|
Zap
the Gaps!
By Ken Blanchard, Dana
Robinson, and Jim Robinson
Unabridged audio,
Recorded Books, LLC
This is a management fable. Ben,
manager of a struggling call center at Dyad Technologies gets a new boss who
lets him know the whole division must improve or she, and he, and the other
managers will risk their jobs. Average
response time is over five minutes and should be under two.
Abandonments, callers hanging up without talking to a Customer Serviced
Representative (CSR), are far too high. And,
first call resolutions are running well below the 70% target.
None of these facts are news to Mike, but he’s not sure how they can
improve things. In fact, his first
idea carries a hint of blaming the CSR’s, saying they should stop chitchatting
so much with customers and get the problems solved.
Fortunately for Ben, this fable has a fairy godmother . . ., I mean
Godfather. Ben meets Mike when he
fills in for his boss at a charity golf tournament.
Mike calls himself a “gardener”, but goes on to explain that he was a
banker, but always loved to grow things. So
he started a landscaping business, added some nurseries and lawn and garden
equipment and supply stores. Ben
knows the company which is very prominent in the area.
In fact, he used them for landscaping on his new house and liked their
service so well he signed a service agreement with them.
After Ben opens up about the problem he’s facing, Mike offers some
advice. Their conversation turns
into a golf date for the next day during which Mike illustrates some principles
through the various kinds of grass on the golf course.
Ultimately, Ben engages with Sarah, Dyad’s vice president for human
resources to implement some of the ideas for discovering new approaches that
he’s gained from his talks with Mike. As
they run into difficulties, the go back to Mike, and he repeatedly helps them
out. In the end, the numbers start
to improve, then improve more rapidly, until all the metrics reflect a
high-functioning call center.
That’s the story. What are
the management suggestions? The are
contained in an acrostic of GAPS:
|
G
|
Go for the “shoulds”
|
What are the results your organization should be achieving?
How are they measured? What
are the metrics? The call
center’s “shoulds” were average response time, abandonment rates,
and first call solutions. In Good
to Great, Jim Collins describes the unique metrics that each of
the companies that made that rare transition used to focus their efforts.
In It’s Your Ship, Mike
Abrashoff looked at reenlistment rates, crew morale surveys, combat
readiness inspection scores, gunnery scores, etc.
|
|
A
|
Analyze the is
|
Determine what is actually happening in your team.
Who are the best performers? How
do they differ from those who are struggling?
It’s important here to do more than just identify the
characteristics and behaviors of the successful individuals or teams.
You must go on to identify the characteristics and behaviors of
those who struggle, and maybe even of the mediocre, so as to eliminate the
ones in common and focus on those that seem to differentiate.
|
|
P
|
Pin down the cause
|
After you know what is happening, you must dig for the causes of the
variations. Do not “jump to
solutions.” Go deeper,
looking at as many variables as feasible given time and resources.
Study not only the personal attributes of your team, but also the
procedures, supporting technology, etc.
|
|
S
|
Select the solution
|
Finally, for each cause, select the most powerful and cost effective
set of solutions. Prioritize
for impact. Implement
thoroughly and carefully, and then reassess as new data on your metrics
are produced.
|
Was Ben’s challenge a technical
problem or an adaptive challenge? In
some ways, it would seem to be technical. It
did not really require that hearts and minds in the organization change, and it
seems an “expert” could have been hired to come in and solve it.
But, the solution process Ben and Sarah followed was very like those
suggested for “adaptive” challenges in Surfing
the Edge of Chaos or Leadership
on the Line. They engaged
the CSR’s, the front line workers, in a collaborative effort to improve.
They laid out the problem, stressed the necessity of improvement and the
consequences of failure, admitted that they did not have the “answers”, and
then aggressively listened to their folks. Even
if an expert could have come in, either as a new boss or as a consultant, and
seen the things it took the group some time and effort to work out, would the
implementation have been nearly as “owned” by the CSR’s if they had not
been part of the process?
Note
written: June, 2003
|