Who Owns Customer Experience? Part 4 of 4: Identifying and Solving Organizational Silos

In Part 1 of this series, we concluded that regardless of CX ownership, EVERYONE in the organization is responsible for CX but that there are barriers to achieving organizational-wide responsibility. Among the most important barriers are lack of executive leadership and silos, both organizational and in disparate information systems.

In Parts 2 and 3, we looked at the organizational silos and communication gaps, starting in Contact Center Operations and expanding to customer touchpoints, respectively.

In this blog, we will wrap up by examining the organizational silos that exist outside the Contact Center. In the process, we will see the impact of communication gaps on the customer journey and, starting with executive leadership, discuss a methodology to close these gaps.

The best way to see how silos impact customer journeys is to present a “real-world” example. Let’s look at a member of a healthcare organization:

The member has a question about Claims and looks at the firm’s website to find out where to call in. The website gives a phone number for Claims, and the member calls that number. She is greeted by a recording that says that the Claims department does not take member calls directly and that the member must dial the Customer Service area for information by dialing a different number. Already a bit confused, the member dials the Customer Service number.

She is greeted by an announcement saying that the estimated wait time to be answered is 50 minutes . . . you read that right . . . 50 minutes.

Why? Well, there was a promotion that went out a week before, and the member-facing portal service that was promoted was not available on the date promised. The message on the promotion said that if there were any issues, the member should call the Customer Service department.

The problem is that the Marketing Department failed to tell the Customer Service management team:

• About the promotion itself
• That the expected date for the promotion start did not occur
• That the number of the Customer Service Contact Center would be listed on the promotion

Oh dear! So, the Contact Center did NOT staff up for additional call volume because they had no idea it would be needed.

Beginning to get the picture? It gets worse. After waiting 60 minutes, our Claims caller finally got an agent, but the agent had no access to the Claims system. The caller was put on hold so the Customer Service agent could speak to a Claims agent. The Customer Service agent, after holding for 10 minutes with the member on the line, finally got to a Claims agent, who told her the Claims system was down, and had no idea when it would be back up. Awesome!

The Customer Service agent had to deliver this message to the member, without resolving the issue. Needless to say, the Claims caller was not very happy being told to call in again.

Back to the Customer Service queue . . . a caller was trying to get through to Customer Service to talk about this promotion that never materialized. After 60 minutes of wait time, he reached a Customer Service agent. That agent had no idea what the caller was talking about, since the Contact Center was never advised of the promotion in the first place.

I could go on, but I think the point has been made. Houston, we have problems!

Well . . . how do firms go about solving these problems. Do you think a little effort toward extra-departmental communication might have made a difference?

Unfortunately, the different methods used to solve problems don’t work toward ultimate resolution. Let’s examine three often used approaches to resolving issues. Why are they NOT effective? Frankly, because they do NOT uncover “root causes.” I’ll use my “made-up” names for these three approaches:

1. The “Band Aid” Approach – Companies merely treat individual symptoms of a problem.
2. The “Patchwork Quilt” Approach – Several departments within an organization that participate in a particular process flow discover that customer surveys consistently indicate that the process as a whole is problematic. To their credit, the individual departments work within their own silos to resolve issues, but they do not examine the interrelationships with other departments involved in the entire flow. It may be that this level of visibility simply does not exist within the organization. This approach may address some of the issues, but it never resolves the “end-to-end” process problems and efficiencies.
3. The “Tunnel Vision” Approach – Companies expend enormous energy looking internally to find the cause of a problem. What they forget to factor into the equation is one of the most important ingredients in a process: the customer perspective. If a “perfect” process is not properly communicated to customers or doesn’t meet their needs, maximum efficiency will never be achieved. Unfortunately, understanding this perspective is a step often excluded.

How do We Fix This?

Understanding and addressing the root cause of issues requires a strong commitment within the organization, starting at the senior management level. This is a commitment of time, dedication, perseverance, and appropriate resources. Without this commitment, the company will never actually attain workflow and process efficiency, and thus will not be able to fix the impact on the customer journey. How does a company begin the journey? By taking the following initial steps:

1. Establish a cross-sectional team of key stakeholders within the organization, commissioned by the senior management of the firm.
   Buy-in and participation by senior management is critical. It is very likely that outside professionals who specialize in process efficiency and understand best practices in this area may be required to augment this cross-functional team.
   
2. Initiate whiteboard sessions with this cross-functional team to identify the major issues within the firm.
   Wherever possible, this step should include customer feedback, either directly or via survey responses. The goals of these sessions are to:
   – Identify key process and workflow issues within the firm.
   – At a high level, document the impact of the issues on internal effectiveness, and on customers.
   
3. Once the key issues have been identified, utilize the cross-functional expertise of the group and develop a plan to prioritize the process issues that are most problematic.
   – Be sure to understand how each individual process impacts other processes/workflows within the firm.
   – A high-level timetable for addressing each process should be included in the plan.
   
4. Present the findings of the cross-functional team to senior management and secure their buy-in. Once buy-in is obtained, create the appropriate team to address each of the prioritized processes/workflows.
   In creating the team, be sure to include:
   – Individuals who are involved in other processes/workflows that intersect or impact the specific process that you are addressing.
   – Front-line staff that are intimate with the details of the process/workflow.
   – Decision makers who can help the team members work through barriers in the organization, monitor progress, and make determinations as to whether the team is on the right track.
   

Now That we Know Where we are Headed, Let’s Get There

I will not go into excruciating detail in this section, but here are the steps that will need to be taken in order to actually deliver on the plan, and positively impact the customer experience long term:

Step 1: Document in detail the current process, including communication flows.

Step 2: Document how the process “touches” or “intersects” with other processes.

Step 3: Objectively analyze the current process, asking a multitude of questions:

1. Are the systems/tools currently utilized effective? Is the data stored across systems accurate and consistent? Who involved in the process requires access to the information?
2. Is there consistency in performing the process (if several people are performing the same functions, are they doing it the same way; have they been trained consistently, etc.)?
3. Is there documentation available for this process?
4. Are there current service level agreements (SLAs) for steps within the process?
5. What happens if those SLAs are not met?
6. What is the impact of the timeframe it takes to complete the process?
7. Is there a methodology to measure the success of the process?

Step 4: Based on the answers to the questions in Step 3, start to develop a plan. The following activities should be performed:

1. Document the trouble points within the process.
2. Assess and evaluate how these “gaps” can be addressed.
3. Document the “to be process,” addressing the gaps identified.
4. Document and develop a plan to address activities that will be required to effect change. For example, consider training, cultural shifts, customer education, and changes in interactions with other processes.
5. Evaluate whether technology can be used to streamline or to automate the process. For example, will it help you to better measure the effectiveness of a process and recognize and address issues on a timely basis?

Step 5: Develop and implement a plan to maintain continuity, once achieved. The goal is to ensure that silos and communication gaps that were rectified in this endeavor do not reappear. This process should also be devised to effectively handle change as well as new initiatives that will require new processes.

In order to deal effectively with change and to be proactive in handling it, you must adopt a culture of continual improvement. This means that you will need to constantly measure process effectiveness and adjust the process, as needed, to adapt to change. This step is essential, and, if done right, will help you avoid the pitfalls that caused the problems in the first place.

We have come to the end of the journey. From all that we have discussed in this four-part series, it should be clear how much silos and communication gaps within the organization impact the customer journey. Thus, in order to understand how to fix this critical problem, everyone in the organization must be involved. The two major conclusions are:

1. The problems we identified are throughout the organization; thus, the resolution must involve the entire organization.
2. In order to achieve this goal, senior leadership MUST be involved, and MUST drive and support the initiative to solve these issues, and to maintain resolutions going forward.

Bottom line . . . everyone in the organization, regardless of ownership, is RESPONSIBLE for CX.