Skip to main content

Broader Process Sharing - Service Request Fulfillment

While at a BMC UserWorld conference a few years ago, I wrote the following. It still applies and I wanted to put it down in a permanent spot where I could find it later.


We're perfecting the Service Desk call center. What would it look like if we invited other campus support units to share our processes and tools, if not our Service Desk?

My recent experience moving into a new building has sharpened my focus on this issue. I'd like to share a taste of my experience by way of introduction and illustration of my implementation recommendation.

In my new office, I need to obtain keys, request door locks to be installed, deal with furniture alterations, move network and power outlets that were obstructed by furniture, request appropriate signage for our department, order new furniture, resolve electrical wiring problems involving and interface with the furniture, request building card swipe access, request thermostat adjustments, and request permanent placement of a projector in our conference room.

All of these tasks dealt with different departments, but involved a nearly identical process. I needed to locate the appropriate contact and submit a request, either via telephone, email, or web form. The service requests involved some degree of personal consulting and approval. I then had to track the progress of each request through to completion.

With each department, the procedure to request and track the service was different. Some of my requests were immediately taken care of. Others were more troublesome. In one case, the department marked the work as complete even though it hadn't been. There was no uniform way for me to learn the status of my multiple requests or to provide feedback to the various service entities.

It would be ideal to have a unified Service Request Management tool that allows users to browse a service catalog, understand pricing and billing options, request service, track order status, receive notifications, add comments, and evaluate completion. Such a system would act as a front-end interface to other existing systems. The work isn't completed in this system, but merely tracked within it. Since we expect each department is already tracking this workflow in some way, we wouldn't expect this to be an increase in work, just a modification.

The benefits in efficiency and customer satisfaction in such a system would justify a significant investment by the university in such a tool.


Popular posts from this blog

Making People Feel Stupid: A Cardinal Sin in Design

People will go to great lengths and inconvenience to avoid appearing or feeling stupid. A great example of when design makes a user feel stupid comes from Alan Coopers 1999 book The Inmates are Running the Asylum on page 24. Cooper is talking about the keyless entry system on his car keys.
"The large button locks the car and simultaneously arms the alarm. Pressing the button a second time disarms the alarm and unlocks the car. There is also a second smaller button labeled 'Panic.' When you press it, the car emits a quiet warble for a few seconds. If you hold it down longer, the quiet warble is replaced by the full 100-decibel blasting of the car alarm, whooping, tweeting, yowling, and declaring to everyone within a half-mile that some dolt--me--has just done something execrably stupid. What's worse, after the alarm has been triggered, the little plastic device becomes functionally inert, and further pressing of either button does nothing. The only way to stop that hon…

Strategy: Efficient or Innovative

We haven't had a refresh on our strategy direction in my office for a few years. It seems like we are frequently torn between being efficient and being innovative.


Lower costspeed to productionminimal failuresmaximum uptime Innovative Higher costlots of failuresfreedom to pursue non-"approved" activitiesshorter attention span I'm part of an IT shop with nearly 200 services that we offer to campus and internally. I love the feeling of being innovative, but I'm concerned that our current push is to be innovative at the expense of being efficient. The result is that we can't accomplish as much near-term good for the campus because our focus is on the longer term.