Process and Customer Service Content - Part I

(Part 1 of 2)

Providing customer service, whether via self-service, performed through the web, delivered through a call center; outsourced or insourced is a business process...on that everyone can agree. And the specific types of customer inquiries can be grouped into a series of sub-processes related to providing customer service e.g. purchase a product, inquire about a charge, return or repair a product. And most customer service environments have figured out how to create prescriptive work flows (scripts and call aids) that are organized around these sub-processes.


However, most of the supporting content and information designed to support accurate and complete response to customer service questions isn't organized by process. It's categorized in information categories that don't align with the way an agent or a customer would expect to find them. So the most common approach to solving customer service content issues is to use enterprise search or to create a large knowledge base of Q&A that can be...searched. One problem with this approach is that as the body of knowledge and content grows, so do the search results...and instead of helping with productivity, this approach drains it by requiring agents and customers to wade through the mounds of content and Q&A returned in a search result before they can provide a hopefully, correct answer.

An alternative method for categorizing content is to do so around the processes, workflows and types of questions that are typically posed. This approach can reduce agent and customer "search" time by up to 50% on a per incident basis. The impact on quality is intuitively positive. The flow-through impact of answering customers more quickly and accurately is also obvious.

But where to start?

When do you stop?

Summer in D.C. is usually a slow period...people on vacation, oppressive summer heat and humidity, Congress out of session. But we've never been busier and as a result, we've neglected the blog a bit. Apologies.

I spoke at the SALT learning conference in Arlington, VA the other day and was asked the question by a knowledge manager in the audience, “when do you stop gathering process or business knowledge and implement your solution.” In other words, how do you know you have what you need to deploy?

I answered it this way. When you implement a training solution, you create a class or an instance of that training which is very modular in nature. You might review it annually or on some other schedule, but regardless, the content is not dynamic in nature. When you implement a BPM solution…you go to great lengths to define requirements, create workflows and integrate/code systems. But try to change it? Workflow is very brittle.

But business is ever evolving. Rules and regulations change. Content and templates change. Employees leave, new ones join. But most importantly, someone is always figuring out a better way to perform the job they’ve been told to do. And in Contextware’s world, we made the conscious decision to create a technology that allows for those improvements to be captured and conveyed quickly and efficiently. It is one of the biggest differentiators in the way we approach process improvement, knowledge and performance support.

After Action Reviews (AARs)

After action were originally developed and practiced by the U.S. Army as a method for reviewing training and live exercises and ensuring that feedback on what worked, and what didn't made it back into the training regimen. Since then a handful of other government and some commercial organizations have adopted the process as part of their standard set of operational processes.

We're big fans of AARs because they provide a rigorous framework by which specific activities and outcomes can be measured and evaluated. We've also seen through experience how AARs can be used (stretched) beyond their original structure and purpose and can be applied to reviewing marketing programs, sales engagements, product development, litigations...almost anything.

The keys to successful application of the After Action Review process are 1) using a defined structure, templates and tools to conduct it, 2) having management buy-in that results will be reviewed and used, and 3) ensuring that the AAR itself doesn't overreach in scope or it's intended goals. It is just one piece of formalized feedback required for continuous improvement.

Contextware has taken the time to create an online step-by-step version of how to conduct an AAR. You can request access to this, by accessing the link found here.

Organizing content around business processes

In January, we blogged about the intersection of process and content. There was also a link via the blog to an article we were asked to write on the topic for the Association for Information and Image Management (AIIM).

We've had a few questions about this, and thought it worth a more concise explanation (in case you're not inclined to read the AIIM piece).

When we refer to "content" we are referring to the body of information informally and formally documented that is relevant to performing one's job. Content could include a presentation, a white paper, templates, forms, email messages, guidelines, photos, laws...you get the picture. This information can exist inside or outside of the enterprise. And if you pause for just a moment to think about just any one process you perform as part of your job, the types of content you might use to help you can be exhaustive.

As you've already figured out, content can be found in lots of different places. Content can also be organized in lots of different ways. Think for a moment about the way you store documents on your own computer. When you click on "My Documents" have you organized information by business unit, by project, by customer or high level function? The likely answer is that you've organized My Documents in a way that makes the most sense to you (your context), and makes the content easiest to retrieve and locate.

Problem is, there are a lot of different contexts for organizing information...so when you take a look at an enterprise, how do you arrive at a least common denominator that is still relevant and effective. Well for most folks, that least common denominator is 'search' technology. While easy, it is imprecise and places the onus on the end user to determine if content that is returned from a search query is actually relevant.

Our argument is that content should be organized around the specific processes that your employees are expected to perform. By organizing information in this way, you proactively provide people with a viewpoint into what is precisely relevant to their jobs. And because a business processes can easily be broken down into a series of activities that comprise the process, you can organize content at an even more precise level...the actual step itself.

Improving Customer Service Through Training

A poor customer service experience this weekend reminded me of something we were asked to write for Chief Learning Officer Magazine a year or so ago. Here's the exec summary:

Most of us can cite examples of a positive customer service experience that left us with the satisfaction and knowledge that we had made the right purchase decision. That the company understood us – and perhaps that as a result of the experience, we had an even greater affinity with the product or service we had purchased. All of us can cite examples where poor customer service left us gasping for air – exasperated by the arrogance and ignorance of the company we were dealing with, left wondering how can they “do business that way?” Many of us probably took the step to tell a family member or friend about the negative experience and in today’s environment of real-time information flow where the web can serve as a force multiplier for bad news, we might have sent an email to the company or even blogged about it to anyone who would listen.

When clients need support or assistance, an organization’s ability to address and resolve those matters consistently and in a quality manner is a key component in the total value delivered to a client and to the retention of an increasingly fickle client base. Whether your clients are consumers or businesses or both, your "brand" and the value behind it, is highly dependent not only on what you deliver, but also on the post-sales experience.

Customer issues should be viewed and treated as opportunities. Although customer service organizations (call centers) are frequently treated as cost centers, there are some compelling arguments that support increased investment in improving the customer service function to help them do just that. One way in particular to gain improvement is through increased investment in training and decision/performance support with learning and training managers taking the lead. Simply put, well-executed training and performance support provides the basis to make a positive impact on many of the key benefits that come with good customer service.

Finding and Using the Right Content - IDC Directions Follow-up

Clare Gillan is Senior Vice President of Executive and Go-to-Market Programs at IDC. Her general session presentation was titled "The Year of the Sales Rep." Among many of the juicy tidbits in the presentation, she cited a 2009 analysis from the Savo Group that indicated only 20% of the content created by the marketing organization for sales, was actually used by sales. Think of the massive waste in terms of time spent, actual cost and opportunity cost. Although this example is specific to sales and marketing content, it could easily apply to content anywhere within the organization. In fact when you think about your own enterprise we bet you'd be surprised that even 20% is used.


Part of the reason for this lack of usage Clare hypothesized is the classic disconnect between sales and marketing. Marketing produces stuff assuming sales needs it, sales doesn't communicate customer pre-sale requirements to marketing and the ships pass in the night. This is certainly a reason. Here are some others that we would add to the list.


1. Inability to locate information. Even if you have an enterprise search technology in place, it's still often difficult to a) search across all content repositories in the business and b) receive search results that reflect the precise intent of the query. Nucleus Research finds that 34% of employees spend 2-5 hours per week searching for content they can use, and 28% spend 5 hours of more. Not how most sales managers want their sales people spending their time.


2. Content without context. Even if you locate content that you think you want, it is up to you, the end user to determine the context of when/how/what/where to use the content. While determining context may seem easy, it places a huge burden on the end user, and also a huge expectation that they'll get it right. Outdated content and poorly written content proliferates most organizations. If you could, wouldn't you want your employees to always have access to the more relevant, best examples of content.


3. Information overload. Sticking with more statistics from Nucleus Research, 67% of employees are overwhelmed by the volume of information they have to access despite (or maybe as a result of) enterprise search technologies such as Google or Autonomy. Who isn't overwhelmed?

So if 80% of marketing content created for sales is going unused, what's to blame?

The Performance Support Imperative for Training Professionals

Check out the most recent ezine version of the peer reviewed Training Industry Quarterly in the link below. We were asked to write a white paper on the topic of performance and training. Seems to be a common theme these days as training and learning organization budgets get crunched. According to the “2007 State of the Industry Report” prepared by the American Society for Training & Development investment in learning and development initiatives reached $134.39 billion in 2007...so there is certainly some there...there. Consider some estimates on training’s effectiveness that suggest from 40% to 80% of training content doesn’t transfer to the worker. That’s significant money and time invested that could be redirected to any number of corporate initiatives if training doesn't find a way to be more relevant.


http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/trainingindustry/tiq_2009winter/index.php?startpage=18