Situation
The Customer Service Center (CSC) of a multi-billion dollar commercial leasing division of this leading Fortune 20 company was being challenged by its leaders to significantly improve customer service levels and cost structure. Acquisitions and consolidations had nearly doubled activity levels over the past year, and the division expected continued growth of fifteen to twenty percent per year. CSC leaders were demanding new goals to help them become truly "world-class."
Solution
Rath & Strong began with an expert initial assessment of the work/job designs, organization structure, staffing, performance metrics, systems and workplace climate. We then compared their current situation to benchmarks from other well-regarded call centers. We concluded that the processes for handling inbound calls fell far short of world-class standards.
- The Average Speed to Answer (ASA) (the time a caller waits while the phone rings) was 35 seconds, nearly six times longer than the "three
ring" (six seconds) standard of world-class companies and 70 percent more than what the client thought was the best they could do (20 seconds).
- The Abandon Rate, customers who hung up before the call was answered, ran six percent versus the standard one and a half percent.
- Timely, Effective Resolution. Nearly 92 percent of calls were completed on-line (no extra work needed after the customer's call), but the other eight percent averaged almost seven days to be resolved. The division set a goal near 100 percent.
- Call Handling Time, averaging 10.6 minutes, reflected the utility of the computer systems, complexity of leases and sophistication of callers.
- Courtesy, already measured in follow-up calls, was very positive.
Since the center received nearly one thousand daily inbound calls and did not have any formal way to analyze them, we listened to a statistically significant sampling of calls, diagnosing symptoms and root causes of the calls. By using Six Sigma statistical techniques and methodology, we were able not only to help them improve their business, but also to transfer skills to them so that they could complete future Six Sigma projects.
Determining the average time it took to complete each type of call ("Call Handling Time") revealed which areas required the most work. The queuing theory model helped employees see the correlation between handle time and customer service measures, allowing them to focus on reducing the handle time. Pareto Analysis targeted the most vital areas for improvement: three items (29 percent) accounted for 70 percent of the calls. By pursuing areas by order of importance, improvements were found and then implemented. Line management was responsible for decision-making and implementation progress, ensuring their ownership and continuation of the ideas and gains.
Results
Even without changing their information systems the Center made a broad range of improvements:
- Simple process improvements and job redesigns eliminated the need for most Customer Service Representatives to leave their workspace.
- Organization by product line enabled specialized expertise, resulting in shorter calls and greater teamwork
- Daily performance metrics and goals gave each employee performance feedback and built pride in their team performance.
- Supervisors were required to plan for variations in workload and staffing.
- Written procedures and training emphasized "best practices" as the standard and clarified policies.
- A group was designed to standardize and improve processes, audit calls and train employees, thereby institutionalizing continual improvement
| Customer Service Performance Indicator |
Baseline |
1997 Goal |
2 months after baseline |
5 months after baseline |
Improvement |
| Average Speed to Answer (seconds) and percent answered within 20 seconds |
35 (about 20%) |
80% within 20 seconds |
21 |
11.9 (83.1%) |
66% |
| Abandon Rate |
6.0% |
2.0% |
2.5% |
1.9% |
68% |
| Timely, effective resolution of off-line tasks (days) |
6.5 |
3 |
7.3 |
92% reduction in number taking more than 2 days |
92% |
| Average call handle time (minutes) |
10.6 |
8 |
8.9 |
3.5 |
68% |
Although measuring customer service is more complex than these four measures, these dramatic performance improvements-together with increased courtesy and quality of service, made management and employees extremely proud of their customer service. Managerial confidence led to considerable new business for the CSC. Productivity improvements also did not require as much staff to handle the increased volume, greatly reducing the cost per customer. |
