Field Service News

Eight tips for improving field service productivity: Part Four

Apr 13, 2015 • Features • Management • management • SGSA • Training

Whilst technology can play a big part in improving the efficiency of a field service operation, nothing is as important as ensuring your field service managers are fully armed to do their job. With this in mind we have teamed up with specialist field service training organisation SGSA to bring this series that looks at some of the key concepts that make a good field service manager great.

The topics included in this series, written by SGSA’s Senior Consultant Steve Brand, are based around the content of SGSA’s 4 and half day, university standard training course for field service managers and Field Service News readers are eligible for a discounted attendance. Further details, a discount code and links to registration are all included at the bottom of the page…

Management is the intervention of getting work done through others, so the success of the field service manager is directly linked to the performance of his team. When the team is meeting its goals, the manager receives the credit. The analogy with the manager of a football team is very apt. When the team lifts the trophy at the end of the match, the manager receives the greatest accolade even though he never set foot on the pitch.

Conversely, when the team is plummeting through the league, the chairman sacks the manager not the team. The previous concepts in this series support this analogy. Concept #1 is to Close the Knowing Doing Gap; in football, the strategy is defined in the changing room but if the tactics are not put into action on the pitch then the match will be lost. Concept #2 is to Put the Whole Team’s Brain to Work; the different talents of everyone on the team are needed for success: forwards, mid-field, defenders and goalkeeper, all working together. Concept #3 is Fair Process; the players actually play the game so their input on how they can win is crucial. Concept #4 is Build a Values System; the manager defines how the team is expected to work together. Concept #5 is People Development; training of the players is the responsibility of the manager. Concept #6 is Empowerment; the manager provides feedback during the match but doesn’t run alongside the players telling them who to pass the ball to next.

You can catch up on the early parts of this series here. Read part one here, part two here and part three here

For the last of our series of four articles, we are providing two more powerful management tips to help Field Service Managers improve working relationships with their engineers and increase productivity.

Concept #7: Manage Behaviours not Metrics

Managers need to compare and increase engineer productivity so they frequently set goals on activity metrics. Activities, for example, the number of service calls made per engineer per day, are easier to count than the results of that activity, for example, an increase in customer loyalty. Technology also allows activities to be easily and accurately reported, whereas it is still ineffective at measuring value creation.

A problem with setting goals on activities (‘input’) rather than value (‘output’) is that it is often simple for field service engineers to manipulate their activity numbers. For example, an engineer being measured on service calls could ignore rather than replace a worn part on a unit being serviced so that he is called out again. Hence, focusing on activity metrics can actually lead to unwanted behaviours being introduced into the operation. The result could be that engineers are commended for meeting their goals when the reality is that they are very busy doing the wrong things to make their numbers look good.

"The challenge for managers is finding the time to make sure that all of these things actually happen rather than reply on a report alleging that they are happening"

The alternative is for managers to focus on the behaviours that result in added value for the customer, for example, picking up service calls quickly, arriving on time for appointments, setting realistic expectations, explaining the solution, cleaning up properly after the job, etc. The challenge for managers is finding the time to make sure that all of these things actually happen rather than reply on a report alleging that they are happening.

An ongoing field service training program is the most effective method of ensuring that engineers know, develop and perform the best practice behaviours for field service. The program consists of two stages: first, teaching all engineers and subsequent new hires the tips and techniques that ensure customer satisfaction and high productivity; and second, providing regular feedback on how many and how well they do each best practice in the field. Ideally, but depending on the size of the team, each engineer should be assessed on his handling of service calls for half a day per month. This means being observed on the job by a manager, team leader, mentor or experienced colleague, and given a score and constructive feedback on how to improve. This isn’t a cheap program but the return on investment is substantial.

In summary, ensuring that engineers adhere to field service best practices is a key responsibility of the manager and one that generates more satisfied and loyal customers, which is obviously good for business. Setting goals on engineer activities will ensure that they are keeping busy but, by itself, can never be effective in ensuring that they are on their best behaviour. And, to continue our earlier analogy, a football manager doesn’t sit in his office waiting to be told the final score, he stands on the side line watching and assessing each player in action.

Concept #8: Eliminate Self-Interest Behaviour

It is human nature to try and make the most out of whatever situation we find ourselves in. Given the choice, most employees would prefer not having to work, but they have to if they want to put a roof over their heads. So, given that employees have the constraint of having to go to work, they will strive to make going to work as enjoyable as possible for them personally. There is nothing wrong with this, in fact, making work enjoyable should be encouraged the manager, but not if the actions or behaviours taken to make themselves happy has a negative impact on the customer, the company or their colleagues.

"If the manager has not said anything about me being ten minutes late every few days then perhaps I can get away with fifteen minutes?"

Self-interest behaviour, or maximizing personal happiness at the expense of others, can manifest itself in many ways; tardiness, laziness, cutting corners, poor documentation and manipulating metrics are amongst the most common. Another problem with self-interest behaviour that is not eliminated by the manager is that it can creep, both in terms of the degree of the behaviour and to other members of the team. If the manager has not said anything about me being ten minutes late every few days then perhaps I can get away with fifteen minutes? And if I see someone else isn’t completing their site reports then it must be ok for me not to do mine.

The key to eliminating self-interest behaviour is to let the engineer know that you have seen it as soon as you see it. State the facts casually the next time you see the engineer alone and give him a chance to respond, for example, “I notice that you’ve been late a couple of times this week. Is everything ok?”

In most cases, just letting the engineer know that you’ve seen the behaviour will be enough to stop it. If the self-interest behaviour continues then the second step is to repeat the statement and remind the engineer of the goal. Words such as “I notice that you’re still coming in late. You know that we need everyone here on time to ensure that we meet service levels. Is there anything that I should know?” There is a third and fourth step to resolving poor work behaviours before taking the official route of a Performance Improvement Plan, but 80% or more issues are resolved after the engineer has been subtly told twice that his behaviour is unacceptable.

Speed is of the essence in eliminating self-interest behaviour. Delaying the conversation until the next performance review or one-to-one meeting allows time for the behaviour to get worse and can also make the behaviour seem more serious, especially if it is included in the meeting documentation. The football manager speaks to the team about what they are doing wrong at half-time, not the end of the season.

Could you or your colleagues benefit from attending the next SGSA Field Service Manager Course?

The Field Service Manager program is dynamic and interactive, with students frequently working in small groups, presenting findings and working on the course case study.

The program is four and a half days of course content and university-level instruction and learning that is focused on managing a field service operation.

If you want to see more information or register for the course you can do so by clicking here

PLUS! Field Service News subscribers receive a 10% discount on the course fee when quoting reference FSN0407.

Be social and share this feature

Eight tips for improving field service productivity: Part Three

Mar 16, 2015 • Features • Management • management • SGSA • Training

In the last article, we highlighted how many field service managers work their way up through the ranks and learn a management style through trial and error or from their managers and their managers’ manager.

In summary, management training is often informal. And yet, John Maxwell, author of The 5 Levels of Leadership, identified that one of the five key reasons that employees choose to follow a leader is because the leader has helped them to progress their career.

Quite simply, managers should take a more formal approach to discussing career aspirations with field service engineers and to help them gain skills that will move them towards their personal career goals. In return, employees show appreciation through greater loyalty to the leader and by working harder.

Just taking an interest and providing career guidance is a good start because it demonstrates to the engineers that we are interested in their success beyond them meeting our monthly targets. Empowerment is also a form of career development.

Continuing our series of four articles, here are two more powerful management tips to help Field Service Managers improve working relationships with their engineers and increase productivity.

Concept #5: People Development

A key difference between training and development is who is ultimately responsible for making sure that both of these things happen. Training is the responsibility of the field service manager.

The manager must provide training to the field service engineer so that the engineer is capable of doing the job that he is being paid for. If the field service engineer has not been properly trained then he is unlikely to have the skills required to be able to do the job. Without skill, there can be no performance. On a side note, having the skills does not guarantee that the field service engineer will perform to his highest level. For high performance, the field service manager needs to provide training and motivation.

There is little benefit to be gained from a lengthy career discussion with a field service engineer who is content with his job and doesn’t see that it is in his interest to gain new skills.

Conversely, development is the responsibility of the field service engineer. Only the engineer can know how he would like to see his career progress. Hence, there is little benefit to be gained from a lengthy career discussion with a field service engineer who is content with his job and doesn’t see that it is in his interest to gain new skills. For the rest of the team, the career development discussion gives the manager the opportunity to understand the aspirations of the field service engineer and to demonstrate his commitment to helping the engineer prepare for his next job.

Training and development plans are often updated and agreed by the field service manager and the engineer annually, typically in the final few minutes of the performance review meeting. The recommendation is that the training and development discussions take place separately and within two weeks of the performance review meeting.

This gives the field service engineer time to consider the job skills that were highlighted in the review as needing improvement and what actions he thinks he could take to help him meet the required standard.

The training and development meeting should be conducted in two stages with the field service engineer clearly understanding the difference in the stages. The first stage is the training discussion led by the manager. The second stage is the career development discussion led by the field service engineer. In some cases a career development discussion is inappropriate, for example, for a new hire who needs a large amount of training or an engineer who is subject to the performance improvement process. In these cases, the manager will need to say that a discussion on career development should be delayed until the field engineer is competent in his current role or the unsatisfactory performance issues have been resolved.

Concept #6: Empowerment

Micro-management is widespread because many managers do not realise that they are micro-managing their employees. Assigning tasks, giving directions on how things should be done and unnecessary checking of what has been done are common forms of micro-management.

It is important that managers understand the difference between delegation and empowerment and use language that reinforces a culture of empowerment.

With the exception of new hires and less experienced members of staff, field service managers should take the approach of setting the goals and letting the field service engineers decide for themselves on how best to achieve those goals. Also, given that the engineers have more knowledge about the customer, machine, situation, etc., they are often in the best position to make the decisions. The alternative is for the engineers to try and transfer their knowledge to the manager so that he can make the same decision as they would have done anyway! The latter approach wastes time for the manager, engineer and customer.

It is important that managers understand the difference between delegation and empowerment and use language that reinforces a culture of empowerment. Consider these statements: ‘Please call the customer, tell him the part is out of stock, apologise and re-schedule the appointment’, versus ‘Do what you have to do to make the customer satisfied and let me know if you need me to help’.

The first statement is an example of delegation, i.e., these are the tasks that I want you to do. The second statement is an example of empowerment, i.e., I am giving you authority to take whatever actions you think are necessary. Managers are often surprised as to how field service engineers rise to the occasion when they are trusted to get on with the job by themselves.

Some caution is required before empowering field services engineers and it is not necessary to give all engineers the same level of authority at the same time. Managers need to consider the return on investment of empowerment in terms of time saved, customer satisfaction, employee motivation and so on, versus the cost of a poor decision.

A frequently made decision that if made badly once per year would cost the company £100 is worthy of empowerment. A decision with a business cost of £10,000 in a worst case scenario is not.

A ‘top four’ factor of employee motivation is the level of responsibility that they are given and empowering field service engineers is equivalent to saying ‘I trust you’. As mentioned in the previous article, as trust goes up, productivity increases and costs come down. Hence, empowering employees is a win-win situation for the field service manager and the engineers in many ways.

Could you or your colleagues benefit from attending the next SGSA Field Service Manager Course?

The Field Service Manager program is dynamic and interactive, with students frequently working in small groups, presenting findings and working on the course case study.

The program is four and a half days of course content and university-level instruction and learning that is focused on managing a field service operation.

If you want to see more information or register for the course you can do so by clicking here

PLUS! Field Service News subscribers receive a 10% discount on the course fee when quoting reference FSN0317

be social and share this feature

Eight tips for improving field service productivity: Part Two

Feb 24, 2015 • Features • Management • management • SGSA • Training

The topics included in this series, written by SGSA's Senior Consultant Steve Brand, are based around the content of SGSA's 4 and half day, university standard training course for field service managers and Field Service News readers are eligible for a discounted attendance. Further details, a discount code and links to registration are all included at the bottom of the page...

Field Service Managers often work their way up through the ranks and learn a management style through trial and error or from their managers and their managers’ manager. Although ‘on-the-job’ training is useful when learning technical skills, it is a risky approach when training managers. Managers need to be able to hit the ground running, i.e., they need to be competent managers as soon as they first have responsibility of leading other members of staff. If not, new managers can unwittingly drive down employee productivity during the process of developing their management style.

Frederik Herzberg’s influential survey on employee motivation in 2003 found that the second greatest cause of employee dissatisfaction is how they are supervised. Untrained managers are often oblivious to how their behaviours are driving down the motivation and commitment of good employees and can mistakenly believe that decreases in performance is an employee problem rather than a management problem.

Continuing our series of four articles, here are two more powerful management tips to help Field Service Managers improve working relationships with their engineers and increase productivity.

Concept #3: Use Fair Process

Employees want to be given the chance to speak their minds. They need to know that their opinions are being considered and they have a degree of influence in what happens at work.

If managers want the team to be committed to the task then they have to use the three steps of fair process: the engagement of employees, the explanation of why the decision is what it is and clearly explaining what is expected from them as a result of that decision. If employees are shown that the company’s decision making process has been considerate of their views then they are much more likely to give their full cooperation to a decision, even when they disagree with that decision.

Without fair process, even a decision that benefits the engineers can be difficult to implement.

The opposite is also true. Without fair process, even a decision that benefits the engineers can be difficult to implement. Fair process should be conducted at every level of the organisation; however, the reality is that managers are often asked to implement decisions that have been handed down to them without their input.

In such situations, and even when the rationale for such decisions is not understood, the management approach is to just pass the decision down to the engineers with the implicit command of Just Do It. Managing staff in this way lowers trust and, as trust goes down, productivity decreases and costs increase (The Speed of Trust: The One Thing that Changes Everything, Stephen Covey, 2006).

But it doesn’t have to be this way. The best practice is to get input into decisions from the engineers as early on in the process as possible. Managers must find time to explain the business problem or other reason behind why a change is needed and then engage the team in finding the solution. Even if the solution has already been decided, input should be sought from the engineers on how to implement the change with the least amount of impact on them personally. Just as important, is providing feedback on how the decision was altered as a result of employee input.

If managers do not do this then employees are unlikely to volunteer their ideas the next time that they are asked. Fair process does not need to be an onerous task; it can be achieved in one hour or one month depending on the size of the change being proposed.

Concept #4: Build a Values System

Given the huge number of correct and incorrect ways there are to behave at work, it would be an impossible and pointless task trying to teach them all to a team of field service engineers.

There is also the grey area of an acceptable behaviour in one company being considered unacceptable in another. For example, going home when the last scheduled service call for the day has been completed may be acceptable in Company A. However, in Company B, the field service engineer is expected to return to base until the end of the day.

In most cases employees know how to behave properly so repeatedly telling them what they should be doing makes the manager appear controlling and untrusting of employees’ intentions.

The problem then arises when a new hire goes home after his last call because that’s what he’s always done. He isn’t aware that his behaviour is unacceptable unless another field service engineer takes the time to helpfully explain ‘how it works here’. In most cases employees know how to behave properly so repeatedly telling them what they should be doing makes the manager appear controlling and untrusting of employees’ intentions.

The values system provides a framework for the kinds of behaviour that are acceptable and unacceptable and also how people are expected to behave towards each other.

When implemented correctly it forms the base on which mutual trust can be established between managers and employees and also between the employees and each other. The first key to building an effective values system is to keep it short and simple.

This allows it to be easily remembered and referred to. An example of a simple but powerful value systems would be these guiding principles: Work Hard; Do What’s Right; Treat Others How They Want to Be Treated. Everything that a field engineer does at work is likely to be a good, poor or indifferent example of one or more of these principles.

If someone is cherry-picking jobs then that isn’t working hard; if someone is consistently late then that that isn’t doing what’s right. The manager’s responsibility is to lead by example and every time he sees a correct or incorrect behaviour, to inform the engineer which of the principles has been supported or violated. By acting in this way, field service engineers quickly learn what to do more and less of in a supportive manner and go on to use their common sense before making a decision about what they should or shouldn’t be doing.

Could you or your colleagues benefit from attending the next SGSA Field Service Manager Course?

The Field Service Manager program is dynamic and interactive, with students frequently working in small groups, presenting findings and working on the course case study.

The program is four and a half days of course content and university-level instruction and learning that is focused on managing a field service operation.

If you want to see more information or register for the course you can do so by clicking here

PLUS! Field Service News subscribers receive a 10% discount on the course fee when quoting reference FSN0223.

Terms and conditions apply

be social and share this feature

Eight tips for improving field service productivity: Part One

Feb 10, 2015 • Features • Management • management • SGSA • Training

Whilst it is often the selling point of specialist field service technology, improving productivity can also be achieved through good management. So as part of a new series from Steve Brand, Senior Consultant with field service training specialists SGSA, we look at eight key management concepts that can help you improve the productivity of your mobile workforce.

The topics included in this series are based around the content of SGSA's 4 and half day, university standard training course for field service managers and Field Service News readers are eligible for a discounted attendance. Further details, a discount code and links to registration are all included at the bottom of the page...

Back in the 1970’s, management best practices were revolutionised by Peter Drucker’s work; it has endured, withstanding the test of time. New books on management best practices are published almost weekly but despite new terminology, they are based on the same fundamental principles. Drucker’s golden rules remain unchanged:

Define the mission
Set the vision
State the goals
Empower
Communicate
Use metrics carefully
Treat employees as a valued resource

So what else, can Field Service Managers do to ensure their team members are highly motivated and committed to delivering high performance?

In this series we will present eight concepts that have the potential to improve the way Field Service Managers lead and organise their teams. Correctly applied, these concepts will result in improved productivity and employee motivation/satisfaction.

We begin with two less common but very powerful management tips to help Field Service Managers improve their relationships with their engineer and increase productivity.

Concept #1: Close the ‘Knowing-Doing’ Gap

Many organisations suffer from the ‘Knowing-Doing’ gap. Some managers seem to be forever attending meetings and conference calls; the output from which is often talk rather than action.

As managers talk more and more, less and less actually gets done! We see some leaders discussing the metrics incessantly, telling others what is wrong with the business, spouting the latest business-speak or techno-gabble, drawing up plans for projects that never get off the ground and even criticising their peers. These are all forms of Smart Talk.

It occurs at all levels of the organisation and can be seen wherever employees attempt to sound knowledgeable or confident by being critical or negative, or by using overly complex language for simple concepts.

Smart talk abounds in the work place and leads nowhere. It occurs at all levels of the organisation and can be seen wherever employees attempt to sound knowledgeable or confident by being critical or negative, or by using overly complex language for simple concepts. The “that won’t work because…” statements, ridicule of others’ suggestions or using phrases such as the ‘Transformation to a Virtual Organisation Project’ when all we want to do is give mobile devices to staff, are all examples of smart talk. The impact of smart talk is that it adds confusion, hinders problem solving and prevents knowledge sharing.

There are a number of ways to eliminate Smart Talk. Firstly, take time to explain the thinking behind initiatives and changes. Secondly, ensure all company messages, directives and objectives are short and simple; never use a written paragraph when a spoken sentence will do. And finally, create an environment of trust and respect amongst the staff.

Field service engineers must feel that they can promote their ideas without fear of criticism or ridicule. Focusing on what went wrong, who is to blame or why something won’t work is self-defeating. The key to success is to put aside what went wrong and focus on what we want or what needs to happen next.

Concept #2. Putting the Team’s Whole Brain to Work

Efficient problem solving requires a group of individuals who see the world differently from each other, to work together in a constructive manner. The key is to identify these differences and to help individuals with opposing perspectives and styles, to work together.

For example, so called ‘left-brained’ thinkers tend to approach a problem in a logical, analytical way. ‘Right-brained’ thinkers rely on more non-linear, intuitive approaches. Some people prefer to work together to solve a problem; while others like to gather and process information by themselves. Abstract thinkers need to learn about something before they experience it; for experiential people the opposite is true. It is important to remember that these different approaches are preferences rather than skills.

Two field service engineers with different cognitive preferences, when faced with the same problem, may reach an identical solution at the same time, but use very different thought processes.

Two field service engineers with different cognitive preferences, when faced with the same problem, may reach an identical solution at the same time, but use very different thought processes. Neither approach should be considered superior. The challenge for Field Service Managers is to understand these subtle cognitive differences and that engineers with differing approaches may clash or struggle to work together effectively, without intervention.

There are many diagnostic tools available to identify these preferences and report back with various levels of detail.

Field Service Managers who do not understand this concept or know their engineers’ default style, may fail to create an environment where innovative solutions are produced quickly. In order to take full advantage of these differences, the manager must carefully select which engineers work together on problems. In most situations, a mixed group will considers more options and the final solution will be better of better quality, than any, one engineer would have produced on their own.

The downside of this approach however, is its potential to create friction. To ensure success in whole-brain problem solving, the manager must take time to define the goal and the rules of engagement; the conflict should not be personal. It is a common mistake to think that a group of people will work together as an effective team when left to their own devices.

In fact, teamwork only happens when leaders create the opportunities for teamwork and effectively manage the process.

Could you or your colleagues benefit from attending the next SGSA Field Service Manager Course?.

The Field Service Manager program is dynamic and interactive, with students frequently working in small groups, presenting findings and working on the course case study.

The program is four and a half days of course content and university-level instruction and learning that is focused on managing a field service operation.

If you want to see more information or register for the course you can do so by clicking here

PLUS! Field Service News subscribers receive a 10% discount on the course fee when quoting reference FSN0209.

Terms and conditions apply

be social and share this feature