ARCHIVE FOR THE ‘standards’ CATEGORY

Nick Frank outlines the PAS280, a British standard aimed at improving service business.

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

: 

 

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.

This is completely at odds with where the industry needs to be. As Margerison alludes to – our expectations as consumers have changed. We live in an age where we are used to having instant access to information we need on demand. 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.

For example 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. In a world where Sat Nav’s and routing software are widely used this is almost beyond comprehension.

 

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: 

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

As a starting point 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. Firstly it is dependent on your field workers arriving at a central depot or office to collect their orders for the day. A waste of time and fuel for everyone involved, and from the field workers point of view an additional hassle at the beginning of the day when they could be starting their first job. Secondly, paper based work schedules are out of date from the moment they are printed. Such a system has no option for the quick reactive response that you desire when an emergency call comes in that must become your clear priority. Fortunately only 6% of companies are still operating in this manner.

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.

Not necessarily a lot of time, but still far longer than sending messages automatically from a field service management solution. And if you add up the amount of time that takes across your whole workforce, even if it is just 10 field workers that is a lot of time being used that needn’t be. Then there is also the issue of driver safety. Yes there are a number of solutions available to allow for hands free communication, however 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

It is interesting to see how few companies are using in cab navigation systems to communicate with their field workers. Only 2% of those surveyed are actually using this method. One reason for this may well be the proliferation of smart phones and or tablets now being used as primary mobile devices for field workers. Indeed there is an evolving movement towards being able to use one device per vehicle such as TomTom Telematics own PRO series of ruggedised tablets, which through the use of open API architecture can provide full access to w whole range of field service and fleet management tools.

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: