Helpdesk/Training Department
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
For example, an SLA is what makes the ISP not have to fix your outage right away - because they have no reason to do anything faster than the SLA. And in many cases the SLA limits damages and makes it not worse fixes you at all.
Service level can be improved which will help overall. Having an SLA in place which gives customer a level of service that we gaurantee is useful as they then know what to expect, and we know what to deliver.
You are describing an SLO, not an SLA.
Do you think its reasonable to charge for different levels?
Of course, but you'd manage that via SLO. SLA is a very adversarial tool, SLO is not.
Do you have an example SLO? I've just had a very quick look online and most sites are saying something to the tune of SLAs being made up of SLOs that are being gauranteed... if you have an example to hand that would be appreciated...
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
For example, an SLA is what makes the ISP not have to fix your outage right away - because they have no reason to do anything faster than the SLA. And in many cases the SLA limits damages and makes it not worse fixes you at all.
Service level can be improved which will help overall. Having an SLA in place which gives customer a level of service that we gaurantee is useful as they then know what to expect, and we know what to deliver.
You are describing an SLO, not an SLA.
Do you think its reasonable to charge for different levels?
Of course, but you'd manage that via SLO. SLA is a very adversarial tool, SLO is not.
Do you have an example SLO? I've just had a very quick look online and most sites are saying something to the tune of SLAs being made up of SLOs that are being gauranteed... if you have an example to hand that would be appreciated...
It's the guarantees that are the problem. The issue with an SLA is that you leave the world of "we will do the best that we can" and move to "We only have to do X, and if we don't, here is the most that you can complain about it." SLOs are about working together on a plan. SLAs are about making sure you don't have to do the best that you can.
Think of it like networking.... best effort is like QoS. SLA is like reserved limits - everyone loses.
-
Here is an example of an SLA....
- We guarantee that we will respond in two days.
Here is what results...
- Tech sits idle for two days and then responds at the last second. There is no reason to respond faster, but there is incentive not to respond faster because you don't want the customer expecting something better than the SLA guarantees. If you miss the two day window, the SLA's purpose is to limit the customer's options for recourse.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Here is an example of an SLA....
- We guarantee that we will respond in two days.
Here is what results...
- Tech sits idle for two days and then responds at the last second. There is no reason to respond faster, but there is incentive not to respond faster because you don't want the customer expecting something better than the SLA guarantees. If you miss the two day window, the SLA's purpose is to limit the customer's options for recourse.
Yes, that makes sense. Using an example though... the SLA to the customer for 'standard, free, part of the normal subscription' support could be 'We will respond in two days.'. Internally however, the help desk KPIs, what their job is based on, could be to make sure all calls/requests are answered within two hours. By sitting idle for two days, they do not meet their target and it risks their jobs. However, from the customers POV we're going waaaay above and beyond as they expected everything within two days, but were meeting two hours... For customers that pay premium for gauranteed within 2 hours, their requests would come first so from their POV, they are still getting what they pay for and now are making some money back from providing the helpdesk function...
If call rate expands, those free support users may get a reply in 4 hours, or a day etc, but its still way within their expected timeframe. The paid customers will be gauranteed the response...
Is that not a fair way?
-
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Here is an example of an SLA....
- We guarantee that we will respond in two days.
Here is what results...
- Tech sits idle for two days and then responds at the last second. There is no reason to respond faster, but there is incentive not to respond faster because you don't want the customer expecting something better than the SLA guarantees. If you miss the two day window, the SLA's purpose is to limit the customer's options for recourse.
Yes, that makes sense. Using an example though... the SLA to the customer for 'standard, free, part of the normal subscription' support could be 'We will respond in two days.'. Internally however, the help desk KPIs, what their job is based on, could be to make sure all calls/requests are answered within two hours. By sitting idle for two days, they do not meet their target and it risks their jobs. However, from the customers POV we're going waaaay above and beyond as they expected everything within two days, but were meeting two hours... For customers that pay premium for gauranteed within 2 hours, their requests would come first so from their POV, they are still getting what they pay for and now are making some money back from providing the helpdesk function...
If call rate expands, those free support users may get a reply in 4 hours, or a day etc, but its still way within their expected timeframe. The paid customers will be gauranteed the response...
Is that not a fair way?
SLA tells nothing of what is expected, it tells at what point they have recourse against you. SLA tells nothing of what you strive to do, only what you strive to avoid.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
But as Scott is saying, there is no guarantee. All they have is what they receive when you don’t meet the SLA, like a refund etc.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
That means nothing, though. I'm literally asking how you will do it. Guaranteeing something isn't as simle as saying it. You have to come up with a means of ensuring that you can always meet that requirement.
-
@dashrender said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
But as Scott is saying, there is no guarantee. All they have is what they receive when you don’t meet the SLA, like a refund etc.
Exactly, guarantee is a meaningless term here.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@dashrender said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
But as Scott is saying, there is no guarantee. All they have is what they receive when you don’t meet the SLA, like a refund etc.
Exactly, guarantee is a meaningless term here.
I get that, but... without something presented to customers, saying what we will do, and what they get if we do not manage to do what we say we will do - why would they hand over any cash? The support we offer needs to be financially viable. By saying for x% of the subscription you will get a, b and c...
How can I charge them for support beyond the free version we include, without saying what that support actually is...
-
"Basic support is included with all subscriptions. We aim to respond and help you within two business days as standard, however, you can bolt-on a tailored support platform enabling us to ensure resources are available to you:
Gold Bolt-On (9am - 5pm UK):
- Direct phone support, and email support
- We work on your question within '120' minutes of opening the case
- Monthly review of support to ensure we are meeting your needs
Silver Bolt-On (9am - 5pm UK):
- Direct phone support, and email support
- We work on your question within '240' minutes of opening the case
- Quarterly review of support to ensure we are meeting your needs
Bronze Bolt-On (9am - 5pm UK):
-
email only
-
We work on your question within '24 hours' of opening the case
-
Yearly review of support to ensure we are meeting your needs
-
Standard Support (9am - 5pm UK):
-
email only
-
We aim to help within two business days."
That sort of thing...
-
Being able to charge for this means I can build the team faster to improve support. As we get more customers, the number of personnel will need to increase offering support... at cost. Currently, this is met with no charge to customers at all, and were just about able to make the finances work. However, It needs to be monetized to make it sustainable...
Do you think such a way is sensible?
Edited: to explain a little.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@dashrender said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Generally we'd want to exceed the expected service by far, but in the case where a customer wants it solid fixed they could pay for the gauranteed 2 hour window etc
How do you guarantee the two hours, though? If you could do that before with best effort, what's the need for the guarantee? If you can't do it without it, how does the SLA make it viable?
The gaurante of doing it is what they pay for as part of that package...
But as Scott is saying, there is no guarantee. All they have is what they receive when you don’t meet the SLA, like a refund etc.
Exactly, guarantee is a meaningless term here.
I get that, but... without something presented to customers, saying what we will do, and what they get if we do not manage to do what we say we will do - why would they hand over any cash? The support we offer needs to be financially viable. By saying for x% of the subscription you will get a, b and c...
How can I charge them for support beyond the free version we include, without saying what that support actually is...
I agree with your premise, but my point is that SLAs do not provide what you are trying to do. SLAs for this purpose only work if you intentionally wait as long as possible to service customers, or else, where is the incentive to go to the next band? Why pay more and more for SLAs, when someone else will do best effort at the base price? SLA = not best effort.
Support bands are great, SLAs are not.
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Being able to charge for this means I can build the team faster to improve support. As we get more customers, the number of personnel will need to increase offering support... at cost. Currently, this is met with no charge to customers at all, and were just about able to make the finances work. However, It needs to be monetized to make it sustainable...
Do you think such a way is sensible?
Edited: to explain a little.
It is extremely hard to do in practice. If you really want to do this, the only way that I have seen it work is to offer phone support at one tier, email at another, etc.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Being able to charge for this means I can build the team faster to improve support. As we get more customers, the number of personnel will need to increase offering support... at cost. Currently, this is met with no charge to customers at all, and were just about able to make the finances work. However, It needs to be monetized to make it sustainable...
Do you think such a way is sensible?
Edited: to explain a little.
It is extremely hard to do in practice. If you really want to do this, the only way that I have seen it work is to offer phone support at one tier, email at another, etc.
Hard, nothing wrong with that. Worthwhile - yes. Worth being hard, yes. If were able to monetize some of the support, that will help financially - a lot actually.
-
Need to think about salary for this position too, as once confirmed (which should be Tuesday), I know it will be discussed. Any ideas on best ways to review salary for roles based in London?
-
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Being able to charge for this means I can build the team faster to improve support. As we get more customers, the number of personnel will need to increase offering support... at cost. Currently, this is met with no charge to customers at all, and were just about able to make the finances work. However, It needs to be monetized to make it sustainable...
Do you think such a way is sensible?
Edited: to explain a little.
It is extremely hard to do in practice. If you really want to do this, the only way that I have seen it work is to offer phone support at one tier, email at another, etc.
Hard, nothing wrong with that. Worthwhile - yes. Worth being hard, yes. If were able to monetize some of the support, that will help financially - a lot actually.
But just to be clear... I mean hard in the "never seen it work, ever" sense. Support and SLAs are very tough things to put together. I can't even picture how it's possible to make it work.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@scottalanmiller said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
@jimmy9008 said in Helpdesk/Training Department:
Being able to charge for this means I can build the team faster to improve support. As we get more customers, the number of personnel will need to increase offering support... at cost. Currently, this is met with no charge to customers at all, and were just about able to make the finances work. However, It needs to be monetized to make it sustainable...
Do you think such a way is sensible?
Edited: to explain a little.
It is extremely hard to do in practice. If you really want to do this, the only way that I have seen it work is to offer phone support at one tier, email at another, etc.
Hard, nothing wrong with that. Worthwhile - yes. Worth being hard, yes. If were able to monetize some of the support, that will help financially - a lot actually.
But just to be clear... I mean hard in the "never seen it work, ever" sense. Support and SLAs are very tough things to put together. I can't even picture how it's possible to make it work.
Then, how do other companies stop support services for customers from burning through cash?
