HDI

Failure to Communicate

“What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate.” This famous line from the 1967 movie Cool Hand Luke seems to be spoken many times by Support Professionals, mainly in reference to inquiries by users who just don’t seem to “get it.” While it is spoken as an attempt at humor in sometimes difficult situations, it may be more of a truth that we suspect. It is not unusual in my role as Help Desk Manager to hear something similar to the famous quote from Help Desk Agents, Second Level Support groups, and the customers themselves. What’s amazing is the “failure to communicate” is not limited to Customer – Support relationships but seems to occur between groups and even within groups at times. Like in the picture to the right, we sometimes don't pay attention to what is being said around us in an effort to get our own message across.

For example, who hasn’t learned of a software upgrade or new product rollout from the customer BEFORE getting the information from the group responsible for the roll-out? One example from my own files is from a recent change in policy we made regarding how a certain issue was to be recorded in our Incident Management system. We communicated the change to the Help Desk Agents and Supervisors, documented the process and changes in our knowledge base, received buy-in from second level support groups and management and implemented the change. Sounds pretty solid, doesn’t it?  It did to me too, until the first reports came in which should have shown how compliant the enterprise was in the new recording processes. It was immediately clear we had forgotten to include a group in our communication plan. It was the Field Support personnel spread out around the world at our properties. While they had access to the same knowledge base the rest of the support organization uses, they were not directly informed about the change in process.

That was a big “Oh-No!” moment.  It was embarrassing to have to admit the mistake, but it exposed a gap in the centralized support organization’s communication plans and abilities. As a result of this breakdown, we did engineer a plan for future communication which would include the field support technicians. It also allowed us to open a channel of communication previously unused. Operational Support hosts a daily check-point meeting hosted by a member of the Change Management team every morning at 8am.  The meeting last no more than 10 minutes and reviews any major issues from the previous day and any open issues or up coming changes for the next 24 hours which might affect system stability or operational metrics. Regional field support management is now invited to this conference call to listen and give input back to the support organization as a whole.

What methods do you use to communicate within your support organization? What have you found to be most effective in communicating changes and issues to other groups in Support or to your customers in general?

Andy Glover

(Picture by gtmcknight used under Creative Commons license)

Andy Glover is a Help Desk Manager with over 17 years experience in Internal Information Technology Support, ten of those years in direct management of Support Professionals, across a wide variety of industries from manufacturing and financial, to hospitality and entertainment.  Andy is currently at Harrah’s Entertainment, Inc. based out of Memphis, TN where he is Global Enterprise Help Desk Manager

Employee Compensation

So...I've never actually blogged before, and even as I type it, I am thinking how long ago would someone have smacked me for suggesting that the word blog could be used as a verb. I mean let's face it, blogging sounds like something your dog would do. Anyway, getting over my own hang-ups, I figured I would try my hand at bloggery and see if it suits me.

I guess the whole point of this is to just write out something on my mind to share with everyone who has a similar interest, and perhaps you will post comments, good or bad, about my thoughts. As someone new to this, please don't be too harsh. It is my understanding that there are no rules to blogging, and like most creative ventures, there are no bad ideas.

So I just finished up and employee satisfaction survey last week. Overall it went' quite well. When I first started this job and measured employee sat it was about 58%. I now have it holding steady at 80%, and if I really wanted to brag, it is actually at 100% rating their job as satisfied or better. After all, if it is an employee satisfaction survey, do we really need to ask if they are extremely satisfied. I suppose the answer is yes. When I was asked about the difference I described it as such; Ane employee who is extremely satisfied with their job is excited to come to work at least 3 days a week. I don't know if that is the official answer or not, but it works for me! Moving on, the two areas where there was a slight hint of discontent, and by discontent I mean someone marked down Neutral rather than Satisfied or Dissatisfied, where for compensation and praise. I liked to talk about the compensation question today.

Looking at compensation, the question posed whether or not the employee understood how their performance impacted their compensation. I always figured this was an easy one. You come to work and do good, you get paid and keep your job. I know that simplifies it...but isn't that truly the hear t of the matter? To give a little more insight, and I reviewed the same with the team. Everyone on my team got an unexpected bonus this year. The amount of each person's bonus was directly correlated to their performance. I reminded them of this when I told them the amounts a month ago...but I suppose that may have slipped their minds.

As far as their raises go, like most companies, we are frugal. The target for raises was 3%...but there was room for playing. As I said, that was just a target. The higher performers got a little more than the lower performers. I suppose the issue is though, when someone is making $38k per year as an analyst, a 3% raise is about $1140 per year. A 4% raise is $1520. It is less than $400...but a whole percentage point. The business looks at the percentage, but the individual looks at the value. This is a hard area for both groups to see eye to eye on. 

We have a pretty significant rewards and recognition program. We have quarterly and yearly team goals and e have had catered meals, outings, clothing, backpacks, hockey and baseball tickets, food supplies, etc as rewards. These are always based upon the team hitting a performance target. We also have a monthly customer survey contest winner, who gets a gift card. This target and contest is based upon performance.

As a company, we have performed well and improved benefits, including increasing the company contribution to 401k...which, if you participate, if basically another 4.5% of your salary.

Oh...I just purchased a library of CBT materials and told the team I will pay for any certification tests they pass.

After reviewing all of this, I think the most of the team got it...but I believe some people in the back of their minds still are thinking I should do more. I guess it is the challenge of making people understands that compensation is much more than just your bi-weekly pay check. The whole package is important.

Well...thanks for letting me talk about this. I am curious to see what others think about my view of compensation. I am right...wrong...left field. Should we abandon all extraneous compensation programs and just give everyone another $1 per hour.

I look forward to your comments.

Jeff

REAL Vacations

Last weekend I got back from a weeklong trip to Playa del Carmen, Mexico (just south of Cancun).  This was a huge milestone in my career because it was my first REAL Vacation, ever. I did not take my cell phone, I do not have a blackberry, and I did not bring my RSA Token so there was no way for me to connect back to work. I planned it all in advance. I planned to not work and hoping to not think about work for the week and funny thing was that I dreaded it. I had anxiety about unconnectedness (the lack of being electronically connected), the lack of not being able to help someone for a whole week, the lack of not being needed to help. We are Help Desk people right, that is what we do, we help those in need. I felt like I was abandoning those that needed me. AHHHHH!!!

Well, at the end of it all... IT WAS AWESOME! I did not have any escalations, requests for reports, complaints, or people wanting more that we were capable of offering.  For an entire week I was FREE!

But hey, I am a Help Desk person so I could not avoid helping someone. I helped myself! I relaxed. I reconnected with my beautiful fiancé who has spent the last 3 months carring for our new baby girl; I overcame some fears and zip-lined at 45MPH over the Mexican jungle, snorkeled in a cave, and repelled down a cliff. I visited Mayan ruins in Tulum. I slept in. I got a killer tan. I, Dan Wilson, took a REAL vacation and LOVED every minute of it.

OK now it is your turn… Tell us your joys of a REAL vacation. And for those that are not brave enough to take one, let’s try to offer support on how you overcame the fear of "unconnectedness".

Managing Like an “Owner”…

After hearing Jason Jennings 4 discoveries of successful business, I had to follow up on one of them in more detail. Discovery 3 was, “The world’s best run companies get everyone to think like owners”. When you think of this discovery it begs the question; is this found more often in small or large businesses?

Why is it that small businesses provide a better experience for the customer than large businesses? Is it because the employees act like the owner? Why is it that large companies begin creating mantras or vision statements rather than just providing what the customers need from the company? Is it because employees at large companies feel less like "owners", and mantras are management’s answer to getting employees to act like owners?

There are a few observations that come to the front quickly when you compare small and large business behavior that may provide some of the answers to getting people to act more like “owners” than employees or observers. Here are a few I have observed. I’m sure you have many more to add.

What you observe very quickly at a small organization is a lack of “hierarchy”. This is not to say that small companies don’t have them, it is just less important than at large companies. Management teams from small companies are advocates for the customer and are comfortable speaking on their behalf. In larger organizations there is a strong focus on the way the company is “structured”. Who reports to whom, what reports are needed to feed up the “chain of command”, the words “synergy” and “efficiency” are more important than customer concerns. It is only the bottom line no matter what that means to the long term health of a business.

The bottom line is extremely important to a small business, and I would argue more important to them for survival, but small businesses know how to balance growth with profits. They balance quality of service with cost, short term profitability with investments that will improve future opportunity, and understand how their actions impact the bottom line. The small business does not have a management team jet setting around the country without a cause. If small business “owners” are jet setting, it is on the customer’s behalf. In the small business it is always about the customer and survival. Two great motivators for success.

So why don’t large companies see the value of being structured like a small business if acting like an “owner” is a key to success? Why is it important to have extra layers of management between the business units and the CEO? Why do large companies feel that “centralized service models” supporting multiple business units are more “efficient” than having these people within the business units? How does creating groups of people further away from the customer, serve the customer more effectively? The truth is centralization is one of the most effective theories in business, but in reality, the implementation of centralization is the most ineffective business model a large business can adopt. No one feels like an “owner” in a centralized model. They feel more like a “government” body, and what government body can you point to that acts like an “owner”?

As we all know, our customers and our ability to serve them quickly, effectively, and efficiently, while creating a great “experience” is how we become successful. If the result of implementing “centralized service models” reduces our ability to be fast, efficient, effective, and pulls resources away from the customer and people serving the customer; why would you implement this model? Why build your business support functions further from the customer? We all need to be as close to the customer as possible to be effective. That is where the “owner” wants to be; next to the customer. So should we, the employees that want to act like the “owner”.

People that provide support to the customer hear this every day from the customers we serve. We capture reports that indicate this, we talk directly to customers and they tell us, we know instinctively what Harvard MBA’s spend hundreds of thousands of dollars studying; that customers want to know and trust the people they do business with. So why create central structures that move people further from the customer? We get it but why doesn’t everyone? Jason Jennings research showed the power that everyone acting like an “owner” has on the success of an organization. So why would companies adopt practices that are counter intuitive to this discovery?

Share your stories of big vs. small business success. Do you agree or disagree that small businesses are better at serving the customer? I would love you to share your favorite “Dilbert” story for a laugh and a lesson!

Good Luck to all of the "owners" out there!

Rich Hand