HDI San Diego Chapter
May 2012
Desktop Support Metrics:
A Case Study
Mike Russell
V.P. Communications, SDHDI
About the Author
• Over 26 years in I.T. in San Diego
• Experienced in Programming, Operations, Infrastructure
and Support
• 12 years in Service Delivery Management
• Specialized in Desktop Support Management and Device
Deployment
• Member of the San Diego HDI chapter for 5 years
• Member of HDI Desktop Support Forums
• Member of HDI Desktop Support Advisory Board
The Challenges of Developing Desktop
Support Metrics
• Analysis and Development of Desktop Support standards
are not as mature as the Service Desk standards
– Different responsibilities require different processes
– Different processes require different metrics which are
difficult to capture
– History of using subjective not objective measures
• Desktop Support Staff have multiple inputs for service
– Mobile, dynamic and dispersed workforce
– Have a closer relationship with customer base
– Receive escalations and triage requests from different
departments in I.T.
Common Perceptions of Desktop Support
• Perceptions of Desktop Support can be varied
– Customers feel the Desktop Support team is an
extension or replacement of the Service Desk
– I.T. Partners feel that the Desktop Support team can be
engaged at will for immediate assistance and may be an
inexhaustible resource
– Project Managers feel that the Desktop Support team is a
replacement for project labor and may be an
inexhaustible resource
– Executive Management does not fully understand the
scope of work performed by Desktop Support
– Desktop Support analysts can feel misunderstood, under
appreciated and over utilized
The Problem
• I needed a way to accurately measure, analyze and market
the services delivered by Desktop Support.
– Demonstrate Staff Productivity
– Measure Staff Effectiveness
– Measure Performance Quality
– Track Customer Satisfaction
– Illustrate effects of bad changes
– Identify Opportunities for Service Improvement
– Demonstrate Improved performance
– Improve staff satisfaction
– Market the value of Desktop Support to I.T. and
Executive Management
“Must Have” Measurements
• Staff Effectiveness
• Staff Productivity
– The ability to track tickets by:
• Incidents
• Service Requests
• Problems
• Changes
• Quality
• Customer Satisfaction
Staff Effectiveness
The Effective use of Time by Staff
• Actual time staff has available to work on issues
– Does not include meetings, breaks, non-ticketed project
time, sick days, PTO, etc.
– May require process changes in time and attendance
• Actual time spent on individual tickets
– Does not mean time received to time resolved
– May be in several chunks of time
– Will require manual “best judgment” of staff
– May require modification to your ticketing system
Actual Ticket Time/Available Time = Effectiveness
Staff Effectiveness
Example:
Bobby works a standard 40 hour week (37.5 hours w/breaks)
Bobby attends 4 hours of meetings (37.5 – 4 = 34.5)
Bobby is sick one day (34.5 – 8 = 26.5)
Bobby documents 22.3 hours spent on ticket resolution.
Bobby’s Effectiveness is 22.3/26.5 = 84%
Staff Effectiveness
• Expect to see initial rates between 30% to 200%
– Low numbers indicate that staff may not be estimating
times correctly or not reporting all issues
– High numbers may indicate duplicate tickets or lack of
understanding of what is being tracked
• This can take 2 – 3 months to “settle in” with staff
– Review monthly with staff to find cause of out of range
effectiveness
– Do not assume staff are purposely misleading with stats
– Tip: do NOT show total time spent on tickets to staff at
first (or possible at all)
Industry Standard: 80% Effectiveness Rating
(48 Minutes per Hour)
Staff Productivity
• You should already be tracking the number of tickets being
closed per day or month
– Decide which metrics are related to productivity and
customer satisfaction (ex: initial response time, days to
resolve, etc.)
– In your ticketing system, automatically classify tickets as
incidents or requests
– Have the analyst resolving the ticket verify the CLOSING
classification (do NOT default to opening classification!)
– The closing analyst should document if the ticket is
related to a change or problem, and if so, which one
– Try using the time captured in the effectiveness metric to
calculate tickets closed per working hour
Quality
•
•
•
•
•
•
Use a monthly quality survey to track SLA adherence and
other factors critical to the delivery of superior support
Customer Contact Time (SLA < 2 business hours)
Resolution Time (SLA < 8 business hours)
Work log information complete and correct
– Document all customer contacts including name
– Should be clear enough that the CUSTOMER can
understand it.
Appointments Made and Kept
– If appointments are made, are they kept
Asset Information Correct
Closing CTI Appropriate for the issue
Quality
•
•
•
•
•
Contains Objective and Subjective measurements
Measurement standards should be clear and documented
Should not be performed by one individual
Sampling size needs to remain consistent
Because some subjective judgments must be made, the
staff members must have the ability to review and challenge
the results
• As a manager, you have the right and responsibility to make
changes to the results in order to remain fair
Customer Satisfaction
• Send an automated survey to customers for each ticket
• Expect a 5% - 15% rate of return
• Very low or Very high returns are a red flag, especially on
an individual basis.
• Design reports so that Customer Satisfaction can be
trended to other metrics (ticket volumes, time to respond,
problems, projects, etc.)
Customer Satisfaction transcends all levels of
management, and can be the most important
factor in the perception, success and survival of
the desktop support team.
Quick Review
• Perceptions:
– Unlimited Resources, Unknown scope of services,
Always Immediately available (not doing anything else),
misunderstood, under appreciated, over utilized
• Metrics driving the solution:
– Staff Productivity
– Staff Effectiveness
– Quality
– Customer Satisfaction
Put this all together, what does it look like?
The Solution
• The Balanced Team Scorecard
– Productivity metrics for Incident, Service Request
Problems and Changes (SLAs/OLAs)
– Average Team Effectiveness
– Average Quality Scores
– Average Customer Satisfaction
– Trending report for last 12 months for Key Performance
Indicators and SLAs
• Subtext describing significant factors in changes
Distributed Monthly to I.T. Management and Customers
What does the end result look like?
The Results
• It Works!
– Received Praise from Executive Levels on the metrics
reported
– Adopted as standard for metrics reporting for the I.T.
operations teams
– Received praise from the staff as they felt recognized
and valued in the organization
– Captures data that can be used for further research, ex:
cost of bad changes, most costly services, etc.
– Recognized as a best practice by HDI, presented at the
2012 National Conference in Orlando
Thank you!
Questions?
Mike Russell, I.T. Service Delivery Management
mrussel2@cox.net