Reflection – Mind Mapping Tool

Challenge:

I am part of a back office team at a large financial institution issuing electronic payment cards.  We are a subsidiary specialized in electronic payment services with a wide range of products /  customers across different geographical areas. Among the missions of our entity, the  management of orders for card holders for different products, in collaboration with the various  stakeholders (manufacturers of card holders, personalization providers, customer marketing  teams, customer communication teams, etc.) to guarantee an optimized supply in terms of cost  / time and to avoid, without a doubt, an out of stock of card holders with our card personalization  providers, the eventual occurrence of which will negatively affect the brand image of our  institution vis-à-vis -views of its customers. The current replenishment process is, as a whole,  done manually. Instead of focusing only on the automation of the process and the issue of stock- outs in a linear way by focusing on the causes taken separately, our challenge is to adopt a  "Design thinking" approach to explore the opportunity to put set up an innovative solution to  improve customer satisfaction by developing an integrated solution taking into consideration  the different needs of stakeholders.

Selection:

To meet this challenge, we used a combination of "Mind Mapping" tools for idea generation to  come up with "models" reflecting the unstated needs of different stakeholders. These needs will  be the basis, thereafter, to create in collaboration with them the quality criteria of the envisaged  solution.

Application:

Together in our team working on the project, we held several preparation meetings, which  allowed us to have a clear and unified vision of the project. This vision has been summarized  in a design brief which succinctly presents the desired results, particularly in terms of customer  satisfaction, the indicators for measuring the results kPIs (number of stock-outs per period,  number of customer complaints, number of account closure due to card stock shortage), the  various stakeholders involved in the process (back office managers, the various marketing  teams per target market, the communication teams, the personalization service provider /  manufacturer).

We then prepared a detailed research plan for all stakeholders based on a representative sample  of 16 individuals. This research plan must be finalized within 6 months. The first interviews (2  months) aimed to constitute, per interviewee, a visual tree map of the tasks in relation to the  ordering process and the various interactions that it has within its entity for the performance of  these tasks. The second series of interviews (2 months) was intended to be more projective by  asking the interviewees to note the difficulties associated with the task on each branch of the  mapping and to project themselves into the solution by proposing an avenue for improvement.  Step (2 months) consisted for our project team to note on sticky labels the difficulties /  improvements declared by the interviewees and to display them on tables separated by category  of stakeholder in order to bring out the corresponding models.

After several consolidation meetings, held internally by our teams, the reconciliation between  the results of the statements displayed on the tables and the individual notes taken during the  interviews made it possible to distinguish 3 models with the following characteristics:

Model 1: Back office managers are used to dealing with operations, are drowned in daily  operational tasks and hate manual tasks requiring more or less complex calculations and  analyzes.

Model 2: Marketing teams frequently use benchmarks to improve the offer offered to customers  by comparing themselves to competitors.

Model 3: personalization providers / manufacturers are forced to seek the right balance between  the satisfactions of order books on time and to optimize the financial investments induced by  the constitution of stock of cardholders on behalf of their customers.

Insight and Approach

Through this exercise, I learned that within the framework of the “what is” phase of the “Design  thinking” process, one should not restrict the field of study by trying to prove that a given idea  is the best possible solution. (like the automation of the process in our case) but rather to widen  the field thus making it possible to explore all the possible avenues of innovation (by studying  the underlying needs of the various stakeholders of the support ordering process Cards) . The  "Mind Mapping" tool allowed us to go beyond the stated difficulties to propose design criteria  meeting the needs of each stakeholder:

For model 1, the solution to be considered should be easy to use with automatic alerts and can  be oriented towards artificial intelligence to automatically calculate the autonomy of the stock,  the quantities to order based on the daily production of each product card.

For model 2: the solution could provide a library of card visuals with history of development  and for the products of our customers and why not of competitors.

For model 3: the solution could make it possible to forecast production forecasts for each  product / customer over different horizons (ranging from 3 months to a year)

A Lean Prototyping approach with a minimum of investment would, in my opinion, be a better  continuity, to quickly test whether the areas of improvement explored can be translated into  functionalities (EX: allow the Back office manager to order, simply and at the right moment,  the optimal quantities for the replenishment of card holders) of a digital solution able to meet  our challenge and confirm our hypothesis.


Reflection – Mind Mapping Tool Challenge : I am part of a back office team at a large financial institution issuing electronic payment cards . We are a subsidiary specialized in electronic payment services with a wide range of products / customers across different geographical areas . Among the missions of our entity , the management of orders for card holders for different products , in collaboration with the various stakeholders ( manufacturers of card holders , personalization providers , customer marketing teams , customer communication teams , etc . ) to guarantee an optimized supply in terms of cost / time and to avoid , without a doubt , an out of stock of card holders with our card personalization providers , the eventual occurrence of which will negatively affect the brand image of our institution vis - à - vis -views of its customers . The current replenishment process is , as a whole , done manually . Instead of focusing only on the automation of the process and the issue of stock- outs in a linear way by focusing on the causes taken separately , our challenge is to adopt a " Design thinking " approach to explore the opportunity to put set up an innovative solution to improve customer satisfaction by developing an integrated solution taking into consideration the different needs of stakeholders . Selection : To meet this challenge , we used a combination of " Mind Mapping " tools for idea generation to come up with " models " reflecting the unstated needs of different stakeholders . These needs will be the basis , thereafter , to create in collaboration with them the quality criteria of the envisaged solution . Application : Together in our team working on the project , we held several preparation meetings , which allowed us to have a clear and unified vision of the project . This vision has been summarized in a design brief which succinctly presents the desired results , particularly in terms of customer satisfaction , the indicators for measuring the results kPIs ( number of stock - outs per period , number of customer complaints , number of account closure due to card stock shortage ) , the various stakeholders involved in the process ( back office managers , the various marketing teams per target market , the communication teams , the personalization service provider / manufacturer ) . We then prepared a detailed research plan for all stakeholders based on a representative sample of 16 individuals . This research plan must be finalized within 6 months . The first interviews ( 2 months ) aimed to constitute , per interviewee , a visual tree map of the tasks in relation to the ordering process and the various interactions that it has within its entity for the performance of these tasks . The second series of interviews ( 2 months ) was intended to be more projective by asking the interviewees to note the difficulties associated with the task on each branch of the mapping and to project themselves into the solution by proposing an avenue for improvement . Step ( 2 months ) consisted for our project team to note on sticky labels the difficulties / improvements declared by the interviewees and to display them on tables separated by category of stakeholder in order to bring out the corresponding models . After several consolidation meetings , held internally by our teams , the reconciliation between the results of the statements displayed on the tables and the individual notes taken during the interviews made it possible to distinguish 3 models with the following characteristics : Model 1 : Back office managers are used to dealing with operations , are drowned in daily operational tasks and hate manual tasks requiring more or less complex calculations and analyzes . Model 2 : Marketing teams frequently use benchmarks to improve the offer offered to customers by comparing themselves to competitors . Model 3 : personalization providers / manufacturers are forced to seek the right balance between the satisfactions of order books on time and to optimize the financial investments induced by the constitution of stock of cardholders on behalf of their customers . Insight and Approach Through this exercise , I learned that within the framework of the “ what is ” phase of the “ Design thinking ” process , one should not restrict the field of study by trying to prove that a given idea is the best possible solution . ( like the automation of the process in our case ) but rather to widen the field thus making it possible to explore all the possible avenues of innovation ( by studying the underlying needs of the various stakeholders of the support ordering process Cards ) . The " Mind Mapping " tool allowed us to go beyond the stated difficulties to propose design criteria meeting the needs of each stakeholder : For model 1 , the solution to be considered should be easy to use with automatic alerts and can be oriented towards artificial intelligence to automatically calculate the autonomy of the stock , the quantities to order based on the daily production of each product card . For model 2 : the solution could provide a library of card visuals with history of development and for the products of our customers and why not of competitors . For model 3 : the solution could make it possible to forecast production forecasts for each product / customer over different horizons ( ranging from 3 months to a year ) A Lean Prototyping approach with a minimum of investment would , in my opinion , be a better continuity , to quickly test whether the areas of improvement explored can be translated into functionalities ( EX : allow the Back office manager to order , simply and at the right moment , the optimal quantities for the replenishment of card holders ) of a digital solution able to meet our challenge and confirm our hypothesis .