter and a member of the HDI Desktop Support Advisory Board (DSAB). He has spoken at local, regional, and national events and has been published in HDI's SupportWorld magazine.
• What is not defined cannot be controlled. • What is not controlled cannot be
measured. • What is not measured cannot be
improved.
Define | Measure | Improve
6
Presenter
Presentation Notes
What do you measure now? What do you do about it? Is it reactive? When first starting and obtaining the data you should be a changing upon the results and doing corrective actions. As you become more mature you should be anticipating your results, have you already created a plan and be one step ahead of the results. You are doing something about it right? If not, what are you waiting for?
Let’s review the Lencioni model introduced in the module. This is a good model for team effectiveness and reveals how you can lead your team to more proactive behaviors depending on where they are in that model. Turn to page 18 of your participant guide to review the Lencioni model. Another way to understand this model is to take the opposite approach, a positive one: Members of truly cohesive teams possess the following characteristics: They trust one another They engage in unfiltered conflict around ideas They commit to decisions and plans of action They hold one another accountable for delivering against those plans. They focus on the achievement of collective results.
First Attempt • Kept it simple • 5 questions • Phone calls by students • 105 surveys
Surveys at the U
13
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Telecom, student would call users and ask them 5 basic questions, lasted about a month to month and a half. Why did we stop? Because nothing was being done about the results. We noticed the feedback affected desktop support and when we reached out to them it didn't go far. The root cause of this was because there wasn't a collaborative relationship between the two groups. In order for a CSI model to work in an environment, you need to work together. Silos won't cut it.
• Different department & role
• Expanded reach • Created SharePoint
Incident and Request form
• 238 surveys • 3 or below, take action • Positive comments
shared on monthly basis
Surveys at the U
14
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Second area worked well, User Support Services. Conduct surveys for 6 months. Created a ticketing system in SharePoint until ITSM tool was implemented. Prior to this, there were areas not tracking incidents/requests. This area consisted of a student application and tier 2 help,desk, internal desktop support, media and user account management. We received close to 300 surveys, one was sent to every incident or request that was closed, our response rate was x%. We did have an override field/button and noticed it was used at times when it really shouldn't have. Those were opportunities to do some coaching and communicate the process once again and the value behind it. The process was to review on a weekly basis and reach out to the users whose surveys scored 3 or below. This was a manageable number and I was able to stay on top of it. It was a more controlled environment and the teams involved all were from the same area. On a monthly basis we sent out the positive comments to the team and copied senior management in this group, not all IT. We created bar charts and shared results with the team. In addition, we compared our numbers in our vertical market, higher education with the results from the HDI support Center salary and survey guide. We were able to show our customer feedback was higher than the HDI results. In addition, at the end of the year I wrote a short recap of our total results and how we compared. Also created some tables and charts to display the comparisons.
@eddievidal
Customer Surveys
1. Overall quality of IT Support Center Staff? 2. IT Support Staff handling my problem was
knowledgeable? 3. IT Support Staff handling my problem was
courteous and professional? 4. Incident was resolved to my complete
satisfaction? 5. Resolution of your incident completed in a
Surveys Comparisons Overall Survey Results USS HDI Education HealthcareThe courtesy of the analyst 97.5% 97% 96% 97%The technical skills/knowledge o 96.5% 95% 94% 96%The timeliness of the service pro 95% 92% 92% 94%The quality of the service provide 96.6% 94% 93% 95%The overall service experience 96% 93% 92% 94%
Overall Mean scores USS HDI Education HealthcareThe courtesy of the analyst 4.87 4.84 4.82 4.87The technical skills/knowledge o 4.83 4.78 4.74 4.82The timeliness of the service pro 4.75 4.69 4.68 4.74The quality of the service provide 4.83 4.76 4.72 4.8The overall service experience 4.8 4.72 4.69 4.77
19
Write a blog, write
something!
Celebrate Your Success
University of Miami User Support Services scores higher customer satisfaction ratings than 2012 HDI Customer satisfaction benchmarking
study report.
20
Presenter
Presentation Notes
User Support Services scores higher customer satisfaction ratings than benchmarking report September 5, 2012 Eddie Vidal, Manger Enterprise Support Services University of Miami User Support Services scores higher customer satisfaction ratings than 2012 HDI Customer satisfaction benchmarking study report. In June 2012 the University of Miami User Support Services (USS) team developed a customer survey process to obtain customer feedback. The survey asks the customer to rate the quality of service, timeliness, technical skills, courtesy and overall satisfaction and experience on a per incident basis. An email with a link to a five question survey is sent to customers after an incident/ticket is closed. USS created an Incident Tracking system using SharePoint forms in Jan 2012 and has closed approximately 8500 incidents. The survey’s results shown in the table below indicate USS customers are very satisfied with their service. HDI is the leading professional association and certification body for technical service and support professionals. HDI published a Customer Satisfaction benchmarking study report in September of 2012. The results are based on over 350,000 survey responses and 510 supports centers representing 215 companies. As the results show, USS customers are very satisfied with support achieving higher results than HDI's benchmarking study. Comparing USS to other Educational organizations USS exceeded the results published in the HDI report. The creation of customer surveys was developed following best IT service management practices and to obtain customers opinion of the services and support provided by USS. With the results of the survey, USS used the data to begin a continual service improvement program. The results were used to determine weaknesses and find ways to improve and correct them. This was accomplished by reviewing the survey results submitted and contacting users who rated USS service with a score of 3 or below. The rating scale is 1 for very dissatisfied and 5 for very satisfied. By contacting customers, USS learned many things and have found ways to improve the delivery of our services. The data has shown the recent effort of implementing the customer survey process has delivered the desired results of improving the delivery of IT services to the university community.
• New department • All of UMIT • New ITSM tool • 1 out of 10 • 10% response rate • Started July 12, 2013 • 1975 Surveys received as
of March 24th
Surveys at the U
21
Presenter
Presentation Notes
455 for Medical Technical Service Desk 115 Uchart Clinical SD 215 Gables Service Desk 785 Total Surveys our of 1975
Jenny: After reviewing many performance evaluation forms from various companies in the support industry, we found some common areas that most organizations are currently using to evaluate their staff. We will focus on these four today: job knowledge, quality of work, productivity, and customer service. While supervisors are putting thought into these reviews, the information shared with staff is mostly subjective. We want to show you how to take that to the next level. Note – these are the most common, but the methodology can be applied to other performance areas already identified on your performance reviews.
@eddievidal
Quality
• Ticket Accuracy Review – Has the customer been contacted within 24 hours? – Are the diary entries user friendly? – Has the customer been kept in the loop? – Was customer sign-off obtained?
34
Presenter
Presentation Notes
EddieTime, how long do you think this takes? Manually completed by students. At FIU it was 48 hour turnaround The first report our team received was at 65%, the boss was not happy. Had to create a plan on how I was going to improve this. It took us 3 months to bring up the score to 90+%. Starting each meeting similar to 5 Dysfunctions of a Team, what are our goals? Has the customer been contacted within 24 hours? Are diary entries user friendly, does the customer understand it if they were to read the ticket? Was the customer kept in the loop. Was customer sign-off obtained? 3 attempts in 10 business days Kept Customer in loop? How is this determined? Keep this in mind to determine if the customer is kept in the loop. If the customer needs to call the SC for the status of their SR, do they really know what the status is? Would that phone call be required? 1) Are the diary entries updated to state when the next expected entry or work is to occur with the user? 2) Is the customer informed when the next visit or work on their service request is to be performed? 3) If you have set an appointment with the customer in advance has it been entered in the Service Request? 4) If customer was not reachable when contacting them is there an entry stating the means of communication, for example, via email, voicemail or in person? 5) Is there a statement stating the user was informed by leaving a service receipt form, email or voice mail? 6) If you answered YES to all of the questions then it's a yes for keeping customer in the loop. If the answer is no to one of the questions then the Customer Service Objective has not been met.
