Transcript Technical Service Quality - How do you measure up?

Information
Technology Service
Quality –
How does yours measure up?
Jane McGuire
Strategic Planner
Office of the CIO
UNM
1
Today’s Topics
Quality
 Service Quality Measurement
 ServQual
 TechQual+

2
What is Quality?
ISO
 Quality Control / Quality Assurance
 Six Sigma
 Lean Manufacturing, JIT production
 Balanced Scorecard
 Malcolm Baldrige Quality Award
Process

3
Malcolm Baldrige Quality
Award
Leadership
 Strategic Planning
 Customer and Market Knowledge
 Measurement
 Workforce
 Process Management
 Results / Outcomes

4
Quality criteria

“The only criteria that count in the
evaluation of service quality are
defined by the customers.”
Valarie Zeithaml, Ph.D., Delivering Quality Service
5
What the customer wants
per Horst Schultze, CEO, Ritz Carlton, 2006

Defect-free service


Timely service


Correct, consistent, reliable
Now, according to created expectation
To feel good

Individual treatment, knowledge
 Result
6
= Loyalty
How do we measure
service quality?
Self-Assessment checklist
 Anecdotal, individual feedback
 Focus Groups and one-time surveying qualitative & quantitative data



Polling


Microtrends (Mark J Penn)
Statistics

7
ECAR, Soochow & University of Hong Kong survey,
University of Wisconsin/ECAR survey
Logs, time measures, ratios, control charts, variation
Service Quality (SERVQUAL)
Model – Published 1990
Comprehensive customer view of Quality Service over time
addresses:

Tangibles





8
Facilities, equipment, personnel, materials
Reliability
 Delivering what’s promised
Responsiveness
 Helping customers with immediate needs
Assurance
 Competence, skills, knowledge, credibility, courtesy,
security
Empathy
 Access, communication, understanding the customer
Evolution: SERVQUAL,
LibQual+®,

ServQual 1990


LibQual+® mid 90s

9
Measure five service areas
Measure place, service affect,
information control
Higher Education
TechQual+
2006 -Tim Chester, CIO, TAMU/Qatar then
Pepperdine University
 3-year research project – multiple rounds
of qualitative and quantitative data
collection
 Statistically reliable, valid and universal
instrument for technology service
assessment
 12 institutions participating in development

10
TechQual+ Survey topics
Instrument
 Content
 Analysis

11
TechQual+ Survey


12
The Instrument
 Standardized, outcomes-based ‘zone-of-tolerance’ analysis
assessment tool
 Customer, not service-provider, perspective
 In-house comparison across years
 National comparison across institutions
 Large numbers of customer data to support data-driven
decisions
 Useful to set internal priorities and allocate resources
The Tool
 Web-delivered, remotely hosted on SQL server,
 institution-defined loading categories
 www.techqual.org
TechQual+ Content



13
6 areas of questions
 Inclusive planning
 Access
 Campus information systems
 Web
 Support
 Classroom Technology
5 questions per area
3 answers per question
 Desired level of service
 Minimum level of service
 Perceived or experience level
Content related to
SERVQUAL

Customer values
Empathy: Inclusive planning
 Reliability: Access, Campus
information systems
 Assurance: Campus information
systems, Web
 Responsiveness: Support
 Tangibles: Classroom Technology,
Support

14
Statistics in TechQual+

Number of respondents, mean and
standard deviation
Service adequacy gap
 Service superiority gap


15
Zone of tolerance identified
For Example:
16
*Qual+ Analysis

17
By groups for each question
TechQual+ Refinement
UNM’s involvement



18
CIO/ITS and HSLIC co-sponsoring
 UNM HRRB approval of research project using human subjects
 Principal Investigators: Holly Buchanan, Barney Maccabe
 Investigators: Jane McGuire, Sally Bowler-Hill
Focus Groups – April 2007 - faculty, staff, student and 2 mixed
groups
 Participants looking for Collaboration, Consistency and
Communication – True in every school, large and small!
 Need for personal control: if no control, it better work
Pilot Surveying
 Internal central IT on main and north campuses – June 2007
 5 Colleges & admin groups – September 2007
Why Pilot ITS/HSLIC?
Gather opinions on most & least
important questions to ask UNM
community
 Establish a baseline for internal
perception of IT services
 Learn the survey instrument
 Tests the interfaces and administrative
functions of this instrument

19
ITS/HSLIC Results
HSLIC
ITS
Total
Invited
90
241
331
Respondents
42
29
71
47%
12%
21%
Response Rate
20
Incomplete surveys
35
Faculty respondents
8
Staff respondents
63
Student respondents
0
ITS/HSLIC Vertical Bar Chart
Mean
Score (1-9)
21
Question #
ITS/HSLIC Radar Chart
Questions
1-5
Incl Planning
6-10 Info Systems
11-15 Access
16-20 Classroom Tech
21-25 Web
26-30 Support
22
Campus Pilot


September 2007
Preliminary list of divisions to survey






23
Anderson School of Management
College of Education
College of Nursing
University College
University Libraries
Administrative groups: Budget Office, Extended
University, Research & Economic Development,
Continuing Ed
Demographic data loaded
Status: faculty/staff/student
 Age:



<=18, 19-22, 23-30, 31-45, 46-65, >65
UNM ‘Age’

< 6mo, 6-24mo, 25mo-5 yr, >5 yr
Gender
 Pure student & Faculty/staff
 Division/College groups

24
Consider for next time at
UNM…
Fewer Questions or categories
 Motivate a higher open rate

 Punchier
invitations & reminders
 More reminders
 Sender should have direct relationship
 Departmental competition?
 Better rewards? (iPods?)
25
Using survey results



26
Work with departmental IT service providers
 Share planning
 Share results
Use data to base decisions, set priorities and
make requests
Organize for improvement, as suggested by
ServQual developers:
 Formalize improvement processes
 State clear direction & priorities
 Involve many, emphasize teamwork
 Incremental steps, not all at once
 Empower staff, flatten the organization
ServQual: service quality gaps
27
2. Management
1. Customer
service
expectations
& management
perception gap
perceptions
and
service expectations
/ standards gap
4. Service delivery and
3. Service quality
external
communication
gap
specifications
and service
delivery gap
Close the service gaps
28
1. Understand
customer expectations
& perceptions
2. Define
affordable
performance
standards, train staff
4. Create
appropriate
expectations
with the
customer
3. Measure performance
only against
the standards
Quality service tenets


Constant, incremental improvement
Add strategic value - don’t only provide a
commodity service




29
Reliably flawless
Right now!
Individualize / personalize service
Right the first time or VERY right the
second time
Questions / Discussion
30