Abhishek Chattopadhyay ShuangGuan Mohamed Karamoko Presentation... · Abhishek Chattopadhyay...
Transcript of Abhishek Chattopadhyay ShuangGuan Mohamed Karamoko Presentation... · Abhishek Chattopadhyay...
February 13th, 2015 2
Project Charter
Problem statement:- Strategic/National Sales team not being able to dedicate at
least 80% of their time towards solution selling
Goal:- To reduce % of non-selling time to 20% (Current mean: 37%)- To improve utilization of Client Care in order to bolster sales
for Insurance SAM’s by 0.47%, Insurance NAM’s by 0.45%and Commercial NAM’s by 0.47%
- To work with Safelite management, SAM/NAM, NAMCommercial and Client Care to identify and implement quickwins
Problem/Goal Statement
Gate Review Schedule
Impact
Scope
- Potential to increase sales by $3.4 Mfor Insurance SAM’s, $0.17 M forInsurance NAM’s and $0.5 M forCommercial NAM’s
Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: 02/13/15 02/13/15 02/13/15
Measure: 03/06/15 03/23/15 03/23/15
Analyze: 03/27/15
Improve: 04/10/15 -
DMAIC: 04/24/15 04/24/15 05/01/15
Team Leader: Abhishek Chattopadhyay
Team Members: Mohamed Karamoko, Shuang Guan
Process Maps for Safelite Solutions
0.0 Claims Resolution Process
15.0 Complaint Resolution Process
15.9 SAM/NAM Complaint Resolution Process
Yes
Yes No
NO
0.0 Claim Resolution Process
Who Step End Customer SAM/NAM/Client care/EST Customer Care Non-affiliate shops Affiliate shops
Need
1.0 File
2.0 Receive
3.0 Upload
4.0 Review
5.0 Coordinate
6.0 Coordinate
7.0 Service
8.0 Invoice
9.0 Service
10.0 Invoice
11.0 Bill
12.0 Send
13.0 Review
14.0 Send
15.0Resolve
Complete
File claims
Receive orders
Upload data into system
Review warranty issues
Coordinate with affiliate shops
Is it a warranty issue?
Coordinate with non-affiliate shops
Service issues
Invoice through EDI
Service issues
Invoice through EDI
Bill through EFT
Send survey
Review complaints through survey & other sources
No issues?
Send to SAM/NAM /Client care/EST
Customer repair job complete
Customer repair job
Resolve customer complaints
Who Step
No No Yes
Yes No
Yes
Yes
15.0 Complaint Resolution Process
End Customer EST NAM Commercial SAM/NAM Client Care
Need
15.1 Check
15.2 Assign
15.3 Recheck
15.4 Review
15.5 Send
15.6 Send
15.7 Send
15.8 Resolve
15.9 Resolve
15.10 Resolve
Rectify
Send to Client care
Send to NAM Commercial
Send to SAM/NAM
Resolve issues
Complaint rectified
Resolve customer complaint
Resolve issues
Resolve issues
Is it an insurance claim?
Is the issue not severe?
Not resolved?
Check CR2
Assign to EST representative
Recheck customer’s issues within 24 hours
No
Step End customers Insurance clients SAM/NAM Client care
Need
15.9.1 Dtermine
15.9.2 Delegate
15.9.3 Detect
15.9.4 Report
Resolve
15.9 SAM/NAM Complaint Resolution Process
Who
Need to resolve issues of insurance clients
Determine to escalate to SAM/NAM/Client care
Does the client want SAM/NAM support?
Detect root causes of issues
Detect root causes of iusses and delegate to Client care
Issues resolved
Report results to client
Yes
No
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Pareto Chart for non-selling time per month (Based on Oct, 2014)
Amount of time Cumulative percent(hrs)
Non-Selling Activities Affinity Diagram
37%
12%9%
9%
7%
7%
7%
5%5% 2%
Breakdown of non-selling activities
Customer service/billing issues
Client management reporting
New client programimplementation
Non Glass programactivities/implementation
expense reports
corporate meetings/conferencecall
HR related activities
AutoGlass inspection programs
Litigation response activities
(66%) (8%) (26%)
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Baseline Capability Analysis for Safelite’s non-selling activities
(Based on time study conducted in October,2014)
Interpretation of ANOVA Tables
P Value close to 0.00 in each of the three cases (circled in yellow)indicates that mean Non-Value Added Time (NVAT) spendtowards non-selling activities such as handling escalated issues isdifferent across SAM/NAM associates. Thus, due to lack ofstandardization in the process, there seems to be discrepancyamongst SAM/NAM’s about the degree to which Client Careshould be involved post escalation of issues
14
People
Time ProcessClient care utilization discrepancy amongst
SAM/NAM
Infrequent time study analysis
Excess reporting (litigation, legislation,
administrative activities)
Lack of ownership/accountability
Shortage of client care staff to support insurance NAM,
insurance SAM and commercial NAM
Lack of client care training to handle all escalated
issues
Limited access to database
Lack of continuous improvement
Technology
Excess motion and complexity due to redundancy in
handling escalated issues
Different nature in escalated claims
Mean NVAT 37% (model NVAT upper
limit 20%)
Fishbone diagram for non-selling activities
Relationship between revenue and selling time Finalized model taking into account square and cubic terms of time
Fitted Line between revenue and selling time
Polynomial (cubic) fitted line
explains the model more accurately (Higher R-Square
value of 65.1%) which indicates lack of standardization
in processes and/or flawed measurement of time
Linear fitted line does not explain the model accurately (Low R-Square value of 22.7%)
Calculation of number of client care employees to be added
Let y be the number of employees that we wish to add to client care
Ratio of transactions handled by Client Care to that handled by SAM/NAM’s = 2:1 (Therefore let us assume that client care handles 2x number of transactions and SAM/NAM’s handle x number of transactions)
Client Care time allocation towards issues (average %runtime); = 28%; SAM/NAM time allocation (NVAT/TotalTime) = 39.1%
Therefore
2x*(5+y)*28 = x*17*39.1
Therefore y = (39.1*17)/(28*2) – 5 = 6.86
Therefore we suggest that 7 client care employees be added to buttress the current client care team of 5 people. Therefore total suggested client care strength = 12
Profitability
Total Transactions handled by Insurance SAM between 2010-14 = 14,582,770
Total Transactions handled by Insurance NAM between 2010-14 = 764,644
Total Transactions handled by Commercial NAM between 2010-14 = 3,145,544
Ratio of transactions handled by Insurance SAM to Insurance NAM to Commercial NAM = 10:5:2
Therefore, based on the ratio of transactions, number of client care employees to be dedicated to Insurance SAM, Insurance NAM and Commercial NAM are 7, 3 and 2 respectively. However, taking into account operational and financial feasibility, we suggest a phased and sequential implementation of the plan of adding client care employees and start from adding 3 extra client care employees, of which 2 employees would be dedicated to Commercial NAM and the rest would be dedicated to Insurance SAM’s and NAM’s based on the ratio of transactions handled by them respectively (2:1). Let us go through a sensitivity analysis to look at the impacts on profitability and margins.
Add 3 client care employees initially Re-evaluate with time study data to check whether proportion of value-added time for SAM/NAMs has
increased
Conduct frequent time study analysis to check trends of value-added time Conduct weekly quality circle meetings to fine-tune process and continually monitor improvements If possible, calculate metrics such as utilization of Client Care at every stage of the issue resolution process to
identify bottlenecks and standardize process
Establish a detailed communication plan- Educate customers about the utility of Client Care through active and passive communication. This would
encourage them to contact Client Care instead of SAM/NAMs- Re-direct every issue to buttressed Client Care team and let customers judge their competence through surveys
- Have a dedicated SAM/NAM individual for training Client Care in order to handle all kinds of issues If all the above steps are implemented and are successful, add more client care employees if required to bolster
margins
Suggested sequential algorithm (Cradle to grave)