Quick Reference: Exit Criteria for Phases
Quick Reference: Exit Criteria for Phases
Note: These seemingly exact numbers are offered as an example of the scope and dynamics of the KCS impact. Actual results will vary based on the characteristics of the company culture, products, and customers.
Phase 1: Design and Planning
Phase 1 Exit Criteria |
Benefits |
Readiness Evidence |
---|---|---|
Organizational commitment |
|
|
Strategic framework complete |
Defined expectations for customer, employee, and organization |
Separate customer, employee, and organization views with related benefits and anticipated results |
Content standard available |
Consistent article content |
|
Article Quality Index defined |
High quality articles |
|
Processes defined and tested |
Enable the Solve Loop |
Process to integrate use of the KB into the issue resolution process has been documented and tested with current tools |
Process Adherence Review defined |
Process compliance |
|
Licensing model defined | Rights and privileges aligned to competency | License level rights and privileges defined with clear criteria to award license and conditions and terms for removing a license |
Coaching model defined | Consistent interpretation of content standard and workflow | Coaches identified and trained |
Performance Assessment Model defined |
Learning and development |
Draft metrics developed and defined (largely derived from AQI and PAR) |
Measure of progress |
All indicators in the measurement framework have a baseline measure that reflects the current state |
|
Communication plan in place |
|
|
Technology functional specifications drafted |
Minimize technology investment for Wave I (practice KCS before major investment in tools) |
|
Adoption Road Map complete |
|
|
Training program for Wave I users | Engage Wave I participants | Training materials and scenarios developed and tested |
Phase 2: Adopting
Phase 2 Activities |
Benefits |
Readiness Evidence |
---|---|---|
Key Performance Metrics are consistently reviewed to assess behaviors. |
Demonstrates commitment to the program |
|
KCS Training and Coaching |
Understanding and buy-in: knowledge workers have adopted the KCS workflow and understand the content standard |
80-90% of knowledge workers are trained and licensed (KCS Contributors or KCS Publishers) |
Knowledge base is being used for 65%-85% of requests |
Reduced rework, leveraging the collective experience of the organization through reuse of knowledge, and minimal duplicate articles being created |
Link accuracy is 90% or greater. Link rates are 65%-85% (this range represents the fact that using the knowledge base has become a habit, and it is enough use to sustain the methodology) |
Articles are being reused or modified as needed, and created if they don't exist |
Most of what the organization knows has been captured in the knowledge base |
Reuse rate of existing articles is greater than the creation rate of new articles |
Functional and integration improvements identified in Wave I have been implemented |
Optimal process drives how the work gets done. Make it easy for the knowledge worker to do the right thing. |
Technology supports the workflow (through modifications to existing tools or acquisition of new tools) |
Articles adhere to the content standard |
Articles in the KB are sufficient to help (findable and usable) |
AQI average for the team is equal to or exceeds the AQI target |
Knowledge workers are doing the Solve Loop activities | Knowledge articles are being reused, improved, and if it doesn't exist, captured in the workflow | PAR average for the team is equal to or exceeds the PAR target |
Knowledge base has shown value internally |
Assures customers will find helpful articles in self-service (Phase 3) |
Reuse of existing articles is equal to or greater than the creation rate |
Phase 3: Leveraging
Phase 3 Activities |
Benefits |
Readiness Evidence |
---|---|---|
Articles available for self-service |
Customers have faster visibility to article |
|
Self‐service use |
Customer success with self-service |
Frequency with which customers use self-service before opening an incident is increasing |
Self-service success | Customer's ability to solve issues without opening a case | Positive trend in customers' ability to find useful information |
The source of pervasive issues are being identified |
Organizational improvements |
Increase in the number of organizational improvements identified (product function, service, process, policy) |
Incident volume decreased |
|
Number of requests/ incidents declines (this needs to be normalized to install base or revenue in order to account for the dynamics of the organization) |
Customer satisfaction and loyalty increased |
Increase customer success |
Increase from the baseline |
Employee satisfaction and loyalty increased |
Increase profit |
Increase from the baseline |
Work has become more meaningful |
Motivation factor for employees |
Employee satisfaction increased from baseline |
Assess self-service (New vs Known study) | Improve self-service experience (success rate) | Improvement in new vs known ratio |
Phase 4: Maximizing
Focus areas and trends for Phase 4
Phase 4 Activities |
Benefits |
Readiness Evidence |
---|---|---|
Customer loyalty | Improve brand image and customer retention | NPS |
Lower customer effort |
|
Survey, CES |
Work shifted from known to new |
New opportunities and challenges for employees |
New vs known—the work in the organization shifts from mostly known to mostly new, . Knowledge workers spend the majority of their time resolving new issues. This will vary based on product lifecycle or process/policy changes. |
Time to adopt new/enhanced products |
Customer success measured |
Decrease from the baseline |
Support cost as a percentage of revenue has decreased |
Lower cost |
Support costs have dropped by 25‐50%, and the volume of customer issues resolved is up at least 100% (web success combined with incidents closed) |
Identification of pervasive issues | Increase speed |