Software Management Document

1. Path to SLA
Attainment
Managed Services – Service Desk
JP Morgan Chase & Co.

2. While we are all aware of our current numbers and level of
production, we are not where we need to be in terms of SLAs and
client satisfaction. We are mindful of the importance of these
issues; we have made several changes & continue to make
improvements to attain our goals as a company as well as the goals
of our client JP Morgan Chase

3. Agenda:
• Implementing Lean Six-Sigma DMAIC
• Definition of our current SLA’s
• SLA Analysis & Where we stand
• SLA – DMAIC Analysis
• Other Issues Affecting Process & Their
Solutions
• Expected Results

4. DMAIC Objectives
We will be using Lean Six Sigma’s DMAIC Approach in addressing our SLA Metrics

5. • Call Response Time < 5 Minutes – Target 90%
• Live Assist Ticket Response Time < 1 Hour – Target 90%
• Call Ticket Resolve Time < 18 Minutes – Target 90%
• LiveAssist Resolve Time < 20 minutes – Target 90%
• First Contact Resolution (Combined) – Target 97%
• Ticket Detail Quality – Target 97%
• CSAT - Target 60%
Definition of our current SLA’s

6. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA Call Response Time < 5 Minutes - Target : 90%
Define Maintain Call Response Times To Under 5 Minutes
Measure
Current SLA Ratings
March: 88.6%
April: 94.5%
May: 94.3%
Analyze
Check Finesse Data For High Volume / Peak Hour Comparision
Agents Did Not Have Wrap Up- Time Earlier, Forcing them to change AUX into Training / Meeting
Agents Exceeding Breaks
High Shrinkage on Mondays & Tuesday's
Improvement
Re-Align L1 Staff to Accommodate these Call Surges
Re-Align High Performing L2's & Team Leads To High Volume Shifts
Bring Down UPL's to Control Shrinkage
Control
Monitor Shrinkage & Ensure Availability.
Limit Paid Leaves to 4 members a day.
Monitor Agent Aux Usage & Availability

7. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA Call Ticket Resolve Time < 18 Minutes
Define Bring The Ticket Resolve Time To Under 18 Minutes
Measure
Current SLA Ratings
March: 41%
April: 69%
May: 75.2%
Analyze
Tickets Left In Progress By Agents.
Agents Not Following Problem Specific KB's (V/S Following General KB's)
Agents Following User Level KB's (V/S Technician KB's)
Agents Trying to Resolve Out Of Scope Issues
Users Not Following Our Instructions Well.
Turnover of older/experienced agents who used to close the calls within SLA
Improvement
Create Multiple Tickets For Multiple Issues
Ticket Handling Refresher
Follow Right KB's - KB Refresher to be arranged
In-Scope / Out-Scope Refresher by GEO , Lyanne & Suma
Review items with JPMC that can be improved for better customer satisfaction
Control
Further Monitor Scores After Trainings Complete
Wrap Up Time Introduced to help close tickets

8. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA LiveAssist Ticket Resolve Time < 20 Minutes - Target 90%
Define Bring Down the Button ticket Resolve time to under 20 Minutes
Measure
Current SLA Ratings
March: 37%
April: 54%
May: 61%
Analyze
Agents Picking Multiple Tickets At the same time
Agents Picking Tickets From Different Time Zone
Agents Not Following Problem Specific KB's (V/S Following General KB's)
Agents Following User Level KB's (V/S Technician KB's)
Agents Leave the tickets as In Progress State
Improvement
Identify Types Of KA Databases
Perform All Troubleshooting With KB's Only.
Arrange Weekly Refresher Tainings Along With Geo, Lyanne & Suma.
QM's to check if any tickets Left In Progress
SLA Added to Agents Monthly Performance Bonus Structure
Control
Re Enforced Queue Management & Gate Keeping to be performed by L2's
Weekly Refresher Sessions with Lyanne , Geo & Paola.

9. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA FCR Combined - Target 97%
Define Maintain & Further Improve Call Ticket FCR & Button Ticket FCR
Measure
Current SLA Ratings
March: 98.6%
April: 99.29%
May: 99.49%
Analyze
Out Of Scope Tickets Being Pushed to Live Assist Queue (Eg: Hardware Related Tickets) That bring down the FCR
Agent Turnover Leading to Low FCR As new Agents need experience / training
In-Sufficient Troubleshooting From The Agents
Resolvable Tickets Being Escalated to GTI
In-Appropriate KB's Used To Resolve Tickets
Aged Technicians are used to applying User Self Service KB's that were used in Zones Instance
In Sufficient Refresher Trainings.
Improvement
Identify Types Of KA Databases
Perform All Troubleshooting With KB's Only.
Arrange Refresher Tainings Along With Geo, Lyanne & Suma.
Review items with JPMC that can be improved for better Results
L2's Need to Keep a close watch during Gate Keeping Process to Catch Incorrectly Escalated Tickets
Control
Include Individual FCR on Monthly Performance Rating
Gatekeeping Calibration Session With L2's / Queue Managers

10. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA Ticket Detail Quality - Target - 97%
Define Improve Ticket Detail Quality Scores
Measure
Current SLA Ratings
March: 85.18%
April: 85.23%
May: 87.30%
Analyze
Currently There is no Standard Ticket Template Being Used
Troubleshooting Steps do not match KB's
Some Of The Closure Statements are One Liners
Check With Paola & Lyanne From JPMC to Update KYE Tool Templates
Improvement
Implement KYE Tool Ticket Templates
Implement KYE Training With Suma Mereti & Lyanne
Distribute KYE KB Material
Include Template Usage Column In Ticket Audits Performed By L2's
Touchbase on KB Usage & Troubleshooting Steps to Match KB
Review items with JPMC that can be improved for better customer satisfaction
Control
Keep KYE Templates Updated With Paola & Lyanne
Monitor TDQ With Agents & Include in Ticket Audit File

11. SLA – DMAIC Analysis
SLA CSAT - Target 75%
Define Maintain & Further Improve CSAT Scores
Measure
Current CSAT
March: 65%
April: 75%
May: 75%
Analyze
We have improved The CSAT This Quarter
Low Control on CSAT Operations
Low Information on User Responses
Improvement
Align tickets in CSAT with Agent Names
Correlate Agents with Low scores for coaching
Categorize the survey's and determine what buckets they fall into (ie. Out of our control process, disconnected calls, etc)
Approach Paola & Lyanne From JPMC to give Agent Specific CSAT Data
Coach the team on improvements
Review items with JPMC that can be improved for better customer satisfaction
Control
Monitor x calls per month and add to Performance Scorecard
Compare Our Internal Scorecard with JPMC's Scorecards to find areas of improvement
Monitor LOW CSAT agents calls more often

12. Problem Statement: Team Leads were not aware of the SLA/SLO goals
Action: We shared these detail with them and made reviewing these numbers part of our daily process.
Expected Result: Actioned & will have a positive impact immediately
Problem Statement: Turn over at the India based PM level disrupting continuity and created a void
Action: Short term we named an internal candidate to the role while a permanent PM was identified
Expected Result: Positive impact on our SLAs in one months’ time 7/30/2022
Problem Statement: Turnover at several key positions of leadership
Action: New staff was brought in to serve as steadying presence to the project
Expected Result: Positive impact on deliverables, Immediate Impact with further impact expected as we have backfilled the
positions.
Problem Statement: Improper workload balance assigned to team leads
Action: Identification of all assigned projects, and side work passed on to the Leads
Expected Result: We feel this will have a hand in improving SLA’s by 7/30/2022
Other Issues That Need Attention

13. Problem Statement: Client complaints about poor performance of technicians, leading to escalations
Action: Implementation of new processes and procedures to help reduce the number of escalations and improve customer
service. Examples of these are the escalation tracker, stale ticket report, and the gate keeper process.
Expected Result: Positive impact on SLA’s by 6/30/2022
Problem Statement: Leads were not given the proper training to lead their teams effectively
Action: Training classes, and documentation around customer service, escalation management, leadership, and proper training
techniques were provided to the Leads and L2’s
Expected Result: Impact immediate, however allowing time for buy in at all levels expected by 6/30/2022
Problem Statement: A number of L1’s were found to be performing under acceptable levels
Action: Reports generated and reviewed daily by team leads and one on one feedback to be provided to the agents identified as
needing improvement.
Expected Result: Immediate impact in some cases, in others SLA impact will be delayed perhaps 7/4/22 as identifying, replacing,
and then onboarding new resources is a timely process.
Other Issues That Need Attention

14. Problem Statement: Common errors were being made that were being caught by our internal processes
Action: In addition to reactively training the individual on proper process and procedure, if a trend was noticed the opportunity
was taken to offer refresher training to all members of the team.
Expected Result: ETA on SLA improvement 7/30/2022
Problem Statement: Time off policy not being followed, too many people allowed out at once
Action: All leads have been made aware of the policies governing time off, and expectations have been set in terms of limiting
time off to individuals especially around festivals and holidays not recognized on the JPMC calendar. Limit of 2 people scheduled
off per shift was implemented.
Expected Result: We expect this to positively impact SLAs on 7/30/2022
Problem Statement: Company policy not being followed in terms of UPLs, no call no show, excessive time off, and excessive
consecutive time off requests.
Action: Leads have been given refresher training on policy and procedure the importance of which has been stressed to them as
well as the L2’s. Especially around disciplinary action, and items worthy of escalating to leadership and or HR.
Expected Result: Addressed.
Other Issues That Need Attention

15. Problem Statement: Technicians were not allowed time in between calls to complete work (ACW) which led to tickets being
opened too long, or updated too quickly leading to issues with SLAs.
Action: We modified the phone system to grant 2 minutes between normal calls and 1 minute between Movius calls.
Expected Result: SLA impact anticipated by 7/30/2022
Problem Statement: There were too few L2’s to share the leadership load and complete side tasks
Action: Deserving members of the team were placed in L2 roles, allowing us more leaders available to spread the workload
across more evenly.
Expected Result: This process is ongoing. SLA impact anticipated 7/15/2022
Other Issues That Need Attention

16. • Action The DMAIC Action Items
• Check & Compare Results at the end of
July
• Follow-Up Meeting to discuss
measurable items and their impact
What’s Next?

17. Questions?

18. Thank You