Doing More With LessManaging a Support Center More

Doing More With Less--Managing a Support Center More Effectively -Omar Reece, Lawson Software

Welcome! • Who is Lawson? – Lawson Software provides business process software solutions that help services organizations in the healthcare, retail, professional services, public sector, financial services, and other strategic markets achieve competitive advantage. Lawson's solutions include enterprise performance management, distribution, financials, human resources, procurement, merchandising and services automation. • Lawson’ Support Model (phone and online interactive-chat) • “Complex” support— 90 minute average case time, 40% first case closure rate

SCP Certified • SCP Certification—Five years in-a-row. • Maturation Process—We wanted to do more with what we had, how could SCP help? • We were scoring “off the charts” for response—too fast answering the phones. • What was the impact of this to other areas (e. g. , backlog, time to work other issues, etc. )? • This case study outlines a re-engineering process in one area of support – Change the way you take calls without effecting customer satisfaction or primary response rate while at the same time reduce the group backlog while making agents more productive

Identifying Areas to Focus • Idle time—amount of time an agent not working while waiting to take next issue • Scheduling—how much time do agents have to resolve existing issues? • Cross-functional—do your agents only work in specific areas, or are they “utility players”?

Case Study—Procurement/Distribution • Idle time—up to 70% idle due to emphasis on primary response • Scheduling—frontline/backline/point person responsibilities all scheduled • Not Cross-functional—Dedicated Distribution personnel, dedicated Procurement personnel

Idle Time • Idle time—up to 70% idle due to emphasis on primary response – Primary response (picking up the phone) was leading mgmt objective. Achieved through scheduling many agents to be available – Could not quantify how productive agents were while waiting for the next call, but felt like could never really start something because phone “could ring”

Scheduling • Scheduling—frontline/backline/point person responsibilities all scheduled – Many staff members were needed to cover frontline shifts to achieve response (4 hours/day) Scheduled Backline (case transfers from other areas/email cases) (3 hours/day) Scheduled point person (1 hour/day)

Not Cross-functional • Not Cross-functional—Dedicated Distribution personnel, dedicated procurement personnel – Consultants specialized in products supported – Phone models separate – Volume low for smaller group – Based this on perceived higher customer satisfaction—customer intimacy

Changes Made • Combined Two Groups to handle all incoming phone issues • Scaled back frontline phone coverage to staff as minimally as possible • Took away other “non resolution” type responsibilities (e. g. , escalation coverage) • Instituted overflow system where scheduled agents would “jump in” only if calls were holding. That way, if things are slow, agents are most effective

Results of Case study—areas effected • Total idle time--Reduction • Service level--Maintained • # of Hours Issues Were Worked by scheduled agents--Reduction • Backlog--Reduction • Customer Satisfaction—Increase • Agent Productivity--Increase

Total Idle Time--Reduction

Service Level (% of calls answered in 3 minutes)-Maintained

# of Hours Issues Were Worked by Scheduled Agents

# of Hours Issues Were Worked by Non-Scheduled Agents (Ad-hoc)

Backlog— 44% Reduction

Customer Satisfaction--Increase

Agent Productivity— 35% Increase in Production Efficiency

Questions?