Problem Solving and Decision Making Essay

Background I work for a company called npower and we are an energy supplier in the UK. Specifically, I work within the Blended Services department and we deal with various types of inbound contact from our customers such as email, letters and telephone calls. I manage a team of 15 people advisors and their role is to effectively deal with customer enquiries that come in via the different methods of contact. Due to the large volumes of correspondence that we have come in, it’s not always practical to respond to customers via a written response and we therefore ask the advisors to call as many customers as possible and resolve their enquiries by phone, this allows the advisors not only deal with the customer’s original enquiry but to also answer any subsequent questions that may arise when they are presented with the answer we give them. Description of the problem When advisors call a customer there are regulations around data protection and also keeping customer contact details up to date that we must adhere to, we refer to these regulations as compliance. This is a very black and white subject, we must be compliant in all we do 100% of the time. The problem that has come to light that in our department, is that our advisors are not 100% compliant 100% of the time. They will fully cover data protection and request up to date contact information on some calls but not others. This presents a problem for the department and me as a manager as well as the advisors in question as these inconsistencies can lead to varying degrees of disciplinary action for the advisors and the company. The impact of this for the advisors is that it can lead to disciplinary action such as informal warnings, up to more formal action such as written warnings and even loss of their job. In extreme cases offending advisors can even face personal fines. As a manager, I then have to consider the potential knock on effects of such action which can include loss of advisor confidence, a reduction in staff morale, and opportunity for progression may be reduced or taken away and all of these in turn may affect an advisors attendance. For me as a manager the concerns are that these actions could affect my time as I am required to carry out investigations in to each case of non-compliance. This is turn could leave other members of my team to feel neglected as my time becomes consumed with investigations and carrying out disciplinary action. Potentially, this could lead to a general loss of morale within my team as a whole and go on to impact their performance. This issue also affects our customers as if we are seen to be breaking such important regulations as data protection, and then this could cause an increase in complaints, damage our customer’s confidence in us as a company, lead to a decrease in customer loyalty and ultimately the loss of their business. From a company point of view the impacts are possibly the greatest. Just a few potential knock on effects from non-compliance are loss of customers, brand damage, legal consequences including large fines and potentially losing out license to trade. Disciplinary action can lead to loss of staff and this brings further impacts such as the time and cost of recruiting and training new staff and all of these could eventually impact our ability to provide a desired service to our customers. Analysis of the problem In trying to identify options to solve the problem of advisors inconsistently adhering to compliance regulations, I first looked at gathering as much information as I could in to how much it was affecting my department and if there were any contributing factors to the problem. I liaised with our quality analysts. The QA team had recently marked a sample of the calls we make within the department and informed me that in the month of September they sampled four calls from each team within the department. This was made up of one inbound call (calls where the customer calls npower) and one outbound call (calls where we call the customer) for two advisors on each team. There are 18 teams so this is 36 advisors that were sampled and scored. The results showed that of the advisors monitored only 69% were fully compliant. This is cause for concern then as the target is 100%. Following on from this, I needed to do further investigation. My time, however, is very valuable and for me to take on such an investigation alone is not feasible. I discussed the problem with my manager and we came up with an idea to help us follow up the results from the QA Teams quality checks. Within our own operations group (5 Teams) we asked each manager to mark two calls for each of their advisor focussing solely on whether or not the advisors were following compliance regulations that we must adhere to. In the first week of October, each manager carried out the quality checks for their teams. The results showed that we were 50% compliant as an operations group. Following these results each manager went out to the advisors that were not following the compliance regulations and gave them a training session as well as an informal warning that this kind of action was not acceptable and that compliance must be adhered to at all times. The managers including myself then left the advisors for a couple of weeks and then went back and completed the same quality checks once more. The second time around we noticed an improvement as we scored 70%. However, we were and still are a long way short of our ultimate goal. Following on from this, I devised what I saw to be a simple yet effective questionnaire that would be completed by a sample group of advisors. The purpose of the questionnaire was to establish possible reasons why the advisors failed to be consistent in regards to meeting compliance when speaking to customers on the telephone. I looked to address such matters as how confident they were that they were personally 100% complaint 100% of the time, were they aware of the tools that npower provide to assist them in being complaint, what barriers they have encountered that make it difficult to be compliant and what do they feel would ensure that they were 100% compliant 100% of the time going forward. The results of the questionnaire showed that the advisors knew what was required of them to be compliant and that they recognised the implications of not being compliant. It also showed that all of the advisors were aware of the various support tools that npower provides them to help with compliance though not all of them used them. This suggests then that the problem of being inconsistent in regards to compliance may be down to advisor attitude or focus but at this point I wanted to avoid making assumptions. With all of this information, I used a simple fishbone to drill down for possible reasons for these inconsistencies. I looked at the following headings and then added the possible reasons: Confidence (lack of) * Inconsistent message * Unclear on what’s expected * Cannot deal with conflict (from customers) * DPA doesn’t feel natural (in call structure) * Situations outside of the norm (3rd party calling on behalf of the customer) Knowledge (lack of) * No or little training (new to business) * Lack of communication (not advised of possible changes) * Inconsistent message (unsure what is correct) Skill * Unsure how to resolve conflict * Not certain how to incorporate data protection in to their call structure * Not able to control a call (allows a customer to drive a conversation, potentially skipping past vital areas for not wanting to interrupt) Attitude/Behaviour * Doesn’t understand potential consequences * Doesn’t like change * Refuses to comply After considering all of the above the potential solutions to my problem could be creating a guide that points out to advisors what they must do to be fully compliant but that isn’t rigid in its delivery so that the advisors can make it their own. Ensuring that the guide and its use is trained out in a clear manner that makes sure there are no questions unanswered. Providing the advisors with additional training to enable them to capably and confidently deal with situations of conflict i.e. if a customer refuses to go through data protection. Finally, making sure that the consequences of non-compliance for both advisors and the company are clearly communicated. Resolution of the problem I went to manager with my findings and stated what I wanted to achieve. I needed the goal to realistic and to be measurable. Remembering that QA Team reported the department to be 69% compliant for the month of September my goal statement was this: * To decrease the compliance fail rate in our department by 15% during the month of November based upon 36 evaluations. In making this statement, I ensured that if would be a fair reflection since it would match the original investigation completed by the QA Team. It’s SMART, because I have a specific goal that can be measured against previous findings. It’s both achievable and realistic as all managers will make numerous quality checks throughout the month and I’m trying to achieve the ultimate goal of 100% compliance but instead make a small but reasonable step towards it and finally, it’s time bound as all steps will be put in place and measured throughout November. Once the goal had been set, my manager and I held a brain storming session to look at possible options to resolve the problem. Further to those I mentioned earlier, we came up with these additional ideas: * Speech Analytics * Scripts for data protection * A specific inbound call team * A specific outbound call team * Feedback, coaching and evaluations * An inbound and outbound call decision making tree * Brief to include what’s expected and what the consequences are for non-compliance * Compliance champs * Compliance tick sheet After we had come up with these various options I went away and decided which would be the best course of action. To help me decide I used a simple Pro’s and Con’s method. I put each of the above options in to a table and then listed what the advantages and disadvantages were. Below, I have just briefly outlined some of the key points for each one. Speech analytics Pros * It saves time (it’s all automated, listening to and identifying key words and phrases in conversations) so managers don’t have to do manual checks. * A large sample is gathered (it pulls data from all recorded calls) therefore the reflection is very accurate. * Reports can easily be pulled, since all data is compiled and exported in excel spread sheet format. Cons * It’s not an immediate solution. Speech analytics for npower is in early testing stages and it’s unlikely to be available for at least another year. * Cost – It’s very expensive to implement and so even to run in a small test environment is currently unlikely. Scripts for data protection Pros * It would clearly set out what needs to be said (no grey area) * Advisors would have something to reference at all times * Can easily be updated when changes occur * Managers could easily cover this in a coaching session Cons * Advisors may not feel it comes across as natural * Advisors may forget to keep it on their desk each day * It would need to be updated with each new change (potentially old ones could be in circulation) * Repeat contact customers would have to go through the exact same process each time and may feel it comes across as robotic Specific inbound/outbound call teams Pros * Advisors would deal with only one call type (one set of compliance regulations, more specialised, less chance of failure) * Becoming specialised may increase confidence Cons * It may not be feasible to have a enough specialised teams to deal with the workload * We would lose multi-skilled advisors, impacting our ability to deal with other work volumes * Specialised teams leave us vulnerable to outside influences such as absence. Compliance Champs Pros * Position of responsibility for trusted advisors * Someone on hand to reference in uncertain situations Cons * Those not chosen may feel disappointed * The cost of taking advisors away from completing work may not be feasible in such a busy time * Having to wait for a ‘Champ’ may impact customer wait times and thus service * Takes ownership and responsibility away from the advisors Compliance Checklist Pros * Advisors already use something similar, so it would be familiar * Advisors could clearly track what they have and haven’t asked * Peace of mind as it states clearly what they must ask * Natural, as it states what they must ask but doesn’t tell them how to do it * Cheap and easy to implement * Easy to amend when changes occur * Advisors can easily keep it with them either paper based or electronically * Puts the responsibility on the advisor * Best use can be coached around Cons * Must be altered with each change (old ones could be left in circulation) * Puts the responsibility on the advisors (must be trusted to use it) After evaluating the options and the pros and cons to each. I decided to go with a compliance checklist. Once I had decided on what I believed to be the best solution I asked myself two important questions, in various decision making models these are also known as Acid Tests 1&2. Acid Test 1 – If I implement all of my plans for action will my problems be overcome? In considering the answer I thought back to areas that I had identified earlier that linked into the problem of inconsistent compliance. To recap these were things such as: * Advisors were unsure what they should be asking. * They lacked confidence that they were saying all the right things. * They could often miss important information if interrupted by a customer before the compliance checks were complete. * The solution needed to be simple and easy to implement, so that it was clear and simple to train out. The majority of my advisors already use a checklist of sorts to capture the work they complete and how they contacted the customer, by adding compliance prompts to this it creates a visual aid for the advisors reminding them of what they need to ask and it remains in a setting that they find familiar. Also, because the advisors are able to tick off the various requirements as they go along it makes it very clear what must be asked and it’s less likely that they’ll miss things out if they are interrupted as they can simply go back along the list and pick up where they left off. It’s also likely to come across as more natural when the advisors are talking to them customers as well as again it only prompts them with what they need to ask rather than telling them how to say it. Finally, it’s relatively cheap to implement, it isn’t very time consuming to put in place and it’s something that can be done immediately. A copy of the checklist is attached (Appendix A) Acid test 2 – If I get rid of all my problems will I achieve my objectives? Again, the answer should be yes. My solution will give advisors something black and white, that’s clear and easy to understand and familiar to them in their day to day role. This should in turn give them the added confidence when talking to customer’s on the phone. There is, however, a human element. This is that the solution once trained out and implemented, relies upon the advisor taking some ownership and making sure that use it every day even if they feel confident that they are fully compliant. Because this is a personal choice there is no plan that I can implement that will solve this. However, as a company we do have measures already in place to manage this. If an advisor is proven to have the skills and the knowledge to be fully compliant and yet for whatever reason chooses not to, then I or any other manager would need to ensure that this is managed in the proper fashion. Implementation and communication of the solution As previously stated the advisor already usage a data capture sheet in their day to day jobs. I have taken that and added some simple yet clear checklist boxes that prompt the advisors on what they need to be asking when speaking to customers on the telephone. I will start off with a trial in my operations group and then if the desired results are proven then I will discuss with my manager a plan to roll it out to the whole department. I’ll start by holding a small group meeting with my fellow team managers, briefly describing the problem that I’ve been looking in to. I’ll present my solution and tell them how I would like it to be used. The managers including me can then go out to our own teams and deliver the message in a brief team meeting. The compliance checklist will be distributed via email to the managers and advisors alike. This way the advisors can choose to print it off and fill it in manually or they can simply fill in in on their PC’S. This also means that they will always be able to access a copy even if they have to move desks as it will be saved to their email. Following this, I would plan to follow up with some side by side observations. This would be to ensure that the advisors are using the checklist as intended and it also gives me the chance to answer any questions that they may have as well as offer advice and praise where they are doing things well and hopefully begin to build that confidence in their ability back up. As far as monitoring and reviewing of the situation, this should be quite straight forward. I know what the problem is and I have identified a list of causes. I also know clearly what I expect to achieve from the solution. I perform at least one quality check on each of my advisors each week, so these will prove useful when monitoring progress in this area and the results should be clear to see. These quality checks are always given to the advisors as feedback and trends from multiple quality checks are used to build useful coaching sessions. The feedback that I receive from the advisors at this point should also allow me to monitor if they are using my solution as expected and how confident they feel with it. As a department, we also receive daily, weekly and monthly reports. These will enable me to view the progress of the other teams in my operations group to see if they are showing the results that are expected. I will raise the matter for discussion in the weekly operations group meeting and this will allow me to receive feedback from my fellow managers and get their thoughts on what is and potentially isn’t going well. Finally, the QA Team will perform another quality check across a random sample of the department. This will perhaps be the ultimate mark of whether or not my solution has been successful. If so, then there should be a significant increase in the percentage of advisors that pass compliance.