Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Teacher’s Guide
Course Orientation and
Introductory Lecture
Session 1
Exclusive property of BPAP. This material or any portions thereof may not be copied, reproduced or distributed
in any manner and for any purpose without the prior written approval of BPAP.
Overview
Purpose This module is a summarized introduction of the Service Culture course. It
is designed to orient students on the framework being used, and the
concepts and values that will be discussed throughout the semester.
Following are summaries on:
Personal Leadership and Personal/Social Competence
Service Culture
Participants The participants of this module are students in the collegiate level.
Learning Goals By the end of this course, students should be able to:
and Objectives Understand what is required of them in class in terms of
participation, learning retention, and output
Discuss how service culture is built on the frameworks of personal
leadership, and the development of leadership and social
competencies
Draw a concrete image of the customer as a goal and driver of
business success
Understand and explain why it is necessary to analyze and evaluate
case studies that illustrate knowledge, skill, behavior,
performance, and values gaps, and determine how best to deal
with similar situations
Picture a concrete strategy in which to develop a customer service
program following guidelines of project management and the
principles and practices of customer service
Training Preparation
Checklist Ensure that you have the following items during the training:
Standard classroom set-up
Teacher’s Guide
Adequate amount of student handouts
Computer Speakers
Projector ( If available)
Writing implements: pen, paper, white board markers and eraser.
Duration: 5 minutes
Presentation: SMPSVCCU001
Student Workbook: n/a
Slide 4
If an explanation seems at odds with concepts you are familiar with, ask
questions. Should there be concepts you feel must be discussed further, do
say so.
Duration: 30 minutes
Presentation: SMPSVCCU001
Student Workbook: n/a
CONDUCT an activity.
HAVE students:
1. STATE their nicknames
2. ANSWER question, What do they think about the IT-BPM Industry
3. DESCRIBE how can they help improve the IT-BPM Industry
4. EXPRESS what they think about {impromptu concepts}
Facilitator’s Note:
Impromptu concepts may include: interracial marriages, the
weather, the neighbor’s dog, the price of gasoline, peanut butter,
and so on.
The general idea here is to get the students used to spontaneous
and free-wheeling conversation, hopefully to encourage a more
relaxed exchange even with heavier modules on the class plate.
This activity should not take longer than 30 minutes depending on
class size, what is important is that you make sure the students are
encouraged to participate and share their thoughts.
Setting Expectations
Duration: 10 minutes
Presentation: SMPSVCCU001
Student Workbook: n/a
Slide 6-7
There are basic expectations from you when in class or performing tasks
meant for class:
Slide 8
Slide 9
Slide 10
The first time that a customer initiates contact with our center, we are
expected to make a complete note of what transpired during the call.
Midterms Finals
Class Standing 20% 20%
Quizzes (minimum of 4) 40% 40%
Projects (instead of period exams) 40% 40%
TOTAL 100% 100%
Motivation
Defines motivation as a set of conditions that incite change. It sets out to
provide a paradigm for personal development.
Empathy
This module discusses “empathy” as a critical social competency required
of a developing leader.
Social Skills
This module qualifies the need for holistic development and expects
students to think of the brand of leadership they would like to develop.
Coaching Sessions as Learning Opportunities
Aims to define what coaching is and creates a mindset through which
students should be able to welcome mentorship, and experiential learning.
Service Orientation
An Operations Manager (OM) of an IT-BPM Company, CTQ&A Ltd., was asked by senior
managers to look into a Quality incident report (IR) sent earlier that day citing compliance and
performance concerns escalated for client League, Inc., a leader in gaming software
development. Reports forwarded by the Quality team stated how five (5) particular agents
have shown habitual noncompliance for items such as (1) using the proper call holding
procedure, (2) using required tools when troubleshooting software usage and compatibility
issues, and (3) making an effort to up-sell software services and product license extensions. A
follow up concern expressed what appeared to be agent toggling and an excessive use of
auxiliary time (AUX) and after call work (ACW).
Agents are allowed to place calls on hold as long as only a threshold wait of not more than
two minutes was utilized at any time. Agents are expected to state the reason for placing
calls on hold, how long the wait will be, and to thank the customer as graciously and
sincerely as possible upon returning for allowing the hold.
The reported agents appeared to not only practice extending these holds; they were also
abrupt in their manner of placing the calls on hold without getting customer agreement.
Various voice-of-customer surveys have also been received for the same agents detailing
reasons for their dissatisfaction.
Agents are required to use a tool connected to a High Speed Internet Access that allows
them to remotely access customer programs in order to determine the extent of the
software issue, troubleshoot as extensively as possible, and to resolve them, if it were at
all possible. A reference number is system-generated at the end of the entire
troubleshooting process and this number should be appended to cases documented for
Client reference.
The reported agents appeared to not only have logged calls without the troubleshooting
reference number appended to the overall notation; they also occasionally skipped the
process of documenting the calls altogether. In a few isolated occasions, the agents
skipped troubleshooting issues for customers who were calling in as repeat escalation
cases.
As an effort to generate additional revenue for the Client, agents are required to deliver a
scripted up-sell of software services and product license extensions for issues that appear
to have been resolved. Following this, it is only upon the customer’s approval that orders
should be processed using customer information already in the system. The Client gives
out incentives for a high-rate of actual sales generated after troubleshooting.
The reported agents were either (1) skipping this process or (2) placing the order for
Service Culture Teacher’s Guide Session 1
Date Developed:2013 page 17 SMPSVCCU001 v2013
successfully resolved issues even without customer approval, creating cause for dispute,
further escalation, and/or order recalls. This also meant that certain metric successes
would have to be put in question for unethical practice.
Regarding the toggling and after call work abuse, Quality recommended seeking the
assistance of the workforce queue management team to look into historical records for
indications of the same.
Threads showed team manager reactions/responses to the said reports and the
compilation attached the original incident reports which appear to have been first
submitted a little more than three months ago.
Communication noted that the team managers either forwarded their commitment to
coach their individual agents and/or defended them stating the weight of customer issues
that were received on particular dates.
Senior management likewise requested a performance review for the team managers and a
review of their teams’ performance and coaching logs for the last quarter, stating that it was
possible for termination to be served based on the gravity of the offenses. At the same time
and if it were necessary, the teams were to be lined up for specialized training to swing their
performance back on track, nip in the proverbial bud further development of similar habits
within the line of business, and realign team objectives with the company’s goals.
Where necessary, they also agreed to consider retraining the agents if the OM saw enough
reason to retain them and instill better performance values. They also agreed to take the OM’s
word into account while gravely stating they expected the misses to be corrected and that a
respect for their processes be restored.
Alarmed, the OM called on the managers of these individually reported agents and requested
to meet with them one by one to discuss the incident reports and to countercheck facts before
sending out his feedback/recommendations.
The OM knows that he would have to rely on previous experience and what he knows as a
former agent—and later as a team manager and workforce officer—in order to keep the
integrity of his account secure.
He is concerned that the named frontline managers’ tenure would also be put to question and
it was ultimately up to him to turn their performance around. What he found based on
documentation and performance tracks was not very encouraging, but he eventually saw this
as an opportunity to improve several aspects of the center’s performance.
It was apparent that supposed coaching commitment aimed at correcting certain behavior
Performance behavior, he knew, results from a number of combined factors such as individual
attitudes and values, leadership influence and coaching, pressure, actual training, internal and
external motivation, and a reaction to a host of other stimuli.
He also knew changing behavior was not something he could do in less than a month, let alone
less overnight.
He had a lot to consider and knew that the decision he would have to make would not be an
easy one.* * *
After meeting with the five team managers separately, he consulted with the quality team,
reviewed 360 degree performance feedback, discussed change impacts with senior
management, and finally submitted his recommendations.
Of the five team managers whose agents were cited for specific reasons, it was deemed that
two of them should be terminated for consenting to unethical practice and for offenses against
customers, Client, productivity, and integrity. Due process was observed with reports and
actual paper trails used for reference. That the managers have been previously cited—and a
few times—as being uncooperative and, apparently, not doing their duty to coach to
performance and correct questionable behavior was the kind of collective attitude that simply
could not be tolerated. They would be given the option to submit their resignation instead as a
mercy to be granted in consideration of the length of their tenure.
Their agents, including the two who were issued IRs, were to immediately go through a
performance improvement plan. Part of this is training to revisit acceptable performance and
policies and procedures. While suspension was still meted out, this was kept at the minimum
with an elicited warning issued and agreeable resolution reached to make sure they were
regularly coached and mentored.
The other three agents, along with their managers and teams were, likewise, required to
attend training.
As soon as all training was completed, the OM called all team managers to a Champions’
meeting to discuss values realignment across the line of business. He directly stated how the
Client is concerned that the center’s performance needed revitalization and that they agreed
the center management knew its people best. The meeting was called to draft an action plan
and address any negative offshoot of the consequence management measures implemented
recently. Among the concerns and ideas put forth included:
Minimizing the time that managers spend on administrative duties where such
duties would not have any impact on their agents’ development so that they might
have more time to coach and monitor their teams.
Assigning process champions or mentors among the team managers—or the more
tenured but consistently high-performing agents—on every shift to make sure
Moreover, it was agreed that the general staff needed to understand and feel that they were
business-owners and ultimately direct contributors to the success of the center.
Commitment was secured and the OM communicated his appreciation for the team’s
suggestions.
Seeing that the team’s suggestions synched with what he had in mind for the long term, the
OM discussed developments with senior management and implemented center-wide
operational innovations with their approval:
Shuffled agents from the five teams with non-performing to inconsistently performing
teams/agents that fell below the mean based on an average stack ranking for the last
two months.
Partnered team managers (tenured+less tenured, or weak+strong) for synergy and
arranged to apply the shuffling of this partnership bi-annually.
Engaged the attendance of three of the rolling month’s best performing agents to
attend one of two Client calibration calls scheduled in a month, and to have them
submit their own feedback or ask questions.
Steadily over the next six (6) months after changes were implemented, the poorly performing
agents realigned themselves and appeared to be performing confidently, if not more
competitively, alongside consistent performers wherever they were assigned.
There was a stronger and more proactive collaboration between the Operations, Quality and
Workforce teams to ensure more or less equable performance.
On the other end, high-performing agents became more forthcoming about best practices and
proactively provided peer mentoring while all team managers actively sought performance
feedback and development opportunities.
To reinforce the trend, team managers were given the option to seek certification training and
the program-wide succession planning process was updated to support the growth momentum
from the ranks and on.
II. Motivation
1. Define motivation.
2. What is intrinsic and extrinsic motivation?
3. What factors influence motivation?
4. Can you tell what may have motivated agents to behave or
perform as described in the incident reports the Quality team
submitted? Which of these are intrinsic or extrinsic?
5. Can you tell what the Quality and Workforce teams might have
understood as the agents’ motivations for performing the way
they did? How about senior management?
6. What may have prompted the Quality team to escalate these
agents and their managers to senior management?
7. Do you think the agents’ motivations, and therefore their
performance, as being influenced? If you answered ‘Yes’, what
could have influenced their motivations?
8. Are these influences controllable or uncontrollable? Explain your
answer.
9. Can motivations be adjusted or changed?
10. Is there anything that the team managers should have done to
help their agents adjust or change their motivations? If you
answered ‘Yes’, what actions could these have been?
11. What role do team managers play in individual motivation? Team
motivation?
12. What should the team managers have done to help agents adjust
or change their motivations?
13. Who is responsible for the agents’ motivations? Explain your
answer.
14. Do you believe that an agent can have a different set of
motivations compared to those of his teammates?
15. Based on what we know about the OM, do you think he is
motivated? In what way?
16. What situation(s) clearly illustrate his being motivated?
17. In the team managers’/OM’s place, what would you do to
influence better motivation and, as a consequence, better
performance?
Wilson Reyes is a business management graduate who, by a series of events and changes in
priorities, realized he needed a more financially rewarding job. His interest in anything
technical eventually landed him a post as a technical support representative (TSR) for CTQ&A
Ltd., an IT-BPM company with a 10-year market presence.
Fast forward to five (5) years later, most of his batch mates have moved on to different roles
within the company or left for greener pastures. He, however, is still a TSR.
He was also starting to feel the weight of expectation on him as less tenured agents were being
promoted or assigned more challenging roles. Wilson felt that he was being passed over for
promotion and felt he had equal or more advanced skills, definitely a lot more experience, and
remains one of the top contributors to people-in-seat overtime support if and when the call
volume demanded it of his account.
He decided to consult with his team manager, Alice Tuason. Calmly, he said he felt that his
contributions were not being recognized; he wanted to know what it was that he was missing.
Scheduling a 1:1 for this, Alice listened as Wilson cited his contributions, concerns, and
expressed his frustration and insecurity about being the “oldest” agent and being “passed
over” for meatier roles he was sure he could manage very well. Alice acknowledged his
feelings, thanked him for his very specific contributions to team maturity and their consistent
above-average metrics, for being proactive about his own performance, and now for taking the
initiative to approach her to discuss his performance development.
They talked about which roles in the company he was interested in and the knowledge, skills,
and abilities that were required for each. At the end of the discussion, Wilson was more
determined than ever to seek a new role that would make full use of his talents and train him
for a possible leadership role sometime soon.
Before leaving the office, he scanned the notes he took from his discussion with Alice.
More of an introvert, he recognized and acknowledged that he had some concerns about
meeting a lot of new people at the same time. In fact, he still finds comfort in the fact that he
could not see the faces of the customers he had to assist over the phone. But Alice told him to
apply what he now knew and understood about empathy to the people he would need to have
more interaction with if he wanted to move on to bigger roles.
In the same manner, he needed to be just as proactive about creating situations or welcoming
situations that would expose him to more informal settings for him to practice his social skills.
Wilson resolved to brace himself for the ride; he knew that the rules of engagement would
soon set him on a course he’d never imagined for himself.
I. Empathy
1. What is Empathy?
2. Can you state what the problem is in this scenario?
3. How many years has it been since Wilson joined CTQ&A Ltd.?
4. Describe Wilson and his work attitude in your own words.
5. Can you tell how Wilson developed his present frame of mind?
6. Differentiate empathy from sympathy (provide an example).
7. Do you think similar experiences occur in real life? If yes, cite an
example.
8. Do you think empathy is a critical aspect of social competence?
Why or why not?
9. Is there a connection between a person’s social competence and
his/her leadership capacity? Explain your answer.
10. Can you think of a similar situation in the past that showed you
your capacity for empathy? What did you learn from that
situation?
11. What can you see as other possible outcomes if Wilson learned to
apply empathy very early in his BPO career?
12. What other ways can you think of in order to help an
acquaintance, friend, teammate develop and apply empathy?
13. If you were Wilson’s manager, how would deal with similar
agents?
14. Do you think that not learning or knowing about empathy is a bad
thing?
15. How effective do you think you are in terms of empathy?
The last few months have been hectic. All mid-level managers in an IT-BPM company, CTQ&A
Ltd., are being asked to submit performance reports urgently after League, Inc., a leading
software development company, declared their intention to discontinue their contract
because of poor issue resolution.
Should the contract end, at least 400 inbound technical support representatives would be left
floating, if not out of jobs. In the long run, this would take its toll on the business since it would
be costly to maintain the frozen headcount.
The Client’s virtual call center was divided into two polarized groups: performers and slackers.
At the moment, CTQ&A Ltd. is deemed a slacker. Management was hoping their business
analysts would be able to provide an accurate picture of the crisis situation and reflect in their
reports what issues needed to be addressed at once.
A report submitted translated the outcome to be the result of poor employee morale and a
need to revisit how frontline managers were managing Client policy changes that were put into
effect within the last two quarters.
Armed with this information, the Board of Directors tasked senior level management to work
on a plan to salvage this account, save jobs, and keep the company afloat.
The team decided on several means of addressing the multiple fires that appeared to be
springing from different areas.
On top of calling for focus discussion groups and revisiting key performance indicators,
management studied agent revenue generation performance for up-selling efforts and found a
significant dip in actual sales right around the time when the update to Client policies was
implemented. However, there was no apparent correlation between the company’s sales
performance downturn and actual employee morale. In fact, it was almost ironic that CTQ&A
Ltd. did not appear to have critical shortfalls in terms of customer feedback; the surveys were
all coming in—but the scores were not exactly filled with praise.
As a contingency, senior management felt that a meeting with the Client would require
focusing on the enduring relationship between CTQ&A Ltd. and League, Inc. in order to buy
time that would eventually allow them to turn their customer service performance around.
Part of the contingency plan involved pushing intensive training that would help make the
policy update easier to communicate to customers. General customer feedback from recorded
escalation calls stated that the added security layer was not getting their issues resolved and
this was turning them off from purchasing software upgrades or services.
Clearly, there was a need to identify what issues did drive customer dissatisfaction. It is simply
hard to resolve an unidentified issue.
Service Culture Teacher’s Guide Session 1
Date Developed:2013 page 28 SMPSVCCU001 v2013
On top of this, the dynamic needs of the market only served to reinforce that there was simply
very little time available to get agents off the phone and arm them to deal with the changes in
client direction.
Management decided that more candid feedback was perhaps critical if this was to be
gathered from a sampling of agents that come from the different teams experiencing a higher
attrition rate than most. Off the bat, it seemed the best solution was to employ the use of
performance incentives as reward for milestone achievements, especially for tenured staff,
and conducting program-wide activities to engage those who were less tenured.
To-date, management has met with the Client and engaged their support in making use of
pocket but high-impact training to roll out the new process and arm staff with information that
would help address customer-agent communication gaps.
Meanwhile, the decision to address internal disquiet within the ranks has yet to be made.
Naturally, another round of internal disquiet appears to be simmering in waves around the
Operations floor and team managers are starting to see how it is taking its toll on resolution
and compliance metrics.
1. Define VOC.
2. Define customer satisfaction.
3. Can you explain what must have happened when the Client
implemented a change in its policies regarding up-sells that should
be generated from resolved issues?
4. Can you see a possible solution to the dilemma(s) being faced by
CTQ&A Ltd.?
5. As a customer, what would be three things you would focus on and
rate in order to give your patronage to any given company or
brand?
6. In your own words, what should customer-service organizations
work on in order to engage customer trust, patronage, and
relationship?
1. In the given scenario, can you identify what metrics the managers
are watching out for?
Can you distinguish between a customer service principle and a
customer service practice?
2. How does personal leadership and competence from the personal
and social levels figure in customer service?
3. How do they figure in the success or failure of service
organizations?
4. What changes in management style would you recommend to
attempt turning the company’s performance around?
5. How would you address issues regarding Client relationship and
policy management? Failing employee morale?
6. If you had all the resources at hand to make a success out of
CTQ&A Ltd., what would be the first three steps you would take to
rebuild the company’s service orientation?
7. Based on actions the company has taken to so far, would you say
that their methods are effective or not? Why?
8. Who are the main stakeholders in a customer-service oriented
organization?