1 Date – 26th April 2020

REDESIGNING THE CUSTOMER CONTACT CENTRE AT TOYOTA

(Reference - Solving problems with Design Thinking - )

This is an interesting real incident that happened in TOYOTA and how the design thinking approach helped
them to come out of the real issue is presented in this chapter.

To start with story Basic problem in TOYOTA was Customer Contact Centre wherein very high complex
queries poured in from customers and process of answering them was equally complex, long waiting time
and providing high quality answers.

Team leader who was involved in resolvement of this business problem was Elaine Matsuda (Fix it person
as she introduced herself)

Elaine believed that the best person to solve this problem are the customer representatives themselves.
She gathered representatives to take the feedback and found that long hrs of waiting for the customers in
course of looking for the best quality answer was the problem.

This project now require a CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROCESS. She wanted to develop a tool kit that can be
used in multiple projects over and over again and become a part of CULTURE.

IDENTIFICATION OF TEAM FOR THIS PROJECT-

Gayle Darby – a change expert at University of TOYOTA (first time came to know about such university set
up by organization to meet requirements within organization). Gayle cam as body and paint engineer with
an undergraduate degree – automotive technology. Promoted and moved to University of Toyota as a
change expert.

Diane Jacobsen - external consultant form HITACHI – global IT consulting firm. Studied human – centered
design at Chicago Institute of Design

In depth problem provided them the real quantified problem statements like customers making three calls
to resolve a problem- Time divided as below

Multiple
Ask tech Hardcopy Ask
Apps -13
Support - resources fellow
applicatio
50% - 11% repr -17%
ns 22%

Initially solution was thought to be pretty straight forward i.e. create new data base for representatives. But
team thought of doing it in a way that would bring a TRANSFORMATION in process.

Gayle earlier did a past study in TOYOTA on failures of projects of similar kind and learning she took from
past failures of the project was RELEVANT STAKE HOLDERS WERE OFTEN NOT ENGAGED EARLY IN THE
PROCESS. So, Gayle was aware of this and decided to avoid this mistake in the new project. A new approach
that would involve PEOPLE- PROCESS- TECHNOLOGY was to be adopted.

Gayle took the test by herself deep diving into to understand better how the customer representative would
be like and how the problem is in real sense rather hearing from representatives. She felt the job very tough
and with immense pressure on customer representatives with present system of operating the department.

So the rich information gathered was plotted into a PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM and JOURNEY MAPPING
DONE. Journey mapping helped them to zero in down to process that would be more efficient and effective.

In Short – S.P.Naik
2 Date – 26th April 2020
Ex:- earlier customer representatives need to open sites which were irrelevant and was required to be
removed. Establish link with new vendors in charge of those site to link them to ours and would find the
information for us rather our own customer representatives looking for answers saving time/effort and cost.

“ JOURNEY MAPPING is one of the power weapons in designer’s tool kit”

Team also understood that NEW SOFTWARE design would resolve this problem effectively. It was
understood that a new software only reinforcement will not work until it is addressing the issues/problems
and representatives approve the use of this new software as breakthrough to problems.

Hence next step before formulating a new software is identifying AGENTS OF CHANGE (mix bag theory), also
key people capable of STYMIEING the progress with there deep knowledge.

AGENTS OF CHANGE acted like liasioning officers within department teams ensuring things are happening
and moving forward. Helping to communicate and coordinate.

This is called as OPPORTUNITIES FOR INPUT THROUGHOUT THE DESIGN PROCESS”

In above approach, it was observed that people from various technical backgrounds/ experience
developed an all-round dimension team, with employees designing the software user interface like solving
a PUZZLE. INCLUSIVE TEAM WORK helps to design in line with context and until designer knows on WHY
TO DO rather than WHAT TO DO the actual context do not get clear.

In above case similarly the engineers who will design the software were asked to attend change
management classes. Gayle found that involving engineers and designers throughout process is “KNOWING
EVERYONE IN TEAM, ENGAGE, BUILD RELATIONSHIP and MOTIVATE TO BE CREATIVE.” By this approach
everyone was made a part of journey, knowing things evolving at stages, see the final outcome and make
one feel a new sense of OWNERSHIP.

CO CREATION- PLAYING TOGETHER – response to Reps need for a LIBRARY with computer/whiteboards and
television. SANDBOX – people can play with new ideas – Reprs wanted more personal and professional
development. Team Games and competitions included. Atmosphere of PLAY uncovered systems’s strength
rather RIGID APPROACH. Design Principle – Power of Play – break free the linear mind-sets.

GAYLE’s team involved designers/ tech associates/ reprs in celebrations for strengthening- communication
and morale.
RESULTS
New system worked. Customers were able to get answers in timely fashion. Generated cost savings
of millions of dollars and empowering to solve more queries. When the new system was showed to
former representative she started crying because she was so happy with the end result.

DISTINCTIVE ELEMENTS OF THE OVERALL PROCESS

a) Creating shared goal with multiple stake holders
b) Involving end users
c) Understanding the current context
d) Working towards goal in way that respected rigid engg necessities and nuanced ways that
human brain think
e) Creating left/Right brain partnership
TAKE AWAY
Design thinking is a FLEXIBLE APPROACH that can be used to develop INTERNAL PROCESS.
Change is rarely painless . Involvement of larger mass for a cocreation of and more involvement in
process , better off everyone will be.
PEOPLE + PROCESS + TECHNOLOGY = SUCCESS

In Short – S.P.Naik