Problem: Launch state-of-the-art Customer Care center as key element in portal’s support organization.

Solution: Evaluated Customer Care requirements and assisted in the selection of eCRM, eMail, Chat, and Knowledge Base technologies and outsource and ASP vendors to create a web enabled contact center. 

eProcesses created all process flows, workflows, and included the creation of all software training (leader lead as well as CBT) for Clarify and Interactive Intelligence. eProcesses introduced a system of management which included: Expert Behavior Models, Barrier Removal, Continuous Improvement Meetings, fully-integrated training and other effective management practices.

Results: Customer Care center solution implemented on time and under budget that enables efficient customer interactions with escalation and clear documentation of those interactions, scalable and changeable processes and technology solutions, multiple communication channels, and multi-site, multi-product line support.

For more than three years after two initial projects with the client, the client request a series of operational audits involving each of their more than 20 offices to reinforce the aggregate changes implemented to improve operational and financial performance. When appropriate, these audits included a series of training sessions on the roles and responsibilities of supervisors, performance measurement and management, and work simplification and methods improvement techniques.

Audit Overview

The scope of the operational audits included the following:

• Analysis of staff productivity;
• Determination of cycle times for key office processes;
• Identification of improvement opportunities in the areas of service, quality, responsiveness, and productivity; and
• Documentation of work volumes for basic office activities and Key Volume Indicators.

Project staff provided Executive management and District management with an independent assessment of the staffing levels, resource utiliza­tion, and improvement opportunities within the client’s field offices.

Audit Results

For each audited office, a report was prepared showing Program Plan (budget) staffing and actual staffing and comparing each of those levels to levels recommended by a model developed by project staff. This model proposed staffing levels based on measurable volumes of work which were reported each month by the field offices.

The underlying assumptions made by the model were reviewed against actual activity levels in each of the audited offices. This review was also provided in the Audit Report.

The analysis of cycle times for mail processing, bill paying, word processing services, data entry/data processing, and other activities in most offices showed significant opportunity for improvement. Where improvement was needed, project staff made recommendations to remove process and organizational barriers.

The staffing and resource utilization analysis highlighted a definition problem for “actual” staffing. project staff recom­mended revising the Monthly Staffing Analysis to include Program Plan as well as Actual and Model Office staffing levels as one way to achieve reporting consistency. Some offices were found to have Actual staffing below Program Plan staffing; rarely do the offices exceed Program Plan levels. Project staff found most offices staffed at levels exceeding Model Office-recommended levels. Consistent with client policy, project staff’s recommendation was to reduce staffing through attrition to Model Office-recom­mended levels.

Training Highlights

In those offices that requested supervisory training, four half-day sessions were presented. The sessions included:

I.         THE ROLE OF THE SUPERVISOR

(District) Office – Current

Historical – General

The changing roles of supervisors – current trends

What does this mean in day-to-day terms?

Where are you now, individually, and where do you want to go?

II.        PERFORMANCE AND WORK MEASUREMENT

Performance Defined:  Productivity, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Quality, Profitability/Budgetability, Innovation, Quality of Work Life

Goals and Objectives – General and Supervisor-Specific

Policies and Procedures

Budgets, Forecasts, and Schedules

Performance Reporting:  What, When, Why, By Who, What Detail

Reasons for Measurement

Evaluation and Problem Solving

The Variable System

The SPAN System

III.    WORK ANALYSIS TOOLS

Process definition

Analysis techniques

Collection, analysis and presentation of data

Procedures and standards

Work Simplification and Methods Improvement

Defining the work process

Investigating the work

Challenging work details

Looking at alternate methods

Benchmarking, Brainstorming, and Enlisting other opinions

Implementing improvement

Following up on details

Measuring results

Each of these broad topics included some lecture, some exercises, and out-of-class assignments (“homework”). All were geared to the client’s culture in general, and the specifics of each field office and its supervisors in particular. Each assignment and exercise required some type of analysis of the partici­pants’ current situation or working environment. Each participant prepared a list of the activities that they were currently involved in, including how much time they spent doing these things. This was compared to a model which was developed during the class time.

Each participant evaluated one or more aspects of the area which they supervised. As time allowed, we looked at analysis and improvement of quality, time-and-motion studies, flow charting, and other applications as time allowed. Time was budgeted to allow for hands-on, one-on-one coaching in the specific applications, when desired by the individual supervisor.

Training Impact

As a result of the training and its related activities, District management reported an increased emphasis on objective rather than subjective measures of departmental results. Awareness of productivity, backlog, work volumes, absenteeism, non-productive time, and other areas of importance to the individual supervisors and to the overall performance of the field office increased. Increased use of measurement enhanced the sense of responsibility and accountability of the supervisors to their peers. Bi-weekly meetings were initiated to provide a forum for discussion of performance, concerns, and removal of process barriers.

Problem: Integrate existing eRetail sites, with full on-line catalog functionality and fulfillment, into new portal environment.

Solution: Identified existing and desired technology, defined business processes, and developed training materials to support the new business model.

Results: On-line ordering and fulfillment capability integrated into portal environment to create new revenue stream (and new revenue).

The client for this three-month engagement was a major, US-based household products company. The engagement encompassed two primary deliverables:

• a description of the client’s historical efforts to improve work flow and reduce costs; and
• an overview of current work simplifi­cation and cost reduction opportunities within the General Office functions of the client’s largest division.

The client’s departmental liaisons representing each of the areas within the division’s executive management team are as follows. Consultant contact with the liaisons focused on the current and past work simplification efforts and on coordination within their department. The consultants solicited input from over thirty individuals to understand the nature, impact, and priority of each opportunity. These in­dividuals assisted the consultants in the preparation of summary-level flow charts of key or core processes.

In general, these efforts were been within functional areas. This limited scope has limited the financial and pace impacts of these historical efforts.

Division General Office staff and management identified over 130 oppor­tunities for improving the way the client did its work. The consultants con­solidated these opportunities to a list of eighty. These eighty range from the broad and general to the narrow and specific.

The Division’s Directors and their direct reports ranked the eighty opportunities using ABC-like analysis. They then prioritized those ranked as the “A” or top priority opportunities. Three cross-tabulation views of these rankings were provided by Functional Group/Department, by SBU, and by position for use as tools for the Management Committee to use in prioritizing efforts within their own area or SBU to improve pace, performance, and the effectiveness of Division’s management and staff.

There were two broad categories of opportunities:  those that are far-reaching and cross-functional, and those that are narrower in scope and that predominantly deal with only one or a few functional areas. The highest priority opportunities, as identified by Division’s directors, were those which were multi-functional. There were other opportunities, however, which needed to be addressed because they would have a noticeable impact on the day-to-day activities of Division General Office management and staff.

The Top Priority Opportunities

Thirty-six opportunities were identified by at least one individual as being a “top priority” opportunity. Three oppor­tunities were identified by the Division’s Directors or their designees as “top priority” to be pursued. These are:

1.         Simplify the Forecast process and sub­processes to reduce multiple sets of numbers, level of detail, and frequency of update; to eliminate multiple recon­ciliations and duplication of effort; to improve timeliness, ac­curacy, and coor­dination of inputs and outputs. Simplify the forecasting of promoted items.

We saw a one-time opportunity to reduce capital re­quirements for finished goods inventory by up to $10,000,000 with an additional annual savings of $1,200,000 in inventory carrying costs for finished goods and an undetermined analogous savings associated with raw materials. The client expected to also see a reduction in ex­pediting and “surge” costs. Division Manufac­turing General Office staff suggested the expediting and “surge” opportunity exceeds $2 million annually.

2.         Simplify/reengineer the Written Recommen­dation process to elimi­nate duplication; to reduce the level of detail, sign-off, “bulk,” and labor intensity; and to eliminate al­together where unnecessary; to focus on the key ele­ments required for Management approval; to increase pace; to improve timing of manage­ment input and higher-level buy-in. Simplify the (cross-function­al) approval process. Clarify decision-making author­ity and roles between key management levels to reduce effort required to obtain approval while simul­taneously increas­ing business building activity pace.

We saw an opportunity to reduce labor costs and cycle time associated with the recommendations. This impact will be “soft” in nature because we anticipated savings in staff time being absorbed by activities not currently performed.

3.         Simplify/shorten the New Product Deve­lop­ment, the Product and Pack­aging Improvement (Brand Improvement) processes, and the New Label and Label Change proces­ses.

We saw the impact here as an opportunity to apply Work Simplification to the already-improved Product Develop­ment processes to reduce cycle time to typically less than eighteen months from reportedly close to three years. Enhanced responsiveness to the marketplace should yield significant additional competitive and financial benefits.

Inventory

A worthwhile “World Class” target for inventory turns for Division’s product line was fifty-two (approximately a 150% improvement). This represented a reduction in finished goods inventory of approximately $10 million.

Raw material inventory is generally in the neighborhood of $15 million. Through improved supplier lead times and forecasting, raw material inventory could be reduced by one-half to two-thirds of current levels. This is a reduction in raw material inventory of a range of $7.5 million to $10 million. Some of this inventory was not specifically considered the Division’s inventory.

In addition to releasing capital of from $17.5 to $20 million, savings would result from reduced inventory handling costs. Assuming average inventory handling costs of 11.4% (based on $40 per pallet divided by the current inventory valued at cost), this reduction in inventory handling costs would be within a range of $2 million to $2.3 million annually with expediting and “surge” providing an additional $2 million annually.

An additional $400,000 in identified savings associated with improved Forecas­ting was included in the above inventory-related savings.

Labor costs

Activity analysis suggested that “Long Range Planning and Forecasting” by client Brand Management costs approximately $.9 million annually. Forecasting and Production Planning by Manufacturing’s General Office management and staff cost somewhat less than that. Sales Planning and Forecasting costs by field and General Office Sales management and staff could be somewhat less than Manufacturing’s costs. Estimated total labor associated with Forecas­ting and Production Planning was in a range of between $1 million and $1.5 million annually. Ten percent or more of these annual costs, within a range of $100,000 to $150,000 annually, was indicated as realistic for savings associated with improving forecasting.

Expediting

Although actual expediting costs are “buried” within the Division’s cost systems, up to $700,000 annually was estimated as potential savings in expediting costs. Expediting costs include changeovers, redeployment, and material upcharges. The consulting team recognized that labor savings in the plants would only be captured to the extent that expediting results in overtime.

Total savings associated with improving forecasting is thought to fall within a range of $2.4 million to $3.7 million annually plus a one-time reduction in capital requirements for inventory of from $10 million to $20 million.

Total Savings Potential:     $18,113,100 of which $3,963,100 is “annual” in nature