Are You Running Service or Is Service Running You? Part II- Call Backs I’ve been very fortunate to have had the opportunity to work with many outstanding office equipment dealers in my career. This is the second installment of the series of articles developed based upon many quality practices these dealers use. Most of what I discuss here is not necessarily new information, but I’ve seen the same common problems in varying degrees in almost every dealer. With this in mind I’d like to highlight these common areas of concern and offer suggestions on how to solve the often-complex nature of running service. Problem Number Two: Call Backs Another common complaint from most customers and service managers alike is the call back. This is the seemingly inevitable call that occurs shortly after a customer has had their machine fixed. The first issue that must be tackled when addressing call backs is the yard stick used to measure what is or isn’t a callback. Since my business is based on standards, we use criteria that are based on how a model performs at a national level. This system uses a copies and/or day’s measurement, meaning the machine needs to produce a specified number of copies OR run the specified number of days before the next service call. So if a product is introduced that does not perform as expected, the call back criteria must reflect this poor performance. Conversely, if a products performance improves over time due to modifications or fixes, the criteria must reflect that improvement as well. To set the call back standards in any other way is not going to allow you to accurately determine which calls should or shouldn’t be call backs. With the variety of products running the gamut from reliable segment one units that average 183 days between calls and high end color units that average 5 or 6 days between calls and digital duplicators that will go tens of thousands of copies between calls, it should be easy to see that there is no one criteria that would allow meaningful call back statistics. In addition, it is necessary to define the math used to determine the call back percentage. At BEI we define the math this way: if a customer calls in for, say, light copies, this is considered an EM or emergency call. If after the fix, the customer has to call back for whatever reason within the call back parameters set for their model, this call is a CB or call back. In this case, what would be the call back percentage? I say it’s 100% call back, because if they had been fixed correctly the first time there would have only been one call and it would have been 100% effective with no call back. A lot of systems would say 50%, because of the two total calls of which one was a call back. As trivial as this definition sounds, many dealers have lulled themselves into a false sense of call back nirvana because they are counting all the calls including no part calls, courtesy calls, PM calls, and shop calls among the total calls then dividing the totals by the call backs, when in reality it is the customer generated EM calls that should be the reference point. After all, isn’t the goal to have the customers calling you as few times as possible? The key component to reducing call backs is to be sure the techs are compensated in a way that encourages them make the machines run well, NOT simply to reduce the number of call backs. Time and time again I see dealers set up the acceptable call back performance levels only to have their techs manipulate their systems to meet “that” number instead of actually reducing the number of call backs. For example I had a customer whose techs are saying they were unable to complete better than 60% of their service calls because of no parts. They then wait to see if the customer called back within the call back parameter and if they did, they would cancel the new customer call and use the no parts call already in the system. Once the previous call exceeds the call back parameters, they will cancel the no parts call and take the new call. Needless to say, this type of numbers game playing cannot be tolerated. Our way of handling this problem is to pay the technician a per click commission for every copy produced after their call is complete. If a call back occurs, they lose those copies and thus the money for those copies. By taking the emphasis off the number of call backs that occur and changing their focus to the benefits of doing a quality job, you can get the needed results. This method also changes the punishment and reward. Most dealer systems punish the technician for having a call back rate that exceeds their pre-determined standards. This is done in an effort to encourage the technician to reduce the total number of calls that could be defined as call backs. With the BEI method, there is very little direct penalty for the call back. The few copies we are taking away impact their bottom line very little. What is impacted is the technician’s ability to manage a large volume of copies. Techs with high call back rate cannot manage as many copies as someone with a lower call back rate. Thus they are limiting their income as a result of not doing a quality call. Using this program, an average tech will lose about $15.00 to $25.00 per month because of call backs, but eliminating those call backs would net the average tech over $100.00 per month. Knowing this, how do you think your techs would respond? It is vitally important to understand what the intended outcome is and tailor your incentives around those goals. Once the goal has been stated you must structure your compensation so that achieving those goals has direct and immediate reward. One of the most common mistakes made by dealers is compensating techs on a quarterly or semi-annual basis. This doesn’t work for several reasons. I believe that changing behavior is much like disciplining children. The closer the reward or punishment is to the behavior the better the results. Most technicians can’t remember specific service calls that happened two weeks ago, let alone 2 months. So it is unrealistic to expect them to remember what they did or didn’t do over the last quarter to earn their bonus. If it weren’t for the logistics involved I would pay techs every week based on the previous week’s performance. Paying each month balances the administrative labor involved with the desire to reward a technician’s successes for the prior month. Another benefit of paying monthly is that most techs live pay check to pay check and as such will most likely spend any bonuses they receive. Getting them used to having additional income each month will encourage them to maintain the standards they set for themselves or their income will suffer the next month. This will by default force them to sustain the improvements in their technical performance. Call backs can be managed and reduced substantially, but you must be willing to set and adjust your criteria, then be willing to provide the proper incentive to achieve the desired reduction in these excessive calls. You also must be able to provide accurate reporting for technicians so they know where they left money on the table, and what they need to do next month to get it. If you have any questions regarding BEI’s nationals call back standards or technician compensation program, please contact BEI Services, (316)772-0234 or Wes@BEIServices.com Mr. McArtor is the president of BEI Services, Inc. that now tracks every service call that occurs on over 3.5 million imaging devices, around the world.