There is no 'I' in software: why implementing an FSM solution is a team effort  

New research suggests that 50% of field service software implementations will fall short of planned outcomes and up to 25% of companies already using FSM solutions still undertake duplicate information entry, even though they have the tools to avoid this problem. What’s going wrong?

There is enormous pressure on businesses today to improve internal efficiency and to deliver superior service. Technology advances keep coming, meaning that customers increasingly expect more from service organisations. The old break-fix methodology no longer applies, as we move to a service delivery model that demands a more proactive approach. So too are the days of accepting the service department as a non-profit-generating yet necessary entity well and truly over.

Of course, there is no shortage of choice when it comes to software solutions to improve field service operations for businesses of any size. Offerings range from relatively simple single-device mobile apps through to complex software solutions capable of integration with other enterprise elements, including accounting, payroll, CRM and supply chain systems — many of which offer endless potential for customisation. Add in other elements, such as GPS technology and advanced telematics, and managing a mobile team has never been easier... theoretically, at least.

So it doesn’t take much to recognise the inherent benefit in moving from error-prone, paper-based, manually driven systems to a more automated solution. Why, then, do so many implementations fail to deliver the expected benefits?

Don’t underestimate the endeavour

According to a recent Gartner report, ‘Succeed on a field service project with the right team’, much of the problem lies in the way the project is defined and managed from the outset. Underestimating the scope of the enterprise-wide change required to smoothly introduce a solution is common, as is the practice of nominating individuals with inappropriate skill sets or levels of influence within the business to adequately manage and guide the process.

Within most companies, implementation of a software solution falls squarely under the remit of the IT department. The reality is somewhat different. Gartner’s research found that the most successful projects not only factor in all of the affected areas of the business, but also clearly define a hierarchy of responsibility, assign appropriately skilled people to those roles and — perhaps most importantly — empower them to act.

That structure, including detailed role descriptions and responsibilities, is then communicated to the entire organisation before the project is kicked off. This makes it clear where accountability lies and increases the chance of cooperation from other departments within the business. Gartner suggests that the following structure will deliver the best results:

1. An executive who has absolute authority — this would generally be at CEO level or similar, as this individual has given financial approval for the project and assigned responsibility to a ‘project sponsor’.
2. A project sponsor is someone who has overall responsibility for ensuring business benefits and outcomes but does not manage the project on a day-to-day level. This person appoints a project manager to run the planning and execution efforts but is also involved in working with other departments to ensure that the project manager receives cooperation. This person will generally be a leader from within the company’s IT or service teams.
3. A project manager deals with all of the specifics and details, from scoping and planning through to execution, and works with other departments to ensure objectives are met. Other involved departmental leaders report to the project manager.

Functional change within many job roles is an unavoidable part of introducing any system to streamline operational activities. As each process change will have an impact across multiple parts of the business, this is often the point where things start to come undone and where buy-in from other departments can become difficult to achieve.

Unsurprisingly, Gartner suggests that there is a higher likelihood of achieving a favourable outcome when the right people are appointed to the right roles in the project plan. A project manager with experience across a number of functional departments is better placed to ensure a smooth transition than an individual with exposure to only one silo of the operation. Additionally, staff members that are well respected have a distinct advantage over those that are not highly regarded, for obvious reasons.

The forgotten team member

The changing nature of field service is giving more visibility to the customer when it comes to job status, particularly as things move toward a more predictive and proactive service program model.

Any chosen FSM solution will intrinsically impact on the customer as they will be required to interact with it to some degree. It therefore makes sense to include select customers in the implementation process — not just in the case of running small pilot trials.

Feedback from the other side of the fence will usually provide insight into kinks and issues that would not immediately be apparent from the service provider’s perspective.

Shifting mindsets

The life of a field service tech was once a fairly autonomous one — he was always on the road, left to his own devices and to plan his own time, connected to the back office by phone (at best) and required to return to home base only in the event that parts were needed or paperwork was due to be submitted. This is how many service teams still operate and it undoubtedly suits certain people to lead such an unfettered existence. It may also go some way to explaining why service departments were never able to turn a profit.

Things change dramatically once an FSM solution is adopted. Depending on the technology and the degree of functionality involved, the changes can be fairly broad: jobs are assigned based on an individual’s current location, carried parts inventory, skill set and licensing requirements; driving routes are recommended based on real-time traffic conditions; driving habits are monitored and incidents reported; time sheets are automatically submitted without any user intervention; and parts are always accounted for. It’s quite a mental shift for the frontline team — from being the Lone Ranger to having every move monitored and documented.

Understanding the significance of this change and eliciting buy-in from the field team prior to putting the solution into action will directly influence overall outcome, as the system can only be expected to operate as well as the team that feeds it.

Getting it right pays off

Gartner’s research suggests that FSM software delivers significant improvement to business when successfully implemented, particularly in the areas of job allocation, technician efficiency and time to invoice. In the companies surveyed, it found that a return on investment was often achieved in less than one year.

If you are yet invest in a more automated solution, there is every reason to do so as the benefits are clear. However, deciding to make the move is not enough — you will need to plan effectively, be clear about your expected outcomes and create an environment that delivers the highest chance of success.

Image credit: ©Rawpixel/Dollar Photo Club