The Problem of Errors

[bathtub-row]

I have an ongoing problem at work that I'm trying to tackle from a different perspective. I would appreciate anyone's input on this as it seems to never really get resolved.

 

The problem is that with data entry and scheduling, my team is making errors. These errors affect people in the field and the Accounting Dept. Last year, some significant changes were made so that the admins were handling specific clients. This cut the error rate down from about 45 per month to around 12 to 16. These are errors that affect Accounting. This month, I started tracking field errors and they're very high - around 45 so far.

 

To give you some perspective, my team is handling about 4,500 records each month. The info is being entered into the company database through various means - phone calls, emails, and client applications.

 

My thoughts about this is that I think my team has too many distractions. I suggested that we have one person answering the phones so that everyone else can focus on the work. My boss agreed that this was a good idea but he doesn't want to do it. I've searched the Internet for solutions and the first thing that's mentioned is that distractions create errors. Some of the other things I've read don't really apply to what we do.

 

One thing I plan to do tomorrow is compile all the info I now have on the errors and see if I can figure out what the main source(s) of the problem is. Hopefully this will allow me to tackle the problem.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts about this? I could use some suggestions.

[TaraMaiden2]

No, but keep a record of everything. That way, when someone 6 months down the line asks "Why haven't we solved this yet?"

You can reply, "I logged these issues six months ago and gave my report, and since then, nothing has been done.

Maybe now, something will get done."

 

That way, at least, people will know you tried, but not being the one who has the power or authority to implement changes, it pays to watch your own back...

 

Remember, those who SAY they're 'watching our backs' are all-too-often those who put a knife in it.

 

Edit to add: Cite your research sources, regarding errors/distractions. That way, you also have 'back-up'.

[TheFinalWord]

I have an ongoing problem at work that I'm trying to tackle from a different perspective. I would appreciate anyone's input on this as it seems to never really get resolved.

 

The problem is that with data entry and scheduling, my team is making errors. These errors affect people in the field and the Accounting Dept. Last year, some significant changes were made so that the admins were handling specific clients. This cut the error rate down from about 45 per month to around 12 to 16. These are errors that affect Accounting. This month, I started tracking field errors and they're very high - around 45 so far.

 

To give you some perspective, my team is handling about 4,500 records each month. The info is being entered into the company database through various means - phone calls, emails, and client applications.

 

My thoughts about this is that I think my team has too many distractions. I suggested that we have one person answering the phones so that everyone else can focus on the work. My boss agreed that this was a good idea but he doesn't want to do it. I've searched the Internet for solutions and the first thing that's mentioned is that distractions create errors. Some of the other things I've read don't really apply to what we do.

 

One thing I plan to do tomorrow is compile all the info I now have on the errors and see if I can figure out what the main source(s) of the problem is. Hopefully this will allow me to tackle the problem.

 

Does anyone have any thoughts about this? I could use some suggestions.

 

It's good you are starting to track things. Right now it seems you are going off of assumptions or instinct. I have found you really need data to pinpoint what types of errors are occurring, what time, through which medium, and if there is one person committing more errors than average (some people are just not good at data entry). Right now the issue is a bit vague but based on the data you collect you may be able to develop a system or set of procedures on data collection and management.

 

I can tell you one method I use, but it is specific to collecting field measurements. I have two independent researchers enter the data from our field tools into the statistical software. Each researcher then runs descriptive stats and we see if there are any mismatched data (cross validation). Also, it if is some important field measurement, we have procedures in place to minimize measurement error. For example, take three measurements and use the mean.

Edited October 30, 2015 by TheFinalWord

[bathtub-row]

Thanks for your reply, Tara. The problem is, my boss is putting this solely on me because I'm the manager of the team who's making these errors. He is seriously pissed about the errors and it has been the subject of a few tense conversations between us.

 

I have been tracking the errors that effect the Accounting Dept for nearly two years now. The significant reduction has helped but now the focus is on the field errors. I've also noticed that the Accounting errors are going up. I have no idea why this keeps happening and why it fluctuates so much because my team is very conscientious. I do have one person on my team that I suspect is slightly dyslectic and she's the one who makes the most errors.

 

It's extremely frustrating, to say the least.

[bathtub-row]

It's good you are starting to track things. Right now it seems you are going off of assumptions or instinct. I have found you really need data to pinpoint what types of errors are occurring, what time, through which medium, and if there is one person committing more errors than average (some people are just not good at data entry). Right now the issue is a bit vague but based on the data you collect you may be able to develop a system or set of procedures on data collection and management.

 

I can tell you one method I use, but it is specific to collecting field measurements. I have two independent researchers enter the data from our field tools into the statistical software. Each researcher then runs descriptive stats and we see if there are any mismatched data (cross validation). Also, it if is some important field measurement, we have procedures in place to minimize measurement error. For example, take three measurements and use the mean.

 

Good info. I have been tracking one area of this for some time now. The field errors is something I just started tracking. My plan is to sort it and spin it all different ways to see what I come up with.

 

The issue I keep running into is that it seems I get it under control and then it all falls apart again. It often feels like I'm beating my head against the wall.

 

I like your comparison method and I'll think about it some more to see if I can apply it to this situation.

[TaraMaiden2]

Thanks for your reply, Tara. The problem is, my boss is putting this solely on me because I'm the manager of the team who's making these errors. He is seriously pissed about the errors and it has been the subject of a few tense conversations between us.

Right; You may need to go over his head. You said that he thinks some of your solutions are a good idea but that 'he doesn't want to do it'.

 

Why not?

 

If you have fielded suggestions which he has not rejected, then why will he not implement them?

 

He can only 'pass the buck' so far.

If he's your boss, ultimately the issue is his to solve.

The worst case scenario is that he would fire you for not getting it done - then they would discover the problem still exists - because HE did nothing.

So really, you need to insist and persist.

 

I have been tracking the errors that effect the Accounting Dept for nearly two years now. The significant reduction has helped but now the focus is on the field errors. I've also noticed that the Accounting errors are going up. I have no idea why this keeps happening and why it fluctuates so much because my team is very conscientious. I do have one person on my team that I suspect is slightly dyslectic and she's the one who makes the most errors.

 

Then you need to hold her accountable and demonstrate - calmly and in a business-like manner - that she is making more errors than anyone else.

You can't carry people; in this day and age, when results count and figures show profit/loss, success/failure, you can't have a wonky wheel that throws everything off balance.

Either she needs to have her work checked and verified, or she needs to find another job.

 

Sorry, but it's the need that drives....

[TheFinalWord]

The issue I keep running into is that it seems I get it under control and then it all falls apart again. It often feels like I'm beating my head against the wall.

 

I understand. Well, the good news is you are conducting surveillance and you are working with data. Over time you will be able to isolate where the errors are occurring if you are being provided quality monitoring tools.

 

Depending on how data are being entered, some software also has validation features. For example, if a data point can only range from 0 to 10, you can use validation features to ensure the entry falls within the appropriate range. This can help with typographical errors.

 

To increase accountability, I have each person that enters data put their initials in the master spreadsheet we are using. If you are finding a person is going above the average amount of errors (as you collect data you can set different goals for date entry errors), they may require more training or an extra eye to double check their work.

[bathtub-row]

Right; You may need to go over his head. You said that he thinks some of your solutions are a good idea but that 'he doesn't want to do it'.

 

Why not?

 

If you have fielded suggestions which he has not rejected, then why will he not implement them?

 

He can only 'pass the buck' so far.

If he's your boss, ultimately the issue is his to solve.

The worst case scenario is that he would fire you for not getting it done - then they would discover the problem still exists - because HE did nothing.

So really, you need to insist and persist.

 

Then you need to hold her accountable and demonstrate - calmly and in a business-like manner - that she is making more errors than anyone else.

You can't carry people; in this day and age, when results count and figures show profit/loss, success/failure, you can't have a wonky wheel that throws everything off balance.

Either she needs to have her work checked and verified, or she needs to find another job.

 

Sorry, but it's the need that drives....

 

He wants to try other things before resorting to my suggestion. He has his reasons for not liking it but I don't think they're valid.

 

As far as the person who's making the most errors, she is otherwise a sterling employee and I would never let her go. My boss feels the same way about her. The other side of the coin is that she handles some of our more complicated clients and that's probably driving the errors, too.

[TaraMaiden2]

He wants to try other things before resorting to my suggestion.

well implement the things he wants to try first. Once you prove they don't work () suggest you now try YOUR suggestions...

 

He has his reasons for not liking it but I don't think they're valid.

Can you counter-argue his reasons? Remember to do so validly, with data, not emotively....

 

As far as the person who's making the most errors, she is otherwise a sterling employee and I would never let her go. My boss feels the same way about her. The other side of the coin is that she handles some of our more complicated clients and that's probably driving the errors, too.

Maybe you should focus on enabling her to do what she's really good at, and get someone else to pick up her slack....

 

We can't all be good at everything...

[bathtub-row]

I understand. Well, the good news is you are conducting surveillance and you are working with data. Over time you will be able to isolate where the errors are occurring if you are being provided quality monitoring tools.

 

Depending on how data are being entered, some software also has validation features. For example, if a data point can only range from 0 to 10, you can use validation features to ensure the entry falls within the appropriate range. This can help with typographical errors.

 

To increase accountability, I have each person that enters data put their initials in the master spreadsheet we are using. If you are finding a person is going above the average amount of errors (as you collect data you can set different goals for date entry errors), they may require more training or an extra eye to double check their work.

 

Validating gets complicated because the info is being entered into the database from an email, for example, or from a phone call, or a client's application. Most of this has to do with scheduling work for field personnel. So, sometimes, someone gets a date wrong, or the type of work is wrong - that kind of thing. How do you do a comparison of that?

 

On the Accounting end - the errors that effect them - those are easier to get a handle on because the goal is to catch things after they have been done in the field, but have not yet invoiced. I had a system where one team member was double-checking another team member's work. My boss decided that was dumb and stopped it. I think this is why the errors on the Accounting end have gone up.

 

I feel like I'm fighting this issue from so many different directions it's ridiculous.

[StBreton]

He wants to try other things before resorting to my suggestion. He has his reasons for not liking it but I don't think they're valid.

 

As far as the person who's making the most errors, she is otherwise a sterling employee and I would never let her go. My boss feels the same way about her. The other side of the coin is that she handles some of our more complicated clients and that's probably driving the errors, too.

 

If this one person is responsible for a large percentage of errors ...maybe have her pass that entry portion onto someone else and she can specialize in handling complicated tasks ...there's a disconnect there ...some people are big picture people and it sounds like she may be better suited there but when it comes to the minutiae ...she's not as attentive. Suggest restructuring to fit the needs of co with the skills of the employees.

[bathtub-row]

well implement the things he wants to try first. Once you prove they don't work () suggest you now try YOUR suggestions...

 

Can you counter-argue his reasons? Remember to do so validly, with data, not emotively....

 

 

Maybe you should focus on enabling her to do what she's really good at, and get someone else to pick up her slack....

 

We can't all be good at everything...

 

He doesn't have any suggestions. He's just telling me that the problem has to be fixed.

[TaraMaiden2]

I'm confused.

Then what 'other things' does he want to 'resort to'...?

 

The more I hear, the more I think your Boss is the fly in the ointment....!

 

I reiterate my 'going over his head' suggestion....

[GemmaUK]

e time to write it all just now but I am on the Accounts side and have had this issue with our Schedule Team for the past several years.

 

This year, things have improved massively via two strategies though.

 

I will post again later/tomorrow to explain what we've done.

 

For the record I am not so sure that one person on phones would be a good idea - we have tried that in the past too. The issue was that the person on the phones didn't have as much knowledge of specific sections as each of those people working their own section did.

 

I used to get massively frustrated with our Sch Team and I have no doubt they did with me also. Now we work happily alongside each other.

 

It sounds dumb but something crucial I have learned these last few months is that the Sch Team works predominantly in the future, we as Accs work predominantly in the past.

You have to remember this part and a completely natural part of that is once a time is in the past for your team it is not natural to go back and double check all the details are there and correct. Not only that but you'll be working weeks and months into the future and your team makes sure business actually 'happens'.

Two to three weeks from now I as Accounts will still be working on October - your team won't - October will be a distant memory for you.

Maybe you can drop that all into conversation with your manager.

 

Anyway, I will post later in detail as to what we have done.

[bathtub-row]

Can't wait to hear your suggestions, Gemma!

 

Yes, my team is almost always working on the previous day and the next day.

[bathtub-row]

I'm confused.

Then what 'other things' does he want to 'resort to'...?

 

The more I hear, the more I think your Boss is the fly in the ointment....!

 

I reiterate my 'going over his head' suggestion....

 

You definitely nailed that on the head. My boss is frustrating because he communicates poorly, among other things. I'm currently looking for another job but I must deal with him for now.

 

I could go over his head but that would mean going to either the COO or CEO of the company. I have done that before - without my boss's knowledge - and the CEO calmed the situation down. However, I'm tired of these games and don't intend to stay at the company much longer.

Edited October 30, 2015 by bathtub-row

[GemmaUK]

Can't wait to hear your suggestions, Gemma!

 

Yes, my team is almost always working on the previous day and the next day.

 

 

Hi again,

 

Ouch! That is a tight turn around - handy info though as I can adjust what we do to suit that. Plus thinking back, in my twenties I was a scheduler of sorts on a tight turn around and me and my 'sidekick' did the same thing so I know in practice in works with a long or short turn around.

 

Just be aware here that I am going to post things that you already know - I know that pretty much for a fact!

I'm not being condescending at all - it's more of a 'I see it this way, you see it that way' - we need to get to a place - as in you and me working in different teams so that we know what the others perspective is. We're coming from two very different departments with two very different end goals. Yours is daily (/weekly maximum) from the sound of it, Accs is monthly, yearly and also multi-yearly on occasions too - yeah, we have to regurgitate the same stuff pretty much!

Tackling these two separate areas:

 

 

Validating gets complicated because the info is being entered into the database from an email, for example, or from a phone call, or a client's application. Most of this has to do with scheduling work for field personnel. So, sometimes, someone gets a date wrong, or the type of work is wrong - that kind of thing. How do you do a comparison of that?

It sounds to me like this is the part which has improved overall from your other posts. Like I said I work in Accs - to give you an Accs view I would 'rather' the dates, times, details for the customer are correct

No company can escape human error. None of us is infallible.

At my company we work up anywhere between a week in advance up to about 8 months in advance however - and obviously the next week and upcoming 4-5 weeks is the priority - again we are talking field stuff here which also gives it more priority due to having to get all the components together (the field staff, flights, hotels (if needed)plus any equipment purchase or rental.

Our Sch Team have a 'buddy up' set up.

This is 2 or 3 people who have a greater knowledge of each others roles and sections.

Right now we have only two on the team who absolutely need to use this to it's full extent.

One has a very large volume, the other has several smaller sections which are much more specialised.

What they do is share information, share each others emails (IT can set this up for you) but also cover each other.

Once per week Ruth shoves herself away in a meeting room and concentrates on her scheduling. Georgia, her buddy is working as normal but she is also covering Ruth's calls and shielding and responding to mails for that day as they come in.

The nest day Georgia is tucked away, Ruth covers and shields.

This means each can properly concentrate on getting the details form emails into the system correctly.

It took a little while but our colleagues now know to go see the one who is not tucked away.

If there is something the buddy cannot help with they will go ask the one who is tucked away concentrating.

The benefit has been that each have much more knowledge of the other's tasks. Often the outside buddy can sort an issue before the tucked away one even sees or hears or a query. When it's urgent then the one who needs to concentrate has one person coming to bother them.

Plus the outside one who is covering is only covering one person so therefore will have a better knowledge and will much more likely know what is and isn't urgent.

 

Where your turnaround is today and next day you can still put this into play by 'buddying up' over a morning and afternoon or even just a couple of hours (plus you will then have much better cover for holidays and sick time too).

If there is no place someone can go for quiet time then just sticking a headset on (I bought some great earphones) and listening to the radio can be enough to hep with concentration (I do this pretty much allllllll the time. Jango is good - free internet radio and you can listen to absolutely anything..classical is good - and I am serious btw. I could not do my job without blocking out what is going on around me or I would still be at work now and likely for another hour or so).

 

 

 

On the Accounting end - the errors that effect them - those are easier to get a handle on because the goal is to catch things after they have been done in the field, but have not yet invoiced. I had a system where one team member was double-checking another team member's work. My boss decided that was dumb and stopped it. I think this is why the errors on the Accounting end have gone up.

 

I feel like I'm fighting this issue from so many different directions it's ridiculous.

 

You are fighting this issue from many directions - there will always be 'some' of that.

 

 

I am the Management Accountant for my company. I am mentioning this because there is also likely to be either one of me where you work or there is a bit of a combination of Accounts Payable and maybe a Financial Accountant or even the Finance Manager or Director perhaps who are querying things with you after the event and also each team member too. Perhaps you don't even know of how many queries they are getting your team may be getting - ask them.

 

First off, have a meeting with your team and find out from them who in Accs asks them the most questions and when.

'Who' is as important as 'when' and for this they can maybe check back on emails.

 

For years at my place we as Accs 'assumed' costs on our database to be correct.

My job evolved into becoming hot on costings and I produce reports now that are as spot on cost wise as I can be.

I also calculate our sales teams commissions so if to me a cost looks wrong and me seeing it I don't query it (and they don't spot it and argue it) then someone could have a £150K reduction in their revenue numbers. To a sales person this could mean £1000 in payment into their bank account. Admittedly I am just playing figures here but it could happen - and it has in the past.

As well as that though Accs are always looking at cost and margin - always.

We spend the last 3-5 months of a year working extra hours putting our Financial Plan together for the up-coming year. All we have to base these figures on is accuracy of data input and invoiced costs where we see them within a month (as in we charge the customer that month, field charge us that same month). It happens 'half' of the time - as you know.

 

The rest of our cost accruals are based upon the info we are given (yeah, some we just know but some we don't - as you said basically)

A cost accrual is the same exactly as 'I wanna buy a Gucci handbag next month - it will cost me £700' - I have looked it up and this is what I will cater for. I will cut out posh meals out and wild parties to allow for that cost.

If an accrual (expected cost) isn't right (suddenly your electric bill triples) then we can't buy that handbag.

In the same vein and for my company I need to make sure those costs are near as they can be right. I would rather the cost looked £200 more than £200 less.

 

Whoever you find out who queries the most after the date you need to find out the report they run for their finance calcs at month end.

 

Run that report, sort it, cut all of the sh*t out and look at the costs. Find out from that bod in Accs exactly what they need.

I asked my Finance Director if I could do this for over 2 years and he said no - just keep querying this and that at all different times - drove me up the wall!

 

My FD was on his hols and I spoke to the Sch Director - My idea was to run a report for Accs, check through it for queries mid month, address those queries with the Schs and sort out most of that month's issues before it was month end.

 

The Sch Director loved the idea, the Sch Team have embraced it as they know they will only get one set of questions per month.

 

My FD didn't know I had done this until he became aware of the results.

He bloody loves it!

 

You do have your Manager to contend with - he sounds more stubborn than my FD was.

I put things into play. Try just doing it.

[bathtub-row]

Thanks so much for your valuable input, Gemma! Very nice of you to take the time to share all of that with me. It was very helpful.

 

Ok, I ran the numbers yesterday. My team handled just under 6,000 records for the month of Oct and made 42 errors. That's under a 1% error rate. Regardless, it's not for me to argue with my boss about that being good enough. And I can see his point. For the people in the field, each and every mistake can cost them time and can create mistakes that have to be fixed. So, these numbers need to go down.

 

In doing the charts, I discovered some areas that I think I can effect by creating written processes for better quality control. Gemma, in the case of my team, while they all have their own company email accounts, we have a few email accounts that I refer to as generic. And everyone on my team has access to those accounts. The clients that they handle go into folders that have their names on them. This common email acct keeps the confusion down for clients because they can consistently send their info to one place each time. If someone leaves the company, I don't have to worry about re-directing the client to someone else. Also, if someone is off sick, someone else on my team can smoothly take over without any hiccup. It's a system I developed years ago and it has proved valuable all this time.

 

I like your idea of sequestering someone so that they can focus. I have said over and over that distractions are our biggest enemy. I'm not sure how to pull this off with my team but I'll give it some thought.

 

As far as our work affecting the Accounting Dept, Accounting's only concern is that we get the info right before they move things over from our database system to their Accounting system. Once it's moved (or copied), correcting errors gets a lot more hairy. I haven't yet run the numbers for Accounting errors this month but they are typically in the range of 10 to 16 per month. Based on what I think happened in Oct, I'm thinking it's going to be higher than that - possibly around 25. Hopefully not any higher.

 

I have constant control and knowledge of errors made with Accounting. That's why the errors are so easy to track. Accounting copies me on everything that goes to my team. Tracking field errors is based on my team putting the info in a shared spreadsheet as they get the info. This is trickier because it's based on them remembering to do it, and being honest about it.

 

I think I have some pretty good ideas about how to deal with this going forward. I expect to see much better numbers next month.

 

Thanks again, Gemma!

[GemmaUK]

You're welcome BTR!

 

Ok, I ran the numbers yesterday. My team handled just under 6,000 records for the month of Oct and made 42 errors. That's under a 1% error rate. Regardless, it's not for me to argue with my boss about that being good enough. And I can see his point. For the people in the field, each and every mistake can cost them time and can create mistakes that have to be fixed. So, these numbers need to go down.

 

What issues do the people in the field have specifically?

I'm asking for specifics because my ex actually used to be scheduled and he had an issue which he could have solved if he had any inclination to. I solved it for him one time within a matter of seconds - boy did I get into big trouble next time it happened when I suggested he did the same as I had done that one time! Each of these errors cost his company £100's in fines.

The errors were something either he could do, your team could do or any outsider like me could do.

 

In doing the charts, I discovered some areas that I think I can effect by creating written processes for better quality control.

Great idea, as long as they are officially made aware that these are the processes and they need to be followed. In other words make a big deal of it, make it a new thing.

 

 

[quote}

Gemma, in the case of my team, while they all have their own company email accounts, we have a few email accounts that I refer to as generic. And everyone on my team has access to those accounts. The clients that they handle go into folders that have their names on them. This common email acct keeps the confusion down for clients because they can consistently send their info to one place each time. If someone leaves the company, I don't have to worry about re-directing the client to someone else. Also, if someone is off sick, someone else on my team can smoothly take over without any hiccup. It's a system I developed years ago and it has proved valuable all this time.

This is going to sound a bit off possibly but are your team happy with how the generic email works?

I ask because our Sch team used to have this and they ditched it.

Our Customer Services Team still has it and it creates animosity all of the time, day in day out.

Not one of our CS team has not had an issue with it. - eg it's Susan's day to pull X report together so she is working on that then Emma, Debbie and Sam all complain that Susan hasn't responded to any mails from the generic mailbox.

What makes matters worse in that team is they are consistently threatened with disciplinaries by their manager. The team does a great job - the manager has different rules for herself, her closest colleague and all of the rest of the team. The generic inbox is a daily thorn of discontent though.

[bathtub-row]

You're welcome BTR!

 

 

 

What issues do the people in the field have specifically?

I'm asking for specifics because my ex actually used to be scheduled and he had an issue which he could have solved if he had any inclination to. I solved it for him one time within a matter of seconds - boy did I get into big trouble next time it happened when I suggested he did the same as I had done that one time! Each of these errors cost his company £100's in fines.

The errors were something either he could do, your team could do or any outsider like me could do.

 

 

Great idea, as long as they are officially made aware that these are the processes and they need to be followed. In other words make a big deal of it, make it a new thing.

 

 

[quote}

Gemma, in the case of my team, while they all have their own company email accounts, we have a few email accounts that I refer to as generic. And everyone on my team has access to those accounts. The clients that they handle go into folders that have their names on them. This common email acct keeps the confusion down for clients because they can consistently send their info to one place each time. If someone leaves the company, I don't have to worry about re-directing the client to someone else. Also, if someone is off sick, someone else on my team can smoothly take over without any hiccup. It's a system I developed years ago and it has proved valuable all this time.

This is going to sound a bit off possibly but are your team happy with how the generic email works?

I ask because our Sch team used to have this and they ditched it.

Our Customer Services Team still has it and it creates animosity all of the time, day in day out.

Not one of our CS team has not had an issue with it. - eg it's Susan's day to pull X report together so she is working on that then Emma, Debbie and Sam all complain that Susan hasn't responded to any mails from the generic mailbox.

What makes matters worse in that team is they are consistently threatened with disciplinaries by their manager. The team does a great job - the manager has different rules for herself, her closest colleague and all of the rest of the team. The generic inbox is a daily thorn of discontent though.

 

Yeah, I'll make sure the process is followed. I do that with several other things already.

 

As far as scheduling is concerned, without too many specifics, let's say there's an A/C repair company. And say they have like 15 guys that get sent out each day for repairs. The day before that, the customers are requesting a certain type of repair. The office schedules it and the repair guy knows he has to do a particular type of function. But let's say the office didn't put the right date in, and now the guy has to pick up something that was unexpected. Another case would be that it was scheduled but the wrong type of repair was put on. Then the repair guy has to regroup. It's things like that they don't necessarily effect the bottom line but causes problems.

 

Any suggestions?

[GemmaUK]

As far as scheduling is concerned, without too many specifics, let's say there's an A/C repair company. And say they have like 15 guys that get sent out each day for repairs. The day before that, the customers are requesting a certain type of repair. The office schedules it and the repair guy knows he has to do a particular type of function. But let's say the office didn't put the right date in, and now the guy has to pick up something that was unexpected. Another case would be that it was scheduled but the wrong type of repair was put on. Then the repair guy has to regroup. It's things like that they don't necessarily effect the bottom line but causes problems.

 

Any suggestions?

 

That would just need a check between the mail trail, database and method of notification to the A/C company before sending them the details.

Anything going to an outside source should always be checked for accuracy.

 

On a few of the internal documents we have at work which are reported on a form we have a box for the 'issue' which is system generated but also an explanation box which is a typed description of the problem written by the person raising the form. Anyone raising that form can see if the issue and descriptions don't match before it gets sent on. The date could be incorporated into the description box also.

[bathtub-row]

Nothing is going to an outside source. Just imagine that the office personnel does the work for the field personnel, generating their schedule for the following day -- all the same company. A/C repair isn't what we do. I'm just using that as an example.

 

Verifying the info source would be possible but extremely time-consuming. For instance, we get about 200 emails a day for scheduling, plus there are 2 other sources we use (our clients require that we use these sources). So, there are about 3 different sources and numerous requests. That's why I think putting measure in place to do it right the first time would be the most effective. What do you think?

[GemmaUK]

Well, of course measures to lessen the likelihood of errors happening should help.

 

I agree with your boss in that one person on calls would not be a good idea but you haven't yet said what his reasons are for not liking this evn though you say they are valid ones?

 

Perhaps your boss is attempting to nudge you into taking this on and 'managing it' without needing to seek consent from him or the CEO.

Perhaps try blocked hours of time and buddy ups for those who need it - just trial it rather than asking if you can. See how it works for a couple of months for the business and for the teams working alongside your team.

[bathtub-row]

Well, of course measures to lessen the likelihood of errors happening should help.

 

I agree with your boss in that one person on calls would not be a good idea but you haven't yet said what his reasons are for not liking this evn though you say they are valid ones?

 

Perhaps your boss is attempting to nudge you into taking this on and 'managing it' without needing to seek consent from him or the CEO.

Perhaps try blocked hours of time and buddy ups for those who need it - just trial it rather than asking if you can. See how it works for a couple of months for the business and for the teams working alongside your team.

 

I'm only talking to my boss about these things because he has made a huge issue of it. So he wants to hear my ideas and then tells me he doesn't like them. I have no intention of going over his head about it. Someone asked me about doing that and I was pointing out who I would have to go to if I did that. I'm just looking for another job because I want to get away from the company.

 

I don't recall that I said he had valid reasons for rejecting my idea about putting one person on the phones. If I did, I misspoke. I believe my team has too many distractions and that's what I think it will take to remove those distractions.

 

My point earlier about verifying emails, etc is that that process would be really time-consuming. I just don't think I could justify spending that kind of time on something like that. I think putting things in place as the data is being entered is a better way to go.

[Popsicle]

Can you point it out on their job review with ratings and have your boss present during the review to give them a stern warning?

 

And maybe some retraining possibly?