Quick Reference: Exit Criteria for Phases

Last updated
Save as PDF

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	Clear vision and goals Budget approval	Executive sponsor buy-in Management team buy-in Budget approval Program manager and KCS Council resources identified, allocated, and committed. Communication sent from executive about plans and goals
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	Content standard is understandable and easily accessible One-page quick reference guide for article quality has been created Process in place to update content standard
Content Standard Checklist defined	High quality articles	Checklist can be captured in an easy to use tool and accessible to all coaches Mechanism to provide visibility to the knowledge workers about feedback from the Content Standard Checklist process
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	Link rate and link accuracy assessment process defined, and measures captured and available to coaches Mechanisms to provide visibility to the knowledge workers about PAR scores and feedback from the PAR process
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 Content Standard Checklist and PAR)
Baseline metrics established	Measure of progress	All indicators in the measurement framework have a baseline measure that reflects the current state
Communication plan in place	Benefits defined for each stakeholder Commitment to project	Written communication plan with project owner Review and signoff of plan by Executive Sponsor Process for testing communications effectiveness Process for feedback and improvement
Technology functional specifications drafted	Minimize technology investment for Wave I (practice KCS before major investment in tools)	Technology assessment complete Technology supports the basic workflow
Adoption Road Map complete	Time and cost commitment known Supports project management	KCS Council engaged Wave I members identified Training scheduled for Wave I
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	First contact resolution increased compared to baseline Time to proficiency decreased compared to baseline Increase in capacity (usually 20-30%) Cost per incident decreased from baseline
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)	Content Standard Checklist average for the team is equal to or exceeds the Checklist 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	% of knowledge base available to self-service 90/0 rule—90% of requestor-actionable knowledge is available to requestors within 0 minutes of becoming known.
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	Cost savings Opportunities to create additional value for customers	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	Resolve issues Optimize usage Adopt features	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