ARCHIVE FOR THE ‘bill-pollock’ CATEGORY

Click’s Scheduling Optimization Module was Just a Teaser! Now, Salesforce has Gone All In, and Click’s Found a Home. Bill Pollock, gives an analyst’s take on the acquisition...

Sector insight required for Strategies For Growth℠'s 2019 Servitization Journey Benchmark Survey.   

Momentum is the missing ingredient that so many field service organisations overlook when planning for success writes Bill Pollock...

Field Service Management (FSM), just like any other major business initiative, requires a great deal of thought, time, planning, resources, energy, and money. But it also requires momentum to ensure that it maintains its relevance as the business evolves in an ever-changing marketplace.

That is why so many well-intentioned FSM initiatives tend to “fizzle out” over time, either in terms of commitment, use, or simply because they haven’t grown in functionality at the same pace as the business itself has grown. Whatever the reason, many organizations ultimately find themselves in a position where their FSM program just flat out isn’t as effective as it once was.

Many years ago, Fram oil filters utilized an advertising campaign that stated “You can either pay me now, or you can pay me later!” This referred to the fact that you could either check (and, if required, replace) your car’s oil filter on a routine basis (i.e., before a problem manifests itself), or wait until after a problem occurs, thereby costing you more money for a “fix” after-the-fact than it would have cost had you routinely changed your oil filter as part of a self-administered preventive maintenance program.

The same concept also applies to FSM: fixing (or correcting) your FSM program along the way will undoubtedly save your organisation much more time and money compared to the risk of having it stray off course over time. Experience has shown that once an FSM program strays off course – whether by alot, or a little – it is extremely difficult to easily get it back on track in terms of refocusing direction, reallocating resources, rechanneling team efforts, realigning processes, and in many cases, admitting that the program had gone off track in the first place!

For these reasons, it is critical to monitor the progress of any FSM initiative on an ongoing basis in order to avoid falling into a situation where you will need to make what NASA typically refers to as “a midcourse correction”. Taking the NASA example one step further, when a rocket is aimed at the Moon, sometimes a “mid-course correction” requires nothing more than a 10- or 20-second burst of steam released from the side of the spacecraft to ensure that its recalculated trajectory will send it to the desired landing spot on the surface.

In cases where the problem is identified well enough in advance, it may only take this 10- to 20-second effort to ensure that the rocket does not miss its target by thousands of miles. In relative NASA terms, this is neither a complicated nor expensive procedure to execute, and the return is enormous (i.e., avoiding a potential total failure, and ensuring that the original target will be hit).

However, in cases where a problem is not identified until much later, or other earlier attempts have been ineffectively executed along the way, the rocket may have to be entirely reprogrammed – literally, on the fly – possibly entailing a new trajectory that will require orbiting around the back side of the Moon several times, and selecting a new landing site – or worse – sending it out into space as a failed effort. While the former “correction” would save the entire effort at a relatively low cost, the latter would – at best – require a huge amount of resources (i.e., people, time, and money) for just the chance of being able to avoid failure.

We believe that the same alternatives also apply to FSM initiatives, and that planning in advance for the most likely “mid-course corrections” should also be a critical component of any FSM improvement effort. Hopefully, any required “mid-course corrections” will be “minor” (such as taking added steps to improve communications between internal customer support groups, improving management and process control, upgrading existing software to the latest releases, etc.).

However, some corrections may be more complicated, such as changing platforms or reengineering existing business processes midstream, or having to deal with other major FSM program-altering situations. Regardless of the level of correction that is required, one thing remains clear – an ineffective FSM program will provide – at best – an ineffective FSM solution! Further, while an effective FS≠M program can generally always be expected to provide a measurable return-on-investment (ROI), an ineffective program typically will not – regardless of the cost!

There are essentially six (6) key reasons why FSM programs fail. They are typically:

1. Lack of management vision and commitment – Executive involvement is critical to steer the project so that it is continually in alignment with the company’s strategic business objectives.

2. Lack of a complete business process analysis – Before embarking on an FSM solution program, there must first be a comprehensive analysis of the individual customer-focused business processes used by the organization – otherwise you will find yourself merely automating the existing “mess”, or still doing things incorrectly – only more quickly!

3. Selecting the software before the analysis is completed – Selecting software before the analysis is completed is a common – and oftentimes fatal – mistake. This is why melding the organisation’s workflows into the software’s functionality, in a customer-focused, streamlined (and possibly reengineered) business process is generally required before implementing an FSM solution.

4. Implementing a system without changing the way you do business – Simply applying a new FSM software solution over the organisation’s existing business processes will not get the job done. Many companies that have attempted to use FSM primarily as a tool for automating their historical business processes have seen their efforts lead to nothing more than a means for preserving their status quo while the marketplace evolves in another direction.

5. Not managing expectations – Managing expectations at all levels within the organisation is critical. Cultural considerations and expectations must be continually assessed, addressed and managed.

6. Becoming locked into a system that does not support the FSM initiative (Agile Adaptability) – Any organization’s FSM program must show quick progress and be able to adapt quickly to changing business processes. Only the built-in “agile adaptability” of the system will preclude the chances for failure.

The best way to avoid any of these eventualities is to address them head-on in your FSM program from the outset. All of your organisation’s major business initiatives should already have these types of contingency plans built-in – especially those that directly impact both the customer base and the bottom line (which is certainly the case with FSM)!

The key to ensuring that your FSM initiative has adequately addressed these issues is to create an ongoing process-monitoring and self-assessment mechanism that is well-defined and clearly delineated in the original plan; and to empower the appropriate internal teams to manage and monitor these functions effectively.

Some tips for ensuring that you are able to successfully avoid any of these potential FSM obstacles are:
• Incorporate internal and external communications as integral components of your FSM design, development and implementation plans.

• Develop “real” goals and metrics for evaluating and tracking performance over time.

• Build effective input and feedback processes (i.e., easy to use, properly managed, and responsive) into your FSM communications model that address all internal (i.e., employee), external (i.e., customers, prospects), and channel (i.e., partners, vendors, dealers, etc.) requirements.

• Build an ongoing monitoring, tracking, and assessment function into the plan, and designate an appropriate individual (and team) to manage it. Also, empower that team to conceptualize, articulate, and recommend appropriate corrective actions as needed. • Provide management with performance tracking reports on a regular basis.

• Keep current with the FSM community in terms of what platforms, applications, or functionality may be newly available; take advantage of your existing vendor’s regular upgrades, updates, and patches; and keep up-to-date on what some of the other leading industry practitioners are doing with respect to their own FSM initiatives (e.g., by tracking them on the Internet; networking; attending trade shows, seminars, and users groups; etc.).

• Plan ahead for tomorrow’s upgrades today by keeping a close watch on your present FSM system status; setting (and revising) your goals and targets on a dynamic (rather than static) basis; identifying alternative “what-if” scenarios for addressing changes in your customer base (e.g., growth), infrastructure (e.g., outdated hardware/ software platforms), or other organizational factors (e.g., restructuring, acquisitions/ mergers, etc.).

There are many ways in which an organization can forestall problems relating to their FSM initiative, or – hopefully – avoid them alltogether. However, in order to accomplish this, you must always plan ahead; address the most likely “what-if” scenarios in your contingency planning; monitor, measure, and track performance all along the way; and encourage and empower both your managers and their support staffs to get their jobs done effectively.

You regularly replace the oil filters in your car – don’t you? And you can always count on NASA to use numerous “mid-course corrections” to protect any of its space launches. Therefore, it should also make sense – both philosophical and economic – to ensure that your organization’s FSM initiative is always supported by these ongoing planning processes as well. 

Bill Pollock is President of Strategies for GrowthSM.

In an exclusive interview with Field Service News, Bill Pollock reflects on the key findings around Customer Satisfaction from the latest Strategies for GrowthSM benchmarking study and reveals that there is plenty of room for improvement...

A question was raised recently at the Field Service Summit held in Warwick where the theme for the conference was moving into an experience economy. It is a question that is often at the top of mind for Field Service Executives, particularly when they are surrounded by so many of their peers, who are all seemingly ploughing ahead with customer engagement programs.

The question went along the lines of “Whilst I can see the benefits of improving customer satisfaction for my customers, how can I translate that into something tangible that my board might actually buy into?’

One man, who has fielded this question many times both when speaking at such events as well as in his long and illustrious career as an analyst to the field service sector, including in his role as a columnist for Field Service News, is Bill Pollock, President of Strategies for GrowthSM.

“It sounds like an easy question, but the reality is that it’s not an easy question to answer at all,” he explains.

The reason for this Pollock outlines is because when in fact Customer Satisfaction (CX) is actually an end product and the net result of a number of other strategic actions or exercises that the services organisation takes. To put it bluntly, CX is not what you do first, there are a whole bunch of other, more tangible tasks that sit in the strategic line ahead of it.

“You don’t achieve customer satisfaction first and then take strategic actions to improve processes and procedures and policies, etcetera, and so forth. It works the other way around,” Pollock explains.

“Now that doesn’t mean to say that once you attain the desired levels of customer satisfaction that doesn’t lead to other things - it absolutely does. But think about how you’re doing business, it’s a journey, it’s a continuum. And if you look at customer satisfaction on that continuum it might be two thirds or three quarters or the way towards the end but it’s not the end onto itself, there’s more that follows.

“When you look at customer satisfaction, that’s mainly a dependent variable rather than an independent variable by which I mean if you update and streamline your service delivery processes, if you acquire a new and upgraded or more powerful and robust field service management solution.

“If you can take steps to eliminate silos and other bureaucratic obstacles within your own organisation that tend to slow down the time it takes for you to deliver services to your customers, and ultimately tick them off.

“If you can train your field technicians and provide them with the latest technologies and mobile tools. If you can provide your customers with portals whereby they can initiate work orders and track the status and order parts and escalate problem scenarios solutions... then you will likely end up attaining higher levels of customer satisfaction.” “So you take those strategic actions first. And then what happens is it leads to more customer satisfaction.”

One of the things that makes Pollock such a well respected voice in the industry is that he is able to draw extensively not only on his own experience but also on solid data that his organisation collects every year within their annual Benchmarking studies. Reflecting on such trends across the last few years he is able to forensically piece together a detailed picture of how field service organisations are behaving both in the US and in Europe.

“What we saw [in 2018] was a dip in customer satisfaction across the European continent, down to 78%,” he explains.

“This was down from about 82% or so the year before. In our latest survey, 2019, the customer satisfaction rating for the total respondents, UK, Europe and North America and the Far East, it’s gone back up from 81% last year to 84% this year.”

“Customer satisfaction is mainly a dependent variable rather than an independent variable..."

This would at first perhaps indicate a course correction of European companies who had started to let the increasingly crucial CX metrics slide. However, Pollock believes there maybe an alternative explanation.

“Last year appears to be a year of transformation, a year of recalibration, a year for stepping back, seeing what needs to be done and then starting to do it. And this year is the year that the fruits of that labour have begun to take place,” Pollock says.

“Now you look at something like that and you say, “Hey, well, that’s really good, it’s improved.” But you don’t want your auto mechanic or your brain surgeon to only have 80% customer satisfaction,” he says with a wry smile.

He is of course correct, as the old adage goes the enemy of excellence is good enough. So what steps does Pollock suggest for companies seeking to go from merely good to great.

“Once you take the steps that I talked about just earlier and you have attained higher levels of customer satisfaction, then the road forward from there gets even trickier, even muddier,” he explains.

“When we ask organisations, ‘Do you measure customer satisfaction?’ 67%, two thirds in our current survey, say, ‘That’s what we measure first.’ That’s two points higher than total service revenue and five points higher than total service cost. 

“They look at customer satisfaction before they look at anything else. And that has been the number one KPI that respondents to the surveys look at in every survey we have ever done. Field service, warranty management, reverse logistics, you name it, that’s number one.

“Now customer retention was only measured by 30% of service organisations last year. So 67% versus 30%. Why is there that discrepancy? Well, because it’s pretty easy to measure customer satisfaction. You get a good qualified third party objective to conduct the survey. They ask the right questions of the right audience, they tabulate it the right way, no errors, you’ve got customer satisfaction measurements.

“How do you measure customer retention? The easiest way is when your company goes out of business because it hasn’t had high enough customer satisfaction and you lose all your customers. You can say, ‘We had a high level of customer retention yesterday and it’s zero today.’ So there are many surrogates to measure retention, but it’s very, very difficult.”

There are of course, ways and means of doing so, particularly in this age of social media and customer sentiment analysis, but that is a topic for another time. After all, as Pollock suggests there is still plenty of scope for improvement in CX metrics first.

Concluding our series our experts, Bill Pollock, Strategies for Growth, Marc Tatarsky at FieldAware, and Richard Pratley from SimPRO, identify potential areas of concern for service companies to look out for in 2019.

In The Big Discussion we bring together three industry experts and put four key questions for them to answer to give us a balanced view of the major trends impacting the field service sector. This week, the panel end our series by picking out areas of concern for the sector that could surface in 2019. 

What is the biggest area of concern that field service companies should address in the next 12 months?

BILL POLLOCK, PRESIDENT, STRATEGIES FOR GROWTH
The biggest area of concern for field service companies in the next 12 months will be, if they’re already somewhat behind the technology curve (or with respect to the competitive landscape), what do they need to do today to ensure that they will not fall further behind? And, it’s not just a matter of technology either; many FSOs will need to alter their corporate philosophy and mentality as well.

Technology goes hand-in-hand with the personnel that use it, so attention must also be given to how the organisation goes about replacing, and/or supplementing, its existing field force with new hires or the use of outside, third-party “feet on the street” support.
The services world is evolving so quickly, that any missteps along the way can be devastating – so every step, every move counts.

There will also be no time for any intra-mural infighting – only for collaboration and inter-departmental cooperation. Equipment will keep on breaking, and end-of-lifecycles are getting increasingly shorter. As such, there will always be the need for services organisations to deliver their support! However, only those that have the technological and corporate wherewithal to continually improve the way in which they deliver their services will rise to the top of the competitive order – and stay there!


MARC TATARSKY, SVP MARKETING, FIELD AWARE
The phrase ‘doing more with less’ is common in field service and that can be in relation to numerous resources and assets.
The workforce is a key element in this equation and can preoccupy a great deal of management time. There are concerns over an aging workforce in field service, a high turnover of workers and a shrinking pool of talent as demand increases.

Technology plays a critical role in any succession and resource planning. This may be empowering the workforce with automation to streamline operations, bring in best practice and increase productivity without the need to increase numbers. Using technology differently or embracing emerging technologies to enable remote expert capabilities, so a more experienced worker assists others.

Also attracting new workers, especially millennials, for whom, the latest technology is a big part of everyday life. The technology has to be right for both worker and the organisation to get maximum benefit

RICHARD PRATLEY, MANAGING DIRECTOR UK, SIMPRO
Technology is changing at a rapid pace. The technology we use today is very different from that we used five years ago so businesses will always have the challenge of how they can ensure the systems and technology they use are still current. Taking a long term view of the business requirement is vital.

Many businesses consider an off-the-shelf solution won’t fit the unique needs of the business. But think again! Overtly customised solutions can lead to restrictions with software updates and integrations with other systems in the future - not to mention a great deal of ongoing expense and time that should be spent on running the business.

Cloud-based software providers frequently release new updates (that are included in the licence fee) to help businesses stay ahead of tech trends. By ensuring the systems you use now are fit for-purpose, you’ll be able to keep up with future technological developments.

You can read the first instalment of The Big Discussion here, the second here and the third here. 

In the third of our four-part series, our industry experts Bill Pollock, Strategies for Growth, Marc Tatarsky at FieldAware, and Richard Pratley from SimPRO, identify key areas of focus for field service managers in 2019.

In The Big Discussion we bring together three industry experts and put four key questions for them to answer to give us a balanced view of the major trends impacting the field service sector. This week, the panel pick out trends for field service managers to look out for in 2019, including AI, data integration and connectivity.

What do you think should be the key areas of focus for field service managers across the next twelve months?

BILL POLLOCK, PRESIDENT, STRATEGIES FOR GROWTH
The next most important areas of focus for field service managers in the coming 12 months will likely be among the following three items:

(1) embracing the “new” technologies to support an expanded and enhanced capability to deliver their respective service offerings. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning have been around for more than 50 years, but are still relatively new to the services segment – but, it’s time to build them into your service operations!

(2) Changing the way in which you deliver – and price – your service offerings. Traditional break/fix service is essentially “dead”. Long live predictive diagnostics and predictive maintenance! Have you spoken to any chat bots lately? Well, you will!

(3) Re-engineering the way you measure performance metrics, or KPIs. MeanTime Between Failures (MTBF) and Mean-Time-to-Repair (MTTR) will not mean anything in an environment where services are being performed remotely on an ongoing basis. It will be time to replace some of the old “tried and true” KPIs with new ones that can measure systemic productivity, rather than merely individual field technician productivity. It’s time to rethink the entire service delivery process – and adjust to it!

MARC TATARSKY, SVP MARKETING, FIELD AWARE
Integration capability tops software selection criteria consistently for field service leaders. Even those who have been hesitant to integrate in the past, can now see that integration capabilities are far more advanced. Working with the right FSM software creates rapid time to value and ensures minimal risk.

Essentially the integration of FSM solutions into existing business systems of record means there is no disruption to ERP, CRM and accounting systems. Ultimately the real value is delivered through synchronized workflows, enhanced reporting and extending results beyond the current systems. Data integration yields actionable outcomes and connectivity to the wider business.

Field service has long been seen as simply a business cost, but leaders now recognise that integration can elevate their service operation, transforming it to a value-driving organisation that delivers broader business results. The evolution of field service through integration should be a focus to unlock this business value.

RICHARD PRATLEY, MANAGING DIRECTOR UK, SIMPRO
We continue to see businesses turning to software and technology to improve the efficiency of their workforce and to support customer service.

Smart connected products and IoT technology is transforming field service operations and we’ll see more adoption of this over the next twelve months. The predictive model not only reduces the cost of reactive maintenance but it addresses any issues before they become critical. For the customer, they won’t ever need to worry about needing to deal with a broken asset ever again.

We already have a number of customers running trials of our IoT technology. Not only are they winning new contracts off the back of it but it’s helping to increase the lifetime value of their existing customers.


The final part of The Big Discussion. You can read the first instalment here, and the second here. 

If you’re a field service organisation you now need to move beyond merely “kicking the tyres” and start making your final FSM solution selection writes Bill Pollock.

You have already spent a considerable amount of time (and resources) evaluating Field Service Management (FSM) vendors and solutions, and now you find yourself at the point where you will soon need to execute on your decision as to which FSM solution will be the best “fit” for the organisation.

You have examined each solution with respect to its capabilities; breadth and robustness of functionality; technology acquisition cost (i.e., both in the absolute, as well as in terms of the Total Cost of Ownership, or TCO); potential disruption during implementation; forecasted timelines for implementation; adaptability and scalability; and ease and application of use.

You have also organised and sat through several C-level meetings, team meetings and internal advisory panels; you’ve fought, time and time again, to obtain management buy-in; and you’ve debated whether to go Cloud- or Premise-based, perpetual license vs. a subscription pricing model, CRM-based vs. ERP-based, and – oh, yeah – where exactly does the Internet of Things (IoT) come into play with respect to supporting the selected FSM solution?

The market is painfully aware of the challenges that are associated with the selection and implementation of an effective FSM solution. In fact, many organizations have previously been burned by acquiring a solution that was over-sold, but under-delivered.

The advent of Cloud-based FSM solutions has also enabled several less-than-complete FSM offerings to overstate their respective functionalities, making it even more important to be able to identify the differences between a qualified start-up – and a less-than-qualified “upstart” – solution provider.

There is much to be cautious about in today’s FSM solution market – and not all products are able to live up to their hype. When asked to state their top three future challenges with respect to acquiring and integrating new FSM technologies into their existing field service management operations, UK/Europe respondents to Strategies For Growth℠’s 2018 FSM Tracking Survey cited the following as the most “disruptive”:

• 48% Return on Investment (ROI) on the acquisition of new technology;
• 36% Integrating new technologies into existing FSM solution platforms;
• 34% Identifying all of the required functionality for our organization;
• 28% Cost of new technology (both absolute, and Total Cost of Ownership, or TCO);
• 28% Obtaining management buy-in for new technology acquisition;
• 24% Identifying the most appropriate devices to support field technicians.

Do these challenges sound similar to the ones that you are facing with respect to bringing new technology to the organisation? If so, then the following opportunities, or benefits, associated with implementing a state-of-the-art FSM solution will likely represent the most compelling “talking” points to support your ability for recommending to management the solution that best fits your organization’s needs (i.e., again, as cited by UK/Europe respondents from SFGSM’s 2018 FSM Benchmark Survey Update):

• 63% Improve customer satisfaction;
• 44% Ability to run a more efficient field service operation by eliminating silos, etc.;
• 33% Improve field technician utilization and productivity;
• 28% Establish a competitive advantage• 28% Reduce Total Cost of Operations (TCO);
• 25% Ability to provide customers with an end-to-end engagement relationship.

Other opportunities and benefits “bubbling” just under the 25% mark include completely automate our field service operations (18%), foster enhanced inter-departmental collaboration (12%), and reduce ongoing/recurring costs of operations (11%). 

Again, if any of these factors represent areas where your organization would like to see improvement, then only by choosing the right FSM solution will you be able to make it happen!Services businesses – like yours – are established primarily to make money for their investors (i.e., the bottom line); however, the only way to successfully stay in business is to deliver what the customer wants, when they want it, and how they want it! And this will still all depend on the organization’s ability to deliver the expected quality of service, which in turn, will depend on whether or not it is using the most effective and powerful tools to do so. That is why choosing the most effective – and powerful – FSM solution is so important.There are many success stories out there in the marketplace – but there are even more failures (i.e., or horror stories)!

Still, the UK/Europe field services segment reflects modestly high levels for the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), or metrics, that measure and gauge its overall well-being. For example, the following represent the principal mean average KPI ratings from the UK/Europe portion of the 2018 SFGSM survey:

• 78% Customer Satisfaction(*** Some improvement definitely required here ***);
• 82% Service Level Agreement (SLA) Compliance;
• 63% Percent of Total Service Revenue under Contract / SLA;
• 36% Service Profitability (as a Percent of Service Revenues).

However, not every Field Services Organisation (FSO) is able to attain even these modestly good – but not great – performance levels. In fact, the survey results clearly reflect an underlying inability for a significant percent of the UK/Europe services community to attain even less than these modest levels of performance:

• 26% Not attaining at least 80% Customer Satisfaction;
• 30% Not attaining at least 80% Service Level Agreement (SLA) Compliance;
• 39% Not achieving at least 50% of Total Service Revenue under Contract / SLA;
• 44% Not achieving at least 30% Service Profitability.

If your organisation falls into any of these categories, then it is clearly time to do something about it; that is, to acquire the FSM solution that has the functionality to take you to the next level. The best way to identify, evaluate – and, ultimately, select the right FSM solution for your organisation will require getting down to the basics, essentially by narrowing down your “long list” to a targeted “short list” of the chosen few for final consideration; then, reading the literature, viewing the demos, checking out the research analyst reviews and recommendations (there are many!), sharing information with industry peer groups, and so on.

There will only be one best choice for your organisation – and only through a concerted effort of due diligence can you be assured that you have made the right decision!

The SFGSM’s 2019 FSM is taking place throughout February, with the top-line results being presented in Field Service News later on this year. You can take part in the survey here. 

In the second of our four-part series, our industry experts Bill Pollock, Strategies for Growth, Marc Tatarsky at FieldAware, and Richard Pratley from SimPRO, tackle the area of IoT and its role in field service.

In The Big Discussion we bring together three industry experts and put four key questions for them to answer to give us a balanced view of the major trends impacting the field service sector. This week, the panel look at the impact of IoT in field service and whether it will become a necessity for firms to embrace if they are to keep ahead of the service curve.

IoT has become an increasingly key discussion amongst field service companies in recent years - do you think it will soon be essential for field service companies to embrace IoT?

BILL POLLOCK, PRESIDENT, STRATEGIES FOR GROWTH
I believe it is already essential for field service companies to embrace the IoT. That ship has already sailed – and those FSOs that run their services operations on an IoT platform are already beginning to see the return on their investment.

The enormous amount – and wealth – of data that is now being generated through the use of an IoT platform is turning many of the traditional ways of thinking upside-down. For example, it has created an environment where the “old” (i.e., last year’s) way of measuring performance is becoming almost instantly outdated. For example, last year, an FSO might have been assessing its service delivery performance on the basis of asset uptime or SLA compliance, etc. However, this year, they may need to gauge their performance via an entirely “new” set of KPIs!

Measuring your performance in providing “power by the hour” or “airplanes in the air” is quite a bit different than measuring on the basis of the number of monthly site visits, PM calls and asset uptime.


MARC TATARSKY, SVP MARKETING, FIELD AWARE
Undoubtedly, IoT has the potential to revolutionise field service in terms of moving to a predictive model of service, increasing efficiency, reducing cost while improving customer service. But any move to IoT is dependent on various operational factors. These include the prevalence of assets and existing IoT sensors, the ability to add IoT sensors to new sources to collect meaningful data and the technology maturity of the organisation and the FSM platform.

These factors can be dictated by numerous elements – company size, the industry and type of clients they serve, the complexity of the work, the value of assets and equipment they supply and service, and their leadership.

It is important for organisations to establish where they need to be in their operational and technological maturity to help the business thrive. For some companies transformative technologies, like IoT, are a key element of their planning and for others they may not figure at all.

RICHARD PRATLEY, MANAGING DIRECTOR UK, SIMPRO
IoT is fast become an essential service offering that customers will ultimately demand of their service providers and it  helps meet the requirement to deliver more for less for customers particularly for those installing and maintaining high-value assets!

When connecting these ‘Things’ to the Internet, using the live operational data and machine learning to analyse performance, it opens up the possibility of variable-based services based on machine condition and utilisation, rather than prescriptive frequency based visits and reactive calls.

This proactive approach can help lower TCO and increase uptime for customers and asset owners, whilst lowering the cost of operation and providing differentiation for the Service Provider. If you want to stay relevant in a competitive evolving market, now is the time to be considering how this technology can be incorporated into your own processes and service offerings.


The third part of The Big Discussion will be published next week. You can read the first instalment here.