Cutting-edge paradigms; A new schedule.

[Davis Thompson]

Hello, Davis here.

The boss recently gathered the managers for an emergency meeting and said that the value-added onboarding that was implemented yesterday is not functioning correctly. Following this, he assigned me the task of incentivizing our task-team's wheelhouse to quickly patch this bug. I'll need Tom, Jerry and Eugene to come in tomorrow so we can roll out meta solutions.

[Taylor Clark]

Hello, Taylor here.

It is important to note the increased availability of the Support Department's employees due to the stunning success the rollout of our new system that occurred late last month. With our previous installation, time had to be allocated to addressing the inevitable hand-holding through the sluggish interface problems and intricacies, leading to inefficient revenue divisions. I'm glad to announce that due to the hard work of Junior Technicians like Davis, (although Pete and Chaankya deserve credit also) total resource time free-ups have increased by a minimum of 23%. Keep in mind this is only the preliminary stages of the company's 10 year expansion strategy, but it is not too far a stretch to say the future is looking bright.

Regards,

Taylor Clark

[TheDarkestLight]

This is the funniest trolling I've seen in a very long time.

[Frog]

@Taylor

If you have 23% availability (I'm assuming you meant 100% availability with 23% minimum idle) this means you can free up some capital on your books by firing an underperforming technician. (I vote Davis).

** unless you're planning on expanding operations which require that 23% buffer to account for future growth. I'd still fire people to remain efficient.

[Taylor Clark]

@Taylor

If you have 23% availability (I'm assuming you meant 100% availability with 23% minimum idle) this means you can free up some capital on your books by firing an underperforming technician. (I vote Davis).

** unless you're planning on expanding operations which require that 23% buffer to account for future growth. I'd still fire people to remain efficient.

Hello, Taylor here to reply to your comment.

I'm sorry for not being clearer in my original statement. I did intend to state that the time spent by those working in the Support Department has gone down by at least 23% in the area of dealing with customer problems, and helping them through those. Of course you are correct in that cutting the fat away, so to speak, in this department would also lift some of the financial burden caused by the recent developments in the Dow Jones, NASDAQ, and others; however the board generally does not approve of taking such drastic measures when things are proceeding to schedule, in this case AHEAD of schedule. Also keep in mind that the median for the time allocation improvements was actually 31.4% for the firm as a whole (reception desk and non-related departments notwithstanding). I'm unsure as to what field you're involved with, but our policy is inclined to value the employee just as much if not more than shareholders and private investors. The way I see it, our success can be found directly in the hard work and effort put in by these industrious men and women, and to throw such people out into the street is paramount to blasphemy towards God and men.

Regards,

Taylor Clark.

[Frog]

Hello, Taylor here to reply to your comment.

I'm sorry for not being clearer in my original statement. I did intend to state that the time spent by those working in the Support Department has gone down by at least 23% in the area of dealing with customer problems, and helping them through those. Of course you are correct in that cutting the fat away, so to speak, in this department would also lift some of the financial burden caused by the recent developments in the Dow Jones, NASDAQ, and others; however the board generally does not approve of taking such drastic measures when things are proceeding to schedule, in this case AHEAD of schedule. Also keep in mind that the median for the time allocation improvements was actually 31.4% for the firm as a whole (reception desk and non-related departments notwithstanding). I'm unsure as to what field you're involved with, but our policy is inclined to value the employee just as much if not more than shareholders and private investors. The way I see it, our success can be found directly in the hard work and effort put in by these industrious men and women, and to throw such people out into the street is paramount to blasphemy towards God and men.

Regards,

Taylor Clark.

I run companies that mostly work in the realms of tech, financial technology, and payments. I'm also involved in venture capital funds. I normally sell off companies after a few years.

If your company is public, you owe it to your investors to be as profitable as possible. You'd be compelled to either fire the fat or strategically increase operations to give them purpose. Otherwise you're purposefully devaluing your company keeping them on board. E.G. Salary is a liability going forward A-L=OE. No board would approve of that. With that freed capital you'd choose to reinvest in the companies assets OR give out dividends. But to keep a useless employee on board is a no-go always.

If your company is private AND 'you' own more than 50% then by all means, be as inefficient as you want. It's your company.

The way you describe availability sounds like some PCI compliant calling center rather than some tech dev center. If that's the case, here's a tip IVR sucks always and it's expensive. Keep IVR as short as humanly possible.

Just curious, since I'm pretty convinced you're more of a calling center- do you structure your outsourced agents as dedicated agents? Or do you group them all together as shared and they answer calls and questions for multiple products from different companies? If you structure your contracts as dedicated agents you'll get far more bang for your buck with far less risk. Obviously, you can't expect a 100% dedicated outsourced contract, but definitely push some mix of dedicated agents. This should create more slop in your availability and increase your profitability.

Again. You're not thinking of the company's best interests. You're thinking like a small time company middle management by trying to keep employees around who serve no purpose. I mean... Do they just come in and do nothing? What's their purpose??

If it's a dev team, and there's 23% idle, then project managers need to increase dev project checklists. When I have dedicated dev teams that are idle, I become furious and fire someone. If it's a shared dev team I expect projects allocated per quarter to be completed with weekly check ups - obviously I implement early completion bonuses with the project managers. But that means the next quarter will have a longer checklist.