The Challenge & Selection

I was recently asked to look at the Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for a customer contract defined  about 3 years ago. The contract is due for renewal soon, hence there was an opportunity for the  company to (a) review & recommend changes based on current and expected work in future and SLA  effectiveness (b) add or delete SLAs based on our experience in working with other customers and (c)  make it a mutually beneficial one in that it will drive performance for the project team (Rewards) and  penalize when we fail to meet desired levels (Penalty). Though, I had not taken Design Thinking course  at that time, I intend to apply the Mind Mapping tool for this challenge.

My choice of Mind Mapping tool was due to (a) ability to represent multiple stakeholders, paths and  data points that were available and (b) for the kind of challenge that was in front of me – Learning  Launch (may have been useful to test assumptions or relevance at a later stage) or Story telling were not  apt.

Tool Description

The Mind Mapping tool provided a fine ability to depict the needs of different stakeholders, current  challenges in the engagement and recommendations to a larger group, suiting their different needs.  Mind Maps were simple, fast and visual in nature that were easily drawn on white boards and easily  represented in Power Point / Word documents for easy communication and review.

Applying the Tool

One of the earliest items that were undertaken was to map the different stakeholders with Service Level  Agreements in the centre and their needs starting with

(a) Current Service Level Agreements and Challenges  (b) Need and use of the SLAs for each Stakeholder  (c) Current type of work and learning from other engagements  (d) Recommendations.

This process is captured in the figured that is attached below.

Insight

The tool allowed for easy collaboration among different stakeholders and the ability to be on the same  page. It allowed for being able to map and represent the flow on how the recommendations have been  arrived at considering the different challenges – focusing on the problem at hand rather than emotional  arguments, which is typically the case in most SLA discussions / review – it becomes the property of  Finance and legal teams rather than for the Project team to use it for Win – Win in a Customer – Service  Provider relationship.

Figure: Mind Mapping to developing Service Level Agreements during Contract renewal

Alternate Tool

An additional tool, I would have liked to use in addition to the Mind Mapping tool in such cases is to  have used the “Learning Launch” tool, once a draft set of SLAs were formed. This would have allowed  the ability to jointly agree upon the new SLAs based on testing assumptions and results and rather than  it being an suggestion into the new contract.


The Challenge & Selection I was recently asked to look at the Service Level Agreements ( SLAs ) for a customer contract defined about 3 years ago . The contract is due for renewal soon , hence there was an opportunity for the company to ( a ) review & recommend changes based on current and expected work in future and SLA effectiveness ( b ) add or delete SLAs based on our experience in working with other customers and ( c ) make it a mutually beneficial one in that it will drive performance for the project team ( Rewards ) and penalize when we fail to meet desired levels ( Penalty ) . Though , I had not taken Design Thinking course at that time , I intend to apply the Mind Mapping tool for this challenge . My choice of Mind Mapping tool was due to ( a ) ability to represent multiple stakeholders , paths and data points that were available and ( b ) for the kind of challenge that was in front of me – Learning Launch ( may have been useful to test assumptions or relevance at a later stage ) or Story telling were not apt . Tool Description The Mind Mapping tool provided a fine ability to depict the needs of different stakeholders , current challenges in the engagement and recommendations to a larger group , suiting their different needs . Mind Maps were simple , fast and visual in nature that were easily drawn on white boards and easily represented in Power Point / Word documents for easy communication and review . Applying the Tool One of the earliest items that were undertaken was to map the different stakeholders with Service Level Agreements in the centre and their needs starting with ( a ) Current Service Level Agreements and Challenges ( b ) Need and use of the SLAs for each Stakeholder ( c ) Current type of work and learning from other engagements ( d ) Recommendations . This process is captured in the figured that is attached below . Insight The tool allowed for easy collaboration among different stakeholders and the ability to be on the same page . It allowed for being able to map and represent the flow on how the recommendations have been arrived at considering the different challenges – focusing on the problem at hand rather than emotional arguments , which is typically the case in most SLA discussions / review – it becomes the property of Finance and legal teams rather than for the Project team to use it for Win – Win in a Customer – Service Provider relationship . Figure : Mind Mapping to developing Service Level Agreements during Contract renewal Alternate Tool An additional tool , I would have liked to use in addition to the Mind Mapping tool in such cases is to have used the “ Learning Launch ” tool , once a draft set of SLAs were formed . This would have allowed the ability to jointly agree upon the new SLAs based on testing assumptions and results and rather than it being an suggestion into the new contract .