The Risk and Opportunity in “Shadow” IT Spending

Do you know how much your organization actually spends on information technology? The answer may surprise you.

According to recent research from advisory firm CEB, “CIOs globally estimate that the ‘shadow’ IT spend in other areas of the business represents another 20 percent on top of the official IT budget. However, the real figure is closer to 40 percent.” Marketing, HR, operations and finance groups are most likely to have their own dedicated IT budgets.

Hidden opportunity in shadow IT spendingThough it’s important for IT departments to understand and address the issues raised by these unofficial technology investments, “shadow” IT spending isn’t all bad.  Andrew Horne, managing director at CEB, noted: “While the idea of ‘shadow spending’ has in the past been seen as a risk or threat, on the contrary it is often a sign of healthy innovation and presents a valuable opportunity for IT to work more closely with business partners to develop new capabilities.”

An enterprise request management (ERM) strategy can be invaluable in assuring that all technology spending is done efficiently (i.e., that departments don’t unnecessarily overpay or duplicate spending) and adheres to compliance and security requirements. The objective needn’t be excessively tight control, but rather a matter of providing guiderails to keep overall enterprise technology spending on track.

An ERM approach provides:

  • An intuitive, unified web portal for all types of service requests, across all shared services functions within an enterprise. Giving department managers a common, easy to use tool for creating, managing and optimizing their own request process workflows reduces the perceived need to work “outside the system.”

  • Transparency in service costs, so everyone understands the costs and other departments can work with IT to minimize technology-related service delivery costs.

  • Exposure for all available services, whether delivered by a single functional group or through the coordinated efforts of different departments. This helps avoid duplicate efforts or spending, and helps functional groups identify opportunities for increased coordination to reduce service fulfillment time and costs.

The CEB study also found that “Spending on mobile applications is set to accelerate in 2014 though, with almost two-thirds (65 percent) of employees dissatisfied with the mobile capabilities available to them for work purposes.” As previously noted here, agile service management practices can significantly improve support for mobile workers, reducing overall costs while improving employee satisfaction and business competitiveness.

While shadow IT spending is a concern for CIOs, it presents opportunities as well as risks. Utilizing an ERM approach to service request and fulfillment can help IT groups reduce unneeded spending and address compliance and security concerns while giving functional groups the flexibility they need to improve their own processes and efficiency through technology acquisition.

For more information:

Using Agile Service Management to Support a Mobile Workforce

If your organization is struggling to balance the need to support mobile devices with security and compliance concerns, you’re not alone. According to recent research from TechTarget, ” Growing demand for mobile computing will continue generating major new challenges for companies in many industries for at least the next year.”

How agile service management supports mobile workers
Image Credit: DTC

Author Anne Stuart reports that two-thirds of survey respondents (3,300 business and IT professionals worldwide) “ranked mobile-device management as a ‘medium’ or ‘high’ priority for this year,” and 85% placed the same importance on security–yet “only 29% reported having a mobile device management (MDM) tools or policies in place.”

Among the report’s other findings, corporate IT support for mobile access varies considerably by device type, with 54% of respondents willing to allow employees to self-provision smartphones, but just 29% will permit them to connect their own laptop or desktop to the company network.

Three key challenges organizations face in this shift to mobile support are:

  • redesigning business processes for mobile workers;
  • ensuring connection, data and device security; and
  • prioritizing the business processes to “mobilize” first.

Mobile Process Redesign

According to TechTarget, “Forrester (Research) studies indicate that companies will spend nearly $8 billion on reinventing processes for mobility this year.” While mobile process design presents some unique challenges, the fundamental approach should be the same as for any process redesign: start with the goal of a delighted customer.

Work backward from the user goal and experience to the required tasks on the business side, keeping the overall process as simple as possible (though not simpler, as Albert Einstein instructed), and always looking for automation opportunities.

Ensuring Mobile Security

While this topic could fill a book (and has–several books actually), one helpful approach where feasible is to use portal software (such as Kinetic Request) as a mobile, Web-based front-end (a system of engagement) between the mobile device and the back-end enterprise application (system of record).

The portal application utilizes existing security protocols and passwords while enabling specific device-level security that protects corporate systems and information without undue complexity for the user.

Prioritizing Mobile Processes

Not every process needs be mobilized, and not every process that does has equal importance. The TechTarget article advises looking “at the employee path of activity, what they’re trying to get done on mobile, and make sure that’s enabled. Let’s also make sure we are delivering what customers want…Don’t mobile for mobile’s sake. Instead, find proof that mobility will improve productivity or help the company better serve customers or reach some other business goal.”

This is where an agile approach to service management is valuable. It enables tackling the “low-hanging fruit” (i.e., processes that are very common, or very painful, or both, for mobile users) first–testing, tweaking and optimizing them. Often, these processes can then be cloned and modified to create new processes. This enables a gradual approach to process mobility, enabling IT to meet mobile users’ most pressing needs while minimizing business disruption.

The “seismic shift” as TechTarget describes it, from desktop to mobile computing, presents significant challenges for IT infrastructure, app dev, and support services. But taking an agile approach to mobility helps to balance user demands with cost and resource constraints.

To learn more:

Kinetic Info Named “Best New Product” at WWRUG

There are lots of awards given out in the business software realm each year, from industry associations, trade publications, and other sources. But the most gratifying award any company can receive is recognition by its own customers and prospective users.

So it is that all of us at Kinetic Data are pleased and honored that the attendees at the recent World Wide Remedy User Group (WWRUG) Conference named Kinetic Info this year’s “Best New Product.”

WWRUG Best New Product Award 2013

Kinetic Info is a social dashboard of key service delivery metrics and trends that provides clear information and the ability to socially share insights for improving business processes. It’s a cloud-based application that provides managers of business service functions, like IT and HR, with visibility into their key service delivery metrics.

Kinetic Info enables managers and teams to view key service measures and trends based on data pulled from virtually any enterprise source or application, and add questions, comments and answers. Discussions are archived with their associated charts and retrievable any time.

For more details, check out the full news release here.

Kinetic Data was previously honored by WWRUG attendees as “Innovator of the Year” in 2009 for our service request management software and for “Best Customer Service and Support” in 2010.

10 Key Benefits of a Business Service Catalog: Forrester Research, Part 2

Forward-thinking IT organizations have embraced service catalogs as means to enable self-service and reap the attendant cost savings. Business users—whether remote or on-site—can request services from a standard set of IT offerings (e.g., password reset, new laptop, application access) and view the status of any previous request, all without a costly call to the help desk.

Business Service CatalogAt a high level, service catalogs reduce the time and cost of delivering technical services while improving the user experience. These and the other benefits of service catalogs needn’t be limited to the provision of IT services however; an expanded view of the service catalog to encompass all shared services groups in the organization (e.g., HR, finance, facilities, etc.) extends the cost savings of service catalogs while also providing employees with a single, intuitive interface for requesting any type of enterprise service.

The Forrester Research white paper Master the Service Catalog Solution Landscape in 2013 identifies a number of reasons for undertaking such a business service catalog effort, as well as the benefits to be gained from the initiative, such as that business service catalogs:

Facilitate self-help. Shifting service and support “to the left” (even to level 0) not only saves money, but in many cases accelerates issue resolution and creates a more positive user experience. Forrester notes the value of “implementing a self-service capability where business users can log their own incidents (and) check on the progress of those incidents.” This isn’t limited to IT support requests though; users should be able to check the status of any type of business service request online, and such self-service can lead to significant cost savings.

Centralize request management. A key benefit of this approach is “one-stop shopping” for business users; there’s no need to learn and use separate systems in order to request services from finance, IT, HT, facilities or other groups.

Simplify the user experience. Users don’t care what happens behind the scenes, they just want their request fulfilled.

Enable agile business processes.

Support IT governance. “End-to-end process governing and tracking the way assets enter and exist in the organization are essential to achieve the highest return on investment (ROI) for the lowest cost. One vendor stated that IT governance is imperative because you ‘must have a way to manage and document things,’ and service offerings within the service catalog are a means to do this.” Proper IT governance and risk management not only reduce costs but also support business growth.

Inspire business process improvement. Forrester calls “the need to map business capabilities to business services…perhaps the most important need and reason for service catalogs…Business service catalogs are top-down capabilities that describe and define IT”s deliverables from a business perspective.” In other words, the implementation of request management forces teams to take a critical look at current processes and encourages redesign based on the goal of a delighted (internal or external) customer.

Help standardize offerings and improve efficiency.

Provide end-to-end visibility into the value chain. “When the service catalog is not just an accessible front end but also automated and integrated with a variety of IT processes…IT operations teams are able to monitor, manage, and report on requests from start to finish. A service request from a business user sets off a value chain that can be tracked within the entire IT organization, from the ‘storefront’ request initiation to product delivery or fulfillment.” Indeed, a key element of the enterprise request management (ERM) strategy is the integrated analytics, which enable accurate costing, reporting on both quantitative (e.g., elapsed time) and qualitative (user satisfaction) metrics,  and continuous process improvement.

Reduce service costs. Forrester notes that globally, help ticket volumes are increasing–not only because of business growth, but also due to an increasingly mobile workforce. According to the white paper, “Forrester Research data shows a growth from 15% to 29% in U.S. and European information workers working anytime and anywhere. Inserting a service catalog that allows this mobile workforce to receive, manage,  and consume business and IT services will…reduce the cost of the service support team.”

Increase user satisfaction. “Customer experience is more than just closing tickets. Establishing a single place for your business users to go where they can request and receive services from either a business team or IT has immediate impact on customer satisfaction and customer experience.” Indeed, a key goal of implementing a business service catalog within an ERM initiative is to not only cut costs but also delight users.

What could go wrong? Forrester also warns about common inhibitors to BT success, including lack of clear purpose; improper tools; lack of ownership (“Ownership leads itself to accountability and pride, two key ingredients for success”); and lack of executive buy in.

Part one of this series defined the business service catalog concept, and part three will address request management architecture.

For more information about the benefits of business service catalogs:

Lessons Learned for Successful Request Projects – How to Scale the Heights of Success, not Plumb the Depths of Despair

It is rather surreal doing this blog post. I feel as if I am in a re-run of “Back to the Future.”

I am putting the finishing touches on this post before I present the session KEG, but because my internal clock is still set to Australian time, I am really doing it on the day after. These are some of the problems in living life “Down Under,” or as we Australians think of it, “Up Over.”

Australia- Up Over

 

Other problems include the “two nations separated by a common language”  that I encounter every time I visit. Please don’t ask me what team I “root” for or whether I would like to buy a Denver souvenir “fanny-pack.” Be careful asking me the way to the “bathroom” as it will get the response: “I’ve got a bath in my room, haven’t you?” We only have loos, dunnies, lavs, bogs or, if in polite company, toilets, and I take great delight in directing any American visitors to the room in my house that has only a hand-basin, shower and bath and not the other small room that has the toilet pedestal and watching their faces when they return with cleaner hands but a slightly more distressed look.

But enough of the cultural differences.

A little about myself and why you may be sitting in this presentation (if so, please put the iPad away and look at me) or reading this alone in your office or home (I assume because you have come to such a boring moment in your life when reading a blog entry of mine adds some excitement).

Well, I discovered the other day—through an automated message sent by our internal version of Facebook called Yammer (hopefully I get something for the plug—but not another bloody t-shirt please) that I have been with Kinetic Data (hereafter, KD) for over 8 years! That re-assured me, because I thought it had been forever…

I also have to admit that I am the oldest person in KD—but of course this does not mean that I am the wisest—as this blog post is proving!

Prior to KD—I can dimly recall that there was such a time—I have been with a number of IT companies working with BMC Remedy and other applications (they do exist), many of which have now melted away like the snow flakes which may be falling outside, when the sun warms them.

So, I hate to admit it, but I have been in this industry for over 40 years, so probably before most of you in this room or looking at this blog post were even in “project initiation phase” and probably before “requirements gathering” and putting out the “RFI or RFP.”

Since then I have worked as a Consultant, Analyst, Designer, Project Manager, Developer, Trainer and even once, on the “Dark Side,” as a Client in this industry of ours.

So, I think I have a right to have a few opinions on this whole “Requirements” business. Hopefully these opinions will inspire some thought, maybe even controversy, and hopefully someone might feel interested enough to have bought me a drink (Single Malt Scotch over 12 YO) to get me to share a little more of my “wisdom.”

OK—here we go.

I was told my Power Point did not have enough bullet points, so I added a second Agenda page. Apart from these two pages, there will be:

NO MORE BULLET POINTS!  JUST PICTURES.

This achieves two things: 1) you might listen, and 2) I don’t have to think of another way to say the same things without using the words in the bullet points.

(For those reading this blog, who want to look at the pictures, someone will have posted my presentation somewhere on the KD website—so you could download it and enjoy the full experience of course, without the “gosh I like the way you Aussies speak” audio component.

Let me “share with you” my first EDP (look it up) job, programming a door opener. I got paid about $50 for it (in those days that would be USD25—now it would be USD60—how the weak become the strong). After the stunning success I had in fulfilling the requirements—door must open, door must stay open for a while, door must close—the requirements were expanded to encompass the concept of “small room – moving up and down in a controlled way,” so I programmed a bigger controller that incorporated all the great work I had done with the  “Project Door” and added moving a room up and down in a vertical shaft, stopping and then doing the door bit. We called this “Project Lift”—or in American—”Project Elevator.”

This was the first time I had been confronted with the idea of requirements analysis in the “real world.” I was obviously excited.

They were simple requirements. We did have a discussion as to whether the doors should open in an “organic, caring and cool way”—it was the 70’s—but we knew that person was a closet hippy, so we ignored this suggestion and just went for “slamming open and slamming shut.” A lot of people nearly lost limbs because of this —but I had the cheque (check) and had moved on to bigger and better things like the Traffic & Parking Infringement Notice system for my home state (Australians have the same urge to make an acronym of everything—that is, when they cannot add an “ie or y” to a name—and we called it the “Project Tin-Pins’.” Yes, there were nerds even in those days and we were they.)

So that brings me to the point of the is session.

How to achieve a successful Kinetic Request project—and—taking a leaf from the “Self Help and Actualisation Movement,” or as I like to call it, “SHAM”the path to success is:

Achieving Oneness with Request ManagementONENESS…

Normally the first interaction you have with any vendor is through the sales team.

Sometimes the interaction is like this…

Over-promise…Get the deal…Under-quote…Under-resource…Under-deliver

At Kinetic Data, we try to make sure that we do not do that.

At the heart of achieving this is ONENESS between the client and Kinetic Data.

INITIAL REQUIREMENTS

Without clearly stated initial requirements everyone is working in a fog of doubt and uncertainty.

Vendors build-in large buffers for this uncertainty and often still under-quote for the project.

Once you have decided on a vendor for your project, work with the internal and vendor teams to:

DEFINE AND REFINE THE REAL REQUIREMENTS

Things to consider when doing this:

  • You may not have all the information; consult widely with ALL stake-holders.
  • There is only  piece of clothing where “ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL”—a straight-jacket.
  • Trying to combine features of different offerings is rarely a success.
  • Just because it can be done, does not mean it should be done.
  • It may be a solution—but is it practical?

There is a reason why you are initiating this project, and it normally not just to:

  • Replicate the existing application
  • Change the appearance slightly
  • Bolt-on some new functionality
  • Get a more powerful application but restrict it to the old limitations

A successful project should deliver improvement. Not repackage the status quo!

To achieve this, all the parties have to be able to be flexible and willing to change expectations and requirements to deliver the BEST solution within budget and on time.

TIMING, EFFORT and BUDGET

Be realistic. Rome was not built in a day.

If you have been set firm dates  and budget to deliver, then make sure that the requirements are aligned.

LISTEN

We are now in partnership with you to deliver SUCCESS.

It is not a battle between two sides—one trying to get more than agreed and the other trying to do less.

Remember that in a difference of approach, the consultant will advise on the best solution, but at the end of the day—if the client wants it, we will build it.

DELIVERY

So we now have a project that has REAL, WELL DEFINED and ACHIEVABLE requirements.

So, let’s stick with them when we develop the SOW and during the delivery period.

Tacking on new requirements while development is going on does not work. It adds to costs and delays.

Importantly, it just shows that the requirements gathering was a failure.

Finally, remember the ultimate measure of success is the satisfaction of your users.

 

 

 

How to Create a Consistent User Experience (And Why You Should)

What makes Facebook a success?

Obviously it provides a way to communicate with friends and acquaintances; but it’s unlikely it would have been as successful if it had followed the design methods that can be found in too many corporate intranets.

One of Facebook’s major features is “consistency.” Consistent styling; consistent behavior; consistent look-and-feel.

Consistency is paramount to the success of all successful social networking sites. In fact, consistency is such a hallmark of these sites that ANY change to the design makes headlines or at least millions of wall posts!

But even when Facebook does introduce updates and new features, it keeps enough of the fundamental functionality and navigation consistent that users are able to fairly easily roll with the changes.

Consistency and ease of use have driven Facebook’s success. From the beginning, the company knew it wouldn’t be able to scale rapidly if it had to hire a huge support team to help users utilize the site. (Ever tried to reach human support on Facebook? Good luck.)

So they focused, relentlessly, on keeping it simple–so simple that even grandmothers (and grandfathers) with almost no computer experience could figure out how to create a page and share photos of their grandchildren.

The Challenge of Simply UI DesignBut if Facebook was like most corporate intranets, its doubtful users would have returned again and again.

Corporate intranets too often present different styling, navigation and features across different applications, sections and pages. Users experience a chaotic environment where they have to work at navigating through the site. Inconsistency causes confusion for users and results in incorrect choices and incomplete responses and general frustration. In a request fulfillment environment, this results in reduced usage and an increased need for ‘call-back’ from the fulfillers.

Consistency Not Chaos

The example below (one of the standard templates provided with Kinetic Request) illustrates a better approach: consistency, not just in styling but also in navigation and layout. From page to page, navigation elements and “action” links remain in consistent locations.

Consistency and clarity result in higher user adoption, faster service request processing, and smoother workflow for service delivery staff.Request Management Screen Example

With a clear and consistent design, users should be confident after the first page of a number of vital things:

  • Where to expect to find information
  • How to navigate from the page and back to the page
  • How to leave the page
  • How to get more information about an item
  • How to select an option or item

Even complex forms can be simplified by pre-populating fields with known information (e.g., if the user is logged in, the system should already know the user’s name, title, office address, phone number, email and other similar data) and keeping the layout consistent with other pages while removing unnecessary information.

Elaborate Yet Simple Request FormQuestions should be “nested” so that additional questions are revealed only if and when the added information is required.  Complex instructions can be avoided by clear and simple navigation that is consistent between forms.

Consistent site style provides a number of benefits for users: it’s easier to use, more predictable, and speeds the request-to-fulfillment process by avoiding unnecessary support phone calls and clarification emails.

In addition, consistent design benefits the organization by:

  • Controlling ‘rogue’ development
  • Enhancing corporate identity / branding
  • Lessening “silo” effects between departments
  • Unifying fulfillment – especially when it is multi-faceted

This post was based on the presentation “Creating Consistent User Experiences” delivered by Michael Poole and Shane Bush at the 2012 KEG event. You can view details of the original presentation on Kinetic Community or learn more about the upcoming 2013 KEG event.

Lotus Notes Apps Find a New Home in Kinetic Request

Microsoft and IBM have been publicly sparring over whose email/collaboration platform is winning in the marketplace.  Microsoft Exchange/Outlook is clobbering Lotus Notes/Domino in market share, Microsoft says.  Nonsense, counters IBM.  Notes/Domino is as strong as it’s ever been.

We’d have to give the advantage to Microsoft.  While market share estimates vary widely for Exchange and Notes, most show Microsoft steadily making inroads into IBM’s customer base.  A recent IDC analysis,  for example, showed IBM’s market share slipping 5 percent to 37.7 percent, while Microsoft’s market share has grown to 52 percent.

The numbers show that a significant number of large companies have made the switch from Notes to Exchange. Many more are contemplating such a move. It’s hard to blame them. Exchange/Outlook is a more up-to-date platform for email, collaboration, and business process automation. The Notes/Domino platform does a lot of great things, but it’s showing its age, and it’s getting harder to find technical personnel with specialized Notes expertise.

But before organizations make the switch, they have to answer one big question: How do you replace the functionality of all the Lotus Notes applications you’ve built over the years to automate workflows and business processes?  One large financial services company faced the question this year. While it had dozens of Lotus apps, two were especially important. These were service request management applications that automated employee onboarding and provisioning and other approval processes. The company estimated that building these applications anew would require over 2,000 hours of programming. Ouch!

Kinetic Request and Kinetic Task did the job in only 400 hours. (Read More). Now, service requesters go to the company’s corporate intranet, where they are redirected to a single company-branded  Kinetic Request portal.  Besides the 80 percent cost savings, the company got something even more valuable: a request management platform that is completely customizable and allows the company to add additional processes, forms and service items quickly and easily across the enterprise.

If your organization is thinking about switching from Notes to Exchange/Outlook, remember that you too may end up with a bunch of orphaned automated request management processes that once lived in the Notes environment.  How are you going to replace them?  One obvious solution is Kinetic Request bundled with Kinetic Task.

What is this “Level 0” thing? (Part 2): Knowledge, Self-Analysis and Feedback

Tools of the Trade (Part 2)

A Vision From Down Under
By Michael Poole

In my last blog, I mentioned a major client who is ‘shifting to the left’ and implementing ‘Level 0’ methods.

For those who missed my last blog, in short, ‘Level 0’ is the process of enabling users to resolve their own incidents and requests.

Obviously, one way of implementing ‘Level 0’ is to shut off the phone lines and email addresses of the Help Desk. A very effective way of getting users involved in the process, but not one I would recommend to anyone wanting a long future in an organisation. Of course, sometimes we implement this method by under-resourcing our support teams – but that is the subject for another blog.

To implement ‘Level 0’, users have to have the information available to them to resolve issues as they arise. So how do we give these to them.

There are a number of tools available.

The Knowledge

It has been famed around the world that London cabbies spend years “doing the knowledge” — learning every street, lane, theatre, hospital and pub in London — before they can sit for the exam to obtain a cab licence. Do we need to ensure that before any person joins the organisation they have an intimate knowledge of computer hardware, software, networking etc.?

No, because now, they can be like today’s Sydney cabbies who avoid “the knowledge” by having a SatNav or GPS system in the cab. Our users’ SatNav can be a Knowledge Base.

The move to implementing “KCS” or Knowledge Centred Support has been going for a number of years, but for many organisations, this has been limited to building knowledge bases directed at and only available to the support team — not the user. With the development of Web 2.0+, users are becoming more accustomed to “googling” for solutions and answers and also using self-help resources that are a part of the major social media sites. I admit, in doing these blogs, I have often consulted the blog site’s help pages and Support Forums.

So KCS is one of the tools that can be deployed as part of the “shift to the left.” But to do this, we have to make sure that we develop our KCS articles, not for computer engineers, or if we are deploying across an enterprise , HR experts or accountants etc, but for the average user and common issues.

Self-analysis

No, I’m not becoming Tony Robbins — all “SHAMish” (Self Help and Actualisation Movement) — perish the thought — or bringing Freud onto the Help Desk — even though at times he might be useful in dealing with users, but more IKEA!

The results of some IKEA assembly projects might belie the concept — but I assume that they have more successes than failures through the step-by-step self-assembly process.

A few — well maybe many — years ago, I was involved in a project that required me to have what is called an “Assumed Rank” in the Australian Armed Services. I made Colonel for a month — the duration of the contract — but thankfully did not have to do the physical, wear a drab khaki uniform, bear arms or be saluted. But I did get into the Officers’ Mess and people had to answer my questions in a respectful way, but that is past. What I did get to find out was how the most complex maintenance and repair processes for a fighter jet could be broken down into simple steps and documented so that even I could have replaced, as an instance, the wiring loom on an F-111 or the laser-guidance system. The “repair manual” — and it was all hard-copy — was contained in a room-full of filing cabinets and needed a librarian to keep it in order and up-to-date. This of course was an extension of the production line methodology introduced by Henry Ford at his eponymous company to make the most complex consumer engineering  product of the day — the motor car — with relatively unskilled workers. Other car makers of the time were using skilled engineers and coach-makers to make one car at a time.

As the makers of the F-111 and Henry Ford knew, every process can be broken down to simple steps and delivered in an appropriate way to produce a complex result. For Ford this was a car; for General Dynamics it was the F-111 repair manual; for us this can be a fault-finding and resolution process.

In fact for the client mentioned above, we implemented such a system — a fault-finding process that enables staff with little or no technical knowledge to analyse and, in over 30% of cases, resolve issues with lap-tops ranging from OS to wireless network issues through a series of simple steps that relied on the answers to a number of questions and test activities that they could understand and carry out.

So another tool in the “Level 0” process, is intelligent and responsive self-analysis and resolution tools. What is sometimes called an “expert system.”

Information, Contribution, Monitoring & Feedback

Implementing “Level 0” also requires openness of information and a positive response to user feedback.

Users should be given every opportunity to be a part of the process.

Where KCS is implemented, users should be able to rate and suggest improvements to KCS articles and guides and also author and submit new KCS articles. As well as providing another source of input into the KCS system, users will develop a group ownership of the KCS system and its acceptance will be more easily gained.

This is also true of any self-analysis and resolution process. A network engineer may be able to define the step-by-step process for resetting a head-end switch, but it may take some input from an end-user to enunciate the process in easily understood vocabulary or point out areas that need better definition.

Users must also be contribute to the areas that need to be covered in the KCS or self-service system. What the experts think are trivial matters, may be a source of confusion to users.

Access to monitoring information in a easily understandable format can reduce calls on the Service Desk. If users know that a system is down for maintenance then they have no need to log a call.

And of course feedback to users is essential when they make a contribution or highlight an area that needs better coverage.

In part 3, I will look at ways to integrate these tools into web-based portals that can be deployed to users.