Skip to main content

Developing a Distinct and Differentiated Experience Delivered through Employees to Define the Institution

Andrew McMillan used to work for John Lewis, where in 2000 he sent a report to the chairman saying that their customer experience wasn’t as good as it should be because it wasn’t consistent enough.  He was then put in charge of customer service and led the company to its current high reputation.   Nowadays he is a consultant on improving customer experience and he treated us to a high-level view of his philosophy.

Andrew has never given a training course on customer service because he argues that it is a matter of behaviour and ethos rather than training.  The institution has to value the service it gives; value the staff who give this service; and use these values to guide the institution’s recruitment, retention and reward policies.  He emphasised the point about valuing staff; if your staff do not feel valued, your customers will pick up this feeling themselves.

This presentation did not go into many details, focusing instead on the core ethos and illustrating this with several entertaining (and occasionally cheesy) video clips.  However, Andrew did make clear that the commitment to the customer experience has to be more than lip service.  If staff do not have sufficient training in the actual services on offer, if the services themselves are poor, if the support channels are unhelpful, nice words will be seen as the empty promises they are.

A good customer experience requires the actual product or service; the service channel (how easy are you to access?); clear processes (how easy are you to engage with?); and positive engagement (how did it feel?).  Leaders need to follow six steps to put this in place:  Define what you want; Measure what you deliver; Communicate the plan; Lead by example; Reward & recognise desired behaviours; Recruit and induct staff accordingly.

Although Andrew has recently worked with some universities, he didn’t attune his presentation much to the HE sector.  He did point out that the lessons could be applied either to the reputation of the university as a whole or to the reputation of the IT division within the larger institution.  One question from the audience asked how much scope middle management could have to drive such an initiative if it did not have active support from senior management.  Andrew replied that it is possible to instigate this sort of policy for your own section and that might inspire other parts of the institution but that this would be hard.

I was really enthused by this talk.  At the same time, once you look beyond the videos and adverts, it is clear that a proper commitment to customer experience is a mammoth undertaking.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Presentation: Putting IT all together

This is a presentation I gave to an audience of University staff: 

In this seminar, I invite you to consider what the University’s online services would be like, if we worked together to design them from the perspective of the student or member of staff who will use them, instead of designing them around the organisational units that provide them. I’ll start with how the services might appear to that student or member of staff, then work back from there to show what this implies for how we work, how we manage our data, and how we integrate our IT systems. It might even lead to changes in our organisational structure.

Our online services make a vital and valued contribution to the work of our students and staff. I argue that with better integration, more consistent user interfaces, and shared data, this contribution could be significantly enhanced.

This practice is called “Enterprise Architecture”. I’ll describe how it consults multiple organisational units and defines a framework …

Not so simple...

A common approach to explaining the benefits of Enterprise Architecture is to draw two diagrams: one that shows a complicated mess of interconnections, and one that shows a nicely layered set of blocks. Something like this one, which came from some consultants:


I've never felt entirely happy with this approach.  Yes, we do want to remove as much of the needless complexity and ad-hoc design that litters the existing architecture.  Yes, we do want to simplify the architecture and make it more consistent and intelligible.  But the simplicity of the block diagram shown here is unobtainable in the vast majority of real enterprises.  We have a mixture of in-house development and different third-party systems, some hosted in-house, some on cloud infrastructure and some accessed as software-as-a-service.  For all the talk of standards, vendors use different authentication systems, different integration systems, and different user interfaces.

So the simple block diagram is, basically, a l…

2016 has been a good year

So much has happened over the last year with our Enterprise Architecture practice that it's hard to write a succinct summary.  For my day-to-day experience as enterprise architect, the biggest change is that I now have a team to work with.  This time last year, I was in the middle of a 12-month secondment to create the EA practice, working mainly on my own.  Now my post has been made permanent and I have recruited two members of staff to help meet the University's architectural needs.

I have spent a lot of the year meeting people, listening to their concerns and explaining how architecture can help them.  This communication remains vital, the absolute core of what we do and we will continue to meet people in this way.  We also talk to people in other Universities in order to learn from what they are doing and to share our own experience back.  A highlight in this regard was my trip to the USA last January.

Our biggest deliverable for the past year was the design of the data wa…