Knowledge Management Project at Simplexity

Evan Baum, Carla Dizon Deo, Russell Caldarone, Megan Nehr

Strategic Knowledge Management: LRNG 762

George Mason University School of Public Policy

Organization Development & Knowledge Management Graduate Program

Spring 2008 – Dr. Mark Addleson

May, 5, 2008

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Description of Project Methodology

a. Overview of Simplexity b. Informal Observations and Field Notes c. Individual Interviews with Management d. Focus Groups with Call Center Agents e. Document Analysis

II. Complete Description and Analysis of Themes

a. Prediction versus Improvisation b. Group/Team versus Individual c. Tools versus Talk d. Silos versus Networks

III. Recommendations, Risks, and Conclusions

a. Embrace Ambiguity as Inevitable b. Slow Down and Encourage Reflection c. Differentiate Opportunities and Needs for Prediction Versus Improvisation &

Harness Human Instinct Towards Conversation to Enhance Agent Productivity and Accuracy

d. Utilize Personality and Learning Style Assessments to Enhance Self and Group Awareness

IV. Reference List V. Appendices

a. Original Project Proposal b. Raw Data from Informal Observations and Field Notes c. Raw Data from Interviews with Management d. Raw Data from Focus Groups with Call Center Agents e. PowerPoint Presentation Slides

3

DESCRIPION OF PROJECT METHODOLOGY Overview of Simplexity Simplexity is an online provider of cell phone and other wireless services for individual customers and

over 1,000 corporate vendors. The main customer call center located in Reston, VA was where our

project data collection was focused. An additional office space in Reston also exists, as do two

complementary contractual call centers in India and one warehouse distribution center in Largo, MD, but

none of these additional cites contributed to the mission of our project. Essentially, we examined three

areas of the work and relationships in Simplexity – within management, within call center agents, and

between management and call center agents. Specifically, this was done in an effort to understand how

the work of providing customer service to individual customers and vendors occurs, and how information

sharing takes place by those directly involved in the functioning of the two primary customer service call

center teams. From the beginning, our project was intended to not simply observe the “what” and the

“how” of Simplexity, but also be able to apply our organizational development and knowledge

management expertise in communicating recommendations for future consideration by the company. A

draft of our original proposal to the company is included in Appendix A.

Informal Observations and Field Notes For our three group members not employed by Simplexity (Evan, Russell, and Carla), spending a half-day

at the site simply observing proved extremely valuable. Initially, we had pondered the idea of starting

with a survey to collect data from the Simplexity staff, but ultimately decided that visiting the office and

taking in things fresh for ourselves would be a better strategy.

Evan, Russell, and Carla each spent approximately four hours making independent visits to the Reston

office site and taking detailed field notes of our observations. These field notes are documented in

Appendix B.

Individual Interviews with Management Having done informal observations and taken field notes, our group then decided that one-on-one

interviews with management staff connected in some meaningful way with the customer service teams we

were focusing upon would be a logical next step.

Evan visited Simplexity for another four hours and completed seven interviews, each approximately 30

minutes in duration. The questions for these interviews were relatively unstructured, asking the

interviewee about their role within the company, how and when they interacted with others, and what

4

defined success for them in their job got the conversation going. From there, Evan directed the

conversation as he saw fit. The raw data from the interviews with management staff are documented in

Appendix C.

Focus Groups with Call Center Agents The last formal piece of on-site data collection was a series of three focus groups conducted by Russell

and Carla with small groups of the call center agents. Russell and Carla worked to formulate specific

questions for the agents, included in Appendix D, along with the raw data from the conversations

themselves. Agents came to talk in the focus groups in place of a regularly scheduled learning lounge

training session, and conversations lasted approximately 45 minutes for each of the three sessions. Russell

and Carla rotated facilitating and note taking, thus accounting for the difference in style reflected in the

data that was captured.

Document Analysis Lastly, prompted by some insights he gleaned during his observation and during the focus groups, Russell

went through a scoring metric document used for quality assurance purposes to evaluate and further

support the call center agents. Additionally, Evan’s initial observation of a learning lounge training

session centered on reviewing a process document, and thus can indirectly be considered a form of

document analysis as well. This was the extent of our group’s document analysis.

5

COMPLETE DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THEMES Prediction Versus Improvisation One of four overarching themes we saw in the data from our observations, interviews, focus groups, and

document analyses from our knowledge management project with Simplexity was the tension between

prediction and improvisation.

As we see it, there is a basic distinction between the two. The two are philosophical mindsets to

approaching how work gets done and how information is shared.

We define prediction as any belief or behavior directed towards definitively shaping future decisions or

actions before those decisions or actions occur. At the other end of the philosophical spectrum is

improvisation. We define improvisation as the capacity to react to a given set of circumstances and reach

decision or actions on the fly within a predetermined set of norms, values, and expectations.

Before moving forward, a brief example helps to further illustrate the difference and tension between the

two philosophies. This example comes from the world of music. In an orchestra setting, the music played

by the members of the group follows directly from the notes on the page as determined by the composer

of the music, and thus, what one hears is the result of predicted behavior. By comparison, if one were to

listen to a group of jazz musicians, much of the music that one would hear would be improvised, that is to

say, the musicians react to what they hear from one another on the fly within a given set of parameters

such as tempo, key, and the instruments being played. In the orchestra example, the music is

predetermined. In the jazz example, the music is created on the spot. It is the tension between these two

divergent principles that we see as an aspect of organizational behavior and knowledge sharing at

Simplexity.

There were numerous examples of where we saw the tension between prediction and improvisation at

Simplexity, and these are summarized below in four general areas of consideration, and then subsequently

connected with the data that was collected in the chart that follows.

1) The first area is a general orientation towards change and problem solving. There is a sense within

Simplexity of needing to be able to anticipate change before it happens, the high priority placed upon

solving problems, and the interest in capturing problems as they occur to prevent them again in the future.

On the other hand, the data reflects that the pace of change is too fast to keep up with, the problem-

6

solving process is detached from those communicating with customers, and a recognition that deviations

from processes is sometimes necessary to produce intended results.

2) Second, tension exists surrounding written documentation as a form of predicting behavior compared

to human interaction as a form of improvisation. Data in the left column below illustrate the effort and

desire to define desired outcomes free of any human interaction or subjectivity. Conversely, the right

column shows recognition that written documentation is inherently incomplete and is regularly ignored.

3) A third area is the area of agent behavior, training, and evaluation. In the left column, the data

generally reflects an interest in maintaining a high level of control over the customer service agents in all

areas. In the right column, we see a perception among the agents of the challenges they face in their

training process, but at the same time a commitment to try and do the job well.

4) Lastly, the physical office environment also reflects the tension between prediction and improvisation

at Simplexity. On the one hand, individuals are physically grouped in rational and logical ways, almost as

if the organizational chart had come to life in the physical manifestation of the office. Additionally, signs

and other evidence around the office are displayed with visible reminders of behavior that is intended to

occur. However, at the same time, at least one of the signs on the wall focuses on the vision of the

company without prescribing specifically how to do something or what needs to be done to get there.

Prediction Improvisation

Orientations Towards Change and Problem Solving

In the learning lounge, if scenarios came up that were not documented the agents were instructed to let someone know so they could be captured in the documents

Across lots of conversations, solving problems/fixing things in general seems to be not only a high priority, but something that people really enjoy doing.

Supervisors and managers in general seem to feel like they need to be experts on everything in order to successfully support the agents when questions arise

The efforts to break down the service that is provided by type of customer based upon revenue produced or value to the company

Success or failure is defined by standard business metrics/scorecards/benchmarks related to profit and revenue generated

A comment from a management interview: “Agents find holes in the processes that are developed because they are the ones talking to the customers, and they see things that others don’t because of it.”

A comment from a management interview: “Sometimes we want them to be more flexible with this because sometimes going off process is what is needed to quickly resolve the call.”

Change is so incredibly rapid within the company that everything feels rushed all of the time; a comment from an agent focus group: “This company has a habit of changing policies on a dime.”

A comment from an agent focus group: “In this business, information is always changing, even hourly.”

A comment from an observation on the phone showing inability to improvise: “We apologize for the inconvenience, but it has been elevated to the highest level, I do not know how the process works, but if you give me your phone number I can have a supervisor call you.”

7

Information Reflected in Documents and Other Written Tools

Process documents uses matrices to prescribe specific response to specific problem that a customer has via phone or e-mail

Seeking a universal format for process guides as a way of improving them from the past

One agent in the learning lounge requests having a script to specifically deal with customer complaints on the process being discussed

A comment in the learning lounge: “All we can do today is what the document says, even if it is wrong, just follow it as best you can.”

As an observation, much of the information sharing takes place over e-mail, even among those considered management staff, although our ability to observe conversations regarding things discussed via e-mail was limited

The natural inclination of the agents in the learning lounges that were observed we to tackle issues by talking about them instead of going through the document they had before them in a step-by-step process

A comment in the learning lounge: “We aren’t going to be able to remember all of this when we are on the phone.”

From observations of the agents on the call center floor, when questions arise the inclination seems to be to consult another person for assistance and not a document, although it was not at all discernable when a document was being consulted

A comment from a management interview: “Technology tools are great, but they are just tools”

A comment from a management interview: “Documentation might not always have the answers.”

General Agent Behavior, Training, and Evaluation

An interest in anticipating training needs in advance so that planning can occur more effectively for training was expressed; general project management needs to be strengthened

Perceptions or realities of agents limitations in some cases guides the development of procedures for them to follow

A general resistance towards having agents communicating about why something is the way it is directly to customers, and as a result, a resistance towards giving the agents that context in the first place

Quality assurance process seems to be set up using a scoring method that is very detailed and intended to produce very specific outcomes

A comment in the learning lounge: “When we have different learning lounges we end up doing it differently. People stop following the document and just start asking each other.”

A comment from an observation of agents on the floor: “Common sense isn’t common.”

A desire to have issues from customers resolved on the first call and to have them be satisfied seems to pervade the attitude of many of the agents and the needs of management

Physical Environment of Office

Individuals are physically grouped together as either management or agent, and the agents are closely connected by their proximity to one another on a specific team; the training room is also arranged like a classroom, with the instructor leading conversation at the front and those intended to be the students sitting in rows

The goals noted for call center teams are very well defined in terms of average call handle time and other similar regimented expectations, and are documented visibly on large paper around the office

The signs on the walls with the owl describing the InPhonet system seem to reflect that all important information can be found in the online system set up for the agents to use, a number of other signs throughout the office seem to reinforce the need for specific behavior

Vision statements on the wall do not spell how exactly how individuals are supposed to do their work, just conveys what the vision is and why it is important

A host of the smartest minds in contemporary organizational development have insights into the tension

between prediction and improvisation we observed at Simplexity. The disconnect between processes

developed by management and the ways in which they are implemented by call center agents connects to

Addleson’s (2007) distinction between having a “view from the top” and “a view from practice.” Simply

8

put, those doing the customer service work (view from practice) see their work very differently and have

a tendency to improvise rather than use the procedures provided to them from “the top” of the

organization. This tension is also reflected in Argyris’s (1994) dichotomy of having an espoused theory

compared to a theory-in-use. An espoused theory is more of a mental framework for how one believes

behavior should occur. By comparison, theory-in-use is a framework of how behavior actually occurs.

The challenge is to bring the two perspectives into alignment.

Similarly, Conklin’s (2005) distinction between tame problems and wicked problems reveals another

layer of the tension between prediction and improvisation at Simplexity. Heifetz’s (1994) lessons on

technical versus adaptive problems and “adaptive” leadership can also be considered here. In its most

basic terms, tame problems are those where a single solution exists to a problem that by its nature has a

defined solution in the first place. These types of problems are those best suited for prediction.

Conversely, wicked problems requiring adaptive leadership by their nature have no single solution, and

by all accounts, efforts to apply traditional predictive management techniques fail to successfully address

the complexities of these types of problems (Block, 2002). Improvisation is a value that is consistent with

the notion of a wicked problem. However, as Gladwell (2005) notes, improvisation is a skill that can be

developed through refining one’s ability to quickly, almost instantaneously, reflect upon a given set of

circumstances and take an appropriate course of action. Seen from this perspective, the lessons from jazz

musicians who reflect and improvise at lightening-like speed without having a predetermined plan of

action before beginning to play has very direct relevance for struggling with wicked problems within an

organization (DePree, 1992).

Lastly, a set of scholars comment upon the tension between prediction and improvisation in yet a third,

similar, but ultimately distinctive way. Scott (2003) discusses the differences between open and closed

systems. Morgan (2000) illustrates the differences between the traditional machine metaphor influencing

organizational behavior and other metaphors that have more modern-day relevancy such as an ecosystem

or the brain. Rycoff and Kash (1999) apply the lessons of complexity theory, and Wheatley (1999)

considers chaos theory and the principle of emergence, as theories that are better suited as mental

foundations for an organization or world with increasingly wicked problems. Seifter and Economy (1992)

show how principles from these theories have manifested themselves in a conductor-less orchestra to

produce an unprecedented quality of music for a group without a formal positional leader. Each of these

scholars shares a piece of a vital insight into the prediction and improvisation dichotomy: the least amount

of organizational structure necessary is ideal for tackling wicked problems like those seen at Simplexity.

The value of prediction manifests itself in creating lots of structure, and the data above clearly reflect this

9

for the company. Conversely, the value of improvisation provides some structure, usually in the area of

core organizational values, and allows structures to develop organically like those in an open system

(Scott, 2003), ecosystem (Morgan, 2000), or environment seen through the lens of chaos (Wheatley,

1999) or complexity theory (Rycoff & Kash, 1999).

Group/Team Versus Individual The next theme that we noticed in our observations, interviews, and focus was a tension between what we

consider team/group versus individual. By group/team, we refer to those pieces of data that illustrate an

either implicit or explicit recognition of multiple Simplexity members collaborating on a project or issue,

almost always using the same method. Conversely, by individual we refer to those situations noted in the

data where teamwork or collaboration was bypassed in favor of individual preferences, choices, or

learning styles, or efforts to impact the behavior of a group (such as the call center agents) produced

distinctive results inconsistent with the values of a team.

In this theme, we primarily ask the following questions:

Where in the data do we see management staff talking about or being on the same page? Where in

the data do we see these things with the agents?

Where in the data do we see the management staff taking about how they operate as individuals,

preferred work or learning styles, or how they like to get/receive/access information?

Where is the tension between the two?

During our observations, we noticed that there was a focus on teamwork throughout the call center. For

example, there were motivational posters and quotes on all of the walls. Teamwork, “being on the same

page,” or having others “buy in” to something where phrases that repeated came up during interviews

with management staff, and also were evident in the focus group with call center agents. At the same

time, there was a recognition among those we met with that teamwork could be better than it is, but also

that the values of teamwork seem to mean different things to different people. The data below on this

overarching theme can be grouped into three categories:

1) Factory workers versus knowledge workers: At times, it seemed like the agents were factory workers.

During our observation, we noticed that all of the agents used the same script, and their performance was

measured the number of call taken, average handling time, average speed of answer, and reading

messages in the company intranet. These data points reflect the principles of group/team. Behavior of the

agents over the phone is intended to be the same and is evaluated using the same standards regardless of

10

the agent, much like antiquated metrics designed in the 1920s to measure productivity of workers in

factories (Morgan, 2000). On the other hand, the work of knowledge work tends to be more

individualized, but at the same time rely upon sharing of information between individuals in order to

accomplish the work itself. Rycoff and Kash (1999) consider this work “complex” work because a

complete business process cannot be fully understood by any one individual. Thus, the tension between

team/group and individual overlaps with the distinction of factory versus knowledge work, as principles

and practices intended to produce common behaviors come into conflict with the realities of individual

differences in executing complex work responsibilities.

2) Quality monitoring: The agents are also measured on quality monitoring. This is a process where the

quality team will listen to calls and score the calls on an established quality rubric. An underlining tension

existed between with the agents during our focus groups in this area. In some cases, agents truly wanted

to be held to the same standards free from human subjectivity. They wanted to have a defined benchmark

for quality customer service. However, some of the agents felt that the quality assurance process, and in

particular the review process in which they are assessed is too rigid, and fails to account for their unique

styles as agents and the uniqueness of each individual customer interaction. As a result, some agents have

come to view this entire process as discouraging for them, when it is ultimately intended to produce more

positive behaviors on their part. Thus, a tension exists between holding agents to the same set of

expectations and standards (group/team), if those standards need to be the same in the first place

(individual), and how the quality assurance feedback process does not seem to account for individual

unique skills, qualities, and interactions.

3) Training and development: The last issue that was consistent in the focus groups was training and

development. The agents felt like they were rushed to go out on the floor, and did not receive the training

needed to provide exceptional customer service. For example, one agent mentioned that there is no formal

training. This piece of the theme has a big impact on the agents. The lack of training was a concern that

came up in each focus group and ties directly into the team/group versus individual concept. On the one

hand, the data from the agents explicitly indicates that they would prefer to learn from one another

through training that is informed by their experiences as a group. Put another way, the agents had an

interest in each having the same basic level of minimum training that would be delivered in the same way

regardless of the agent and regardless of the point in which they entered the company. Thus, while

teamwork is espoused as valuable for the agents of Simplexity, in practice (Argyris, 1994) the realities of

the current training systems come into conflict with the value of group/team, as much of the preliminary

training of call center agents occurs one-on-one. If this is the first experience many agents have when

11

beginning their employment with Simplexity, it should not be surprising that the value of collective

teamwork, despite examples of one-to-one information sharing and assistance, is not a deeply held aspect

of their culture.

Group/Team Individual Factory Workers versus Knowledge Workers

Agents performance is measured on the number of call handled, average handling time, wrap time, and average speed of answer

A comment in focus group #2 from an agent, “occasionally you get an atta boy” and “we use to do an employee of the month, but that got too expensive”

A comment in focus group #1, “If you ask about 5 people—3 would have different answers—we get trained differently—you gather information from the team.”

Quality Monitoring Agents stated in focus groups that they felt discouraged when reviewing call, and that the QA process was subjective

A comment in focus group #1, “Just one call, they always pick the wrong one, I get 30-40 calls, one session proves that I am not a good rep.”

Training and Development

A comment in the group #2 focus group, “Just sat there, (training) not structured.”

A comment in focus group # 3, “Read Flynet—just do it yourself—no formal training—we don’t get it—you don’t have time to read the next time it changes—training sessions like these.”

The need for sharing information between departments stood out in our interviews and focus groups.

Verna Allee, the author of The Future of Knowledge states that since social interactions are so important

for knowledge sharing, there is a growing interest in learning organization principles, networks,

communities of practice, and social network analysis (p.114). In some of the focus groups, we noticed

that there was a social network accessible to the agents, but it seemed to be missing when it related to the

agent and management relationship. Knowledge sharing was happening, but only at the agent-to-agent

level and it was difficult to tell the accuracy of this knowledge sharing through social networks. If the

agents needed an answer to questions they would ask each other. Can these instincts towards sharing

knowledge as a social process among the agents be more robustly integrated into the overall functioning

of Simplexity?

Blackler’s (1995) distinction between knowledge and knowing is also worth consideration under this

thematic area. Many organizations like Simplexity focus upon the content of information that individuals

have and need to know in order to execute specific job functions. This frame of reference parallels the

way Blackler describes knowledge. It also reflects the view that drastically over-emphasizes the content

of individual knowledge and under-emphasizes the manner in which knowing is created. Blackler would

consider “knowing” a process that mediated, situated, provisional, pragmatic, and contested. These values

differ drastically from those that attempt to frame knowledge management as a system by which

12

individual knowledge is captured and organized for accessibility. The perspective of focusing upon

knowing recognizes that knowledge management is really about knowledge creation, and that knowledge

creation is a collective, group/team process in which individual understandings of bits of information are

always being debated and reformed. Thus, static pieces of information captured from one individual at a

specific point in time are only a piece of the knowledge management equation. The other piece is how

bits of information becoming meaningful for those using them, how they are challenged and changed over

time, and how facilitating effective group processes for knowledge creation warrants just as much

consideration as traditional methods of capturing and organizing data.

Tools Versus Talk The next theme we saw in the data we gathered at Simplexity was the dynamic that exists between the use

of tools and talk. We define tools as the display and transfer of information from a source to the audience

through a device, equipment, and technology. Ultimately, the information is traceable and tangible. On

the other hand, we define talk, simply put, as the conversations, discussions, and learning that occur

between individuals or among groups and is disconnected from any specific tangible source of

information like a document or manual.

In this theme, we primarily ask the following questions:

Where in the data did we see evidence of the importance of physical, technological, written, or

electronic tools to aid in information sharing at Simplexity?

Where in the data did we see evidence of conversation or other person-to-person interaction

among colleagues as a form of information sharing at Simplexity?

Where lies the tension between these two methods and how does this translate towards the goal of

a high performing organization?

There is a tremendous emphasis on the written word at Simplexity, whether it is in process documents, e-

mails, newsflashes, and so forth. On the other hand, data from the agents seems to suggest that it is much

more natural for them to engage in conversations to get the information they need to solve problems for

which they do not automatically know the answer. We also saw this theme in some of the management

level data as well.

13

There are four prevailing areas in the data that reflect the theme of tools versus talk. These are 1)

information flow, 2) preferred method of communication, 3) making sense of information, and 4) use of

information.

1) Information Flow: Whether through tools or talk, the information flow at Simplexity could be

categorized into four directions:

Within Agents: Flow of information amongst the agents

Agent to Management: Flow of information that is driven by the agents to the management

Management to Agent: Flow of information that is driven by the management to the agents

Within Management: Flow of information amongst the management team

2) Preferred Method of Communication: Once the flow of information is established, i.e., how does the

giver of information choose to communicate its message? Based on the observations and interviews,

agents and management prefer different methods of communication. Agents are more informal and more

spontaneous while management prefers email and formal communication.

3) Making Sense of Information: Once the message is received, how does the recipient make sense of the

information? We observed that confusion exists due to inconsistency of how the message is

communicated and by the choice of words that area used.

4) Use of Information: Once the message has been translated from the source to the recipient, how is it

used? Agents only have one use for the information they have – to respond to and provide answers to the

customers on the call. However, we question if managers receive information from the agents that they

can use in making decisions, and if they do, how effective is this flow of information back up the

Simplexity hierarchy?

Tools Talk Flow of Information Most of the information that is

communicated using tools is from the management to agents. Primarily, these are through emails, newsflashes (Flynet), and procedural documents.

There is limited information that flows from the agents to management. Agents indicated that they do not a have forum where they can share their insights, feedback, and opinion.

Agent-to-agent information sharing occurs through conversations.

Preferred Method of Communication

Agents request scripts that would help them during their calls.

Agents indicated that the scenarios

Information sharing amongst agents is done through story telling, such as sharing of a phone call they just had or through

14

developed are not always the most helpful; yet they realize they are a good alternative to none.

One management personnel indicated that email is the most common method of communication within the management team.

One management personnel indicating that the new updates will be communicated through email to the agents.

Agents expressed the need to have access to other departments through instant messengers, which would be helpful while they are on their calls.

questions and answers, when they ask a question to a neighbor during a call with a customer. At either way, these are done casually.

Agents comments that important updates should be delivered during a meeting instead of through emails

The question and answer forum of the learning lounges is well received by agents – to go along with interactive training, i.e., not just go through what is already displayed on the computer screen.

Making Sense of Information

Gap between translation of process and documents to what is meaningful to the agents.

Multiple updates to procedural documents and agents’ inability to keep up and read through the documents

Inconsistent training style and message during learning lounges lead to confusion among the agents that lead them to ask their colleagues for the information instead of referring to official documents.

Use of Information Training coordinators acknowledge that process updates occur too frequent and agents cannot keep up.

Supervisors use the Intranet as a source for policy changes

Agents use Intranet sources for common questions such as plan and pricing.

Agents call onto their supervisors when they are confronted with a caller question they cannot resolve.

Agents pick up styles and answers from the people they shadow.

One of the areas within the discussion of “tools versus talk” is the concept of how recipients, mostly

agents in Simplexity’s world, make sense of the information they are given. Krogh, Ichijo, and Nonaka,

the authors of Enabling Knowledge Creation: How to Unlock the Mystery of Tacit Knowledge and

Release the Power of Innovation, define knowledge as justified true belief. By this they mean that “an

individual justifies the truthfulness of his or her beliefs based on observations of the world; these

observations in turn, depend on a unique viewpoint, personal sensibility, and individual experience”

(2000, p. 6). Furthermore, they state that “creation of knowledge is not simply a compilation of facts but a

uniquely human process that cannot be reduced or easily replicated…it can involve feelings and belief

systems of which one may not even be conscious” (2000, p. 6). How is this concept translated in

Simplexity? Based on our analysis of the data, the agents at Simplexity feel that they are overwhelmed by

information that they cannot make sense of. From the perspectives of management, they are providing

agents with the tools to do their jobs. They are giving them the knowledge – the accurate “facts” and

information that they should use. If we look at how the authors define knowledge, the agents create their

knowledge based on their feelings and belief systems. For the agents, making sense of the information

requires a human process. Thus, this is why “talk” is more prevalent than tools amongst agents.

Additionally, it is important to remember that knowledge is both explicit and tacit. There is knowledge

that can be put on paper, in sentences and captured in manuals, databases, and displayed through the

15

company intranet. But, there are also other kinds of knowledge that are tied to the “senses, skills in bodily

movement, individual perception, physical experiences, rules of thumb, and intuition” (Krogh, Ichijo, &

Nonaka, 2000, p. 6) and these are the kind that the agents tend use on their jobs. This is called tacit

knowledge and recognizing its value and figuring out how to use it could be important for Simplexity.

However, this requires extended conversations and good personal relationships.

It was also apparent that the majority of the agents feel that the current technology is not reaping the

benefits it should. Although the intranet allows for accessibility of the information, it offers more than

what is useful. Brown and Duguid (2002), the authors of The Social Life of Information, talk about tunnel

design. Tunnel design occurs when we ignore the clues that lie beyond information, and this narrow view

produces technologies that in Brown and Duguid’s terms “bite back.” These technologies are the ones that

“create as many problems as they solve” (2002, p. 3). The agents claimed that they receive alerts and

newsflashes that are hard to keep up with. The question is: can Simplexity recognize the clues that lie

beyond the updates? One way of doing so is by “socializing technology,” which means by creating

technological solutions that are designed with the consideration of social resources and patterns of social

behavior.

Silos Versus Networks Simplexity is a complex interweaving of both silos and networks. Identifying areas of opportunity to link

current silos into existing networks, and expand the networks themselves is an important component of

improving the efficiency of the organization and people resources. For this purpose, silos are groups or

teams that have little interaction with other groups or teams at the front line or supervisor level. While

there may be interactions or conversations at higher levels that should filter to the front line or supervisor

level, this communication may or may not be regular or effective. Networks are, for this purpose, webs of

people and resources that allow front line and supervisor level employees access to information beyond

formally established silos.

There were numerous examples in the data of either silos or networks at Simplexity. These are

summarized into three general areas below and subsequently connected with the data in the chart that

follows:

1) Process Silo: Information established, developed and distributed by the process development team is

‘handed off’ to training and communications, the group that is responsible for ensuring groups are

updated and educated on all releases. Information established for training is often incomplete which

16

causes one of two scenarios. First, training and communications spends important time and resources

completing process documentation which detracts from their real deliverable, or, second training is

disjointed and requires multiple follow up sessions to send a complete message on a given subject.

2) Team Silo: Because different teams have different functions and have historically been provided with

different information in order to carry out their functions, different team silos have been created. This is

most evident across departments and (while it may not have been in the past) has become limiting in the

sense that people must create informal networks to do their jobs well.

3) Team Network: Within the customer service group, there is a network structure that has been

informally created so people have access to important knowledge needed to effectively do their jobs.

Many times in the data it was stated or observed that an experienced supervisor is a lifeline for the team.

Her value is mostly embedded is the fact that she has cross-departmental experience that gives her a

context within which she can more effectively solve customer issues. Identifying what the supervisor has

access, in an effort to make whatever it is more widely available, is a good jumping off point to expand

the network across teams or departments.

The table below contains key phrases or concepts from the data collected that are representative of a

process or team silo or network. Generally, for an enabling context that gets positive results and provides

a teamwork rich environment, team networks are positive. However, they may be present due to a larger

need or gap in communication that can be addressed by considering some of the recommendations listed

in the last section.

Silo Network Process It doesn’t seem that the instructor, female,

has written the document, it seems that it came from “Emily.” (LL Observation)

There’s a need to get training staff involved in the change process earlier than currently happens (akane)

Team Different agents handle different types of calls (russ observation)

If you ask about 5 people – 3 would have different answers – we get trained differently – you gather information from the team – I was not trained (fg1)

None – there is no communication whatsoever – I can sit there and say we need it (fraud, activation) – no clue what is going on – when something goes bad – customer service always gets blamed (fg1)

There are territorial issues that come up within the team that create roadblocks and

“Documentation might not always have the answers” – would have to reach out to others when he worked on the phones to get answers to new or unique situations instead of checking with documentation (lwashington)

There are lots of staff from the past team with a knowledge base that is important, and their experience needs to inform the future (jbailey)

One man at his computer has a question and calls over another staff member, the other staff member gets up from his cube

17

there’s a need to refocus on mission to get past them (jbailey)

I’m doing escalation – we get order but we don’t know what to tell the customer (fg1)

We cannot even transfer them – just give them the number – not good when they have to redial after being on hold already for 30 minutes – it will be good to be able to say “I won’t be able to help you but I can transfer you to someone who can” (fg1)

and explains something to the first staff member about what he is seeing on his computer screen. The man at his work station gets back on the phone with the customer after getting the information he needed from his co-worker. It seems to be about an authorization to return a phone, as he is describing information about how to send out a package back to the company. (carla observation)

If the agents had a question, they would leave their desk, and walk a few feet to ask Lenin a question (russ observation)

Q: “How do you get access to what you need to know to be effective in you job?” Best tool, talking to other workers, You talk to someone in the department that knows the answer (fg2)

Simplexity’s customer service team is made up of knowledge workers that use tools and resources to

assist customers who may contact the center via phone, email or chat. For each customer issue, there is a

solution that must either be referenced or derived by each of the knowledge workers. According to

Drucker, “knowledge workers are unlike previous generations of workers, not only in the high levels of

education they have obtained, but principally because, in knowledge-based organizations, they own the

organization's means of production (i.e. knowledge)” (in Blackler, 1995).

In addition to doing knowledge work, the customer service team at Simplexity also is responsible for

creating knowledge. If the company is looking for a way to resolve issues and roadblocks to improve

efficiency and profitability on a long term basis, an important thing to consider is an enabling context

within the organization that allows people to feel that innovation, knowledge sharing, efficiency and

working toward a common goal are valued behaviors.

For every company it is necessary to “continue creating new knowledge to fuel an advancement strategy

at the same time that it uses existing knowledge for survival” (von Krogh, Ichijo, & Nonaka, 2000, p.

257). While creating new solutions is something Simplexity has done often in the past, the viability and

sustainability of these solutions for the future may hinge on fostering innovation among all levels of its

employees, including the call center agents. This is evident in many locations in the data where workers

mention that things change very often. Frequent changes in the system are likely based on frequent

instances where knowledge is being created. The question is: how well are these pieces of created

knowledge shared across the networks that exist in the system?

18

As is the case with Simplexity, “the business of many organizations can change as quickly as it takes

people to identify and respond to emerging challenges or to pursue new opportunities” (Addleson, 2000).

While Simplexity manages and implements thousands of changes annually, the effectiveness of

implementation comes into question if people are not appropriately identifying and responding to these

changes. A formal project might be closed in a matter of weeks, but from the organizational and

knowledge worker perspective, a change may never be fully implemented, and in fact, one piece of data

from an interview reflects this, as one management member stated, “you fix something and then

something else breaks.”

Part of the reason for this inaccessibility of resources and sluggish response to change is in part due to the

presence of team barriers that do not allow effective communication between teams that need it the most.

Access to the solution is the number one need for a customer service agent. Although some workers draw

on the expertise of their team members to fill in knowledge gaps, other members of the team are less

effective at this. To provide a foundation of success for all knowledge workers, it is important to foster a

caring team environment where knowledge can be shared and created easily. Von Krogh, Ichijo and

Nonaka (2000) talk about breaking down barriers within organizations and opening pathways to effective

team work and knowledge creation. These authors argue that one of the most important environmental

factors in moving toward an organization that has effective knowledge sharing and creation is a caring

and supportive workplace, stating, “When team members take a lenient and helping attitude toward one

another, new ideas flow easily, and even radically different knowledge can be created” (von Krogh,

Ichijo, & Nonaka, 2000, p.9).

19

RECOMMENDATIONS, RISKS, AND CONCLUSIONS Recommendations From the themes, data, and connection to organizational development and knowledge management

literature cited above, we have several proposed and interconnected recommendations that we feel are

worthy of consideration for Simplexity. A summary of these recommendations is followed by an

overview of potential risks.

Embrace Ambiguity as Inevitable Simply put, we believe that embracing ambiguity as inevitable in the workplace of Simplexity will, as a

shift in mental models, allow the organization to better manage the inherent tension between the four

themes that we observed in the data. Ambiguity is around every corner, in every conversation, and an

aspect of every decision in an ever-increasing business world of complexity, and what happens at

Simplexity cannot be disconnected from this unquestionable truth. The practices, beliefs, and behaviors

noted above from the first theme in the prediction column of the data by their very nature attempt to

precisely shape future actions in a business environment where doing so seems to be nearly impossible.

Instead of fighting to eliminate or even minimize ambiguity in the work of Simplexity, a basic question

we believe Simplexity should collectively wrestle with is, “How can we work with the ambiguity inherent

in what we do instead of working against it?” Only after examining this question do we feel that

Simplexity can come to terms with the tension we observed surrounding the efforts to control and define a

future that is beyond control and definition.

Slow Down and Encourage Reflection This theme is, like the first, grounded in the data we collected and the literature on organizational

development we have referenced. While it may seem heretical to encourage slowing down in an

environment where the pace of change is already at strenuous levels, it is only through slowing down that

individuals at Simplexity will be able to make better sense and meaning of the work going on around

them. An ideal question to frame this conversation would be, “What are we (or what am I if at the

individual level) currently doing that we (I) should stop doing?” Taking the time to consider this question

will allow the organization to individually and collectively identify those aspects of accomplishing

Simplexity’s work that are truly important, and at the same time, further a group commitment to whatever

outcome the conversation holds. Furthermore, if improvisation is to be further valued, as we suggest, it

only becomes possible if individuals have the time and encouragement to reflect upon what is actually

occurring or has occurred. If one is in a constant state of action without pausing to consider that action

and its role as a part of something larger, than it becomes extremely difficult to even consider a different

20

course of action. This is a necessary first step to address the tension surrounding differences in

orientations towards change throughout the company.

Differentiation Opportunities and Needs for Prediction Versus Improvisation & Harness Human Instinct Towards Conversation to Increase Agent Productivity and Accuracy This third recommendation contains two related pieces. The first is to carefully examine what business

functions absolutely require a need for prediction and control and which business functions do not. In our

estimation, even if never explicitly stated, prediction is overwhelmingly valued above improvisation at

Simplexity as a corporate philosophy, in spite of the tension between the two values reflected in the data

above. If in answering the question posed at the end of the first recommendation Simplexity were to find

value in continuing some of the practices of prediction, where are these practices essential? Put another

way, given that the data above in many places illustrates a natural instinct towards (and in some cases, an

interest in fostering more) improvisation within the work that happens in Simplexity, where are the

opportunities to feed this instinct? It is our belief that continuing to over-value prediction as an implicit

corporate philosophy, particularly given our first recommendation regarding ambiguity, needs collective

consideration by everyone at Simplexity that was connected to this project, but in particularly

management-level personnel whom hold responsibility for fostering (or rejecting) particular values in the

workplace.1

At the same time, improvisation as a value can be understood as a more natural human instinct, and once

the best opportunities to foster the value of improvisation are identified, we believe that these

opportunities should, if drive by focused conversations, lead to greater agent productivity and accuracy.

In terms of the flow of communication, we found that there is limited or no process in place that allows

for information sharing that is driven by the agents to the management. This present situation allows for

discontent and the agents feeling undervalued and appreciated. It may also be the reason to the fact that

formal documents, such as process and quality improvement, are not well received. Involving the agents

into the development of procedures which they have to adhere to will allow for smoother implementations

of changes in processes and would yield better reaction and results, and is just one way in which the

instinct among the agents to solve problems through discussion can be better utilized.

Another area in which this recommendation can take place is in the area of agent training. Due to the

nature of the agent’s job, the faster they can get the answers they need, the better they can do their job. In

1 We would recommend for the management staff a new book by Bill Price and David Jaffe called The Best Service Is No Service which outlines that there is more to helping customers than picking up the phone within three rings or emailing within 24 hours.

21

most cases, the answers they can get during the limited amount of time are through their neighbors or the

supervisors. This presents a concern from the management’s perspective because the faster answers do

not necessarily mean the correct answers. However, the project team suggests that agents should receive a

more formal training when they are first hired, consistent with a recognition that some limited set of

predicted behaviors are going to be necessary to be successful in the work environment. Agents have

voiced that the current training method is not sufficient. A formal training, followed up with “talk”

through discussions and questions and answers, will set up a mentality from the very beginning that

should follow suit post-orientation. The project team observed that the current practice is in reverse: new

hires shadow and pick up informal training from colleagues yet they are demanded to review and adhere

to formal documents when they are fully transitioned into the call centers. Reversing this current practice

by getting the agents to use the tools in the beginning will most likely result the agents referring to them

again in the future, and perhaps cutting down on some of the improvisational tendencies in places when

they are not truly appropriate or necessary, and also increasing agent accuracy.

Lastly, if agents are routinely put in a situation where they are required to derive solutions to customer

issues, they must have a reliable, non-intrusive and efficient network communication structure that allows

them access to information, people or resources they need. The quickest, most beneficial and available

solution is technology related. Implementing a quick and efficient way for people to reach out to the

multiple teams of Simplexity in order to spur action on a customer issue will be beneficial to all groups

and particularly enhance the customer experience. In addition, the company could consider the creation of

a human resource desk that agents could use to reach out to when a customer issue arises that transcends

traditional silos. If the natural tendency is to look for other people to solve problems through

conversation, than the identification of expert sources to which the agents would be encouraged to turn

for assistance would minimize the frequency of agents simply turning to the person next to them and

could increase their reliability in the process. The development of these expert sources could have the

consequence down the road of leading to fully cross-function2 teams and agents prepared to handle any

issue at any level from any customer.

Utilize Personality and Learning Style Assessments to Enhance Self and Group Awareness Our final recommendation is that both management staff and call center agents could greatly benefit from

utilizing an assortment of personality and learning styles inventories and assessments, which if facilitated

2 Establish a cross-functional team that can act as a liaison between departments, and/or take any type of call in the call center. This would prevent the customer from having to call back (according to some of the agents, they can not transfer the customer to another department) and the customer could be helped with one call. This could also help eliminate territorial issues within the call center. One call, one solution.

22

correctly, will lead to much greater self and group awareness within Simplexity. From a management

perspective, being able to understand innate attributes of other team members’ personalities and preferred

styles of learning will allow conversations and goals related to teamwork and being on the same page to

have greater meaning. Simply put, not everyone gets on the same page in the same way and buys into the

concept of teamwork through the same methods. Using tools such as the Learning Styles Inventory,

Conflict Style Inventory, or Gallup’s StrengthsFinder will enable management staff to more productively

talk about territorial issues and personality conflict that exist among those considered management, thus

raising a greater level of group-awareness. Additionally, individual self-awareness of strengths and

weaknesses, habits and blind spots, and preferred practices and foreign practices will become more

evident through the completion of these assessments, which will allow management that is most senior to

best assess skill sets among middle managers, and allow all individuals the chance to better understand

themselves inside and outside of work.

After management-level staff begins to become comfortable with these assessment tools at their own

organizational level, we would also recommend that the same tests and inventories be utilized among the

call center agents and other non-management staff. Identifying unique personality and learning styles

among the agents will greatly improve Simplexity’s ability to customize employee training and quality

assurance feedback processes. As it was quite evident in the data that there is tremendous variation among

call center agents in preferred ways to access information, these tests would further validate our

observations and provide Simplexity with even more evidence that different employees have different

preferred forms of learning and communicating. Ultimately, this process may have the benefit of agents

relating to one another more effectively, but even if this does not result, Simplexity management will

have a much more significant grasp on which agents prefer to learn in which ways and how best to

communicate information to different learning and personality groups.

Potential Risks Associated with Recommendations These recommendations are not without potential risks. However, ultimately we believe that the much

greater risk is choosing to not engage in discussions about the questions we have suggested and in

choosing to not utilize assessment tools that will lead to greater self and group awareness.

First, and perhaps obviously, many of these recommendations do not include defined answers. In fact, it

is impossible to predict where the conversational recommendations will go if the questions in each

recommendation area are raised within the company. Furthermore, raising these questions will likely

evoke anxiety for those being asked to consider them. Examining the questions we have offered in an

23

open-ended manner might be dreaded by any individual within Simplexity. As such, these emotions need

to be acknowledged and the conversations themselves need to be facilitated in a way that accounts for

them. Third, having individuals within Simplexity included or excluded within these conversations also

comes with a degree of risk. Including certain individuals and not others may prevent those who are not

included from committing to whatever emerges from the conversations. Therefore, we would suggest that

those most likely to object to these recommendations be the first to be included in tackling the questions

we have raised. At the same time, making the conversations too large may prevent them from achieving a

level of depth that would be beneficial. Thus, balancing who participates, when, and how, needs to be

carefully considered from the beginning, and is not something that our group can define for the

organization as outsiders.

The recommendations we propose call for improvement initiatives that will require additional effort and

time as well as incur cost. Conversations, team building, new forums for providing and receiving

feedback, and assessment tests each comes with certain costs. However, the long-term benefits of

implementing these recommendations we believe far outweigh the short-term costs, and ultimately, would

lower the degree of risk that would be taken when undergoing formal change projects within the business.

For instance, establishing a forum where agents can provide feedback to management will provide

another perspective before any changes are communicated to the entire staff. Most of the time, the people

who are closest to the jobs would be the only ones who can see certain impacts. The factor to consider in

this recommendation is the logistics that will surround it, i.e., how will feedback be given and received?

To avoid a forum that is negative in tone or complaints-driven, we suggest that this forum be done in

smaller groups and with a clear intent of the forum. In other words, a suggestion box in the kitchen,

though allows for anonymity, would not necessarily be as valuable because the tendency would be to get

very general issues that for the most part, management already is aware of. It also is antithetical to the

need to develop more robust patterns of networked communications and relationships. We suggest that

Simplexity, solicit feedback on specific areas that management has already identified as a priority.

Several more specific risks are also worth noting. First, if the assessments and inventories are completed,

the outcomes need to be meaningfully integrated into the day-to-day work of Simplexity, otherwise, the

false sense of positive change that will naturally accompany completing these activities will leave staff

members with the hollow feeling of having wasted their time and even more resentful towards company

goals and objectives. Second, a risk involved with creating a resource desk of expert agents may be a

developed over-reliance on the experts. Agents need to be continually supported and developed so that

they are confident and able to resolve base level issues on their own, and the resource desk should be

24

consider as a opportunity to foster conversation, not exempt agents from striving to achieve in their jobs.

Ultimately, all these senior expert agents should serve as a model for all agents to strive towards,

preventing complacency. Third, meaningful changes will not happen over night. If anyone within

Simplexity considering implementing these recommendations is hoping to see immediately results, you

will simply be disappointed. New obstacles will arise as changes take place, and these obstacles need to

be addressed. At the same time, celebrating little successes will allow the company to build momentum

towards creating the best possible future. When expectations are met, celebrate them, when they are not,

recognize it publicly and move forward with even greater commitment.

25

REFERENCE LIST

Addleson, M. (2007). A journey to the other side of management. Unpublished manuscript. Addleson, M. (2000). Organizing to know and learn: Reflections on organization and knowledge

management. In Srikantaiah, K. & Koenig, M. (Eds.), Knowledge management for the information professional, Medford, NJ; Information Today, Inc.

Allee, V. (2003). The future of knowledge: Increasing prosperity through value networks. Burlington,

MA: Butterworth-Heinemann. Argyris, C. (1994). Good communication that blocks learning. Harvard Business Review. July, p. 77-85. Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work, and organizations: An overview. (Full citation

unavailable) Block, P. (2002). The answer to how is yes: Acting on what matters. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler

Publishers. Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. (2002). The social life of information. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School

Press. Conklin, J. (2005). Dialog mapping: Building shared understanding of wicked problems. Hoboken, NJ:

John Wiley & Sons Inc. DePree, M. (1992). Leadership jazz. New York, NY: Dell Publishing. Heifetz, R.A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Gladwell, M. (2005). Blink: The power of thinking without thinking. New York, NY: Time Warner Book

Group. Morgan, G. (1997). Images of Organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Rycoff, R.W., & Kash, D.E. (1999). The complexity challenge: Technological innovation for the 21st

century. New York, NY: Pinter. Seifter, H,. & Economy, P. (2001). Leadership ensemble: Lessons in collaborative management from the

world-famous conductorless orchestra. New York, NY: Times Books. Scott, W.R. (2003). Organizations: rational, natural, and open systems (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Prentice Hall. Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation: How to unlock the

mystery of tacit knowledge and release the power of innovation. New York, NY: Oxford Madison Press.

Wheatley, M.J. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. San

Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

26

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Original Project Proposal Appendix B - Raw Data from Informal Observations and Field Notes Appendix C - Raw Data from Interviews with Management Appendix D - Raw Data from Focus Groups with Call Center Agents Appendix E - PowerPoint Presentation Slides

27

Appendix A – Original Project Proposal PROPOSAL Members All members (student consulting team) are enrolled in the Masters of Organization Development & Knowledge Management program at George Mason University. Evan Baum, Russell Caldarone, Carla Dizon Deo, Megan Nehr Scope To narrow the scope of the organizational issues and provide as detailed a recommendation as possible, our group would like to center our attention on an area that could be seen as a microcosm of the larger organization: Preferred Customer Service and Office of the President groups. We would like to include the following organizational members in our efforts:

1. Vice President, Customer Service John Bailey 2. Senior Manager, US Operations Elliott Garufi 3. Preferred Partner Supervisor Lenin Rivera 4. OOTP Supervisor Shani Black 5. All (or selected) agent members of the Preferred Partner and OOTP teams.

The student consulting team will gather information in the following ways:

· Anonymous online survey with questions targeting knowledge and knowing within the group (conducted during the month of March)

· Focus groups (total of 2 split amongst members of the teams, each led by external student consultant)

· Individual interviews (scope and schedule to be determined) · Observation (Floor observation, participation in Learning Lounge)

Schedule Interviews and focus group sessions will take place the week of March 24, 2008. All information gathering will be completed no later than April 11, 2008. Results The results of the information gathered through the course of the project will be presented to Simplexity in the form of a report and/or presentation (depending on the decision of the Simplexity Management team). Results will include:

I. Findings from information gathering (survey results and focus groups/interviews) II. Recommendations for improving knowledge sharing within the Preferred Customer Service and

OOTP groups III. High level recommendation for expanding/implementing learning from the microcosm to the

larger organization (off shore call centers)

28

Appendix B – Raw Data from Informal Observations and Field Notes Simplexity Visit 1 Evan Baum Thursday, March 13, 2008 I arrived at 1:10pm and was greeted by Elliot, one of Megan’s co-workers. The main office space is well lit. Fluorescent lights run along the ceiling and there are windows with blinds, most of which are open running all the way down a far wall. There are 8 cubicle-pods running along the floor of the office space, most of the cubicles are empty. The pods are organized by team – customer relations, sales, risk, and so forth. One person told one of her staff that learning lounges were in 15 minutes and to Curtis she said, whatever you are doing, wrap it up and head over there. Along the walls there are various signs, many for cell phone carriers such as sprint, tmobile, etc. There are several “inspirational signs” on the wall where the private offices reside, directly opposite the wall with the windows. One sign reads “InPhonet, are you logged in?” With a bird and clouds. Another sign with flowers, sun, and clouds reads “Seek to Improve”. Another sign also with birds on it says SOAR SCORE, standing for Satisfy Own Assure Resolve to Seek to Improve Customer Oriented Optimize Teamwork and Accountability Respect Ensure Integrity and Professionalism. Another sign reads “One Band, One Sound” with images of band players on it and beneath these images says “No 1 can whistle a symphony. It takes a orchestra to play it. Teamwork is key!.” A sign standing on an easel but a supervisors cubicle reads “Preferred Team Goals” ACD calls, 35+/day, average handle time under 9 mins, wrapping up time, under 3 mins, av speed of answer, under 2 mins, read InPhone+ Daily, Complete 1 LMS daily Most staff members in the customer relations area are male, all are dressed casually. All have headsets and computers at their cubicles. Most cubicles are sparsely decorated, with only a few personal mementos. Further down the wall with the personal offices and the row of signs there are more signs on large white paper. One sign reads “Vision: Work Effectively to Deliver Quality Service to: Achieve Customer Satisfaction, Encourage Loyalty, Maximize Profitability” – the handwriting on all of these creative signs seems to be the same, perhaps indicating that they were made by the same person. Beneath this sign are images of a hand giving a thumbs up signal. There are also awards and compliments signs beneath the thumbs up. It appears that this is where staff members may recognize each other. I hear at least one non-English language being spoken, likely Spanish. I hear one staff member say to another, I’m going to send you this note, but it would help if you were actually on. I’m not sure what she’s referring to, possibly some kind of intranet. The two staff members are no more than 10 feet apart in having this interaction. A coffee/break room was situated at one end of the office space, closest to the main entrance.

29

A training room where the “learning lounges” are held is at the far end of the office space closest to the sales cubicles. The training room has older computers and an LCD projector. The computers are arranged in rows/classroom style with a dry erase board at the front of the room. The topic of today’s learning lounge is cyber risk. Another sign near the customer relations team, also on the wall with the private offices has the same owl and says “Inphonet” with “Did you know I have CBA, Sales, and Customer Service Information on Inphonet?” Perhaps the owl is meant to symbolize wisdom and Inphonet seems to be the company’s intranet for sharing information? When one staff member received a call and answered “activation and retention” another staff member sitting at the same pod of cubicles turned to him and said “jay, damn, don’t nobody have no candy or nothing?” Aside from the people on the floor at their cubicles answering phones, the office space is rather quite. I can hear some conversation going on inside one of the private offices to my right, along the wall with the hand-make signs, but can’t really follow what is being said. ** I’ve entered the learning lounge. I’m sitting in the last row of computers with the instructor up at the front of the room by the dry erase board. The LCD projection onto the screen is very difficult to see clearly from this angle. Five staff members appear to be in the session sitting at computers in the room. One is drinking a soda and eating candy. The three staff members in the middle row are talking, one in what seems to be Spanish, one male and one female. One male in his chair is shifting around and looks up at the ceiling a lot. The instructor says that Michael is going to take over because “he knows more about what you do with the customers and stuff.” I’ll have a meeting with Emily to get it squared away is something else the instructor says. She’s says process guide changes, and it is going to be left in a green font “for a while.” She seems to be making a request for them to provide her with input. The instructor is describing a matrix. She says “Emily wants me to keep it in there because it is still considered policy.” Michael then goes through and describes what this means so the others in the room can understand it. The conversation seems to be about customers wanting change their address for a shipping. It seems that if a credit decision has already been made than a new order needs to be placed. One person asks if this is for a shipping and billing. One woman says, I’m very confused, you just confused me with this. The instructor doesn’t really let the people finish what they are saying before she just them off. The process guide is just about fraud, not about all of shipping. This is just about touching a fraud order as a customer service agent. There are many people asking questions of each other and of the instructor at once, not really listening to each other, and are talking over one another.

30

One staff member who was sitting in the middle row gets up and says “I’m leaving, I’m confused” but then comes back to her chair and sits down. She then talks to the man to her left in Spanish once again. Michael answers a question that the woman in the middle row had. He explains the document they are reviewing. The woman than says “We aren’t going to be able to remember all of this once we are on the calls.” They read through a specific statement in the document and Michael says “This is contradicting itself.” It doesn’t seem that the instructor, female, has written the document, it seems that it came from “Emily.” The woman in the center says, “When we have different learning lounges we end up doing it differently. People stop following the document and just start asking each other.” At this point, there doesn’t seem to be any attention at what is on the screen – they seem to be mostly focused in on the document itself. The instructor asks for the question the woman asked any so she can “ask Emily.” The man in the middle row who was speaking Spanish says that “if you look at the matrix, it says to do one thing under this scenario, and under other scenarios that are the same it says to do something different.” He also says “I read it this morning and I didn’t understand it then.” At one point the instructor says “this document is going to need to be redone, by the way.” Another gentlemen in the middle row says “this is wrong too” The instructor says, “This is why we have these, so we can see what’s wrong and go back and fix it.” The instructor is appointing one person to ask “her” the question. No one really wants to do it, so Michael does it. It doesn’t seem clear who the “her” is and why no one wants to ask the question. One woman says, “If it is fraud, it goes to cyber risk, we all understood that.” It seems that they are trying to figure out how this really applies to them. The conversation seems that they are thinking they can update the credit card billing address, but not the shipping, but it isn’t clear if the system will allow them to do that or if they just have to do it in the notes for the file. Again, one person is asking a question of the instructor and the others are having a conversation among themselves talking about the subject at hand. One woman says “Can you imagine how many orders we would be cancelling if we had to do this just for a simple address change?” One man says “Yeah, and that’s without fraud flags.” Michael says “You guys think these could be typos?” One woman says “If I was the customer, I wouldn’t be pleased,” and other man in front of her agrees “exactly.” Emily enters in with her laptop. The instructor describes the issues the staff members are having. Emily says she wanted to put the information where they would find it instead of in a separate document, but they could do that if they wanted. If you have another scenario that you don’t think is in the matrix, feel free to let me know, is what Emily says.

31

The training room itself is much more poorly lit than the outside office space. The computers are older, and there is a ceiling tile missing in the ceiling. The chairs also appear to be older. Emily says, we usually don’t talk about “why” in the documentation, so I’m glad we had the chance to talk about it with you guys today. She says that they are trying to reduce their fraud and that is why they are making this procedural change, but they can’t tell the customers that. She says “You guy probably wonder why this is so complicated, right?” And the other staff members in the room all laugh. Michael says “I want a script for that because the customer will get upset.” Emily says, “Will you guys use a script if I write it,” and they all say yes, and she says, “well, I’ve written scripts before and no one around here seems to be using them.” Emily says “We should probably do this for all of these. Is it better to have these kinds of conversations for all of the new updates?” And one woman says “yes!” And the instructor says, “I can read it and I think I understand it, but then I always have questions.” Instructor says “We’ve probably learned more by talking about the document than reading it, but let’s just go through it once” and she goes back to the LCD presentation, which is still at the same point that it was 45 minutes ago when the session started. She also says, “Emily’s going to get on the OPS call and once this document gets to India, I have a feeling that it is going to change.” One man then says, “well, once it has already been shipped and activated, you can’t do anything, they have to place a new order. Can you send us an e-mail.” “Yes, we’ll have a briefly tomorrow and I’ll follow it up with a new guide and an e-mail,” says the instructor, and then she proceeds to go step by step through the document. “All we can do today, is follow what the document says, even if it is wrong, just follow it as best you can.” “I’ve been dealing with this crap for two days, so believe me, my head hurts to.” “Do you even get a lot of these calls” –staff “No, not really.” “This is why we’re doing this – to see why the process doesn’t work, because you all are the ones on the phones with the customers.” Staff leave. ** New staff enter, one guy says “I look forward to meetings, I like chocolate, that’s why I like meetings.” Same instructor and Michael are present. Instructor starts by saying, “process guide we’re about to show you is going to change, imagine that, and from the last session, there were a lot of questions. I might not be able to answer all of your questions, but I want to go back to process today with your questions so we can firm up the document and you can assist your customers.” She asks who read the updated document that came out today, and no one raises their hand saying that they did. “Let me get through at least a paragraph before you start asking questions.” At this point, I leave the learning lounge realizing that the same information is being covered with a different set of customer relations staff.

32

** I leave the learning lounge and head back out to go the bathroom. I meet John, the VP, who introduce himself and says he hopes that things can be a two way street (or something like that) and then has to head out to a meeting. He thanks me for coming in. I let him know a small group of us will be back a various points in the coming weeks, and I’m just here to observe for today. As I head back out to the front of the office suite to head to the bathroom, I notice a set of higher cubicles closest to the main entrance and to the break room with the vending machines. These cubicles are more isolated than those that the rest of the staff have and have higher walls, preventing others from seeing in/out as easily as the others on the office floor. The setting is eerily like office space the movie. On this wall closest to the exit is yet another hand-written sign that says “We’re on a Mission: to Team & Customer Satisfaction.” On a dry erase board near these higher cubicles someone has written, “Soar to Score” and “How is your quality today?” Another sign with the same owl is on the adjacent wall, this sign says “InPhonet, Have you checked my Super Service Tip today?” Back further down the wall where the private offices is another hand-written sign with “Mission, We Will: Listen, Communicate and Educate, Do what is Right for the Customer and the Business, Take Ownership of Each Interaction, Act Responsibly and with a Sense of Urgency” I head into the break room to get a tissue to blow my noise and see lots of T-Mobile advertisements on the wall. There is a soda and snack vending machine, as well as a coffee maker and tea available. On a large dry erase board someone has written “Vision, Mission, and Values: Demonstrate by Example” but some of it has been wiped away, although not enough to not read each word clearly. ** I sit down back in the Customer Relations area to listen in on the conversations going on. I see a dry erase board on the window ledge by the far wall that says “Jan 4476; Feb 5060; Mar 1587” It isn’t clear what this board is indicated. Another sign by the Customer relations supervisors cubicle says “Please utilize the not ready button when leaving your station for lunches and breaks.” Several people in the area look at me as they obviously don’t recognize me as the person that should be sitting at this cubicle, but don’t ask me who I am or why I am here. Most of the men at the cubicles answering the phone calls are black, several appear to be Hispanic, none are white. There are few black and Hispanic females as well. Thinking back on the learning lounge, Emily who appeared to have written the document was a black female, the instructor, whose name I did not get, was a white female, all of the staff members in the training were black or Hispanic.

33

I can hear one woman on the phone with a customer. She is asking about whether the customer wants to return her phone. She is speaking very slowly and politely, but it is clear that she some noticeable accent. I can’t really make out where it is from. Her English is good. One man at his computer has a question and calls over another staff member, the other staff member gets up from his cube and explains something to the first staff member about what he is seeing on his computer screen. The man at his work station gets back on the phone with the customer after getting the information he needed from his co-worker. It seems to be about an authorization to return a phone, as he is describing information about how to send out a package back to the company. Another staff member is on the phone with a person in New York, asking about the person’s address. He says that the computer system is incorrect, and then he says that he’s got the problem, as the address was missing the person’s apartment information and that is why she hasn’t received her package as of yet. I hear several comments starting with “what I am saying is, that’s what I am trying to get to, what I am trying to tell you” but can’t make out who is saying them or in what context. The eyes of most people in their cubicles look glazed over. It seems that they are bored. I again hear conversations about food – cookies, why there aren’t any left, but can’t make out much more. I hear one other person say, “yo, what time this training man, shit. My mike has been on fire man for like an hour, they be buzzing me yo.” ** I head into the break room again to get another tissue to blow my nose. I see another sign on the wall for international food day at simplexity coming up on March 13. The sign describes what is happening – it seems to be some kind of potluck lunch – and that each person brining in a dish gets a raffle ticket. It doesn’t say what the raffle ticket is for or why you would want one. ** April 1, 2008 Visit # 2 – Observation Field Notes by Carla Entered the building, as I was dialing Megan’s phone number on my cell, a man opened the door and let me in. Met Megan in the front and she showed me where the call center was located: Open area Rows of desk separated by short partitions – probably just a couple of inches off the top of the desk Well lit room – windows on the side with blinds on the left side – fluorescent lights on the ceiling Along the right side are rooms – and in between the rooms are walls covered with signs and posters Standing on the side gives you a good view of everyone on their desks Briefly met John – Megan introduced me. He made a comment that today is a good day to stay in – with the rain and all and its April’s Fools day. He was dressed very casual – jeans and a buttoned shirt Megan showed me where to sit and introduced me to three of the men who were sitting around the area. She explained that I was one of the members in the group project doing some observation – one man asked “what is she doing here?” Megan responded that the class is knowledge management - – and again the man said “exactly, what is she doing here?” – sounds like he is implying that there isn’t knowledge? Then Megan said to the effect of – to see how we (Simplexity) could improve – he says “we already know what is wrong” – and left it at that.

34

Sat down on the farther end of the rows – probably around the same row as John’s office – began observation at 8:58 a.m. Listened to a call by Jace (male) – he was already on the phone when I began listening Began my observation at approximately 9:00 My desk was behind his so I can see his computer screen – while he was talking on the phone, he was also scrolling on this computer Talked about the blackberry curve from T-mobile and explained the different plans available – one being 1000 T-mobile free minutes for $99/month Ended the call at 9:06 a.m. Stood up, chatted with the ones around him briefly while he put on his jacket and let the room Came back 9:13 a.m. As soon as he arrived back at his desk – he was back on the phone answering, “…activation” at 9:14 a.m. The question must be related to billing and he was looking at his computer explaining about security deposits and how to avoid the fee explaining, “all you pay is the first month” – the other person on the other end probably said something and his response was “What is that?” to get clarification During the call (I presumed he put the phone on mute)– he talked to the woman (wearing a black short sleeve shirt and a thick black belt) next to him and the man across him (wearing a blue striped zipped pulled up sweater) – it sounded like it was related to the phone call he just had – something about a picture camera – this was only for a few seconds – then (I presumed) he was back wit the customer and proceeded to explain the deposit and prices for having multiple lines Also during his calls –at some point, the woman next to him would face her chair towards him and listen in (could she be shadowing? Or could she be listening to how he is doing as part of training?) He was asking questions such as “are you a regular service contract…?”, recommends the upgrade – asked a lot of questions. Continued with explaining the programs, plans and prices. Lastly saying “I have to respond….will call you back…” He provided his name and extension number (3085) and ended with “you’re welcome” – call ended at 9:22. At this time, I still have not heard anyone else receiving any calls (at least near the vicinity I was in). After the call – he worked on something on the computer – he filled something on paper that the man with the blue shirt passed on to him then he in turn passed it to the woman next to him who was wearing the black shirt – it looked like a spreadsheet of some sort ( I could see a table – rows and columns) Picked up another call at 9:26 a.m. Picked up another call at 9:28 a.m. Simultaneous observations: At about 9:15 a.m. – Simultaneous conversation beside the man next to me (Ali?) – I listened in but speculated that it was going to be a personal call because he initiated the call – something about his car / license, etc. Ended the call at 9:21 a.m. At this time a man wearing an orange shirt with talking on the cell phone and got up and left. At 9:17 a.m. – I heard a ringing bell? Could it be someone buzzing at the door? It was only a couple of buzz Around the same time, I am overhearing a conversation between Megan and another man on the background – standing along the wall outside of the offices – heard the man say something like, “that’s the last I’ve heard of it “ and “we can have another whole process document about it…” “put it in IBox” – there was a tone of sarcasm in his voice. I couldn’t hear Megan’s response – but I could hear some laughter (softly and lightly) The woman across me wearing a white shirt didn’t talk much to anyone and she wasn’t talking on the phone either – she was typing in her computer a lot (perhaps she was responding to emails? Post observation – Megan told me that emailing is another way for providing customer service). She did have her headphones on. Around this time between 9- 9:30 – (though got calmer around (noise level) around 9:15) there’s a lot of chattering around. I was trying to pay attention to any “customer service” knowledge sharing but heard the following instead:

35

The man next to me (Ali) and the man behind me (didn’t catch the name) –briefly talked about the show “Avatar?” on TV There was also a comment about going to ChickFilet Someone on the news? Getting shot? Another man on the phone – laughing – I’m guessing not with a customer Observed John leave his office at 9:10 a.m. to go to the room at the end – 2 rooms down his office and chatted outside (with the person inside the room) until 9:13. Then he walked a way. He did not go back to his office until 9:23 a.m. He left again at 9:25 a.m. – during my short visit – I didn’t see him talk to much people within the call center area. Not sure what time he came back but he left again the office at 9:42. But as he walked in and out of his office – walking along the hallway – he didn’t talk to anyone – occasionally glanced at the call center area. Some used their headsets to talk and some picked up the phone I hear a couple of phones ringing – probably 2 rings at most before it stops The man with the blue sweater was standing on his side of the row of desks facing the woman in black shirt – saying to check the day she sent him the email and start from that date – (sounds like they are trying to figure out some scheduling – events) – he said “I’m trying to think of the easiest way…” the woman responds (can’t decipher) and he responds saying ”that still means you’re going back….deciding the best way…let me look in the back room” he walked away…when he came back after about 10-15 minutes - he came back carrying a white/calendar board and offered it to the woman – she responded “I’ll try it” – then she says, maybe she should try it in Excel and post it. At this time, I turned my attention to the conversation that was going on behind me. I turned around and saw John standing next to a man wearing a blazer (Elliot). I realized I could be listening in to the “status team meeting” – but I didn’t hear an announcement or any sort. While Eliot was saying something – John made a comment – and then said “sorry I’m interjecting to add some comedy. Elliot asked if there were any questions or issues. A woman started talking – and Elliot responded saying “Sprint/Nextel is the only carrier…”I looked around to see if people were listening. I didn’t hear the beginning and can’t tell who exactly – or which group Eliot was talking to – I can’t tell whether anyone could hear him then I heard a man somewhere in the back saying “can’t hear what they’re saying” – another man said, more loudly, “what happened?” Elliot was saying something about Ibox cancellation and canceling it in CSR. Someone asked, do we still have to send email” and a woman said, “Yes” CD Editorial: Eliot did not have the command of everyone – people couldn’t hear what was being said – not a lot of people were paying attention – perhaps because there was no announcement? Then Eliot says “tell you what – we’ll follow up with an email” – Sounds like he will email whatever it is that he wanted to convey in the first place. A man around me tells another “I haven’t accessed my email in six months.” Then Eliot ‘concludes’ the meeting and says “anything else folks? “Then he turns to the people by him and says something like “let me figure out your name first --- he he he (he laughed awkwardly) NCS??? Folks?” Then I’m guessing – the folks he was referring to were the people who met with him in the office (outside the wall of the “Vision” poster. Meeting at the vision room ended at 10:02 am. A man behind me picks up a call at 9:35 – saying “activation” – based on his responses, I gather the caller is calling for a refund – the man scrolls on his computer, clicking a couple of drop down menus The man behind me (Michael) is talking to the man next to him and says “gotta learn Ibox – do you want to take an Ibox call?” The man responds “no” – Michael says, “no really – it’s easier than wireless” “it’s just tedious – changing billing address” Then the man says “common sense isn’t common” At 9:37, Michael picks up the phone, “…may I have the account number please... have existing order…uhuh…” on the phone and looking at computer. Customer wants to return phone – not exchange – Michael asked for the last name. He puts the phone call on hold and walked a few stops and he knocked on the “Vision Room” where Elliot and some people were having a meeting. He explains what was going on. One of the supervisors came out (pregnant woman) and started using his computer – clicking – adding a line – then Michael says “wait” – while the woman clicks on the computer they were having a discussion on figuring out the customers’ concern: how is it that she is returned 1 phone and cancelling another line. Supervisor asked him to clarify – and he went back on the phone to get clarification – then

36

she went back to the room. Michael continued on the phone – looking at his computer – saying “I’m not showing a return yet…let me place you on hold for a short moment” – walked towards the door again then decided to talk with another person for a minute or two. It is 9:47 on the clock. Then knocked on the door and the supervisor came out and said “what?” he replied, “this is what she did…” time check 9:51 – the supervisor sat down on his desk – he pulls the chair next to him – the supervisor was checking online while he was on the phone talking to the customer. Customer was asking about the curve and the dash – “let me check for you’” – he checked that they had the curve on stock but not the dash – customer still wanting to know the difference – Michael responds that the difference is the price but performance is pretty much identical. Checked dash in stock and can ship out. At this point 9:57 – supervisor went back to the office. Michael went back to his desk to finish up the call – order # 382984282??? – End call at 10:01 a.m. and said, “Very welcome” – wrote notes on computer. Then he talks to the man next to him about the call he just had – but not in detail – just a couple of sentences. Another conversation between the man across me to the left – wearing a gray sweatshirt and the woman wearing the white shirt saying something like “8 people working on the day and 200 people at night and it’s still not going fast …” “They’re trying to figure out if its better than India” Someone said – “we just have to speak in the proper tone” – the other person laughingly said, “did you say cracker tone?” – person clarified and said “no – just speak clear than Indian” CD Question: I see instant messaging in some computers? Is this internal communication in the organization? At this point – I switched seats – moved towards the front rows. I overhear two people talking as they walked by. One saying to email it and the other replying “…does not mean they’re gonna do anything about it” – woman said they have gotten better with expenses. From this view – I can see a white board by the supervisors desk with writings that says “Preferred Team Goals” – then under “ACD calls – 35* / day” “One Band One Sound” – “No 1 can whistle a symphony – it takes an orchestra to play it” “Teamwork is key” It is so much quieter on this side. John the man across me – picks up a call and has a good tone and pace in his voice “Our Philosophy” – some words like “message of the …CEO/Chairman” and highlighted words like “err on doing the right thing…?” Valencia by the end cube – by window-is printing something and the older man next to her was assisting her. I hear the Spanish language spoken – I hear a call that begins what a scripted reading “We apologize for the inconvenience but it has been elevated to the highest …“Then she continues to say “I didn’t know” then again saying “I was not the same person…do not know how the process works but if you give me your phone number I can have a supervisor call you.” CD Question – how do calls come through? Who routes it? I was curious since I’ve observed that some people got more calls than others. Megan explained about putting your status – and also email as another way of answering. Visit #3 – Observations by Russ Field notes: Simplexity visit / 4.1.08 / 4:05 pm – 6:15 pm (In my field notes, I tried to capture different data then was captured by Evan and Carla. Some of my data might be redundant.) Vision (taped on the desk that I was sitting at: Vision Work efficiently to deliver quality service + and solutions to:

37

Achieve customer satisfaction Encourage Loyalty Maximize Profitability Also taped to the desk I was sitting at was a list the agents and their hire dates. The list was called the “Seniority List” Regina 7/24/06 Nivrea 7/1/06 Sean 4/7/06 Joe 7/3/06 Rhonda 2/7/06 Michael 9/1/06 Clifford 3/5/07 Nicholas 4/17/06 Richard 3/12/07 James 3/18/07 Antonie 4/16/07 Richard A. 5/21/07 The supervisor: Megan introduced me to Lenin Rivera, one of the call center supervisors. During my visit, I observed Lenin to be very positive and upbeat when assisting the agents. Her desk was facing the agents work stations. There was nothing separating her desk with the closest agent’s desk—not sure if this was just a supervisor station, and she had her own office. There was not a lot of privacy, for example, on several occasions she had to take “complaint” calls, and everyone on the “floor” could hear her on the call. I observed that the agents were comfortable with her, and that she was very approachable. If the agents had a question, they would leave their desk, and walk a few feet to ask her a question. I also observed that she was quite knowledgeable about the service and procedures. One “complaint” call she took was from a customer that purchased a refurbished phone in January. The manufacturer of the phone had told the customer (this is according to the customer) that they would have to call the call center to get a new phone. Lenin explained (very professional) to the customer that since if was a refurbished phone, the customer did not quality for a new phone. She did offer the customer a “replacement” phone. I observed that Lenin was always available to help her team and she would even go to the agent’s desk to take a “complaint” call. RC (Russell comment) Having spent some time in calls centers (GEICO) and setting up a call center for Vitamins.com, I was very impressed with Lenin. She was always available for her team, and it was my impression that the agents respected her. She was processional when speaking with the agents and the customers, plus she was very knowledgeable about the service and “technical” aspects of the product (sell phone). To the right of her desk, she had the following information written on a flip chart: Preferred Team Goals: ACD Calls – 35+ / day (this is the number of calls the agents are required to take per day) Average Handling Time ≤ 5:00 (this is the average time spent on a call by the agent) Wrap Time ≤ 3:00 (this is the time to finish documenting the previous call before taking the next call) Average Speed of answer ≤ ) 0:30 (this is the time that an incoming call should be answered)

38

Read Flynet daily –15 minutes before shift (I would image that this is a company Intranet for the agents) I did notice that there was (I believe) another supervisor (older African American female) r that sat to the right of Lenin. During my 2 hour observation, the only time this person left her desk was when it was time to go home. At no time during my observation did any of the agents approach her or ask her any questions Questions for supervisors: What is their background and training? Were they promoted (former agents) from within the company, or hire from the outside? Do they receive “team” performance bonus? What is their span of control? What is the career path for the supervisors? How much of their time is spent on team building, admin, goals, team performance appraisals, and leadership skills? How much support do they get from their managers? The agents: As soon as I sat down, an agent (older with gentleman with a white beard) came up to me and said, “I hate when I go to a new place and people act weird around me.” I just smiled at the guy, and then Megan moved me to another section of agents. The section I sat in had a total of six work stations and there were five agents at their work stations. I sat next to the right of Carlos. Carlos has been an agent for 30 days and I was my observation that he was knowledgeable about the service and the process. During my two hour visits, he had to ask Lenin two questions about a process (not sure what the customer was asking) he was not able to explain to the customer. It was my observation that he was comfortable handling calls and looking up information via the data base. He was quiet between calls and would occasionally look over to see what I was doing. All of the agents used the same script: “Thank you for calling Wireless services, my name is X: May I have your order number? May I have you address? May I have the last 4 numbers of your social security number? Thank you, how can I help you? I did not observe any of the agents using the customer’s name. For example: How can I help you Mr. Jones? Thank you for holding Mr. Jones? Is there anything else I can help you with Mr. Jones? The “flow” Different agents handle different types of calls (cross train agents to take any type of call)

39

Agent ask for the following data before assisting customer: order#, address, last four of ss# (can automated system capture this data before call is transferred to agent—this would eliminate an additional step for the agent) Agent helps customer—no manual, either the agent knows the answer to the customers question, or the agent asks the supervisor (set up a help desk where the agent can call someone (i.e. supervisor, sr. agent) so they don’t have to leave their work station) Agent logs information about the call in some type of software The agents I observed seemed very knowledgeable and they were professional, but there was a lot of down time between call. Maybe it was the time of day? . RC—ACD Customer service work is like factory work—the only way to measure success is # of calls taken, avg. handling time, call work time, and number of complaint calls the supervisor / manager receives from the agent. Agent Questions: How do you motivate an agent? How do you keep them motivated? What is the average tenure of an agent? How are their goals set? Is there a career path for the agents? The job pool of agents (what backgrounds do they come from) What is the hiring process for the agents? What do they like about their job? What do they dislike about their job? If they could change on thing in the call center, what would it be? If they were a supervisor / manager, how would they motivate their team? Do they receive a performance bonus, or is it straight salary? Are their goals achievable? How often do they receive performance feedback from their supervisor / manager? What types of “call” decisions can the agents make? I believe I was able to capture some good data in the two hours of my observation. I would have liked to spend more time observation the call center management team.

40

Appendix C – Raw Data from Interviews with Management Simplexity Interviews 4/3/08 John Bailey, VP Customer Operations Has been in job for 3 months, but with company for 3 years Worked closely with COO with the “best” division of the prior company (a quote) Has 20+ years experience with finance background from GW First experience in managing a company through/back from bankruptcy Feels need to be efficient with overhead expenses and staffing Recognizes need to provide high quality service Concept of the old company was not really though out Trying to provide the company a bit of a life raft until things get better There were lots of customer complaints, some with the better business bureaus Need to be efficient with the dollars that are spent – act like an “e-tailer” Wirefly.com provides 50% of revenue Trying to split customer base into different levels based upon value to company and provide different levels of service to each Basic philosophy – need the team to coalesce; get them to work together effectively There are lots of staff from the past team with a knowledge base that is important, and their experience needs to inform the future Determine success by standard metrics – financial/business (volume and dollars) but also by “soft” metrics Going to provide more technological enhancements for customers to reduce call ratio from 2:1 (2 calls per order) to less than 1:1; customer self-help solutions provided through online portal so agents get fewer calls as volume of sales increase Need to “drive data down” to staff so issues can be handled in one call. Have a pretty talented staff, but need to get them all to buy into what’s going on with the company – trying to get them to focus in on the company mission Says that objectives aren’t really that clear and needs to do that better There are territorial issues that come up within the team that create roadblocks and there’s a need to refocus on mission to get past them Uses reporting tools from his managers on a weekly basis with the COO to determine a scorecard for that week “Give folks reporting to me more visibility so they can work with their staff” – more context for what is going on Prefers “walk-around” style of management “Technology tools are great, but they are just tools” “Need to get people to eat their own dog food so they can understand how it tastes.” Need to get more front-end input from staff prior to process and systems development and training Current work process is a temporary band aid to get from point A to B, trying to minimize changes along the way People need to get time to reflect and try and understand bigger picture; some get it, some don’t, but there’s a need to give people the opportunity to learn more Recognizes his own need to not take for granted that information that is “imparted clearly” is not always understood Different US office locations (call center/management center) get in the way sometimes – management center staff don’t want to come down to the call center to see how things happen Wants to be able to see problems from multiple perspectives and get a sense from our group about good things and not so good things we see

41

Allison Kane, Training and Communications Coordinator Has an HR/Management background Has been getting “pulled back” away from vision for a while and are just now getting more into training for staff There’s a need for management to work better to pass info along to agents effectively A new hire training has been created which has worked well Process team is understaffed There’s historically been no continuity between process guides – no universal format for their development Has spent a lot of time converting old process guides to new format – says it “really sucked” Uses SharePoint to dialog across groups, at least between training and quality groups; process is not using it yet, but will start using it soon – it would be great if process would use it so training can anticipate training needs in advance and plan ahead better There’s a need to get training staff involved in the change process earlier than currently happens Agents find holes in the processes that are developed because they are the ones talking to the customers, and they see things that others don’t because of it Information here gets passed along through a lot of meetings, but many times a lot of “important people” aren’t in the meetings There’s a difference in processes that are mandated because of new requirements from contractual partners and internal process changes that are decided to me made by process/training/quality management Everything seems so rushed, there’s not enough time, it’s killing the agents because there’s so many changes and there’s no time to read all of them and understand them (Unasked question from Evan – do process guides get checked by multiple people prior to them being given to agents and call center supervisors?) There’s no project management – that’s what’s needed, the timelines that we have aren’t being prioritized correctly Agents have so much information to know they need to know it correctly the first time – they retain very well so it causes backtracking when process guides are given to them with errors, and there’s so much new information to communicate in such a short time that what is passed along isn’t always right In the past, no one has really been held accountable Leonard Washington, Training and Communications Coordinator Has been with company for 2.5 years, used to work on the OOTP team as a phone agent, only in T&C job for 3 weeks Before he was getting the training, now he’s the one giving it – needs to be quick and easy to access and agents need to be constantly updated on policy changes “Documentation might not always have the answers” – would have to reach out to others when he worked on the phones to get answers to new or unique situations instead of checking with documentation Process changes quite often in the industry, needs to be “funneled down” to the agents, training needs to get the agents this new information quickly There’s a need to improve communication between departments – get everyone on the same page – needs to be continuous between all departments, and everyone should have access to all information Shani Black and Lenin Rivera, Call Center Supervisors They write lots of reports on a daily basis – call times, numbers, basic agent activity to track performance metrics They step in and take irate calls from customers when agents can’t handle them They do lots of monitoring of calls for quality – they pick agents at random and listen in; voices of agents getting loud is a good signal that they should listen in

42

Success for them would not be getting bad calls from customers, not having too much to do for the next day when they leave at night – being able to leave the work at work Need to give agents all the tools they need to do the job – they try to stay up on policies and be the experts first so they can give the agents guidance Staff not being present is an issue – when people are out sick their own call volume goes up They use the policy guide on the intranet to stay up on process changes They “look deeper into it” to be experts on it – need to be the most on top of it They say the search function on the intranet doesn’t really provide useful results when they use it They don’t really know how the reports they produce get used by management, but they know it gets used because they hear lots about how the execs crunch numbers using their reports – Elliott gives them feedback based upon the reports to make sure they stay in the right range, they need to meet the benchmarks They like working with people, being busy, the noise in the office – it is more challenging than other call centers where they have worked Communication is happening better now under the new company – it used to be scattered and inconsistent Signs on the wall bring up morale of staff – the recognition section is good because it reminds them that they can be rewarded for their work Elliott Gaurfi, Senior Manager US Operations Manages preferred and executive escalation team via phone and e-mail Oversees other internal projects like IT issues and “storefronts” of 1000+ partners online – proprietary code of company inserted to basic template and then presented using individual branding of partners so customer doesn’t see any real differences – needs to know about any changes to online functioning to be able to effectively communicate with partners Needs to be aware of process and policy changes because of a de facto relationship with India where his team will handle escalation calls that they can’t – act as a safety net for India Looks to see trends on similar issues in a given day, but for most escalation calls transferred from India he just has them forwarded along to the relevant call center supervisor A success would be being confident in the morale of his team, as well as having the tools and resources they need – not quite their yet Success would also be in meeting metrics (call related, budgets, agreements) Uses monster spreadsheets to inform decisions, but not numbers alone – quality is also very important; wants to see issues resolved on the first call and subjective feelings of customers should be good “We’re the janitors” – get to clean up other’s messes He is seeing attitude changes from old regime that focused intensely on sales volume and numbers to determine effectively to their detriment, to a focus now on quality and people He’s trying to change the culture from what it was to something better – some people have to be “managed out” because many are just legacy employees and he might not have chosen some of the staff that he has if he had the chance to choose all of them Sometimes he has to “micro those people” because they are representing him and the company and he doesn’t want him or the company to look bad – he’s going to scrutinize them at a very high level of monitoring Doesn’t like to micromanage, would prefer to focus on supervisors to get them to work with their staffs Sees himself as responsible for bringing trends and issues to others up the chain E-mail is the primary means of communication among the management team There are different IT systems for staff work and management communication, but this is really ideal so staff/customer interactions can be isolated and tracked IBOCS is a system they developed for AAA; other large partners have other separate products beyond what individual customers get via phone and some agents need to be trained to assist partners with these other products

43

Nan Musich, Quality Manager It used to just be her, but now she has two other people on her team She listens a lot on the phone of calls going into both US and India to score them for quality, and then calibrate standards with India as well Some calls are live, but most are mainly recorded Oversees internal Reston calibration of quality as well – feels that Reston is on the same page with it Plays calls back for agents as practice and to give them feedback There’s a different culture between the US and India – India wants it to be black and white to be scored, and they don’t like to deviate from process, but sometimes we want them to be more flexible with this because sometimes going off process is what is needed to quickly resolve the call Is happy to hear that agents who go through her coaching are having their satisfaction scores go up from phone interactions – gets to see the agents develop Likes catching a problem – being able to identify where a problem was coming from when a problem arises and the cause of it isn’t very obvious or known Feels she needs to know just about everything because she listens for stylistic quality of agents and technical knowledge of process too Says, “You can tell when they don’t read the newsflashes, or they haven’t understood it” Things that get in the way of agents – attitudes sometimes, different learning speeds or ability to retain information, their lack of self-awareness about phone voice/presence Uses scoring cards to “go back to process” to recommend changes based upon the feedback she is seeing so processes can be revised and training can be implemented, but short staffing doesn’t allow this to happen quickly Says she is a “reenforcer of the rules” not “a creator of the rules” One year at the company, basically in the same job, but with different titles – used to supervise a call center for United Airlines Emily Fair, Director of Process Development Says that structure of company is set up around theory of EMR – express, model, reinforce – corresponds with process, training/communication, quality divisions of management Says that T&C needs to break down process into “baby language” – needs to be easy to understand Says that there is no recipe for every scenario, but uses example of Starbucks – if you know how to basically make a drink than you can take different ingredients and make different combinations – give people foundations and allow them to make adjustments People know how to do things, but they don’t always know why Has a background in IT and web design – was asked to move into this role as a process person Says she gets understanding of what she does by asking questions, doing interviews, and making observations – tries to investigate what is going on in order to make necessary changes Is very rational/linear – provides numerous analytical examples (Evan comment – LSI might be a nice thing for folks to do among management staff) Defines success as being able to fix something Can sense in advance when a project isn’t going to work and plans to have a backup in these cases Uses metaphor of blocks to illustrate how she likes to be able to identify “weak points” and be able to change them Says that “you fix something and then something else breaks” Things that get in the way of fixing things – bureaucracy, budgets get in the way of progress, as does IT – says that she asks for a “Cadillac” and the give her a “Pinto” because they say something are too expensive in terms of hours and dollar cost Also says that things don’t get done on merit alone, not just ROI Does some call monitoring with Nan as well for calibration purposes, has some e-mail contact and interaction with agents on specific questions

44

Says that she needs to be conscious of limitations and capacities of agents when she is developing process guides because of differences across teams Says that some teams have special functions (like three-way calling) requiring separate processes, while others have barriers (like poor English) and she says this gets built into the process she develops Says she needs to figure out who can do what before process gets created – says that we don’t have agents who can do X Also said, “if you explain to an agent why a policy exists than that will get explained to the customer on a call and you don’t want to have that” – not supposed to happen – not everyone can make distinction between what is proprietary and should not be communicated to customers and what is needed to get the job done Questions how much information is too much information for the agents

45

Appendix D – Raw Data from Focus Groups with Call Center Agents Starter Question: (Start off the focus with an experiental question that everyone takes turn answering and thus gets everyone feeling comfortable in talking) Agent’s name, how long they have been with company, tell us something about yourself that you would like to share with the group? Participant # 1: Started with Inphonics in June 2006 – love working here, gets along with the colleague – good rapport Participant # 2: Been in the company for 2.5 months – in school (technical) Participant # 3: 2 years with company (April 6th) – Unique name and is Spanish speaking Participant # 4: 1st year anniversary yesterday with the company - – I don’t know – very boring person – I love children Participant # 5: 6 months – church – weird/crazy, laughs out loud – customers can get frustrating – try to keep something positive Each answer is coded with the participant # (above) who gave the response. Discussion Guide: Topic # 1: Strengths and Areas for Improvement in the Call Center If there were one /or two things you could change in the call center, what would it be? Why? (3) Training –current way is not the best training (5) In the beginning – starting off – all they ask us to do is read information and listen to phone calls and no training class – down the road they got a little better because they gave us a little…whatever…but no job training. Company Telec (?) had a 2 week training class – where you sit down and learn (1) It’s different with each rep – when I first started I had training – then after that I saw people coming in they get 1-2 days then they listen – before class lasted for 1 month with 2 people in it – gave general overview then after 2 weeks got us in the floor – 1 month before taking calls (2) I’ve been a trainer for 2 years – you cannot put someone on the floor as soon as possible – because you get lost – definitely need to change – they [agents] will work better – rep will be sufficient if they learn the basics first – I tell them the same thing – I’ve trained about 200 people – lasted 5 weeks (5) After training – it sits in better because you say “ahh, I remember that” – there are so many different scenarios (2) You’ll be amazed – not really that different [referring to the different scenarios participant # 5 referred to] (3) If you ask about 5 people – 3 would have different answers – we get trained differently – you gather information from the team – I was not trained (2) No I say more [referring to the answers you will get as referred to by participant # 3] How do you get access to what you need to know to be effective in your job? (2) In one place – Inphonet but even that is still a bug – it has information that is just placed there – you figure it out from your own understanding – someone writes it technically from management’s perspective – there are words like ‘blah blah blah’ that doesn’t mean anything to us – (1) In this business, information is always changing even hourly – need to go to Flynet to keep updated – we also have quizzes and exams to take to help that information stick to our brains Russ – Do the exams help you? (2) The scenarios they put there – I don’t’ think they help – they’re not close to what is actually in the system – when you take it – you say – ok I think it’s that

46

(1) He has a good point [referring to participant # 2’s comment on scenarios being not helpful] – but that’s all we have – so we re-read instructions. They added newsflashes for something very critical – that is coming soon and you need to know – we also have meetings letting us know of the flashes – they do schedule 30 minutes for us to go on the site to read newsflash Do you feel like you get enough information? If not, what makes you think that... examples of problems that may be caused by not being informed. What do you think is effective about the way you access information? What do you think is ineffective? How much input do you feel you have when it comes to system improvements (call center, processes, etc)? (4) None – there is no communication whatsoever – I can sit there and say we need it (fraud, activation) – no clue what is going on – when something goes bad – customer service always gets blamed (3) The company has to work together as a team – we are the frontlines – if we don’t know the information how can we help the customers? They [referring to other teams in the company] don’t want to help – so I don’t even bother – they are mean people – but they are right next to us (5) To change – hire some nicer people (2) That’s a biggie – Flynet is put out there so you don’t have an excuse (scapegoat) – it’s ’unacceptable – if there is a way of not getting together once a week – that way is Flynet. We are the ones dealing with the customers – we need to know and give more information – we just can’t verify and send then out (3) I’m doing escalation – we get order but we don’t know what to tell the customer – I know it needs to be verified – we need to know what is needed – (1) In fraud – when we see anything red on the screen – just give the fraud contact number – I’m not supposed to deal with it – I guess they are trying to make it easy for us (2) We need a bulletin board – but not just a physical board – where our supervisors can project all the information back to us – if they don’t want “us” to mess with them [referring to other teams]. Everybody is divided – no one cares – “you’re below me.” We need not a training – more like a meeting – just to be aware on what is happening – so we have something to say other than giving a number – for example: I’m buying a car – if no one can help me and I get referred – I walk away. “Here’s a number, you’re not my problem” (3) Everybody is sales – etc –we’re close – but a big meeting with everyone – it’s a small place – it’s not a call center – its like 2 different companies – we don’t have a clue – the information they give to customers is different from what we give When you’re confronted with a question or call you do not know how to answer or respond to, what do you do? Who do you ask for help? (4) You put them on hold – then ask the manager – or they will have to be called back (1) Can send IM to supervisor for a quick response (5) They don’t want us to tell customers we are not sure What aspect of the training you receive allows you to provide quality service to customers? Tell me about some of the different tools you use to do your job. What tools do you like? What tools do you think need improvement? Topic # 2: Agent/Management Interaction (Incentives/Motivation) How do you know that you are doing a good job? (5) How we take a call – not emails not better business bureau (3) Just that one call – and they always pick that wrong one. I get 30-40 calls – one session proves that I’m not a good rep

47

(1) Something about quality – doesn’t sit well Are you always clear about what your job is? Do you feel prepared? How is your performance measured? (1) We have quality monitoring - pulling on random (4) That’s it – we are starting appraisal Tell me a little about the type of feedback you receive on your performance? How are you rewarded for a job well done? What could your supervisor / management do to better motivate the team? (3) Really give a damn – they don’t – ‘way to go” – they go by that 1 call – they’ve never been on a call (1) Good criteria for everyone joining – taking a call – to experience what we go through (2) Motivation – not much – incentives – people are recognized – it keeps you that you are doing a good job even if you think of that one bad call (4) Bring back employee of the month (3) If I get discouraged every time I get out of a QA session – if I feel like I’m not a good rep – they don’t take anything else in consideration – that I take escalation calls or Spanish (4) The bagels and donuts…I’m not that hungry (3) People were just doing that to make themselves look good – more than just the calls – that discouraged others because my name is not in the wall How does this management team differ from other managers you have reported to in the past? Tell a little about the management team at Simplexity? (Follow-up question--What's working well? What are some of the obstacles?) From the customers’ perspective, how would they describe their service experience with an agent from your call center? (4) Horrible (5) Yesterday – a person needed business documents – faxed 2 times – it says we received it but nothing was done – gave supervisor and checked – (2) It all depends on how you respond – if you care – take a separate extra step – can’t keep telling the same thing to do again and again (3) No follow up (2) Boundaries – talk of ‘us’ and ‘them’ – not an oiled machine – customers see this miscommunication – it will be a better experience for customer (3) We cannot even transfer them – just give them the number – not good when they have to redial after being on hold already for 30 minutes – it will be good to be able to say “I won’t be able to help you but I can transfer you to someone who can” (5) We’ve been talking about this for months (1) We do have positive customer service – few that needs to be polished – in the past – customers will actually write about a customer rep – email – thank you – don’t know if they are encouraging that anymore – in the past – ask for manager’s number (3) From my point of view – I don’t think it’s right to ask customers to write us an email of appreciation – I’m not going to tell every customer that “if you like my service, then send my manager email” – that’s why we are the preferred customer – we’re supposed to be providing good service (1) If the customer voluntarily tells you – I’m not saying ask for it

48

(3) I don’t think there’s a need for any customers to send the manager – sometimes a little secret goes around – what they are doing back then – people were doing to prove (the wall) Group # 2: Four participants / average tenure (2) years Q: “If there were one or two things you could change in the call center, what would it be? Why?” Job distribution—habit of company—they take you from one job on put you on something without training or notice, “you’re going to do this.” Job—got dumped on—hired as CSR on day, and the next day I’m answering email for OTP—no warning—just put you there. No time to develop a style—if this is your first job; you’re not used to it. We’re “wage slaves.” Q: “What resources do you use?” The person before you—what issues did they have? Nothing formal Information is based on announcement—the news flashes are bad—it is always changing This company has a bad habit of changing policies on a dime Q: “How do you get access to what you need to know to be effective in you job?” Best tool, talking to other workers You talk to someone in the department that knows the answer Flynet—too confusing! It has too many categories—where the info is placed—takes too long to get to the information needed. Q: “How much input do you feel you have when it comes to system improvements (call center, processes, etc.)?” Zero at my level As new person, no input, straight minded information “Our friends from India.” Q: “What aspect of the training you receive allows you to provide quality service to customers?” Just sat there—not structured No specific training Sat in with agent that was doing the job (shadow) The best training asset is other employees In the past, training was (2) months Company strapped for cash—no formal training Sit with someone—then take calls on your own, that was the training Told to check out the (company) website and place an order like a customer, after that, take calls. The call center was understaffed when I came in It was trial by fire—sink or swim If I have a question, I place the customer on hold, and then ask a co-worker Q: “When you’re confronted with a question or call you do not know the answer or respond to, what do you do? Who do you ask for help?”

49

Escalate to a supervisor Ask sr. rep—someone who has been here the longest Past job experience Talking to people in India Put customers on hold, and then ask coworker If you can’t find phone number (provider), Google it Go to storefront and see the phones Q: “How do you know you’re doing a good job?” On the call, customer understands what you’re saying They (customer) complains—the call goes from bad to worse Q: “How is your performance measured?” Been here 6 ½ years—one review Never had a review Calls monitored Listen to the call, then (they) take you in the office to go over the call Occasionally you get an “atta a boy” Supervisors will vote for the best employee Used to do employee of the month—got to expensive Started to run out of employees for the Employee of the Month Q: “Do you get a lot of information from email?” Elliot took it over, more information, great job with email Q: “What could your supervisor / management do better to motivate the team?” I don’t know Everything is pretty laid back Set the right expectations when they switch you from job to job—I’m not doing the same job I was hire for. Give me some perks. I get the same pay for different job, more money would be nice Q: “Do get a forum to talk about issues?” You can ask the management team You can ask for a meeting The management style is pretty laid back In the past you could not wear jeans Boneheaded decisions—management changes and policies changes Got pulled aside for wearing jeans in the past This job, the customer does not see you—they used to tell us we could not wear jeans because we might have a tour (investors, board members, the president of the company) come through At AOL, Steve Case hated wearing ties—we still have dress code, no one pays attention to it as long as you come in and do your job Q: “From the customers’ perspective, how would they describe their service with an agent from your call center?’

50

Rate it a solid “B” India—better then they were (We) have racist customers, they want to speak to someone who speaks English: “I want to speak to an American” The agents in India do bonehead stunts—the email we get from them (agents in India), it they did X, I would have not gotten that call Inconsistent information—agents have different ways of answering—different styles Misprint phone prices ion website—colors we don’t have Q: “How is information updated?” Bring it to a manager—manager then brings it to the team. It has to be corrected on the website This is the class structure: Pond scum (agents) Middle (managers) Georgetown Because of the bankruptcy, Reston I and II will merge Starter Question: (Start off the focus with an experiential question that everyone takes turn answering and thus gets everyone feeling comfortable in talking) Agent’s name, how long they have been with company, tell us something about yourself that you would like to share with the group? Participant # 1: Rehire – last week of January – set record in track and field in HS that is still standing – long jump Participant # 2: 1 year – I try to let people think – for example – my name upside down – instigator – get my point clear Participant # 3: 5 months – since end of October – only person with holes in the clothes and can get away with it Participant # 4: 6 months – right handed Participant # 5: 7 weeks – go with the flow (everything he says is true – comment from other participants) Participant # 6: 9 months – only veteran in this room Participant # 7: Close to 3 years – like to microwave my ice cream [Supervisor] Each answer is coded with the participant # based on who gave the response. Discussion Guide: Topic # 1: Strengths and Areas for Improvement in the Call Center If there were one /or two things you could change in the call center, what would it be? Why? (3) Change hours of operation – give an extra hour for nap time – after lunch time you get sleepy – metabolism – serious note – improve communication – ex. wrong phone number in the email to go out in customers (5) Communication – with other departments – normally I have to go to 2-3 people (it’s better in customer service than sales) one department’s policy and procedures is not the same in another department. If it’s fraud status we still get the calls (6) Communication – operational, customer service, events, management – you have to be nosy and smell stuff – they try or we try to communicate – the level is two ways – if I say hi you need to say hi back 0

51

not just nod. Noise – if the communication is not effective – its noise – lots of noise in Simplexity – things change and we don’t know – it’s not right (1) What I see now is completely different from Inphonic – what you deal with now is different – it’s a lot better – your escalations actually get answers – I understand your point of view and it seems that its worse than it really is – positive (5) Mostly technical – when customer receives a message and I have to refer them to give another phone call – make it a smoother – it can get a little tense – they ask why they have to be transferred? (2) Inbound communication works but outbound isn’t – some calls at escalation should be prevented – ex. AT&T – activate in 5 days – no need for extra calls (3)A lot of information that customers can do without calling the customer serve (change of address) (6) I agree with some – verification – fraud (1)Try to cut fraudulent activities – makes sense (3)Email notification that is an order is shipped – cancel order – policies presented not being followed (3) Some of the policies don’t make sense – but outlining very specific instances – you have to cancel order and start from scratch –mistake (e.g. Apt E or F – have to cancel) (1) I have a feeling that it will change once the company is stabled (3) Delivery policy should be signature required (agreed by # 1) – but cost too much How do you get access to what you need to know to be effective in your job? Do you feel like you get enough information? If not, what makes you think that... Examples of problems that may be caused by not being informed. What do you think is effective about the way you access information? What do you think is ineffective? How much input do you feel you have when it comes to system improvements (call center, processes, etc)? (3) Website is user friendly to customers but not to us – we don’t have enough input – website to put suggestions – but never (2) Too much bureaucracy – formula – every 24 hours things change- if not all your senses are open – you get lost (6) A lot of gatekeepers (7) I don’t know any better just because of my positions (2) Indians call center makes it worse – wrote a full page report – simple phone lost – 27th of march – stayed on the phone 1 hour – sprint don’t believe the phone is lost– cost of shipping rates - refund (6) We don’t do that some procedure – see? – incorrect information – see it proves that policy is different When you’re confronted with a question or call you do not know how to answer or respond to, what do you do? Who do you ask for help? (6 )participant pointing at the supervisor – participant # 7 if not available – you’re short - you ask to call them back (2) Brainstorm a bit – think about it and then go to colleague – then supervisor (7) The same information I get, people could get it from the same source (6) Disagrees with # 7 – we don’t get the same information – I give you the reason why – a lot of the questions she can answer is because she has prior experience in activation that is not trained in customer service – (blue notes – automated for AOP – in comes in as cosmo – notes on your account – automated – a lot to do with activation) – blue notes very vague and makes it hard to communicate What aspect of the training you receive allows you to provide quality service to customers?

52

(6)Trial and error – transfer from 2 months – they gave me Flynet -63 notes to read – takes 2 weeks to review – listen in a few calls – to do the job – you have to have very detailed knowledge of the company because we get issues on finance, etc. I harass Lenin – feels like a crutch (3) Trial and error – they will post the most updated change in Flynet – hey we can’t ship this phone anymore – or note that we can’t provide this phone anymore – (2) Flynet is 50/50 – quality assurance should make you feel where you are – what you’ve done right and wrong and where do you go from there – but it feels like you “you didn’t do what you were supposed to” – “you didn’t do your job” (4) Read Flynet – just do it yourself – no formal training- we don’t get it – you don’t have time to read and next time it changes – training sessions like these Tell me about some of the different tools you use to do your job. What tools do you like? What tools do you think need improvement? (6) Cosmo – log of all the different communication between the customer and agents and the things done – or supposed to (?) Flynet – info and updates Topic # 2: Agent/Management Interaction (Incentives/Motivation) How do you know that you are doing a good job? (6) To be honest – based on what I’ve seen – nothing – no way to know if you are doing a job – did it fix the problem other than opinions from afar – QA is subjective to opinion – “you did it right, if it was me..” sure if I can look at myself at hindsight – I’ll be a better person too. One personality over the other – if that what justifies me – I don’t think it’s a good measure – problem to QA you have to have intricate knowledge (5) I base it on the customer’s response (4) Test scores – go to QA got a 60% - (3) If the customer is satisfied – period. “But you were great, perky, customer was satisfied, but – there’s always but”…or they say “I understand why you hang up – I probably would have to – but you get a zero.” Are you always clear about what your job is? Do you feel prepared? How is your performance measured? Tell me a little about the type of feedback you receive on your performance? How are you rewarded for a job well done? What could your supervisor / management do to better motivate the team? (6) Wow – not motivate but assist me in doing my job – to have avenues to get the answer other than her – there are 14 people on the floor who asks her a question and I have to put someone on hold – talk to someone else – the set up “instead of having to go to her and so on – I should just have an IM and hit someone at activation – and get answer – catch someone on sale – I set it up on my own – informal – they don’t want to deal with us (3) An hour where there is no supervisor – who do you go? No escalation? There is no supervisor (6) “I will call you back in the morning” – they refuse that – QA doesn’t even have the answer – just opinion How does this management team differ from other managers you have reported to in the past?

53

Tell a little about the management team at Simplexity? (Follow-up question--What's working well? What are some of the obstacles?) From the customers’ perspective, how would they describe their service experience with an agent from your call center? (4) Go around in circles – if they go to Indian – get this and here – escalate again and again – very frustrated because you’re giving me the responsibility – why is this on me? I’m tired of contacting the same 800 number – lost in the system – you send me to India (3) You cannot escalate an issue twice before a ticket is closed – same woman cannot escalate – big problem – (2) One time resolution – but communication and logistic fails that – eyeballs – another headache – you call and it’s disconnected – done deal – but still getting billed – end of story Other Discussion: Participants were willing to stay past the time to share more of their thoughts Input on QA (7) I’ve been in these monitoring sessions – the sheet is set up 3 sections – agent fails to do one thing it’s 40 points off and zero – morale goes down (3) “above and beyond” is subjective– put someone on hold to go above and beyond – still fails – the QA doesn’t know what you did to put the person on hold – while you’re running up and down Communication /Suggestions (6) Assign a team of folks with different sets of skills that have to work together – more intricately – can make a better process – expand the knowledge based. If you don’t know why – Flynet doesn’t tell you why – customers ask why – but we don’t know why – customer services is making the customer understand – because they said so isn’t customer service (3) You can see what you see, they can see what I see (7) I have asked if I can be trained in fraud – answer is no (3) Customer service should be trained in every department – every position – upper management to lower management – because we get every possible question – we’re the front line (5) Get together – assign a contact – to make it quicker (4) Have a chat room to log in – label with type of agent they are – can ask – hey do you still have that offer – ask specific question about their department since they won’t let us walk over there. Also get rid of India or train them better. (1) Different department – training should be structured better – detailed job description – this is what you are accountable and this is what I expect from you – attitude and personality and information you are giving – not presented in how you learn things (visual – Flynet) – different learning styles – maybe your boss should take interest in that – training and training – if you pull me in a room and grade me without me knowing the expectations – is not fair. (2) When you’re hired – you need extensive training (3) Training is sit in front of the computer and you read Flynet (4) We had binders – read everything – this is a mouse and this is a key board – gives you the knowledge (2) Simplexity is not perfect – every business is there to make profit – cut corners – (6) Go to UPS instead of Fedex

54

Appendix E – PowerPoint Presentation Slides

WELCOMEto

Learning Lounge!

A Little Simplicity at Simplexity

KM Group ProjectMay 5, 2008

By Evan Baum, Russell Caldarone, Carla Dizon Deo & Megan Nehr

Simplexity

• Online Company

• Complex Service

• KM Project Scope

Source: stock images

Data Collection Methods

• Field Notes and Observations

• Individual Interviews with Management

• Focus Groups with Agents

• Document Analysis

Themes from Data

• Prediction v. Improvisation

• Team/Group v. Individual

• Tools v. Talk

• Silos v. Networks

Prediction v. ImprovisationSource: Art.com

Examples Related to Theme

• Change and Problem Solving

• Documentation and Human Interaction

• Behavior, Training & Evaluation

• Physical Office Space

Orientation Towards Change and Problem Solving

•“We apologize for the inconvenience, but it has been elevated to the highest level, I do not know how the process works, but if you give me your phone number I can have a supervisor call you.”

Documents & Written Tools

• “All we can do today is what the document says, even if it is wrong, just follow it as best you can.”

• “We aren’t going to be able to remember all of this when we are on the phone.”

Agent Behavior, Training & Evaluation

• “When we have different learning lounges we end up doing it differently. People stop following the document and just start asking each other.”

Physical Office Environment

• Physical Set Up of Office Environment

• Signs Throughout the Office Space

Views• How is the view from the top different from the

view from practice?

• How is the espoused theory different from the theory in use?

Source: Allposters.com & Tropicalisland.de

Prediction v. Improvisation in ODKM Literature

• Tame / Wicked, Adaptive, Jazz Musicians

• Open / Closed Systems

• Chaos / Complexity Theories and Emergence

• The conductor-less orchestra

Team/Group v. IndividualSource: Ec.europa.eu & Toddmccartney.info

Examples from the Data

• Factory or Knowledge work?

• Quality Monitoring

• Training & Development

Factory or Knowledge Work

• The Flow

• Making of Meaning

• Conversations

Quality Monitoring

• Behaviors and Processes

• From Superstar to Unsatisfactory

• Tension

Training & Development

• Structure

• Knowledge or Un-Knowledge?

• Doing

Networks and Sharing

• Teams and Individuals Participating in Networks

• Big K or little k?

• Efficiency and Knowledge

Tools v. TalkSource: sap.com & pro.corbis.com

Areas Related to Theme

• Information Flow

• Preferred Method of Communication

• Making Sense of Information

• Use of Information

DataFlow of

InformationPreferred Method Making Sense

Use of Information

Tools

limited information that flows from the agents to management. Agents indicated that they do not a have forum where they can share their insights, feedback, and opinion. 

Agents request scripts that would help them during their calls. 

Agents indicated that the scenarios developed are not always the most helpful; yet they realize they are a good alternative to none.

Gap between translation of process and documents to what is meaningful to the agents. 

Supervisors use the Intranet as a source for policy changes 

Agents use Intranet sources for common questions such as plan and pricing. 

Talk Agent-to-agent information

sharing occurs through conversations. 

Information sharing amongst agents is done through story telling, such as sharing of a phone call they just had or through questions and answers, when they ask a question to a neighbor during a call with a customer. At either way, these are done casually. 

Inconsistent training style and message during learning lounges lead to confusion among the agents that lead them to ask their colleagues for the information instead of referring to official documents. 

Agents call onto their supervisors when they are confronted with a caller question they cannot resolve. 

Agents pick up styles and answers from the people they shadow. 

How do you MAKE Sense?

• Types of Knowledge (Explicit & Tacit)

• Tools give too much information

• Tunnel Design

• Socializing Technology

Silos v. NetworksSource: Uwex.com & Dailygalaxy.com

Areas Related to Theme

• Process Silo

• Team Silo

• Team Network

DataSilos

There’s a need to get training staff involved in the change process earlier than currently happens (akane)

If you ask about 5 people – 3 would have different answers – we get trained differently – you gather information from the team – I was not trained (fg1)

There are territorial issues that come up within the team that create roadblocks and there’s a need to refocus on mission to get past them (jbailey)

We cannot even transfer them – just give them the number – not good when they have to redial after being on hold already for 30 minutes – it will be good to be able to say “I won’t be able to help you but I can transfer you to someone who can” (fg1)

DataNetworks

There are lots of staff from the past team with a knowledge base that is important, and their experience needs to inform the future (jbailey)

If the agents had a question, they would leave their desk, and walk a few feet to ask Lenin a question (russ observation)

Q: “How do you get access to what you need to know to be effective in you job?” Best tool, talking to other workers, You talk to someone in the department that knows the answer (fg2)

Availability of Resources

• Tools and Resources

• Solutions Prescribed or Derived

• Doing Knowledge Work and Creating Knowledge

Team Barriers & Solutions

• Sluggish Response to Change

• Environmental Factors

• Supportive Workplace

So what to do...

Recommendations

• Embrace Ambiguity as Inevitable

• Slow Down and Encourage Reflection

• Differentiation & Human Instinct

• Enhance Self and Group Awareness

Factors to Consider

• The questions we raise do not have simple answers

• Open ended-ness

• Emotion and Anxiety

• Scope of Conversations

Factors to Consider

• Additional Effort

• Time

• Cost

• Logistics

Specific Risks

• Meaningful Integration

• Reduced Empowerment (instead of increased)

• Managing Expectations for Rate of Change

Conclusions

• Celebrate even the smallest successes

• A little Simplicity at Simplexity would go a long way...

Thank You