Identifying reasons of high handle time when connecting a call to Disputes department

Challenge:  I am studying a team of customer service agents who assist customers over the phone. Each  call takes 3mins to complete. There are times when a customer has a transaction that he/she doesn’t  recognize, and, in this case, a customer service agent would transfer the call to another department (i.e.  Dispute Department). The challenge I have is to understand why it takes for a phone agent additional 3  minutes to connect a call to another department. I am interested to find out what happens during this  time, the behaviors, practices or breaks in process that lead to an additional 3 minutes before customer  service agent can wrap up a call with a customer.

Selection: For this challenge, I am using the mind mapping technique, which I normally use to  understand the different steps in a process and where the breaks are. Mind mapping is also effective in  identifying which steps cause waste in the process map, so I can easily identify the problem. Because I  am trying to understand breaks or waste in a process flow, this technique will be most appropriate.

Application: Using the mind mapping technique, I gathered a group of 10 phone agents to plot the step  by step process they follow when transferring a call to another department. To make it easier for them  to visualize the flow, I gave them notepads and pens to write down 1 step on each notepad. Once  they're done writing the steps, I had them post the notepads from first to last step on a whiteboard for  everyone to see. I also asked questions that helped the team talk through the variations of their actions.  I asked open ended and close ended questions that helped the team identify the non-value adding and  value-adding steps in the process, following the principles of LEAN. By doing this, we were be able to  identify clearly which step need to be retained, reduced or removed. Then, using the SIPOC diagram (Six  Sigma), I helped the team look at different factors that may have caused waste: Supplier, Inputs,  Process, Outputs, Customers and other requirements.

Insights

Data gathered-

Supplier  Input  Process  Output  Customer

Agent calling  another  department:

-took 2 mins  before dialing the  other  department’s  number, placed  customer on hold  to do make up or  read an online  book (NVA, Non  Value Add)

Numbers to be  dialed to call the  other department

-agent takes 1min  additional, looking  for the number  -New numbers for  some departments  -no updated phone  book/directory  (Value Add if made  readily available)

Identified waste  on Step 4:

-Agent must dial  the call right away,  connect the call  within 30 seconds.  (Value Add if  followed)

Can save time if  the agent reduces  delay, knows the  phone number/or  has resources  ready, and follows  process.

Higher Customer  Satisfaction,  Better efficiency:  Customer’s call can  get to appropriate  department  quickly, the  originating agent  can assist another  customer who  comes on the line.

It is important to note that for this strategy to work, I had to give the participants a brief orientation on  how SIPOC as a mind mapping diagram works and what its purpose is. What I have learned from  conducting this exercise is that it's easier for groups to understand where in the current process or work  causes waste when a mind mapping technique is used. It is also helpful if the mind mapping diagram  such as SIPOC is made visually available and interactive for everyone to participate in. After identifying  the waste in their work and process, and ensuring that every team member is involved, it is easier to  then move into analysis and solutioning phase. Because the participants are end users and executors of  the same process, they are taking part in an agile process of improving their efficiency. There is lesser  push back when the participants themselves were made part of the entire process from problem  identification to solutioning.

I also observed that with everyone in the room doing the solutioning, it took longer time. This is where  the mind mapping process progressed into becoming a learning launch session. I realized how  intertwined these two approaches are.

Approach

If there’s another approach that could’ve also worked, it would be the learning launch. There are  participants who are more dominant and could therefore influence the groupthink. At this phase a  third-party person, such as someone from quality control would’ve been a big help in cleaning the  findings and data gathered from the mind mapping session.


Identifying reasons of high handle time when connecting a call to Disputes department Challenge : I am studying a team of customer service agents who assist customers over the phone . Each call takes 3mins to complete . There are times when a customer has a transaction that he / she does n’t recognize , and , in this case , a customer service agent would transfer the call to another department ( i.e. Dispute Department ) . The challenge I have is to understand why it takes for a phone agent additional 3 minutes to connect a call to another department . I am interested to find out what happens during this time , the behaviors , practices or breaks in process that lead to an additional 3 minutes before customer service agent can wrap up a call with a customer . Selection : For this challenge , I am using the mind mapping technique , which I normally use to understand the different steps in a process and where the breaks are . Mind mapping is also effective in identifying which steps cause waste in the process map , so I can easily identify the problem . Because I am trying to understand breaks or waste in a process flow , this technique will be most appropriate . Application : Using the mind mapping technique , I gathered a group of 10 phone agents to plot the step by step process they follow when transferring a call to another department . To make it easier for them to visualize the flow , I gave them notepads and pens to write down 1 step on each notepad . Once they 're done writing the steps , I had them post the notepads from first to last step on a whiteboard for everyone to see . I also asked questions that helped the team talk through the variations of their actions . I asked open ended and close ended questions that helped the team identify the non - value adding and value - adding steps in the process , following the principles of LEAN . By doing this , we were be able to identify clearly which step need to be retained , reduced or removed . Then , using the SIPOC diagram ( Six Sigma ) , I helped the team look at different factors that may have caused waste : Supplier , Inputs , Process , Outputs , Customers and other requirements . Insights Data gathered- Supplier Input Process Output Customer Agent calling another department : -took 2 mins before dialing the other department ’s number , placed customer on hold to do make up or read an online book ( NVA , Non Value Add ) Numbers to be dialed to call the other department -agent takes 1min additional , looking for the number -New numbers for some departments -no updated phone book / directory ( Value Add if made readily available ) Identified waste on Step 4 : -Agent must dial the call right away , connect the call within 30 seconds . ( Value Add if followed ) Can save time if the agent reduces delay , knows the phone number / or has resources ready , and follows process . Higher Customer Satisfaction , Better efficiency : Customer ’s call can get to appropriate department quickly , the originating agent can assist another customer who comes on the line . It is important to note that for this strategy to work , I had to give the participants a brief orientation on how SIPOC as a mind mapping diagram works and what its purpose is . What I have learned from conducting this exercise is that it 's easier for groups to understand where in the current process or work causes waste when a mind mapping technique is used . It is also helpful if the mind mapping diagram such as SIPOC is made visually available and interactive for everyone to participate in . After identifying the waste in their work and process , and ensuring that every team member is involved , it is easier to then move into analysis and solutioning phase . Because the participants are end users and executors of the same process , they are taking part in an agile process of improving their efficiency . There is lesser push back when the participants themselves were made part of the entire process from problem identification to solutioning . I also observed that with everyone in the room doing the solutioning , it took longer time . This is where the mind mapping process progressed into becoming a learning launch session . I realized how intertwined these two approaches are . Approach If there ’s another approach that could ’ve also worked , it would be the learning launch . There are participants who are more dominant and could therefore influence the groupthink . At this phase a third - party person , such as someone from quality control would ’ve been a big help in cleaning the findings and data gathered from the mind mapping session .