In the first part of this exclusive research project run in partnership with Advanced Field Service, we looked at the types of mobile devices being used in the field and why it seems that the days of pen and paper are becoming increasingly numbered....
ARCHIVE FOR THE ‘research-2’ CATEGORY
May 12, 2015 • Features • Management • Advanced Field Service • management • research • Research • Decision Making
In the first part of this exclusive research project run in partnership with Advanced Field Service, we looked at the types of mobile devices being used in the field and why it seems that the days of pen and paper are becoming increasingly numbered. In the second of this four part series we look at whether there is a future for wearables in field service, are devices being used rugged or consumer and has BYOD worked?
Now in the third part of this series we turn our attention to the feedback our field service engineers are providing...
There is also a white paper accompanying this series, with even further insights, which you can download here
Engineers reaction to mobile devices in general
We asked our respondents “Do you think your your field engineers have appreciated a move to using a mobile device?”
The results showed that in the main there is a strong acceptance from field engineers that using a digital device as part of their role is a benefit. In fact over a third of respondents (37%) stated that they had “absolutely taken to mobile” while the largest response to this question was “we have mostly had a positive response from our mobile workers” which was stated by just under half (44%) of respondents.
Just under a fifth of companies (17%) stated they had received a mix of positive and negative feedback from their field workers, whilst less than 1% admitted they had “some success but getting widespread adoption is tough”.
The largest reason for engineers responding to the implementation of a mobile devices was that it “makes their work-flow easier” with 57% of companies stating this to be the case.
One respondent summarised the dual benefits of the approach for both engineers and company alike stating: “The engineers have appreciated the move from a rugged PDA to an Android device because it offers them more advantages; web, apps, email, etc. From a business perspective we got them access to industry apps (fault code analysis, parts availability, etc.) as well as improving the acceptance of the company solution”
Involving engineers in the selection process
Given the importance of quick user adoption, we wanted to see how involved field engineers were in the selecting the devices they would be using. We asked our respondents “Did you have any input from your field engineers in selecting both the devices and apps they use in the field?”
Whilst it is an approach recommended by many hardware, software and change management experts to help improve swift user adoption rates, it is not one that is adopted by the majority of companies when selecting the tools their field service engineers will be using. In fact almost two thirds (61%) of companies admitted that they don’t involve their engineers in the decision making process.
Almost two thirds (61%) of companies admitted that they don’t involve their engineers in the decision making process.
Indeed it would seem that whilst the majority of respondents failed to take advantage of their engineers insight during the selection process, there may actually be a growing groundswell to see this happening more frequently as almost half of those who didn’t take input from their field engineers admitted that in hindsight they think this would have likely helped speed up the adoption of the new solution. “The engineers have appreciated the move from a rugged PDA to an Android device because it offers them more advantages; web, apps, email, etc.”
The decision making unit
So engineers input aside, who is involved in the decision making unit when it comes to selecting a new field service mobility solution? Having put that question to our respondents our research would certainly back the assertion that the single decision maker seems to be somewhat of a myth, or at least a very rare scenario.
The most common role to be involved within the decision making unit (DMU) is IT Director with 64% of companies stating that their IT Director would be involved in the decision making process. This was followed by MD/CEO (58%), Field Service Director (53%) and Field Service Manager (45%). Meanwhile 20% of companies have procurement involved within the DMU also. Perhaps contradictory to these statistics is how a company will approach the early selection process.
The most common approach for this initial phase of selecting a new field service solution is when the “field service director/manager identified the need for a mobile solution and made recommendations to the board.” Which was how 35% of companies began their search for a new system. The second most common means of instigating this process is when “the board decides to implement a mobile solution and tasks the IT manager & Field Service Manager together to identify the right solution” which was what was reported by exactly a quarter of companies.
Other options that were board driven were for the board to task the “Field Service Manager/ Director to identify the solution” (13%) and the board task the “IT Director to identify the right solution” (8%) whilst amongst 17% of companies it was the ‘IT Director identified the need and advised the board”
Choosing a solution
When it comes to selecting a solution the most common approach is to view three different solutions which exactly a third of companies opted to do.
Just under a quarter (23%) of companies will leave no stone unturned and look at five or more solutions when making their decision
A similar amount (22%) will look at just two solutions whilst a tenth of companies made their decision based solely on looking at one solution. In terms of the frequency of updating a field service solution the consensus is very much that every three years is the optimal time between updates with just under half (47%) of companies stating they believe this to be the case. The second most common thought is two years (30%) whilst all other options were 10% or below.
But how does compare to the reality?
Well, whilst a similar majority (42%) refresh their solutions every three years it would also seem that many companies keep their existing assets longer than they would like.
41% of companies state they will wait four years or more to refresh their field service solution,
Compared to this ‘finding the time’ to arrange an implementation was a minor worry for most with just 12% of companies stating that this is their primary concern. What is interesting is that 34% of companies see worries around integration being their biggest challenge. Of course the irony here being that the longer you ‘sweat’ an asset the greater the chance of the technology becoming tougher to integrate with the latest emerging tech.
Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report now!
Find out more about Advanced Field Service in the Field Service News Directory
Please note that by downloading the above research report you agree to these fascinating terms and conditions
May 05, 2015 • Features • Hardware • Advanced Field Service • research • Research • wearables • BYOD • rugged
In the first part of this exclusive research project run in partnership with Advanced Field Service, we looked at the types of mobile devices being used in the field and why it seems that the days of pen and paper are becoming increasingly numbered....
In the first part of this exclusive research project run in partnership with Advanced Field Service, we looked at the types of mobile devices being used in the field and why it seems that the days of pen and paper are becoming increasingly numbered. Now in the second of this four part series we look at whether there is a future for wearables in field service, are devices being used rugged or consumer and has BYOD worked?
There is also a white paper accompanying this series, with even further insights, which you can download here
The next wave of technology –wearables
Of course whilst one end of the spectrum is the laggards still using paper based systems at the other end we have the bleeding edge early adopters. With 2014 being predicted to be the year of the wearables have these very personal computers started to become part of the fabric of the field engineers tool-kit? Or have wearables faltered in industry much as they have done in the consumer world?
Our research would seem to indicate that the latter is true with two thirds of our respondents stating that they didn’t think Wearables would be a device they would be implementing within the next 12 months. Many of the arguments against such devices becoming part of the field engineers tool-kit were focussed around there simply not being a need for them in the eyes of many.
Comments from those who didn’t see Wearables coming to the fore anytime soon included there being “no obvious benefit of wearable technology”,“Too small, not enough visible info, techs have enough gadgets they need tools that work efficiently – not toys to keep up with technology” and the rather damning “They are a gimmick. No-one takes them seriously”
As for those who did see the march of the Wearable happening within the next 12 months almost three quarters (71%) felt this was because Wearables could help “improve the engineers work-flow”
As for those who did see the march of the Wearable happening within the next 12 months almost three quarters (71%) felt this was because Wearables could help “improve the engineers work-flow” over half (56%) saw the advantage of “hands free working” as key to the potential of the devices while just under a third (32%) identified “health and safety” as a reason why Wearables could be important.
Rugged vs. Consumer
Having established the form factors that were prominent in the industry, the next focus of our research moved on to another ongoing debate in field service – is the higher cost of rugged devices worth it in the long term?
Or are consumer grade devices fit for the task?
Our research highlighted that amongst our sample group of field service companies at least, the vast majority of almost three quarters of companies (74%) were using consumer grade devices compared to the 21% of companies using more rugged devices.
Often one of the most frequent arguments put forward by rugged device manufacturers is the Total-Cost-of-Ownership – i.e. that whilst a consumer grade device may be available at a lower cost, across the space of the devices lifetime the more expensive rugged device will prove to be a better investment as repairs and replacements for the consumer grade device mount up.
It would appear however, that either the numbers don’t stack up or that the argument is falling on deaf ears as almost half (48%) of those companies that selected a consumer device based their decision around cost, while 44% cited the fact that they felt the “improved speed of user adoption” was what drew them to a consumer device.
BYOD
The other reason cited for the preference of consumer devices was BYOD. However, despite a large amount of hyperbole surrounding the movement towards implementing a Bring Your Own Device policy this remains a largely unpopular option, with less than a tenth (8%) of those companies opting for consumer devices citing BYOD as the reason for doing so.
Amongst this small group the leading reasons for taking this approach were “quicker user adoption” and “employee satisfaction” which were both identified by over half of the respondents. Meanwhile the lower costs associated with the BYOD was acknowledged as a driving factor by a 29% of respondents in this section.
hose who had implemented a BYOD policy had universally found it to be a successful approach with 86% reporting that it had been a successful strategy
The reasons for the success of BYOD were stated as “increased productivity” (44%), “engineer satisfaction” (43%) and again interestingly the cost factor scored lowest with just 14% stating that the “reduced cost of mobilising their workforce” was a significant factor in why they perceived their adoption of a BYOD policy as a success.
From the engineer’s point of view the adoption of a BYOD policy was also mainly positive with 86% of respondents stating their engineers were “generally supportive of the policy”. However, such a policy was not universally accepted by engineers with 14% of respondents admitting they had faced “strong resistance to BYOD” from their engineers.
Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report now!
Find out more about Advanced Field Service in the Field Service News Directory
Please note that by downloading the above research report you agree to these fascinating terms and conditions
Apr 28, 2015 • Features • Advanced Field Service • Future of FIeld Service • research • Research
Our exclusive research project sponsored by Advanced Field Service looks at the types of solutions being used by Field Service companies in 2015 and how those companies select the right solutions to meet their needs. Across the next four weeks we...
Our exclusive research project sponsored by Advanced Field Service looks at the types of solutions being used by Field Service companies in 2015 and how those companies select the right solutions to meet their needs. Across the next four weeks we will present you the findings of this research...
There is also a white paper accompanying this series, with even further insights, which you can download here
Field Service News has recently completed a research project, sponsored by Advanced Field Service, into what types of mobility tools are being used by field service companies. What types of hardware are most commonly being selected for our field engineers? What software is being used out in the field? How are companies selecting the right solution for their engineers?
What feedback are those engineers giving? And what actual benefits are being delivered through digital mobility solutions?
In total 122 field service professionals responded to our survey which ran across February and March with respondents from companies with mobile workforces ranging from less than ten field engineers through to over 801 engineers and with an even number of representatives across the spectrum with no obvious spikes, the research offers insight into trends across field service as a whole.
Types of devices being used in the field
It is perhaps no surprise by now that most companies are using some form of digital device.
We have been going through a digital revolution across the last decade and no industry has felt the impact of this change as keenly as field service.
Indeed out in the wider world of industry the emergence of Enterprise Mobility as a definable, and eminently sizeable industry that will ultimately dwarf the size of the field technology sector considerably, has now firmly taken root. However, the field service industry, which has more complex needs than it’s younger cousin of Enterprise Mobility, is also a far more mature market in general.
In fact our research indicates that the majority of companies are using a mix of differing digital devices, with 46% stating this is the case. This would make sense as many field service organisations are now in their second, third or even fourth generation of digital device being rolled out to their field engineers.
However, when it comes to those companies that have rolled out just one device to their mobile workforce the results revealed some further insight into the trends now appearing amongst field service companies.
“It appears the rumours of the death of the laptop have been greatly exaggerated”
Of course every action has a reaction, and the rapid growth of smart phones as a tool for field service engineers has resulted in an equally rapid decline in the use of PDAs. In fact now just 5% of companies are using these devices - the smallest percentage of any device being used within the field.
One myth however that the research helps debunk is that Tablet computing his having a similar impact on the laptop sector as smartphones are having on PDAs.
Whilst it seemed at one point that the trend for tablet computing would see the laptop being edged out of both the consumer and rugged markets it appears the rumours of the death of the laptop have been greatly exaggerated.
In fact our research outlines that in terms of the devices being used on there own, both tablets and laptops have an equal share of the market at 14%.
However, we should also consider the fact that of those companies who provide more than one device to their engineers, a large proportion of companies are likely to offer a laptop as one of those devices, largely due to the fact that having a built in keyboard makes any significant manual input much easier.
So whilst it is likely that ultimately the traditional laptop will become replaced by the convertible or even the detachable laptop, the keyboard remains an important part of the field engineers mobile technology kit.
The last few days of pen and paper
What the research presents clearly is that the masses in field service have moved towards the new digital dawn.
There are of course in any industry sector, laggards that remain behind the trend.However, when it comes to the application of mobile technology amongst field engineers this group (i.e. those using no digital medium) now stands at just a nominal 3%.
Not only the is the group now just a very small minority, but our research also indicates that this group is potentially set to disappear completely within the next twelve months.
Of those companies still using pen and paper 100% stated they are considering moving to a digital mobile platform within the next twelve months.
The reasons for this are of course clear, as are the benefits of moving to any digital medium, including increasing productivity and streamlining a field engineers work-flow.
The fact is that those companies still relying on pen and paper are in danger of falling significantly behind their competition.
In fact of those companies still using pen and paper 100% of the respondents admitted that they felt they were at a disadvantage, with 50% stating that they felt that disadvantage was significantly impacting their ability to remain competitive.
Want to know more? Download the exclusive research report for free now!
Click here to read the second part of this research report coming next week which will look at Wearables, Rugged vs. Consumer and BYOD...
Find out more about Advanced Field Service in the Field Service News Directory
Be social and share this feature
Mar 31, 2015 • Features • Hardware • Advanced Field Service • laptops • pdas • research • Research • hardware • smartphones • tablets
Field Service News is currently undertaking a research project into what types of mobility tool are being used by field service companies. What types of hardware and software are being used? How are companies selecting the right solution for their...
Field Service News is currently undertaking a research project into what types of mobility tool are being used by field service companies. What types of hardware and software are being used? How are companies selecting the right solution for their engineers? What feedback are their engineers giving them and what benefits are being delivered through digital mobility solutions?
The survey is coming to a close at the end of this week so if you want to make your voice heard and enter the survey now by clicking this link. All respondents will get a full copy of an exclusive white paper based on the findings of this research and also thanks to our sponsors Advanced Field Service we are also offering three x £50 Amazon vouchers for those who opt to enter our prize draw.
Types of devices being used in the field
It is perhaps no surprise by now that most companies are using some form of digital device. We have been going through a digital revolution across the last decade and no industry has felt the impact of this change as keenly as field service.
Indeed out in the wider world of industry the emergence of Enterprise Mobility as a definable, and eminently sizeable industry that will ultimately dwarf the size of the field technology sector considerably, has now firmly taken root.
The field service industry, which has more complex needs than it’s younger cousin of Enterprise Mobility, is also a far more mature market in general.
In fact our research indicates that the majority of companies are using a mix of differing digital devices, with 50% stating this is the case. This would make sense as many field service organisations are now in their second, third or even fourth generation of digital device being rolled out to their field engineers.
However, when it comes to those companies that have rolled out just one device to their mobile workforce the results so far certainly raised a few surprises. Perhaps the biggest of this is that despite the high profile increase in tablet computing, of those companies responding to our survey so far only 4% are using tablets exclusively.
This is only fractionally greater than those companies using PDAs exclusively which was just 3%. However, if we think that PDAs were the dominant mobile device in the not so distant past it is interesting to see such a dramatic decline as these devices essentially become faded out to obselition.
Of course the natural successor to PDAs is the smart phone and the number of companies relying on smart phones only as their field service engineers' working tool was a relatively sizeable 14%.
The most frequently provided tool in isolation remains the laptop with 32% of companies providing only these to their field engineers.
Of course as alluded to above, many companies are using multiple devices, and it is highly likely that these companies are using more modern devices (i.e. smartphones and laptops) so this should also be taken into account in assesing the most common devices being used, however the trends of declining PDA use and increasing smartphone use certainly align with other industry reports.
The last few days of pen and paper
There are of course in any industry sector laggards that remain behind the industry trends. However, when it comes to the application of mobile technology amongst field engineers this group (i.e. those using no digital medium) now stands at just 3%.
Not only the is the group now just a very small minority but our research also indicated it is set to completley dissapear within the next tweleve months.
Of those companies still manual systems 100% of the respondents admitted that they felt they were at a disadvantage
In fact of those companies still using pen and paper 100% of the respondents admitted that they felt they were at a disadvantage, with 50% stating that they felt that disadvantage was significantly impacting their ability to remain competitive.
What about you?
How does this tally with your own situation? Let us know by taking five minutes to help us with this research by completing our online survey here.
And if you would like to know more about the findings of this research, which also looks at the types of software being used in the field, whether BYOD is taking hold, rugged vs. consumer technology and what types of decisions are being made in selecting the right digital mobile solution - then remember every respondent will receive copy of an exclusive white paper reporting these findings. PLUS you could also win of three fifty pound prizes!
The survey closes on 2/4/15 at 23:59 GMT so complete the survey now to make sure you get your copy of the white paper and a chance to win.
this research is sponsored by:
be social and share this feature
Nov 30, 2014 • Features • Future of FIeld Service • research • Research • resources • Standards • tomtom
Field Service News recently undertook an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Field Service News recently undertook an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Across the last three features we have taken a close look at the findings of this research In part one which is available here we explored what technology was being deployed and identified a the have's and the have not's of the industry. In the second part of this series, which is available here we expanded on this by taking a more detailed looked at how companies are communicating with their employees in the field and why this is such a key component of getting it right when it comes to delivering service excellence.
In the third part we began to see patterns emerging that indicated a clear link between the levels of service a company can deliver and the technology that they employ. You can find this feature here
Now in the final part of this series we will look at exactly where field service standards are falling flat, exploring if there is a disconnect between our own perception of our service and our customers before drawing conclusions across the research results as a whole...
There is also an accompanying report to this series which you can access by clicking this link…
Measuring field service worker productivity
As we saw in the last segment of this series if we were to put together a report card for how our customers view service standards amongst field service companies then we would probably be looking at a ‘could do better’ scenario for the field service industries as a whole. [quote float="left"]Did those working in field service believe that their organisation at least was hitting the right notes of success when it comes down to meeting service expectations?
But how does this compare to how we measure our own field workers productivity? Is it a case that our customers expectations are rising rapidly and we are yet to adjust to these new demands? Did those working in field service believe that their organisation at least was hitting the right notes of success when it comes down to meeting service expectations?
We asked our respondents to identify their main KPIs that they set for their field workers given them the options of “number of calls attended”, “number of jobs completed”, “number of first time fix rates”, and “sales/leads generated”.
It seems that when it comes to marking our own performances, the field service industries are somewhat more forgiving than our customers with over three quarters of companies (77%) stating that they are generally meeting these KPIs. There is clearly a disconnect between the two realities which needs to be addressed, and it may seem we need to reassess what the standards are that we should be aiming for...
Are we setting the right KPI’s
Lets begin by taking a closer look at these KPIs that are being met in a little further detail... The most common KPI was number of jobs completed, which was cited by over half (54%) of our respondent field service companies. The importance of ensuring that wherever possible jobs are completed is of clear business benefit; especially if we understand that each additional call is going to not only cause our company additional cost but also add further frustration and potentially lost revenue for our customers also.
Therefore it is good to see that so many companies value this is as a KPI. [quote float="right"]Whilst the field service workers themselves may work hard to reach their daily rota of allocated calls, if they are not completing the jobs then all that hard work may as well count for nothing.
Number of calls attended however, is less of an efficient measure, almost simply a tick box exercise. This is reflected in the fact that far fewer companies, in fact just 13% utilise this as a measure of their employees productivity.Whilst the field service workers themselves may work hard to reach their daily rota of allocated calls, if they are not completing the jobs then all that hard work may as well count for nothing. It is absolutely vital that we empower our field service engineers to be able to complete as many jobs as possible.
Again the technology is there to improve these odds, systems that enable knowledge sharing, or access to parts inventory, or intelligently scheduling the right worker, with the right skill set required for the job are all widely available from a number of providers (such as our research sponsor TomTom Telematics) and these really massively improve your productivity levels.
Getting it right, first time - the field service mantra
This leads us on to the direction where many think the focus of the next generation of field service management will lay. That is the pursuit of a combination of preventative and planned maintenance and the accompanying increase on first time fix rates. Currently only 16% of companies set first time fix rates as a KPI. [quote float="left"]As we move towards a world of remote machine-to-machine diagnostics, the Internet of Things and 3D printable parts the first time fix should become less elusive and even commonplace.
In some ways this is a reflection of the current reality, first time fix rates are always desirable but rarely achievable.
The fix may be reliant on parts not to hand, or in some cases particularly where complicated machinery or devices are involved diagnosis of the exact problem may take the full allocated time slot. However, as we move towards a world of remote machine-to-machine diagnostics, the Internet of Things and 3D printable parts the first time fix should become less elusive and even commonplace.
Whilst these concepts may seem futuristic the reality is that they are not too far away, but even if they remain out of reach for now, initiatives such as improving customer communication, so we can start to get our customers to be part of the diagnostics program, are available and in many cases require just a simple shift in thinking as to how we approach service, to become part of the solution.
With this in mind it is really interesting to see that those companies who are currently embracing technology (i.e. using dynamic scheduling, intelligently responding to emergencies and use apps to communicate workloads to their field workers) have a much higher focus on first time fix rates with almost half of the companies in this bracket (47%) stating that this is their main KPI.
Incidentally 20% of these companies state that “number of jobs” completed is their main KPI It seems that the use of technology is allowing such companies greater productivity and the next evolution for these companies is to continuously try to improve their service standards, and improving first time fix rates is the logical progression which is of benefit to both customer and service supplier.
Our customers want our attention
There are a number of interesting points that this research has thrown up at us. Firstly there seems to be a big disconnect between the way we are judging the performance of our field workers, and the reality which our customers see.
When we put together the questions for this survey I genuinely felt that very few companies would have had people turning up at the wrong address, for companies whose workforce is based on the road this is surely the simplest of standards to meet, yet it seems it is not only a fairly common issue but a frequent one at that. [quote float="right"]Having a call centre is simply not enough in any industry these days. Our customers want our attention, they want it now, and they want to use their own preferred means of doing so whether that be phone, email, online chat or even social media.
Similarly for so many ‘service’ companies to be failing when it comes to perhaps the most important element of service i.e. communication was also a major surprise. It seems that customers and their expectations have evolved rapidly in the twenty first century and many if not the majority of service companies have fallen behind those expectations. Having a call centre is simply not enough in any industry these days.
Our customers want our attention, they want it now, and they want to use their own preferred means of doing so whether that be phone, email, online chat or even social media. We need to move quickly to accommodate these needs, because if we don’t you can be sure our competitors will.
However, all is not lost. The technology is their to help and it is no longer prohibitively costly as it was a few years ago. What’s more is as the technology evolves integration between differing systems means we can work with solutions that are tailored specifically for our business.
TomTom Telematics for example now have three separate API’s across their solution that allows for integration with a whole raft of other providers enabling you to tailor your solution to meet your exact needs. As TomTom Telematics Director Giles Margerison commented:
“There isn’t one off the shelf solution, it would be wrong to try and develop that because every company has their own specific needs.”
“What we as technology providers should do is make sure those systems integrate so customers can choose best of breed for their particular needs and we will work together for those customers.”
As has been shown on a number of occasions as we have gone through this research the technology available really can help companies keep pace with our customers growing demands as well as reduce costs and improve technology.
If we want to improve our report card for next year perhaps we need to start looking at how we can utilise it better?
If you want to know more about this research then you can access the full report by clicking this link.
This series is sponsored by
: 
Nov 25, 2014 • Features • Future of FIeld Service • research • Research • resources • Standards • tomtom
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
In the first part of this feature which is available here we looked at the types of technology that are being deployed amongst field service companies today and explored whether the gap is widening between the have's and the have not's in the industry.
In the second part of this series, which is available here we looked at how companies are communicating with their employees in the field and why this is such a key component of getting it right when it comes to delivering service excellence.
Now having established a baseline for the types of technology being used within the industry lets take some time to explore the standards being set by Field Service organisations before we try to identify if there is a clear and tangible link between those using technology and the levels of standards being delivered...
There is also an accompanying report to this series which you can access by clicking this link…
So what about the field service standards?
Earlier on in this series we touched on the most common complaints our respondents received from their customers, citing that of those companies using paper based dispatch notes the most common complaint by a long way (40%) was the availability of time slots.
In an interview with Field Service News, Giles Margerison, Director of TomTom telematics highlighted the need for more flexible time slots commenting
“We as consumers have adjusted our requirements to the service industry, it used to be that we would expect to have a service delivery within a day, now really we expect a one or two hour appointment window. That represents a huge challenge for the industry”
The findings of our research would also appear to back this up also as time slots was the joint second largest complaint for companies with 23% of the full respondent group citing this as the most common complaint. Interestingly this figure comes down to just 11% when we look at the largest companies.
This would indicate that the largest companies have the resources in places to accommodate more efficient systems, which allow for tighter time slots
Getting the basics wrong?
However, the most commonly cited reason for customer complaints was actually communication which was the most common complaint for 28% of companies. Given that there are a proliferation of means for companies to communicate with their customers this really is an area that should and could be significantly improved yet seems to be being neglected. In a piece of research undertaken by Field Service News earlier this year we looked at the types of communication field service companies were using. This research revealed that whilst the 82% offered a call centre, and 62% offered email communication less than a third of companies (32%) offered online service and just 6% offered access via an app.
Whilst call centres and email certainly have their place, they are both slow processes when compared to web-based self-service options or online chat portals.
When we consider that we all work in service industries, whether it be manufacturing or medical devices, whether we visit opticians or oilrigs our core goal should always be delivering good service, and doing it efficiently. Quite simply poor communication between ourselves and our customers should not be tolerated and this should be a key area of concern for many. The good news is of course those companies that look to investigate this within their own organisations and remedy issues around communications will very quickly be able to take a step ahead of their competitors.
In line with poor communication is poor response times, which was joint second most common complaint cited by 23% of companies. Again this is an issue that sits well with the notion that we as consumers are becoming less patient with service providers.
Cost is less of a concern than bad service
What is of particular interest is that the least common complaint is the time charged and invoiced which was a major issue for just 13% of companies. This would seem to suggest that most customers are happy to pay a fair price in exchange for good service, but the expected standard for service is coming under increasing pressure as customers rightly demand the same type of service that they get from the field service they deal with as they do from other organisations they deal with in their daily lives like Amazon for example.
As we start to look further down into the research we can see even further evidence of simple mistakes being made on an alarmingly regular basis.
Almost half (42%) of all companies stated that they have mobile workers turn up at the wrong address whilst 5% stated this happens on a weekly occurrence
Perhaps even more incredibly is that when we asked our respondents if they had ever experienced two mobile workers turning up at the same job again almost half of companies (43%) stated this had happened.
This is also apparent amongst companies of all sizes, even amongst those at enterprise level almost a third (28%) admitted to two workers turning up at the same time and a similar amount (33%) suffered mobile workers turning up at the wrong address on a monthly basis.
However, if we look at those using technology to improve their service standards we fortunately see improvements so all is not lost! The amount of companies that have a monthly address issue falls to just 13% with thankfully no weekly mishaps! Also the total of companies that never have this issue rises to 46%, which is 18% higher than the general average.
So it is clear that there is a distinct advantage for those using the technology available to them.
If you want to know more about this research then you can access the full report by clicking this link.
In the final part of this exclusive series we will take a look at the KPIs we are setting, how these match up with the service we are delivering in reality and explore one possible scenario for improving our standards within the future...
This series is sponsored by:
Nov 17, 2014 • Features • Future of FIeld Service • research • Research • resources • Standards • tomtom
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
In the first part of this feature which is available here we looked at the types of technology that are being deployed amongst field service companies today and explored whether the gap is widening between the have's and the have not's in the industry. Here in the second part of this series we look at how companies are communicating with their employees in the field and why this is such a key component of getting it right when it comes to delivering service excellence...
There is also an accompanying report to this series which you can access by clicking this link…
Talking to the field:
In the first part of this series we looked at three options that are important for gathering information from the field and reacting to it. The flipside of a modern field service management solution is how we communicate information back into the field. This is perhaps the most important element of an overall solution to get correct as if done well it can not only improve your companies efficiency, increase your service standards but also make your field workers lives easier. We asked our respondents “How do you inform your drivers of jobs and work schedules?” Giving the options of “Phone”, “Text”, “Paper dispatch note” “Via in Cab navigation” and “via App”.
Paper dispatch
Lets look at paper dispatch notes. Of the options given this is probably the most arduous means of delivering a work schedule for many reasons.
The majority (68%) of these companies still using paper based dispatch are as one would imagine in the smallest bracket of companies, although examples of companies still using such a system are to be found right up to the 151 – 300 field engineers bracket. Given that their work schedule is largely static, and it is therefore hard for these companies to react to either emergency call outs or delays either on job or non transit, it is of very little surprise that we see that the most common complaint these companies receive from their customers is missing time slots which 40% of companies cite.
Text:
The most common way of companies to notify their workers of their job schedules is by Text. This is sensible as SMS is a relatively cheap, instant means of communicating and 41% of companies use this method. It could well be that this method will ultimately be replaced by “Via App” so communication becomes part of the wider ecosystem of the companies mobile workforce management program. This is of course ideal as it allows for both additional layers of information to be included, for example the details of the last call out, even photos etc., as well as easy navigation through to other systems. Currently however only 17% of companies are using this option.
It’s good to talk…
However, there are a huge amount of companies (34%) that are still using the phone to communicate work schedules. This does have it’s positives in that it can be flexible and you can update the work schedule on the fly according to how the day is progressing however, there are a number of distinct drawbacks. Firstly there is the issue of wasting resource. Talking on the phone takes time.
Studies from road safety charity BRAKE! Show that even hands free calls can be dangerous claiming an incredible 98% of motorists were unable to divide their time without it affecting their driving ability.
In cab nav
There is an evolving movement towards being able to use one device per vehicle such as TomTom Telematics own PRO series of ruggedised tablet
As devices like this become more prevalent then having both a standalone in cab navigation devices and another device to run your field service software on simply becomes unnecessary.
If you want to know more about this research then you can access the full report by clicking this link.
In the part three of this exclusive series we will start to explore how the technology being deployed amongst field service organisations is impacting the levels of service they are capable of delivering...
This series is sponsored by:
Nov 09, 2014 • Features • Future of FIeld Service • research • Research • resources • field service standards • TomTom Telematics
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Field Service News has recently undertaken an exclusive research project, sponsored by TomTom Telematics to explore the standards of field service companies.
Are they improving or are they falling? Is it that standards as a whole are now under greater scrutiny than ever before as we all become more and more expectant on getting results as soon as we expect them now that we inhabit an age of instant information thanks to the Internet?
Across the next four weeks we will be publishing a series of features that looks at the findings of this research… what about those companies that are pulling ahead of the competition and not only delivering to their customers’ expectations but exceeding them and delighting them? What tools are they using to do so? What about those falling behind the pack – what are they getting so wrong?
There is also an accompanying report to this series which you can access by clicking this link…
About the research:
The research was conducted over a 2-month period in which we contacted members of the field service news online subscription as well as using the reach of Field Service News throughout the social media channels. We had a wide number of respondents from companies of differing size from those with less than 10 mobile workers through to those with over 2,500. Our respondents also came from a diverse collection of industries including Manufacturing, Retail, Healthcare, Transport and Local Government amongst many others.
The types of technology being used:
To establish whether field service standards are falling, improving or just staying static, an important starting point is to explore how significantly some of the technology, which is designed to make life easier for field engineers, is actually being applied. Would we see a dramatic difference in standards between those who are using the latest field service technologies and those that are not? To give us some understanding of the type of technologies that were used we asked our respondents to let us know if they were using ‘real-time telematics when creating work schedules’, ‘dynamic scheduling and planning’, ‘intelligent scheduling around emergency call outs’. On top of this we also asked how they inform drivers of their jobs and work schedules and whether they offered job-tracking functionality to their customers. So first up lets take a look at who’s using what in field service industries…
Real-time telematics data:
In fact it was a completely even 50:50 split of companies who are and are not using telematics data. We do see bigger trends shift [quote float="left"]Of those companies with 500 or more field engineers 84% of companies using telematics data.
When we look just at those companies in the extremes of both brackets however we certainly see a trend emerging. Of those companies with 500 or more field engineers 84% of companies using telematics data. This is in stark contrast to those companies that had 50 field workers or less. Here the number of companies using telematics data in real time is just 17%.
Dynamic Scheduling:
At first glance it seems a similar situation with dynamic scheduling also. Of the group as a whole 56% of companies were using some dynamic scheduling. Again looking at the outliers, amongst those companies with 50 engineers or less this figure dips dramatically to just under a quarter of companies (24%). Similarly again as we focus on the larger companies this figure once more leaps to an incredible 89%. Again it seems that those companies with larger workforces are taking more advantage of the tools that are available.
Intelligent Scheduling around emergency call outs:
With the group as a whole we see a very marginal majority of companies using intelligent scheduling around emergency call outs with 54% of companies surveyed using them.
The haves and the have nots:
Before we move forward lets take a moment to stop and consider the reasons for the wide gap between the large and small in terms of the technology they are using. One possible argument that could support the statistics are that perhaps smaller companies may not need such sophisticated methods to maintain the standards they deliver. This is of course will be proven one way or the other later in this report as we look at the varying levels of standards that are apparent amongst companies of all sizes.
This certainly could hold true when we look at both dynamic and intelligent scheduling. As we have looked at before in a number of features there are many levels of scheduling systems available with dynamic and intelligent systems being both the most complicated and the most costly. However, for a small organisation sometimes these types of systems can be impractical as the effort in establishing the correct rules and data logic in place to get the desired results can sometimes be counter productive for a small organisation where a simpler ‘assisted scheduling’ solution would be more suited to their needs.
This logic in some part could also explain the reason why fewer larger companies are using intelligent scheduling, as it is perhaps the most sophisticated form of scheduling engine available currently, so perhaps even prohibitive for larger organisations who are able to operate with just a dynamic system in place?
Whilst there are certainly existing arguments about which types of scheduling systems suit companies of varying sizes there can be no doubt that the ability to track driver and field engineer data in real time can only be a positive
Whilst there are certainly existing arguments about which types of scheduling systems suit companies of varying sizes there can be no doubt that the ability to track driver and field engineer data in real time can only be a positive for a company regardless of size, both in terms of their own internal efficiency as well as the level of service they can deliver? Again as we continue this series we will uncover the truth to this supposition, as with the number of companies offering telematics solutions, the availability of such solutions is high while the costs are reasonably low.
If the evidence supports the theory that such tools will help improve service delivery then it will be hard to see an argument for smaller companies not taking this step at the least.
If you want to know more about this research then you can access the full report by clicking this link.
In the part two of this exclusive series we will look at how field service companies are communicating from the office to the field, what the best in class companies are using and what impact this can have on productivity…
This series is sponsored by:
Oct 27, 2014 • Features • Software & Apps • mplsystems • Podcast • Research
Welcome to the latest edition of the Field Service News podcast. This month we are joined by Paul White, CEO of mplsystems as we revisit some exclusive research undertaken by Field Service News in partnership with mplsystems earlier this year.
The research set out to unlock exactly what technology is being used within the field service industries in 2014 and in this exclusive interview Paul and Field Service News Editor Kris Oldland discuss some of the most pertinent and surprising results and explore and extrapolate the meaning of these findings. Amongst the topics discussed are whether the ratio's of dispatchers to engineers in field service companies are actually lower than they should be, whether the smallest companies are getting short shrift from software providers and why mobile has changed the shape of the industry and whether it will continue to do so...
To download the full podcast just click here and complete the brief registration form!
Please note that that promotion of this download is a joint venture between Field Service News and mplsystems and by downloading the podcast you agree to the fascinating terms and conditions which are available right here.
You can also find out more about mplsystems in the Field Service News Directory by clicking here
Field Service News is published by 1927 Media Ltd, an independent publisher whose sole focus is on the field service sector. As such our entire resources are focused on helping drive the field service sector forwards and aiming to best serve our industry through honest, incisive and innovative media coverage of the global field service sector.
Leave a Reply