Final Report

ICBM 507 Uncertainty & Decision Models Preem, June, Yuan, Gregor

Agenda

A. Problem Identification & Problem Statement B. Influencing Factors & Workflow Analysis C. Short List of Alternative Solutions & Evaluation Criteria D. Assessment of Alternatives E. Evaluation Process F. Implementation Plan

Agenda

A. Problem Identification & Problem Statement

Since April 2012 Atos is facing decreasing customer satisfaction, creating a significant gap between target and actual value

Customer satisfaction with SAP FI-Support

90 85 80 75 70 65 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 Aug 12 Sep 12 Customer Satisfaction

Target

Gap

In which ways might we increase satisfaction of customers with Atos SAP FI-Support?
Source: Internal Customer Survey
3

While customer satisfaction is decreasing, numbers of customer complaints are increasing at the same time
Complaints (escalations) are increasing in all priority levels 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 Aug 12 Sep 12

Escalations P1 Escalations P3

Escalations P2 Escalations P4

So, we assume a causal relationship between decreasing customer satisfaction and increasing escalations.
Source: Internal Data
4

Agenda

B. Influencing Factors & Workflow Analysis

An influence diagram helps to identify root causes of the problem

New hiring process Consultant Quality

Demanding Customers

Turnover rate

Motivation

Complexity of problems

Quality of Work

Escalations

Customer Satisfaction

ERP system Client (training, problems)

Appropriateness of work process

Number of Problems

Having identified the relevant relationships, assumptions are necessary to simplify the problem
6

Workflow I/V
Customer Inquiries

No

Is Inquiry a Problem of Existing System?

Yes

CR Ticket is Raised

IMS Ticket is Raised

Workflow II/V CR Workflow

CR Ticket is Raised

Assign to SMO

Reject CR

No

SMO Approve ? Yes

Assign to FI-IM: Feasibility Analysis

FI ?
Yes No

No

Assign to other team

Feasible ?
Yes

TL Assign CR to FI Consultant
8

Workflow III/V CR Workflow (Continued)

TL Assign CR to FI Consultant Impact Analysis & Man-day Estimation

Enough Info?
Yes

No

CUAC: For more Info

TL Revise & Approve for Implementation

Customer provides more information INPR

Reject CR

No

TL Approve ?
Yes

No

Negotia ble?
Yes

No

SMO Approve ?
Yes

FI Consultant Implement CR

SOLU CR
9

Workflow IV/V IMS Workflow

IMS Ticket is Raised
Service Desk assign IMS

FI Related ? Yes

No

Assign to other team

Assign to FI Consultant

FI ?
Yes

No

Problem ?
Yes

No

Reject IMS

FI Consultant Investigate Problem

10

Workflow V/V IMS Workflow (Continued)

FI Consultant Investigate Problem

Enough Info?

No

CUAC: For more Info

Yes

FI Consultant Provide Workaround / Solution

Customer provides more information INPR

CUAC: For Customer Approval

No

Solution Accepted ?

Yes

SOLU IMS

11

Agenda

C. Short List of Alternative Solutions & Evaluation Criteria

12

Based on identified points of improvement, we have created a short list of these alternatives that are able to improve customer satisfaction
Estimated impact and cross-functional involvement were first filters Four alternative solutions to increase customer satisfaction

CR Process Restructuring

Communication and knowledge exchange training

4

Improve Service Desk IT

Improve FI support departments IT

13

Evaluation Criteria
Criteria
Impact on Customer Satisfaction

Explanation & Reasoning

Increasing Customer Satisfaction is the main goal, therefore alternatives are expected to contribute positive impact of following factors: 1. Ticket Processing Time 2. Quality of Deliverables. Time required for implementation of each alternative. Customer Satisfaction is decreasing in the increasing rate, therefore the less time required for implementation, the better.

Implementation Time

Implementation Costs

Cost of Implementation is necessary to be considered, two major costs will be evaluated for each criteria: Direct Costs Opportunity Costs Expected Resistance of related parties can affect outcomes of alternatives, therefore it is necessary to take it into consideration of evaluating alternatives.

Expected Resistance

14

Agenda

D. Assessment of Alternatives

15

Alternative 1: CR Process Restructuring

Description
Goals: 1. Time Reduction from eliminating the approval process for small enhancements. Result: Increased customer satisfaction Activities: 1. Scoping enhancements to be included in PreApproved CR List. 2. Meeting to get approval from Managers, SMO, and customers. 3. Informing Clearing Center regarding the bypass route for Pre-Approved CRs. 4. Releasing Pre-Approved CRs Process to all Consultants. Impact: 1. Time reduction by reducing approval process of Small Enhancements.

Assessment of Evaluation Criteria

Impact on Customer Satisfaction Time Costs
Small CRs account for majority of incoming CRs. (75%) Reduced Approval Process from 2-3 days to 5 minutes

15 weeks
Opportunity costs of resource who are planning and implementing this process. SMO: Some enhancements may have big business effects even it is small change in SAP system. Customers: Customers will be responsible for incorrect requests and costs.
16

Expected Resistance

Alternative 2: Communication & Knowledge Exchange Training

Description
Goals: 1. Quality improvement by reducing volatility 2. Time reduction through knowledge leverage Result: Increased customer satisfaction Activities: 1. Knowledge exchange meetings 2. Creation of internal project database 3. Writing a handbook for standard problems 4. Communication trainings by experts Impact: 1. Sensitivity for current workload allocation 2.&3. Time reduction & increased predictability of outcome 4. Improve customer communication and lowering response time

Assessment of Evaluation Criteria

Impact on Customer Satisfaction Time Costs
Less volatile workload improves quality. More predictable outcome Reduced response time
8 weeks Opportunity costs of consultants for attending meetings and creating a database External training costs

Expected Resistance

Consultants: Database will create extra work Meetings might be seen as waste of time

17

Alternative 3: Service Desks IT & Incentive Plan

Description
Goals: 1. Working performance improvement on better workload allocation assigns to each individual consultants. 2. Balance workload as much as possible among consultants. Result: More efficiency on time spending on the customers to increase customer satisfaction
Activities: 1. Get approval from the management on the new working improvement system for this department. 2. Review on job description to Service Desk. 3. Set up KPI to measure working performance. Impact: 1. Maximize usage of the available resources. 2. Reduce overload VS under load among consultants. 3. Assess KPI whether they can achieve goal or the Key Success Factor.

Assessment of Evaluation Criteria

Impact on Customer Satisfaction Time Costs
Quick response to the customers. Reducing waiting time.

5 - 7 weeks No development cost occurs as the system is already in place. Costs involved in the incentive plan when KPI is in a satisfaction level, they can get salary increased or promotion. Service Desk As more work will be given. Pressure on KPI system.

Expected Resistance

18

Alternative 4: FIs IT Improvement & Incentive Plan

Description
Goals: 1. Encourage consultants to use available workload information for re-assigning tickets to less-workload consultants: 1. Quality Improvement 2. Time Reduction Result: Increased customer satisfaction Activities: 1. Analyze and improve available information. 2. Conduct Incentive Plan 3. Meeting to get approval from Management. 4. Releasing Incentive Plan to all Consultants. Impact: 1. Available Information can be used effectively to support consultants working process. 2. Quality Improvement 3. Time Reduction

Assessment of Evaluation Criteria

Impact on Customer Satisfaction
Better work allocation among team members, followings will be improved: Quality Improvement Time Reduction 4 - 5 weeks Opportunity costs of resource who are planning and implementing this process. Planned Monetary Incentives for achieved consultants. Management: Incentives Plan might be seen as waste of money Outcomes are likely to be nonmeasurable indicators of improvements. FI Consultants: Additional work is required. Unattractive incentives
19

Time Costs

Expected Resistance

Agenda

E. Evaluation Process

20

Evaluation Matrix
Weight
Impact on Customer Satisfaction
Implementation Time 45%

CR Process Restructuring
0.0 0.00

Communication Training
10.0 4.50

Service Desks IT
5.0 2.25

FI teams IT
4.0 1.80

10%

0.0

0.00

5.0

0.50

6.0

0.60

10.0

1.00

Implementation Costs

30%

10.0

3.00

0.0

0.00

4.0

1.20

3.0

0.90

Expected Resistance

15%

10.0

1.50

5.0

0.75

0.0

0.00

2.0

0.30

Sum

100%

4.50

5.75

1.80

2.20

Based on the assessment of alternatives and weighting of the decision criteria, we see Communication & Knowledge Exchange Training and CR Process Restructuring as the most promising solution.
21

Agenda

F. Implementation Plan

22

Implementation Plan: Training I/II

Knowledge Exchange Meetings

Weekly meetings, Consultants verbally present current projects and workload Impact on quality and pace of work: Knowledge leverage Sensitivity of workload Identifying experts

Internal Project Database

Informal knowledge database, with description of solved problems As easy & convenient as possible (Excel) Align incentives to use it Impact on quality and pace of work: Leverage of problem approaches Identification of contact persons Communication trainings with external trainers

Creating an intranet based handbook for recurring problems Automatic feedback to ERP development team, once a new recurring problem is entered Impact on quality and pace of work: Leverage of problem approaches Increased process speed and better results

Increasing Customer Satisfaction

Impact on quality and pace of work: Better communication between shifts More efficient and effective customer communication, leading to reduced circle times

Handbook

Communication Trainings

23

Implementation Plan Training: II/II

Activities Management Approval

December 2 3

January 2013 6 7

Employee Buy-in Communication Trainings IT infrastructure for handbook and knowledge database Knowledge exchange meetings Incentive plan optimization Training database and handbook usage
Kick-off

24

Implementation Plan: CR Process Improvement I/III

CR Ticket is Raised

PreApprove ?
Yes

No

Assign to SMO

Reject CR

No

SMO Approve ? Yes

Assign to FI-IM: Feasibility Analysis

Yes

FI ?

No

Assign to other team

No

Feasible ?
Yes

TL Assign CR to FI Consultant
25

Implementation Plan: CR Process Improvement II/III

TL Assign CR to FI Consultant

Yes

PreApprove ?

No

Impact Analysis & Man-day Estimation

Enough Info?
Yes

No

CUAC: For more Info

TL Revise & Approve for Implementation

Customer provides more information INPR

No

Reject CR
No

TL Approve ?
Yes

Negotia ble?
Yes

No

SMO Approve ?
Yes

FI Consultant Implement CR

SOLU CR
26

Implementation Plan: CR Process Improvement II/III

December 2012 January 2013 February 2013 March 2013 April

Activities Pre-Approved CR Process Approval from Management Proposed Pre-Approved CR List SMO Approval Customer Approval Finalize Pre-Approved CR Process & List Inform Clearing Center Releasing Pre-Approved CR Process & List to all FI Consultants

10

11 12

13 14

15 16

17

Kick-off

Go-Live

27

Agenda

Backup

28

Backup Volatile Work Process

Highly volatile workload for the individual consultant
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 14 12 10 8 6 4 2

Free capacities at other consultants

Mon

Tue

Wed CUAC INPR

Thu

Fri

0 Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

0 - 1 Ticket

2 - 4 Tickets

5 Tickets & Above

29

Backup Escalation by Type & Priority

Escalations by Type of Priority 1
50 40 30 40 20 10 0 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 P1 CR P1 IMS Aug 12 Sep 12 20 0 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 P2 CR P2 IMS Aug 12 Sep 12

Escalations by Type of Priority 2

80 60

Escalations by Type of Priority 3

150 100 50 0 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 P3 CR P3 IMS Aug 12 Sep 12

Escalations by Type of Priority 4

150 100 50 0 Apr 12 May 12 Jun 12 Jul 12 P4 CR P4 IMS Aug 12 Sep 12

30

Assumptions I/II
Influencing Factor
Demanding Customers

Assumptions & Reasoning

Growing expectations regarding provided services are observed

Feasible leverage for problem solving?

No. Atos positioned in premium market segment unwilling to lower customer expectations

Quality of Work Consultant Quality

No recent changes observed Assume fluctuation, motivation and hiring process are not significant Tight budget Assume not possible to higher better skilled consultants No.

Complexity of Problems

Observe increasing complexity of problems, while no significant changes in ERP system have occurred Assume increasing complexity of customers business world is relevant driver

No. Complexity of customers business environment is an external factor, we cannot influence.

31

Assumptions II/II
Influencing Factor
Quality of Work Number of Problems

Assumptions & Reasoning

Observed increasing number of problems, without recent changes in ERP system or client training Assume external factors responsible for increasing number Observed fluctuating workload Assume current work process is inefficient to handle incoming problems Interviewed consultants & management who complained about volatile workload, leading to bad average results Assume less volatile workload leads to better average quality of work, resulting in lower escalations and higher customer satisfaction,

Feasible leverage for potential improvement?

No. Number of inquires cannot be reduced under given assumptions. Yes. Optimizing workflow process might enhance quality of work output, resulting in increased customer satisfaction.

Appropriateness of Work Process

Based on the influence diagram and assumptions, we will focus on an improvement of the work process as it appeals most promising.

32