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.

Comments

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 ho...

Beyond Scrum?

[Adapted from a post to our internal Slack team.] My manager has been working to get an agile consultancy into our university's central IT department to help us progress in our journey toward being more agile. I hope that the training and coaching we receive will focus more on the root principles of value in agile processes rather than on a single process like Scrum. Are there any root agile principles that you think we need to be better at embracing? Here are some that come to mind for me. Develop functionality vertically instead of horizontally. You don't create the database layer all the way, and then the web services layer all the way, and finally--after 9 months--start to create the web user interface. Instead, you find a way to introduce a complete feature that touches all those technology layers so that you can get real feedback about the usage and value of the system or feature. Be willing to throw things away. If we're going to experiment, we have to be okay ...

Hammers and Nails: Technology Push Design

"We need to refine our requirements first, before we look at tools." This is a common phrase that I hear. While I sympathize with the sentiment, I think it is frequently wasteful. I suspect that we'd get to the right requirements faster by looking at tools already available in a given problem space. Pushing the concept further, is it foolish to find a cool technology and then look for ways that that technology can apply to current problem spaces?  What if you don't even recognize you have a problem space? Without a constant search and openness, we'll miss many serendipitous opportunities. Here is BYU professor Larry Howell discussing this issue. I often enjoy doing something ... that is sometimes controversial. In this approach, rather than starting with a need, you start with a new technology and you search to identify a need that it can fulfill. This second more controversial approach is called "technology push design."   You can imagine t...