MGMT 90141 Business Analysis and Decision Making

Telstra Shift Allocation Cost Optimisation

Name 1. Anusit Phipatananukit 1005021

2. Ying Yu Ko 247284
3. Manasicha Makaew 1000073
4. Rebecca Vidal Padilla 1022764
5. Nigel Xiaofeng Xu 598608

Stream 1 (Tuesday/ Thursday: 10AM-1PM)

Table of Contents
1.Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
2.Literature review .............................................................................................................................. 2
2.1 Synopsis .................................................................................................................................... 2
2.2 Strengths.................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Weaknesses ............................................................................................................................... 7
2.4 Summary of Literature Review ................................................................................................. 8
3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Identifications of Problem ......................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Define the decision variables .................................................................................................. 10
3.3 Identify the objective function ................................................................................................ 11
3.4 Identify the constraints ............................................................................................................ 11
4. Model Implementation .................................................................................................................. 14
4.1 Reasonable Simplification and Assumptions .......................................................................... 14
4.2 Problem Identification ............................................................................................................. 19
4.3 Decision Variable Identification ............................................................................................. 19
4.4 Identify the Objective Function............................................................................................... 20
4.5 Constraints Identification ........................................................................................................ 21
4.6 Implementation in Excel Solver .............................................................................................. 41
4.7 Optimal Solution ..................................................................................................................... 44
4.8 Sensitivity Analysis ................................................................................................................. 45
5. Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 47
5.1 Advantages .............................................................................................................................. 47
5.2 Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 49
5.3 Discussion & Recommendations ............................................................................................ 51
6. Conclusion..................................................................................................................................... 54
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................ 55
- Literature Review Conclusion .................................................................................................... 55
- Group Meeting Minutes .............................................................................................................. 67
References: ........................................................................................................................................ 71
1.Introduction

Telstra is the market leader and the largest provider in the telecommunication industry in

Australia. It has a market share of 38.1% of overall industry size, 42,823 million AUD at the

end of December 2018 (IBIS,2018). Telstra has many other businesses including fixed-line

broadband, mobile and support service to other companies, which we will mention later in

the report (Morning star, 2018). Telstra revenue and profit have had a downward trend since

2014 ( Marketline, 2018) . The number of employees is approximately 33,000 people at a

stagnant levelfrom 2014 to the present (Orbis,2018).

According to the Telstra annual report (2018), Telstra was threatened from competitors and

lower demand from the customers. Furthermore, it has been impacted by the low growth rate

in Australia telecommunication industry which is one to two percentage growth rate since

2015. The company has reduced cost in high human capital cost including lower small

percentage of employees every year from 2016 ( Marketline,2018) . Meanwhile, Vodafone

and Optus, the major competitors of Telstra have started to lay off a number of employees

and undertake reorganisation which lead to lower expenses and higher profit for the two

companies ( Marketline,2018) . In July 2018, Telstra launched the reorganization policy to

reduce its labour costs and simplify the organisation workforce structure efficiency in long

term by announcing all levels company reorganisation. Approximately 8000 employees

leaved their jobs and most employees who worked in shift had their new shifts adjustment

( Company360, 2018) . Thus, we have chosen one of the Telstra sub- departments to analyse

Page | 1
the change of workforce shift allocation by comparing the OLD and NEW rosters as the

business problem in this report.

Telstra has been burdening high employee costs for a long period of time as mentioned

previously. Therefore, a new optimal worker roster does not only increase the company profit

by minimising operating expenses but also improves employee satisfaction and work- life

balance level which are usually low during a reorganisation period ( Van den Bergh et

al. ,2013) . We applied integer programming method to achieve an optimal solution for the

pre- and postworkforce shift allocation.

The purpose of this report is to apply optimisation modelling, analyse the costs and benefits

of the old and new roster systems and justify whether the shift from old roster to new roster

is a better business decision in terms of cost savings while keeping minimal impact on the

operation and employee satisfaction. The audience of the report will be the senior

management. The report consists of introduction, literature review, methodology, model

implementation, discussion on advantages and limitations followed by conclusion.

2.Literature review

2.1 Synopsis

In this report, we evaluated the business criteria to minimize workforce cost by focusing on

shift allocation. Due to the absence of information regarding man force allocation in the

Page | 2
telecommunication industry, we reviewed ten academic articles with previous studies from

the last ten years with similar topics, which helped us get the latest research from our topic

and associate it to the collected data.

We used journal sources such as Scopus, ScienceDirect, Emerald and Google Scholar by

using keywords such as “integer programming”, “IT staff scheduling”, “workforce/shift

scheduling”, “workforce management” and “optimisation”. The following sections are the

analysis and summary of these articles, highlighting the relevant information that helped us

solve the business problems.

2.2 Strengths

2.2.1 Worker satisfaction-scheduling optimisation

According to the recollected data, worker satisfaction is the most significant aspect of labour

cost minimisation. Lin, H., Chen, Y., Chou, T., & Liao, Y. (2012), Shuib, A. and Kamarudin,

F. I. (2019), Hecke, T. V. (2011) and Cheang, B., Li, H., Lim, A., & Rodrigues, B. (2003)

had a “worker-shift fondness” approach to accomplish work satisfaction.

Shuib, A. and Kamarudin, F. I. (2019) discussed the significant correlation between company

overtime, personal efficiency and overall cost. According to the research, assigning workers

to have the best shift pattern is reflected in the maximisation of customer satisfaction and

Page | 3
worker performance. Lin et al. (2012) studied the significance of a high-quality schedule to

lead to a more contented and more effective workforce.

Labidi, M., Mrad, M., Gharbi, A. & Louly, M. A. (2014) discussed that the two common

ways to prevent scheduling conflict are a schedule review during and after changes and

having one person responsible for the schedule. They also highlighted that poorly arranged

schedules including a lack of breaks between shifts and double shifts. This lowers staff

morale which leads to poor production and increases the occurrence of accidents or errors

due to employee fatigue from overwork. This is the exact situation at Telstra, staff are usually

working at average 60-70 hours or even up to 86 hours a week which is a double of the

number of ordinary hours (average 36.92 hours a week). Supported by Lin et al. (2012) who

addressed the importance of considering days-off in order to have higher personal worker

efficiency, lower overtime and total human capital cost.

2.2.2 Multi-skill

Multi-skill is a key criterion which can directly focus on shift scheduling to minimise costs.

According to Zulch, Rottinger, & Vollstedt, (2004), this property has remarkable effects such

as organizing the workforce more efficiently and expending the labour cost more

economically. Bhulai, S., Koole, G. & Pot, A. (2008) proposed an efficient method for shift

scheduling in a multi-skill environment while taking into consideration service-level

constraint in each planning period. The authors assumed that agents from the same group

have an equal set of skills by meeting the service-level constraint against minimal costs. We

can apply the multi skills criterion to Telstra where staff are also working in a multiskill

Page | 4
environment and are required to meet the service level agreement (SLA) requirements. This

can be done in a two steps approach by firstly converting the amount of work into the number

of technicians required such that SLA requirements are met and secondly generating shifts

such that staffing levels are met.

Jeffrey L. Cummings, Bing-Sheng Teng (2003) suggested that after a knowledge transferring

system upgrade, more professionals can manage the same projects as an expert would do and

have a considerate overview of how the amount of cost varies when it is applied. Factoring

in this information will allow telecommunication companies to create flexible workforce

allocation for any shift and with any person in order to minimize costs and maintain the high

service quality.

2.2.3 Workload Balance

Based on our data, evening and night shifts are difficult for staff recruiting due to employee

preferences. However, there are business needs to be fulfilled and the best way to achieve it

is by the efficient utilisation of resource and workload balance schedule. Labidi, M., Mrad,

M., Gharbi, A. & Louly, M. A. (2014) suggested the coverage schedule method which is

applied to the inconsistent pattern of workload where high flexibility is required. Schedules

must be set accordingly to the prevailing pattern in the workload. Lin, C. K. Y., Lai, K. F.,

& Hung, S. L. (2000) emphasized the workload that the company has and the service levels

set that they must achieve. This is difficult due to the lack of staff available during evening

and night time shift. They solved this problem by developing a model considering the

Page | 5
workload in the coming days, weeks and months to allocate manpower as is needed.

Furthermore, by weighting this information, companies can reduce the workforce cost by

excelling at shift allocation knowing beforehand the workload and be able to put the right

person for the tasks needed to be done.

2.2.4 Minimising overtime

Our research brought that minimising overtime as a factor to minimise cost and at the same

time, increase employee satisfaction. Labidi, M., Mrad, M., Gharbi, A. & Louly, M. A.

(2014) suggested a method where the highest importance level is given to minimise overtime

in order to have higher employee satisfaction hence better productivity. Hecke, T. V. (2011)

proposed having an extra shift with lower workers per shift which resulted in better customer

service level comparing to doing overtime with the same amount of shifts in terms of cost

and performance in busy periods. Cheang, B., Li, H., Lim, A., & Rodrigues, B. (2003)

proposed a single objective optimization with some of the constraints suitably applied using

integer programming (IP) which can effectively solve the scheduling problems regarding

fortnightly working hours and three-shift day. By taking into consideration this data, it is

compatible with the outcome of Lin, C. K. Y., Lai, K. F., & Hung, S. L. (2000) that after all

the staff are scheduled, the final output of overtime/excess man-hours by day and hour would

further inform the supervisors on when to allocate additional staff or organize training

sessions (in hours indicating excess staff).

Page | 6
2.3 Weaknesses

2.3.1 Legal regulations

Hecke, T. V. (2011) stated that some employee preferences might not match with the

regulation in some countries, for example, working four nights consecutively without

stopping and working without break time. According to Australia Fair Work Act (2018),

workers need to have at least half an hour break after five-hour of work and employees should

receive at least one day off per week unless alignment with company CEO or executive level

and approval letters from several government sectors are in place.

2.3.2 Large amount of employees

Lin, H., Chen, Y., Chou, T., & Liao, Y. (2012) focused on more than two people working on

the same task, equivalent to Bhulai, S., Koole, G. & Pot, A. (2008) whom solutions can

require more agents with additional kills than an optimal solution would require. This is

undesirable if agents with more skills are significantly more expensive and difficult to apply

in business models where employees are multi-skilled.

Page | 7
2.3.3 Constraint trade-off

The nurse rostering problems (NRP) in Cheang, B., Li, H., Lim, A., & Rodrigues, B. (2003)

sometimes are not able to find a solution without breaking any constraints, therefore there

must be a relative prioritization of constraints. The scheduling problem from Labidi, M.,

Mrad, M., Gharbi, A. & Louly, M.A.(2014), was formulated as a multiobjective

programming model. Some of the constraints may be conflicting and not all constraints can

be optimised simultaneously. It requires trade-offs between the constraints.

2.4 Summary of Literature Review

By studying these articles, we were able to summarise the strengths that were important to

ascertain our assumptions for the optimisation model and added up more to consider.

The above framework acknowledges important parameters for workforce cost minimisation

which are worker satisfaction, scheduling optimisation, multi-skill, workload balance and

minimising overtime. These criterions have a strong correlation among themselves and

impact directly the overall workforce cost of the company. This forms a good basis for our

optimisation model of which the interviewee in Telstra prefers not to work overtime at night shifts,

however, there are business needs to be fulfilled and also SLA requirements to be met in a multiskill

environment in the Networking and IT department at Telstra. Similarly, we found weaknesses

that lack diversity and flexibility to different objective functions like ours where legal

Page | 8
regulations, a small size of employees and the constraint trade-off matters to our optimal

solution.

3. Methodology

3.1 Identifications of Problem

Our target department is the Telstra Department of Operations Network Engineering South

East Team consisting of 19 engineers ranging from Band 4 to 8. Their daily tasks include

carrying out complex engineering assignments which requires advanced system engineering

knowledge and expertise to deploy, support and maintain applications, servers and platforms

to support organizations who are currently using Telstra network services across the south-

east part of Victoria. Most of the support works are done remotely via remote network access,

phone calls support, email responses and Telstra internal ticket system.

To optimize the schedule of IT operation team, integer programming model is built in this

report to achieve a rational schedule that maintain the same team size at a minimum cost

while satisfying the constraints. The main challenges of optimization include the following

factors:

x Minimum cost of staffing requirement

x Compulsory Rest Period (CRP)

x Competencies to support 24 hours SEV1 issues

x Maximum after-hours shifts fortnightly

Page | 9
In the new proposal of the schedule, the three shifts during weekdays is now reduced to two.

In this report, we aim to optimize both proposals and then analysis the differences between

the two schedules.

3.2 Define the decision variables

The Decision Variables:

1, if employee i is assigned to shift j

!"# = 0, otherwise

$"# = salary costs if employee i is assigned to shift j

( i = 1,2,...,19 and j = 1,2,...,19 )

There is a total of 19 engineers in this team, employee number from 1-10 are band 4 from

older roster and now promoted to band 5 in the new roster. The following engineer’s band

remains the same as 11-14 are existing band 5 employees. 15-18 are Band 7 and 19 is for

Band 8. The shifts for old roster are consists of 3 shifts for each weekday and 2 shifts of

weekends in total 19 shifts. The new roster consists of 2 shifts for Monday to Sunday in total

14 shifts.

Page | 10
3.3 Identify the objective function

The main objective function is to calculate the minimize total cost by optimize the shift

allocation, then calculate the total cost which equals total normal-hours salary costs plus total

after-hours salary costs, more precisely, total salary costs are consists of four parts as four

different bands of engineers with different pay rates.

Minimum costs Z=

(+ (+ (+ (+ (+

%& '"( )"( * - & '". )". * - & '"/ )"/ * - & '"(0 )"(0 * - & '"(1 )"(1 *2 -!
",( ",( ",( ",( ",(
(+ 1 (+ 5 (+ + (+ (4 (+ (6 (+ (+

3& & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# 8
",( #,4 ",( #,6 ",( #,7 ",( #,(( ",( #,(. ",( #,(5

3.4 Identify the constraints

3.4.1 Minimum Staffing Requirement

In the old roster, each IT engineer works at ordinary hours of 73 hours and 50 minutes in 9

days per fortnight. Staffs are ranging from Band 4 to Band 8 at different salary levels. At

least 18 employees work in normal shift from Monday to Thursday during normal business

hours 7am – 3:40pm and at least nine employees work in normal hour shift on Friday whereas

only one employee works in each after hours shift from Monday to Sunday.

Page | 11
In the new roster, each IT engineer works at ordinary hours of 72 hours in 6 days per fortnight.

All Band 4 employees are now promoted to Band 5 employees as an incentive to work

overnight shifts at normal pay rate. The arrangement releases Band 5, 7 and 8 employees

from working any overnight shifts. We applied pool allocation method, i. e. use the total

available labour hours of 624 hours from Monday to Thursday in the old roster ( 8. 67 hours

x 4 days x 18 employees) and calculated backward to derive the number of employees

required in normal hour shift in the new roster. At least 13 employees work in normal shift

from Monday to Thursday during normal business hours 7am – 7pm and at least seven

employees work in normal hour shift on Friday whereas only one employee works in each

after hours shift from Monday to Sunday.

3.4.2 Compulsory Rest Period (CRP)

In compliance to compulsory rest period ( CRP) , employee must have 10 hours of rest time

after completing shift work. Therefore, employee who works overnight shift gets a day off

the next day. For example, employee working on Monday night shift will get a day off on

Tuesday.

3.4.3 Competencies to Engineer with Different Bands

In the old roster, at least four Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal hour shift on Monday,

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday and at least two Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal

hour shift on Friday. Band 4 engineers are considered as junior and are lack of the skillset to

Page | 12
handle severity 1 (SEV1) issues. According to the service level agreements as committed

within the operations team, the allocated tasks are categorized into four different levels of

urgency from SEV1 to SEV4, SEV1 is the most urgent priority which normally involves

faulty or out of services programs and servers that significantly affect the business operation.

Once SEV1 issue has been raised to the operations team, they must respond to the issue in a

short period as agreed and provide directly support or re-direct the issue to the relevant

department. Considering Band 7 and 8 as senior and Band 4 and 5 as junior, the senior: junior

ratio is 1: 2.6 for Monday to Thursday shifts and 1: 3.7 for Friday shift. In the new roster

arrangement, all Band 4 employees are promoted to Band 5 and trainings are provided to

them to be able to handle more severe tasks.

3.4.4 Maximum Shifts in Specific Period

In the old roster, each employee works 9 normal hour shifts per fortnight with possibility to

work additional shifts subject to a maximum of 7 shifts per week, a maximum of 2 shifts on

weekday and maximum of 1 shift on weekend working day. However, Band 7 and 8

employees do not work overnight shifts.

In the new roster, each employee works 6 normal hour shifts per fortnight with possibility to

work additional shifts subject to a maximum of 2 after- hours shifts per week. However,

existing Band 5 and Band 7 and 8 employees do not work after-hours shifts.

Page | 13
4. Model Implementation

4.1 Reasonable Simplification and Assumptions

In this section, the data and information were collected from an employee in Telstra through

an individual interview together with research to come up with the assumptions in

formulating the selected mathematical modelling. We have developed two separate models

for the old and new rosters for comparison and analysis.

OLD ROSTER - Simplifications and Assumptions:

x In the Network and IT Department of Telstra, it is a requirement in the Service Level

Agreement to have employees available 24/7 as an emergency technical support. The

working hours are assigned through weekly rostering which includes three shifts a

day during weekdays and two shifts a day on weekends. The shifts are identified as j

= 1, 2, …, 19 from Monday to Sunday.

x The qualification and pay levels are represented in bands which are Band 4, Band 5,

Band 7 and Band 8 for 19 employees. Employees are defined as i = 1, 2, … ,19.

x The salary costs are based on the band level of the employees. The number of ordinary

working hours is 73.83 per fortnight for each employee. To simply the model, we

worked out the hourly rates for each band by multiplying the number of ordinary

hours by net number of fortnights, which is the number of fortnights in one year minus

two weeks of annual leave, and then divide the annual salary costs by the number of

ordinary hours less annual leave.

Page | 14
For example, the hourly rate for a Band 4 employee will be:

$80,670 / [73.83 x (26-2)] hours = $45.52/hour

Number of Less: Number of

Number
Annual ordinary Annual ordinary hours
Band of Hourly rate
salary hours per leave less annual
fortnights
fortnight (2 fortnights) leave

4 80,670 73.83 26 -2 1,772 45.52

5 91,355 73.83 26 -2 1,772 51.55

7 99,525 73.83 26 -2 1,772 56.17

8 110,004 73.83 26 -2 1,772 62.08

x Normal-hours shift commences at 7am and concludes at 3:40pm from Monday to

Friday employees are paid at a normal pay rate. After-hours period is split into two

shifts, 3:40pm – 9pm and 9pm – 7am where employees are paid at overtime rates.

The first three hours of overtime are paid at 1.5 and thereafter are paid at 2. Whereas

shifts on Saturday and Sunday are split in two shifts, 7am – 7pm and 7pm – 7am and

same overtime rates applies. To simplify the pay rate, we worked out the pay rate for

each shift by weighted averaging.

Page | 15
For example, the pay rate for shift 2 (3:40pm – 9pm) will be:

[1.5 x 3 hours + 2 x (5.33-3) hours] / 5.33 hours = 1.72 pay rate

Shifts Time Number of hours Pay rate Explanation

1 7am-3:40pm 8.67 1 normal pay

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

2 3:40pm-9pm 5.33 1.72 pay

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

3 9pm-7am 10 1.85 pay

**repetitive shifts for Mon to Fri (Shift 1 to 15)

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

16 7am-7pm 12 1.88 pay

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

17 7pm-7am 12 1.88 pay

**repetitive shifts for Sat to Sun (Shift 16 to 19)

x There are 19 full-time employees (FTEs) in the department. We took into account

annual leave being taken by employees to come up with a more realistic number of

FTEs available in normal-hours shifts. Assuming all employees take four weeks of

annual leave throughout the year as they are entitled to. The total number of weeks

of annual leave taken will be 4 x 19 = 76 weeks. Dividing it by 52 weeks will result

in 1.46 FTE equivalent. Therefore, the realistic number of employees available on

weekday will be 17.54 FTEs (19 – 1.46) on average for Monday to Thursday and half

on Friday. Due to integer constraints in integer programming, we rounded up the

Page | 16
 FTEs to 18 FTEs for Monday to Thursday and 9 FTEs for Friday to meet the operation

need.

FTEs available on roster 19

Less annual leave entitlement (FTE equivalent) 1.46

Feasible FTEs 17.54

Feasible FTEs (round up in integer) ** 18

**round up to integer 18 to meet

operation need

We calculated the salary costs for each shift by band based on the above-mentioned assumptions and

simplifications and a salary cost matrix for the old roster is demonstrated as follows:

Page | 17
Cost Matrix – Old Roster

Shift (j)
Cost (9:; ) Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- <:
15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00
Employee
Band 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
(i)
4 1 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 2 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 3 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 4 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 5 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 6 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 7 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 8 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 9 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

4 10 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 394.55 417.31 842.21 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 1,024.31 7

5 11 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 7

5 12 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 7

5 13 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 7

5 14 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 446.81 472.59 953.76 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 1,159.98 7

7 15 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 7

7 16 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 7

7 17 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 7

7 18 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 486.77 514.85 1,039.06 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 1,263.72 7

8 19 538.02 569.06 1,148.46 538.02 569.06 1,148.46 538.02 569.06 1,148.46 538.02 569.06 1,148.46 538.02 569.06 1,148.46 1,396.78 1,396.78 1,396.78 1,396.78 7

=; 18 1 1 18 1 1 18 1 1 18 1 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 1

Page | 18
4.2 Problem Identification

We encountered issues with Excel Solver as Solver was unable to handle a large volume of

decision variables and constraints. To resolve the issues, we used Open Solver instead to

generate the results. We also experienced errors with Open Solver which returned no feasible

solution. We resolved the issues by relaxing our model through increasing the RHS values

of certain constraints and reviewing the constraints to ensure no contradicting constraints

were included in the model. In the new roster model, we started with putting a standard

constraint of a maximum of 5 shifts of work per week for all staff. We reviewed the results

and tightened the constraint to a maximum of 4 shifts per week to eventually achieve a more

even distribution of shifts among the team.

4.3 Decision Variable Identification

1, if employee i is assigned to shift j

!"# = 0, otherwise

$"# = salary costs if employee i is assigned to shift j

( i = 1,2,...,19 and j = 1,2,...,19 )

Page | 19
4.4 Identify the Objective Function

We used single objective function and focused on minimization of costs rather than using

multiobjective function and applied weighted averaging between costs and employee

satisfaction as suggested in the literature review. This is due to senior management’s interest

is about cost savings and multi- objective function tends to compromise when there are

conflicting constraints. As a result, cost related constraints cannot be optimised

simultaneously in a multi-objective function.

Minimize costs or Z = total normal-hours salary costs + total after-hours salary costs

= (total normal-hours salary costs for band 4 + total normal-hours salary costs for band 5 +

total normal-hours salary costs for band7 + total normal-hours salary costs for band 8) +

(total after-hours salary costs for band 4 + total after-hours salary costs for band 5 + total

after-hours salary costs for band 7 + total after-hours salary costs for band 8)

(+ (+ (+ (+ (+

Z = %& '"( )"( * - & '". )". * - & '"/ )"/ * - & '"(0 )"(0 * - & '"(1 )"(1 *2 -
",( ",( ",( ",( ",(
(+ 1 (+ 5 (+ + (+ (4 (+ (6 (+ (+

3& & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# - & & '"# )"# 8
",( #,4 ",( #,6 ",( #,7 ",( #,(( ",( #,(. ",( #,(5

Page | 20
Indices and Parameters

i = worker number

j = shift number

!"# = worker i is assigned to shift j

$"# = salary costs of worker i is assigned to shift j

>" = Maximum number of shifts employee i is required to work

?# = Minimum number of employees required in shift j

4.5 Constraints Identification

x !"# @ 0 For all i and j

x Binary integer all !"# A 0 or 1

x At least 18 employees work in normal hour shift on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,

and Thursday respectively.

?( ****@ 18

?. ***@ 18

?/ ***@ 18

Page | 21
 ?(0 @ 18

x At least 9 employees work in normal hour shift on Friday

?(1 @ B

x Only 1 employee works in each after hour shift on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,

Thursday, Friday, and weekend respectively.

?4 C ?1 AD

?6 C ?5 ***A D

?7 C ? + AD

?(( C ?(4 A D

?(. C ?(6 A D

?(5 C ?(/C ?(7 ,*?(+ A D

x At least four Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal hour shift on Monday, Tuesday,

Wednesday, and Thursday respectively.

(+

& )"( @ E***F *GHIJI*K A D

",(6

Page | 22
 (+

& )". @ E***F *GHIJI*K A E

",(6

(+

& )"/ @ E***F *GHIJI*K A L

",(6

(+

& )"(0 @ E***F *GHIJI*K A DM

",(6

x At least two Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal hour shift on Friday

(+

& )"(1 @ N***F *GHIJI*K A DO

",(6

x Each employee works 9 normal hour shifts per fortnight. The average shifts per

week will be 4.5 shits. Due to integer constraints, we assume half of the team work 4

days a week, the remaining half 5 days a week except Band 8 employee who work 5

days a week.

)(( - )(. - )(/ - )((0 - )((1 @ E

)4( - )4. - )4/ - )4(0 - )4(1 @ E

)1( - )1. - )1/ - )1(0 - )1(1 @ E

).( - ).. - )./ - ).(0 - ).(1 @ E

)6( - )6. - )6/ - )6(0 - )6(1 @ E

Page | 23
 )5( - )5. - )5/ - )5(0 - )5(1 @ P

)/( - )/. - )// - )/(0 - )/(1 @ P

)7( - )7. - )7/ - )7(0 - )7(1 @ P

)+( - )+. - )+/ - )+(0 - )+(1 @ *P

)(0( - )(0. - )(0/ - )(0(0 - )(((1 @ P

)((( - )((. - )((/ - )(((0 - )(((1 @ E

)(4( - )(4. - )(4/ - )(4(0 - )(4(1 * @ E

)(1( - )(1. - )(1/ - )(1(0 - )(1(1 * @ P

)(.( - )(.. - )(./ - )(.(0 - )(.(1 * @ P

)(6( - )(6. - )(6/ - )(6(0 - )(6(1 * @ E

)(5( - )(5. - )(5/ - )(5(0 - )(5(1 * @ E

)(/( - )(/. - )(// - )(/(0 - )(/(1 * @ P

)(7( - )(7. - )(7/ - )(7(0 - )(7(1 * @ P

)(+( - )(+. - )(+/ - )(+(0 - )(+(1 * @ P

x Each employee works no more than 7 shifts a week

(+ (+

& & )"# Q L

",( #,(

Page | 24
x Band 7 and 8 employees do not work overnight shift where i = 1, …, 19 and

j = 3,6,9,12,15,17,19

(+

& )"1 A M
",(6

(+

& )"5 A M
",(6

(+

& )"+ A M
",(6

(+

& )"(4 A M
",(6

(+

& )"(6 A M
",(6

(+

& )"(/ A M
",(6

(+

& )"(+ A M
",(6

Page | 25
x Employee who works overnight shift on Monday gets a day off on Tuesday, exclude

Band 7 and 8 employees as they do not work overnight shifts

(. .

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*K A OCE

",( #,1

x Employee who works overnight shift on Tuesday gets a day off on Wednesday,

exclude Band 7 and 8 employees as they do not work overnight shifts

(. /

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*K A RCL

",( #,5

x Employee who works overnight shift on Wednesday gets a day off on Thursday,

exclude Band 7 and 8 employees as they do not work overnight shifts

(. (0

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*K A BCDM

",( #,+

x Employee who works overnight shift on Thursday gets a day off on Friday, exclude

Band 7 and 8 employees as they do not work overnight shifts

(. (1

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI**K A DNCDO

",( #,(4

Page | 26
x Employee who works overnight shift on Sunday gets a day off on Monday, exclude

Band 7 and 8 employees as they do not work overnight shifts

(. (.

& )"(+ - & )"( Q D***F *GHIJI*K A DBCD

",( ",(

x Each employee works a maximum of 2 shifts on Monday

(+ 1

& & )"# Q N

",( #,(

x Each employee works a maximum of 2 shifts on Tuesday

(+ 5

& & )"# Q N

",( #,.

x Each employee works a maximum of 2 shifts on Wednesday

(+ +

& & )"# Q N

",( #,/

Page | 27
x Each employee works a maximum of 2 shifts on Thursday

(+ (4

& & )"# Q N

",( #,(0

x Each employee works a maximum of 2 shifts on Friday

(+ (6

& & )"# Q N

",( #,(1

x Each employee works a maximum of 1 shift on Saturday, ignore Band 7 and 8

employees as they do not work overnight shift anyway

(. (/

& & )"# Q D

",( #,(5

x Each employee works a maximum of 1 shift on Sunday, ignore Band 7 and 8

employees as they do not work overnight shift anyway

(. (+

& & )"# Q D

",( #,(7

Page | 28
To improve profitability, Telstra management has decided to undertake workforce reduction

by changing employee shift structure. To analyse the costs and benefits of the business

decision, we developed another integer programming model for the new roster and compare

the results with the old roster. As the work schedule has now been reallocated, it requires

review of the decision variables, objection function and constraints as well as the

simplification and assumptions. The following sections illustrate the major changes that are

applied to the integer programming for the new roster to generate the optimal minimum cost

solution.

NEW ROSTER – Simplifications and Assumptions

x The new roster is split into two shifts. The first shift commences at 7am and concludes

at 7pm and the second shift commences at 7pm and concludes at 7am from Monday

to Sunday. The new shifts are identified as j = 1, 2, …, 14 respectively.

x The new roster requires employees to work longer hours per day, however, they now

work only 6 days or 72 hours per fortnight. The number of ordinary hours per

fortnight has been reduced by 1.8 hours.

Roster types Working days Number of hours

Old roster 9 days a fortnight 73.8

New roster 6 days a fortnight 72

Page | 29
 x To encourage staff to work after-hours shifts, incentive was given to all Band 4

employees that they will be promoted to Band 5 with conditions of working overnight

shifts, i.e. after-hours shifts, from Monday to Friday at normal pay rate, i.e. without

overtime pay. Applying the same simplified calculation as the old roster, the hourly

rates for each band have been increased as follows.

Less:
Number of Number of
Annual
Annual ordinary Number of ordinary Hourly
Band leave
salary hours per fortnights hours less rate
(2
fortnight annual leave
fortnights)

New
26 -2
Band 5 91,355 72.00 1,728 52.87

Existing
26 -2
Band 5 91,355 72.00 1,728 52.87

7 99,525 72.00 26 -2 1,728 57.60

8 110,004 72.00 26 -2 1,728 63.66

x All weekend shifts are paid at overtime rate though and follow the same pay rate as

the weekend shifts of the old roster, i.e. first three hours are paid at 1.5, thereafter at

2.0

Page | 30
 Shifts Time Number of hours Pay rate Explanation

1 7am-7pm 12 1 normal pay

2 7pm-7am 12 1 normal pay for New Band 5

**repetitive shifts for Mon to Fri (Shift 1 to 10)

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

11 7am-7pm 12 1.88 pay

first 3 hours 1.5 pay, thereafter 2.0

14 7pm-7am 12 1.88 pay

**repetitive shifts for Sat to Sun (Shift 11 to 14)

x To derive the minimum number of staff required for normal hour shifts on weekdays,

we first calculated the total number of hours available in the pool for Monday to

Thursday which is (18 FTEs x 8.67 daily hours) x 4 days = 624 hours. This forms the

base for calculating the daily number of staff required in the new roster. Applying the

same principle, the number of staff required per day for the new roster can be

calculated backward by assuming a same base of 624 hours available in the pool,

divided by 4 days and by 12 daily hours which results in 13 FTEs (624÷4 ÷12 = 13)

for Monday to Thursday. To work out the number of staff required on Friday, we

simply divided it by 2 which resulted in 6.5. Due to integer constraints, we rounded

up to 7 FTEs.

Page | 31
 Daily

Mon-Thu Total hours Daily number of number of

Normal Number
Roster (Number available in staff required staff
Shift of hours
of days) the pool (Mon-Thu) required

(Fri)

7am-
Old 8.67 4 624 18 9
3:40pm

New 7am-7pm 12 4 624 13 7

We calculated the salary costs for each shift by band based on the above-mentioned assumptions

and simplifications and a cost matrix for the new roster is demonstrated as follows:

Page | 32
Cost Matrix - New Roster

Shift (j)

Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Cost (9:; )
07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00-
<:
19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00

Employee
Band 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
(i)

New 5 1 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 2 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 3 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 4 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 5 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 6 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 7 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 8 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 9 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

New 5 10 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4

Existing
11 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4
5

Page | 33
Existing
12 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4
5

Existing
13 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4
5

Existing
14 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 634.41 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 1,189.52 4
5

7 15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 4

7 16 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 4

7 17 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 4

7 18 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 691.15 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 1,295.90 4

8 19 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 763.92 1,432.34 1,432.34 1,432.34 1,432.34 4

=; 13 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 7 1 1 1 1 1

Page | 34
Constraints Identification

x !"# @ 0 For all i and j

x Binary integer all !"# A 0 or 1

x At least 13 employees work in normal hour shift on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,

and Thursday respectively.

?( ***@ 13

?1 ***@ 13

?6 ***@ 13

?/ @ 13

x At least 7 employees work in normal hour shift on Friday

?+ @ L

x Only 1 employee works in each after hour shift on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,

Thursday, Friday, and weekend respectively.

?4 A *D

?. ***A *D

?5 A *D

?7 A *D

?(0 A *D

?(( C ?(4C ?(1 ,*?(. A *D

Page | 35
x At least three Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal hour shift on Monday,

Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday respectively.

(+

& )"( @ O***F *GHIJI*K A D

",(6

(+

& )"1 @ O***F *GHIJI*K A O

",(6

(+

& )"6 @ O***F *GHIJI*K A P

",(6

(+

& )"/ @ O***F *GHIJI*K A L

",(6

x At least two Band 7 or 8 employees work in normal hour shift on Friday

(+

& )"+ @ D***F *GHIJI*K A B

",(6

x Each New Band 5 employee works 6 shifts per fortnight, i.e. average 3 shifts per

week. This includes normal hour and overnight shifts

(0 (.

& & )"# @ O

",( #,(

Page | 36
x Each Existing Band 5, Band 7 or Band 8 employee works 6 normal hour shifts per

fortnight, i.e. average 3 shifts per week

(+ (0

& & )"# @ O

",(( #,(

x Each employee works no more than 4 shifts a week

(+ (.

& & )"# Q E

",( #,(

x Existing Band 5, Band 7 and 8 employees do not work overnight shift, where

i = 11,..,19 and j = 2,4,6,8,10,11,12,13,14 respectively.

(+

& )"4 A M
",((

(+

& )". A M
",((

(+

& )"5 A M
",((

Page | 37
 (+

& )"(7 A M
",((

(+

& )"(0 A M
",((

(+

& )"(( A M
",((

(+

& )"(4 A M
",((

(+

& )"(1 A M
",((

(+

& )"(. A M
",((

x New Band 5 employee who works overnight shift on Monday gets a day off on

Tuesday

(0 1

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*S A DC T T CDM*UV?*K A NCO

",( #,4

x New Band 5 employee who works overnight shift on Tuesday gets a day off on
Wednesday

(0 6

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*S A DC T T CDM*UV?*K A ECP

",( #,.

Page | 38
x New Band 5 employee who works overnight shift on Wednesday gets a day off on

Thursday

(0 /

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*S A DC T T CDM*UV?*K A RCL

",( #,5

x New Band 5 employee who works overnight shift on Thursday gets a day off on

Friday

(0 +

& & )"# Q D***F *GHIJI*S A DC T T CDM*UV?*K A WCB

",( #,7

x New Band 5 employee who works overnight shift on Sunday gets a day off on

Monday

(0 (0

& )"(. - & )"( Q D***F *GHIJI*S A DC T T CDM*UV?*K A DECD

",( ",(

x Each New Band 5 employee works a maximum of 2 overnight shifts per week

)(4 - )(. - )(5 - )(7 - )((0 - )((4 - )((. Q N!

)44 - )4. - )45 - )47 - )4(0 - )4(4 - )4(. Q N

)14 - )1. - )15 - )17 - )1(0 - )1(4 - )1(. Q N

).4 - ).. - ).5 - ).7 - ).(0 - ).(4 - ).(. Q N

Page | 39
 )64 - )6. - )65 - )67 - )6(0 - )6(4 - )6(. Q N

)54 - )5. - )55 - )57 - )5(0 - )5(4 - )5(. Q N

)/4 - )/. - )/5 - )/7 - )/(0 - )/(4 - )/(. Q N

)74 - )7. - )75 - )77 - )7(0 - )7(4 - )7(. Q N

)+4 - )+. - )+5 - )+7 - )+(0 - )+(4 - )+(. Q N

)(04 - )(0. - )(05 - )(07 - )(0(0 - )(0(4 - )(0(. Q N

Page | 40
4.6 Implementation in Excel Solver

The below Open Solver model illustrates the constraints of the new roster that generates the

optimal solution.

Binary

Demand constraints
(Staff required in normal
hour shift on Monday to
Friday for all bands)

Demand constraints for

Band 7 and 8 working in
normal hour shift on
Monday to Friday

Supply constraints for

new Band 5 employee
shift work per week

Supply constraints for

existing Band 5 to Band 8
shift work per week

Supply constraints for

each employee per week

Demand constraints for

existing Band 5 to Band 8

Demand constraints for

compulsory rest period
(CRP) condition

Supply constraints
Page | 41
overnight shift for each
new Band 5 employee
 Result A - Old Roster Assignment
Shift (j)
Assignment
Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
(X:; )
07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 15:40- 21:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- <:
15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 15:40 21:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00
Employee
Band 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
(i)
4 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

4 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 6

4 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 7

4 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 6

4 5 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

4 6 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

4 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

4 8 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

4 9 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

4 10 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 7

5 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

5 12 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

5 13 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

5 14 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

7 15 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

7 16 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

7 17 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

7 18 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

8 19 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
=; 18 1 1 18 1 1 18 1 1 18 1 1 14 1 1 1 1 1 1

Page | 42
Result B - New Roster Assignment
Shift (j)
Assignment (X:; ) Mon Tues Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- 07:00- 19:00- <:
19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00 19:00 07:00
Band Employee (i) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
New 5 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4
New 5 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
New 5 3 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
New 5 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
New 5 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4
New 5 6 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
New 5 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 4
New 5 8 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4
New 5 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 4
New 5 10 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Existing 5 11 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Existing 5 12 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
Existing 5 13 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Existing 5 14 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
7 15 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
7 16 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
7 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
7 18 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
8 19 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
=; 13 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 7 1 1 1 1 1

Page | 43
4.7 Optimal Solution

Result C – Old Roster Minimum Costs $47,643.94 per week

Result D – New Roster Minimum Costs $46,429.65 per week

Page | 44
4.8 Sensitivity Analysis

Due to the integer constraints of binary integer programming, it is unable for Excel Solver to

generate a sensitivity analysis report. Thus, it is a manual sensitivity analysis based on several

scenarios of the engineer shift allocation. In this section, we will mainly focus on the normal

shift on weekdays to examine the movement of the salary costs with changes in the minimum

number of employees required in normal shifts.

One of the constraints of our optimisation models is the minimum number of employees

required on Monday to Thursday which is 18 employees for the old roster and 13 employees

for the new roster and Friday which is 9 employees for the old roster and 7 employees for the

new roster. To understand the impact on the salary costs, we change the minimum numbers

of employees to examine the movement in salary costs

For Old Roster

Scenario Monday- Friday Total Cost

Thursday

Optimal Solution Minimum 18 Minimum 9 (baseline) $47,643.94

(baseline)

Decrease one from Change to Change to minimum 8 (However, was $43,660.58

baseline on Monday to minimum 17 assigned as 9 by Solver)
Friday

Increase one from Minimum 18 Change to minimum 10 (No change in $47,643.94

baseline on Friday only (baseline) optimal cost, thus keep increasing the
minimum)

Change to minimum 14 (Solver returns $48,090.75

movement in costs until minimum was
increased to 14)

Page | 45
In the old roster model, instead of increasing the required number of employees on Monday

to Thursday normal shifts from 18 to 19 employees, we reduce the number by 1 to 17

employees. This is due to contradiction to another constraint of which employee works in

night shift will have a day off on the following day in the given team size of 19. As a result,

17 employees are assigned to Monday to Thursday normal shifts and 9 employees on Friday

normal shift. The results show a cost saving of $3,983.36 when decreasing one employee.

The second scenario is to increase the minimum required number of employees on Friday. It

is found that there is no change in cost by increasing the required number of employees from

one to four employees until by five employees, the salary costs increase by $446.81.

For New Roster

Scenarios Monday-Thursday Friday Total Cost

Optimal Solution Minimum 13 Minimum 7 $46,429.65

(baseline) (baseline)

Increase one from baseline on Monday to Change to Change to $49,715.17

Friday minimum:14 minimum:8

Increase one from baseline on Friday only Minimum 13 Change to $47,643.94

(baseline) minimum:8

In the new roster model, if we increase the number of required employees by 1 from 13 to 14

employees on Monday to Friday normal shifts, the salary cost will be increased by $3,285.52.

Whereas if we increase the number of required employees by 1 from 7 to 8 employees on

Friday normal shift, it incurs an extra salary cost of $1,214.29.

Page | 46
5. Discussion

5.1 Advantages

5.1.1 Simple shift allocation for decision making

The aim of our model is to optimize the old shift allocation as well as simulate the new roster.

Our model used simple calculations in a logical manner to derive the salary cost matrix by

band level and by shift type. The model is easy to maintain. For example, manager is required

to merely update the salary scale to apply the CPI salary increment and re-run the model for

optimal solutions on an annual basis. The salary cost matrix and assignment table give

manager a clear costing for each shift and each band level within a weekly schedule. It

facilitates the senior management in the decision making process as a new roster model can

be built within a quick period of time using similar methodology and parameters as the old

model for optimisation and analysis.

5.1.2 Considering simulating the real situation

The model we conducted considers the actual situation that employees do take annual leave.

As suggested by Lin et al. (2012), it is important for the employees to take leave to maintain

higher personal worker efficiency and reduce human errors. Netting annual leave, the

Page | 47
available engineers are adjusted from 19 to 18 in normal hour shift. We also formulated the

constraints to satisfy the employee preference of having day-off on alternate Friday in normal

hour shift. It aligns with the information collected from the interviewee in Telstra that they

normally have approximate 18 engineers on duty and usually only half of the team works on

Friday. The constraint parameters we applied in our model are very close to the current team

in real situation on a weekly basis calculation.

5.1.3 Considering equal shift allocation

We repeated the result review and model modification process by including more effective

constraints and tightening the constraints to distribute the shifts more evenly among each

band. As a result, Band 4 employees work between 5 to 7 shifts per week, Band 5 and Band

7 employees work between 4 to 5 shifts per week and Band 8 employee works 5 shifts per

week in the old roster. In the new roster, we achieved a fair result of an even distribution of

shifts among new Band 5 ( weekly 4 shifts across) and an almost even distribution of shifts

across existing Band 5, 7 and 8 (weekly 3-4 shifts across).

5.1.4 Fairness among employees

In the new roster model, we considered the promotion incentive that is offered to Band 4

Page | 48
employees. We formulated the constraints to achieve none of the after- hours shift being

assigned to existing Band 5 and Band 7 and 8 employees, so they can enjoy weekend break

and more work-life balance.

5.1.5 Considering quality of services employees provided

The model considers senior to junior ratio to ensure the quality of services the operations

team provided is not compromised. Since SEV1 issues can only be handled by senior staff,

it is essential to ensure the presence of senior staff in each normal hour shift to support high

level services. Furthermore, it is important to the customers that the level of expertise and

service coverage is maintained after switching to the new roster system. We have taken into

account the reference senior to junior ratio in the new roster to fulfil such expectation.

5.2 Limitations

5.2.1 No preference for employees on the allocation shift

The optimisation model does not acknowledge the possibility of employees wanting to

choose the shifts of their preference which might lead to employee dissatisfaction and hence

decrease productivity. This can also create a lack of flexibility should the model be applied

to other company for analysis purpose.

5.2.2 Weekly overview / Absence of employees

Page | 49
In order to maintain a simple model, the model was structured on a weekly schedule basis.

This, however, limits the model to a wider window in allocating shifts in seasonal and festival

periods and forecasting various situations such as extensive absenteeism. For example, the

assumed constraint of having one Band 8 employee on Friday normal hour shift is not a

perfect representation of the real situation. Within the operation team, there is only one Band

8 employee. However, due to integer constraints of the chosen integer programming model,

we are unable to present the alternate Friday work arrangement constraint for Band 8

employee as ‘ requiring 0. 5 Band 8 FTE’ on a weekly basis as the number must be rounded

to integer. However, we will be able to present the Friday constraint as ‘requiring one Band

8 FTE in the first week and zero Band 8 FTE in the second week’ if we structured the model

on a fortnightly schedule basis.

5.2.3 Employee satisfaction segregation

As our data were collected from only one interviewee out of 19 in the operations team,

feedback from the interviewee such as level of employee satisfaction of the shift allocation

may not be a true reflection of the population. His shift preference and job satisfaction does

not represent the entire department.

Page | 50
5.3 Discussion & Recommendations

5.3.1. Discussion

5.3.1.1 Quantitative cost savings

In comparison with the optimal solutions between the old roster and the new roster, the results

show a weekly cost savings of $1,214.29 in the new roster model (new roster of $46,429.65

< old roster of $47,643.94). From an annual perspective, it is a cost saving of $63,143 per

annum, which is equivalent to 0.7 FTE saving at a Band 5 annual salary of $91,355. If we

break down the costs into band type, we can further understand the cost savings was mainly

coming from the senior staff (senior weekly cost savings of $866.38 > junior weekly cost

savings of $347. 91) . By offering a promotion incentive to Band 4 staff to alleviate the

overtime pay burden on Telstra in the new roster system, it achieves an improvement of

$2,464.71 in overtime spending in Band 4 even the employees are now paid at a higher salary

of newly promoted Band 5 in the new roster system (weekly overtime pay in new roster of

$7,930.12 < old roster of $10,394.84).

Page | 51
5.3.1.2 Qualitative shift distribution

Telstra also considers the qualitative factors when implementing the change of workforce

shift allocation by offering general incentive and individual group incentive to the operations

team. From general group perspective, the switch of a 9-shift roster to a 6-shift roster results

in a reduction of number of fortnightly ordinary hours from 73.8 hours to 72 hours which is

a general incentive to all staff.

From individual group perspective, based on the assignment optimisation results, there is an

improvement in distribution of work hours (including normal hours and after hours) from a

disperse range of 40 to 56 hours per week across all bands in the old roster to a more evenly

distributed range of 36 - 48 hours per week in the new roster. Every employee now shares the

work hours in addition to the ordinary works, which are necessary to meet the operation need,

instead of having the burden on certain group of employees in the old roster. This will

certainly have a positive impact in terms of fairness and work-life balance among the team.

Moreover, the number of shifts each employee works on a weekly basis also improves from

a disperse range of 4 – 7 shifts in the old roster to a more evenly distributed range of 3-4 shifts

range. The reduction of overtime as suggested by Hecke, T. V. (2011) is a contributing factor

in minimising costs. The incentives act as a mitigation to moderate the anxiety and

dissatisfaction of the employees in the change of workforce shift allocation.

Page | 52
5.3.1.3 Qualitative retention of expertise ratio

Furthermore, the model takes into consideration of the senior to junior ratio in the old roster,

that is every one senior supervises no more than three juniors (1: 2.6) on Monday to Thursday

and no more than four juniors (1: 3.7) on Friday. We used it as the reference ratio and applied

it to the new roster system to retain the expertise ratio in the operations team. As such, the

level of service quality and coverage is not compromised when optimising the cost savings

within the team.

5.3.2. Recommendations

1. Consider the New Roster as the new optimisation model

Taking into consideration of the comparison and discussion between the two roster models,

the new roster model improves the effectiveness and efficiency of shift and worker allocation

which simultaneously minimises weekly salary costs and improves employee satisfaction.

2. Gathering more data from Telstra insiders

In order to have a more realistic optimal solution, we suggest to collect more data from

Telstra employees such as work satisfaction and system efficiency to improve workforce

shift allocation and hence minimises costs in a greater degree.

Page | 53
6. Conclusion

The report analyses the business problem and the change of workforce shift allocation in

Telstra by means of integer programming using Open Solver in Excel for comparison

between the preand post- reorganisation of workforce shift allocation. Through the

application of strengths and elimination of weaknesses of the ten literature reviews, a

simplified optimisation models were developed to facilitate the decision making process for

the senior management in Telstra. The results show a lower minimization cost in the new

roster model.

In conclusion, the business decision of changing the work shift allocation is a relatively win-

win outcome for Telstra and its employees. A 0. 7 FTE annual cost savings is achieved by

switching from a 9- shift roster to a 6- shift roster rather than through a redundancy program

of laying off employees. It also improves the shift distribution among the team to achieve

fairness and worklife balance. While accomplishing an optimisation in cost control, the level

of service quality and coverage is not compromised by retaining the reference senior to junior

ratio. These are important aspects to consider when enforcing a change in human capital

policy to maintain business continuity.

Page | 54
Appendices

- Literature Review Conclusion

Journal Articles Analysis Strengths Weaknesses

Lin, H., Chen, Y., Chou, The paper reviews a crew The article consider The article is focused

T., & Liao, Y. (2012). rostering problem from the that one person can on more than two

Crew rostering with customer service section of work in more than one people can work on the

multiple goals: An a department store. shift in a day and also same task which

empirical study. full rest days. makes it difficult for

Computers & Industrial The authors concern about teams where one

Engineering, 63(2), 483- assigning multi-functional person is responsible

493. doi: workers to different types of It points out the for one task.

10.1016/j.cie.2012.04.013 job and scheduling the importance of a high-

working and rest shifts for quality schedule in

each worker over a planning order to lead a more

week. contented and more

effective workforce.

They focus on three items to

develop rosters more

equitable and personalized

work timetables for the

worker in order to increase

work satisfaction and then

externally improve service

quality and efficiency:

Page | 55
 worker-job suitability,

worker-worker

compatibility and worker-

shift fondness.

Shuib,A. and Kamarudin, This journal illustrate shift The article showed that The article has a lot of

F. I. (2019). Solving shift allocation problem from the employee satisfaction constraints for

scheduling problem with changing in the new has significant example; the company

days-off preference scheduling in the power correlated with need to have large

for power station workers station which cause company overtime, amount of workers to

using binary integer goal unsatisfactory among personal efficiency, be substitute, flexible

programming model. workers resulted in lower and overall cost. company policy and

Springle Nature, 19(4), performance and increasing no conflicts on day-off

355-372. company cost from higher The paper also rise the preference.

overtime or hiring external point that working

parties to complete the more than seven day

work. without day-off likely

to result in lower

The authors concern mainly personal worker

on assigning workers to efficiency.

have best shift pattern to

maximise customer

satisfaction and worker

performance.

Page | 56
 It summarised that having

shift pattern with employee

can select their preference

day-off and having more

than 4 consecutive day-off

twice a year enhance the

efficiency and satisfactory

of the worker with lower

overtime and total human

capital cost.

Hecke, T. V. (2011) The paper shows the The article shown that This journal showed

Shift Scheduling with maximisation between two making shift based on that some employee

Optimized Service Levels factors: employees employee preference shown preference that

and Employee preference (satisfaction) and enhance effectiveness might not match with

Satisfaction. Math minimum staffs associated and reduce human the regulation for some

Scientist, 36(1), 89-94. with lowest employees cost capital cost. countries, for example,

that company needed to working fourteen hours

pay. This model displays consecutively and

simple model with working without break

This journal focus mainly different time and time.

on the call-center service seasons, which

which mainly have 3 shifts indicated making more It also mentioned that

and the main objective for shift is better than there might be a

optimisation are satisfy doing overtime in conflict that employee

company, employee and terms of cost and willing to move for the

customers ( constraints of performance in busy lower workload time

period. and might lower

Page | 57
 pick up customers call employee satisfactory

within 1 minute). in the middle to long

term plan.

The result is focused on

customer preference

enhance work efficiency

and reduce company cost.

Another interest finding is

having extra shift with

lower worker per shift

resulted in better customer

service level comparing to

doing overtime with same

amount of shift.

Cheang, B., Li, H., Lim, The journal illustrates - The authors consider - The NRP problems

A., & Rodrigues, B. scheduling problems for a variety of constraints sometimes are not able

(2003). Nurse rostering nursing staff, which have which are classified as to find a solution

problems––a been an impact on nursing hard and soft without breaking any

bibliographic survey. officers to generate rosters constraints such as the constraints, therefore

European Journal of manually. In order to fulfil number of staff with there must be a relative

Operational Research, the staff required from the particular skills prioritization of

151(3), 447-460. hospital, the officers have to requirements and constraints.

reschedule regularly due to staff’s satisfaction

the staff’s preferences. respectively. - This article applies

Furthermore, the multiple approaches to

This article attempts to constraints are set in cover any potential

inform the reader of the the range of number problems that may

Page | 58
difficulty in maintaining such as minimum, arise, which could be

twenty-four hours coverage maximum and exact complicated and cause

by nursing staff; also taking number in order to confusion in order to

into account staff achieve the optimal generate the rosters.

requirements and result. Moreover, it may have

satisfaction. Highlighting been more time

how a more efficient system - The decision variable consuming to complete

provides patients with a of this model is defined these tasks.

better quality care by as three shifts per day,

applying mathematical which consist of eight

programming. hours per shift. One

nurse will be assigned

to any of those shifts

with particular tasks.

- A single objective

optimization in some

of the constraints is

suitably applied by

using Integer

programming (IP)

which can solve the

scheduling problems

about working hours in

a fortnight and

considering three-shift

day effectively.

Page | 59
Lin, C. K. Y., Lai, K. F., This article demonstrates a - The main concept of - Due to the increase of

& Hung, S. L. (2000). mobile communications workforce scheduling the company workload

Development of a company’s problem in this model is that within a particular

workforce management focusing on their customer officers are classified time, it would be less

system for a customer service hotline. They have in 2 levels which are efficient in this model

hotline service. been faced with a need to junior and senior. The to divide the number of

Computers & Operations schedule their workforce requirement of officers equally to

Research, 27(10), 987- due to an increasing customer hotline work in different

1004. demand. The service has to service is every shift shifts. This means that

operate 24 hours a day 7 has to have at least one the officers would get

days a week. senior to deal with a different amount of

complicated tasks. works, which opposes

The authors emphasize the Therefore, junior to the constraint of

workload that the company officers are divided workforce equality to

has and the service levels set into groups to work the requirement and

that they must achieve. with the senior in the workers’ satisfaction.

Which is difficult due to shift that they are

lack of staffs available assigned.

during evening and night

time shift. - The model includes

overlapping shifts

This problem is approached condition which

by using a mixed integer imposes the officers

programming to develop a working hours. The

support system which is the authors assign a

importance of knowing the constraint that the

workload in the coming officers who work on

Page | 60
 days, weeks and months; to night shift must not be

allocate manpower as is assigned to the

needed. morning shift on the

next day due to a lake

of the break gap

between shifts.

- The authors explain

the formulation section

in detail, which is very

valuable. For example,

minimizing the cost of

overtime, balancing

working hours equality

to meet the demand,

and all other

constraints.

Labidi, M., Mrad, M., The article focused on the The article suggested a The scheduling

Gharbi, A. & Louly, M. scheduling optimisation number of scheduling problem was

A. (2014). Scheduling IT problem of bank methods. One of the formulated as a

Staff Information Technology methods is the multiobjective

at a Bank: A (IT) staff in consideration of coverage schedule programming model.

Mathematical (1) shift coverage method which is Some of the

Programming Approach. requirements, (2) seniority- applied to the constraints may be

The Scientific World based workload rules and inconsistent pattern of conflicting and not all

Journal, (3) staff work preferences. workload where high constraints can be

14(1), 1-10. Retrieved This forms a good basis for flexibility is required. optimised

Page | 61
from our model where some staff Schedules are set simultaneously. It

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/ prefer not to work overtime accordingly to the requires trade-offs

2014/768374. at night shifts, however, prevailing pattern in between the

there are business needs to the workload. constraints.

fulfilled and also Service

Level Agreements (SLA) As scheduling conflict

requirements to meet in a can be stressful and

multi-skilled environment in detrimental to

the Networking and IT productivity, the two

department at Telstra. common ways to

prevent scheduling

The author highlighted conflict are schedule

poorly arranged schedules review during and after

include lack of breaks changes and having

between shifts and double one person responsible

shifts. This lowers staff for the schedule.

morale leading to poor

production and increases the Weights were applied

occurrence of accidents or in the multiobjective

errors due to employee function. The highest

fatigue from overwork. This importance level is

is the exact situation at given to minimise

Telstra, staff are usually overtime, whereas the

working at average 60-70 second highest priority

hours or even up to 86 hours level is given to

a week which is a double of satisfaction of desired

the number of ordinary employee preference.

Page | 62
 hours (average 36.92 hours

a week) in Telstra.

To facilitate the decision

making process, the main

objectives of staff

scheduling should consider

efficient utilisation of

resource, workload

balanced schedule,

employee preferences and

satisfaction and also the

conformation of the team

workload pattern to achieve

an efficient and effective

schedule.

Bhulai, S., Koole, G. & The article focuses on phase The article used The model resulted in

Pot, A. (2008). Simple 3 of the labour allocation method which consists agents with a large

Methods for Shift process: shift scheduling of two amount of idle time

Scheduling in Multiskill which generates shifts such steps: (1) methods for when there are many

Call Centers. that staffing levels are met the determination of different agent groups

Manufacturing & Service in a call centre. It is a rough staffing with only a few skills

Operations Management, match between the levels and (2) the and all shifts require

10(3), 411–420. predicted workload and determination only a small number of

Retrieved from agent labour capacity. It is of an optimal set of skills.

https://www.math.vu.nl/~ important to use a shifts. It is an efficient

scheduling method with method for shift

Page | 63
koole/publications/2008m short computation time and scheduling in a multi- However, the idle time

som1/art.pdf integer programming skill environment can be reduced to a

techniques can be used to while taking into lower amount by

obtain the optimal shifts. consideration of including some agent

service-level constraint groups with more than

First, feasible solutions are in each planning two types of skills.

generated by using a fast period.

and accurate The disadvantage of

heuristic that solves the The adopted integer the solutions can

Phase 2 staffing problem programming model require more agents

(Pot et al. 2008). The determines the with additional

integer programming model cheapest set of shifts skills than an optimal

then encapsulates the such that requirements solution would require.

flexibility of multi-skill concerning minimum This

agents to work in different numbers of is undesirable if agents

groups that may use various agents are met. with more skills are

subsets of their skills in significantly

different periods of the day. more expensive.

It is assumed that agents

from the same group have

an equal set of skills. The

objective is to meet the

service-level constraint

against minimal costs.

Page | 64
 The model can be applied to

Telstra where staff work in

a multi-skill environment

and are required to meet the

SLA requirements. We can

consider following the two-

step approach. First,

translate the amount of

work in the number of

required technicians such

that the SLA requirements

are met. Second, generate

shifts such that staffing

levels are met.

Dexter,F., Blake, J. T., This article shows how to In our report, we have All data is gathering is

Penning, D. H., Sloan, B., use the Linear programming engineer with different from a year basis, it

Chung, P., & Lubarsky, to analysis the data of annual salary and this can optimize the cost

D. A. (2002).Use of resource allocation of a is the various cost and and allocation but the

Linear Programming to hospital to investigate how we can calculate the situation is more

Estimate Impact of much a change in allocation efficiency and cost. complicated to

Changes in a Hospital’s of operating room time Also, we have different compare with our case.

Operating Room Time among surgeons and nurse priority of the tasks

Allocation on without change hours for which requires specific

Perioperative Variable elective cases. skill set is a similar

Costs. The method is to gathering situation as the case in

data and put all condition in this article. Last but

Page | 65
American Society of one day to determine how not least, the size of

Anesthesiologists, 67(1), much change of the mix of the hospital operating

10-24 surgeons can increase total room size is similar to

variable costs. The result is the size of team in our

that the cost can be varies report, the linear

around ⅓ of the budget if programing method

maintain the same hours. approach is also

suitable for our case.

Cumming, J. L., & Teng, This article studied This article described This article does not

B. S. (2003) Transferring knowledge transfer within several benefits that show the cost of

R&D knowledge: the key more than 15 industries with knowledge transfer knowledge transfer

factors affecting different governance to brings, they key factors including time,

knowledge transfer analyze what’s the success of the knowledge training and effort. The

success. Journal and benefit that knowledge transfer and provided reasons why

of Engineering and transfer brings. In our two methods and knowledge transfer has

Technology Management, report, if put a scenario that demonstrate the result, been overlooked by

20(3), 39-68 after knowledge transferring combine with analysis most of the companies

system upgrade, we now with the hypotheses. are not discussed here.

have more technicians can

handle project and sev1

issues, and we can have an

overview to see the amount

of cost varies with

knowledge transfer.

Ağralı, S., Taşkın, Z., & The journal explores a Analyse the employee It does not consider

Ünal, A. (2017). problem in a health-care satisfaction by workforce cost

Employee scheduling in organisation and on how to assigning the employee minimisation as an

service industries with deliver flexible demand objective function nor

Page | 66
flexible employee using flexible employee appropriately with as a parameter for

availability and demand. availability. They developed their skills. scheduling allocation.

Omega, 66, 159-169. an integer linear

doi:10.1016/j.omega.201 programming to minimise

6.03.001 the unfulfilled service

requirements and maximise

employee satisfaction.

- Group Meeting Minutes

Meeting 1 Assignment topic alignment

Date 8 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 13.45

Avenue The Spot 5008

Attendees All

Task 1. Alignment on topic “Minimisation shift allocation cost in Telstra

company”

2. Brainstorm for further information needed for next meeting

Meeting 2 Work distribution for introduction and literature review section

Date 10 Jan 2019

Page | 67
Time 13.00 – 13.50

Avenue The Spot 5008

Attendees All

Task 1. Share findings for individual finding information

2. Distribute tasks to individuals for introduction and literature review

section

Meeting 3 Further discussion of the assignment

Date 15 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 13.30

Avenue The Spot 5008

Attendees All

Task 1. Add on to the excel file and draft constraints/situation

Meeting 4 Model Building

Date 22 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 15.15

Page | 68
Avenue The Spot 4018

Attendees All

Task 1.Clear literature review unclear

2.Model and Optimisation question alignment

3. Separate the rest tasks to all members

Meeting 5 Model Alignment and Problems discussions

Date 24 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 14.15

Avenue The Spot 4018

Attendees All

Task 1.Brainstorm to solve problems encountered on the model

2.Re-adjust model for better efficiency

Meeting 6 Methodology and Implementation Alignment

Date 29 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 14.00

Page | 69
Avenue The Spot 4018

Attendees All

Task 1. Alignment on Methodology and Implementation part

2. Brainstorm on findings and responsibilities split for the

rest tasks

Meeting 7 Improve discussion part and alignment on project format

Date 31 Jan 2019

Time 13.00 – 13.45

Avenue The Spot 4018

Attendees All apart from Nigel Xu

Task 1. Discussion of work progress

2. Alignment on project format

3. Develop contents on discussion part

4. Align on deadline of individuals and submission time

Page | 70
References:

Ağralı, S., Taşkın, Z., & Ünal, A. (2017). Employee scheduling in service industries with

flexible employee availability and demand. Omega, 66, 159-169.

doi:10.1016/j.omega.2016.03.001.

Bhulai, S., Koole, G. & Pot, A. (2008). Simple Methods for Shift Scheduling in Multiskill

Call Centers. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 10(3), 411–420.

Retrieved from https://www.math.vu.nl/~koole/publications/2008msom1/art.pdf.

Cheang, B., Li, H., Lim, A., & Rodrigues, B. (2003). Nurse rostering problems––a

bibliographic survey. European Journal of Operational Research, 151(3), 447-460.

Company360 (2018). Telstra Pty Ltd., profile [Company profile]. Retrieved from

Company360 Database.

Cumming, J. L., & Teng, B. S. (2003) Transferring R&D knowledge: the key factors

affecting knowledge transfer success. Journal of Engineering and Technology

Management, 20(3), 39-68.

Dexter,F., Blake, J. T., Penning, D. H., Sloan, B., Chung, P., & Lubarsky, D. A. (2002).Use

of Linear Programming to Estimate Impact of Changes in a Hospital’s Operating

Room Time Allocation on Perioperative Variable Costs.American Society of

Anesthesiologists, 67(1), 10-24.

Hecke, T. V. (2011). Shift Scheduling with Optimized Service Levels and Employee

Satisfaction. Math Scientist, 36(1), 89-94.

Page | 71
IBIS (2018). Telstra Pty Ltd., profile [Company profile]. Retrieved from IBIS World

Database.

Labidi, M., Mrad, M., Gharbi, A. & Louly, M. A. (2014). Scheduling IT Staff at a Bank: A

Mathematical Programming Approach. The Scientific World Journal, 14(1), 1-10.

Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/768374.

Lin, C. K. Y., Lai, K. F., & Hung, S. L. (2000). Development of a workforce management

system for a customer hotline service. Computers & Operations Research, 27(10),

987-1004.

Lin, H., Chen, Y., Chou, T., & Liao, Y. (2012). Crew rostering with multiple goals: An

empirical study. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63(2), 483-493. doi:

10.1016/j.cie.2012.04.013

Marketline (2018). Telstra Pty Ltd., profile [Company profile]. Retrieved from Marketline

Database.

Morningstar (2018). Telstra Pty Ltd., profile [Company profile]. Retrieved from Morningstar

Database.

Orbis (2018). Telstra Pty Ltd., profile [Company profile]. Retrieved from Orbis Database.

Thomson Reuters Legal (2018). Fair Work Act 2018-2019 Edition. Melbourne Australia:

Thomson Reuters Australia.

Shuib,A., & Kamarudin, F. I. (2019). Solving shift scheduling problem with days-off

preference for power station workers using binary integer goal programming model.

Springle Nature, 19(4), 355-372.

Van den Bergh, J., Beliën, J., De Bruecker, P., Demeulemeester, E., & De Boeck, L. (2013).

Personnel

Page | 72