Mobility in Service Enterprise

Field Service 2011: Mobility and the Extension of the Service Enterprise

July 2011

Sumair Dutta, Aly Pinder, Jr.

Field Service 2011: Mobility and the Extension of the Service Enterprise Page 2

© 2011 Aberdeen Group. Telephone: 617 854 5200

Executive Summary Research Benchmark

Aberdeen’s Research Benchmarks provide an in-depth and comprehensive look into process, procedure, methodologies, and technologies with best practice identification and actionable recommendations

The explosion of mobility in both the consumer and enterprise arenas is undeniable. Every day, we are informed about the development and retail of new devices, applications, operating environments, network capabilities and a new level on Angry Birds. Just as the selection of the right device and right plan can be overwhelming for everyday consumers, the amount of information that needs to be sifted through when considering the mobilization of a field service workforce for an enterprise can be crippling. Business leaders in service, IT or otherwise, cannot ignore the importance or impact of mobility on their service operations. Those leaders that are successful fully fathom the opportunity provided by mobile tools and applications, and treat mobility as an extension of their IT and business strategy, requiring buy in and collaboration from all parties involved.

Best-in-Class Performance In May and June 2011, Aberdeen Group surveyed over 200 service professionals. Organizations defined as Best-in-Class exhibited the following:

• 82% average first-time fix performance (65% for all others) and a 15% average decrease in service cost over the previous 12 months

• 76% average level of workforce utilization (57% for all others) and a 16% increase in workforce productivity over the previous year

Competitive Maturity Assessment Survey results show that the firms enjoying Best-in-Class performance are:

• More than two times as likely as Laggards (70% vs. 31%) to have a mobile application for field service in place

• Nearly two times as likely as all others (62% vs. 34%) to integrate field data with enterprise systems in real-time

• 15% more likely than all others (38% vs. 33%) to have a standardized mobile strategy across the enterprise

• 49% more likely than Laggards to leverage a cross-functional team of executives and users to define, manage and support mobile requirements

Required Actions To achieve Best-in-Class performance, companies must:

• Assess current performance and build a scalable mobile roadmap

• Improve integration between parts management and field service and provide up to date parts information to field technicians

• Continue to drive data driven collaboration across the entire organization

www.aberdeen.com Fax: 617 723 7897

“Investment in mobility isn’t a stand-alone strategy; it’s an integration and extension of an overall IT strategy.”

~ Ron Hyland, Vice President IT, Home

Services DIRECTV

This document is the result of primary research performed by Aberdeen Group. Aberdeen Group's methodologies provide for objective fact-based research and represent the best analysis available at the time of publication. Unless otherwise noted, the entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by Aberdeen Group, Inc. and may not be reproduced, distributed, archived, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent by Aberdeen Group, Inc.

http://assessment.aberdeen.com/ehsELH8yME/index.aspx


© 2011 Aberdeen Group. Telephone: 617 854 5200 www.aberdeen.com Fax: 617 723 7897

Table of Contents Executive Summary....................................................................................................... 2

Best-in-Class Performance..................................................................................... 2 Competitive Maturity Assessment....................................................................... 2 Required Actions...................................................................................................... 2

Chapter One: Benchmarking the Best-in-Class.................................................... 5 Mobility - The Extension of a Business Strategy............................................... 5 The Maturity Class Framework............................................................................ 8 The Best-in-Class PACE Model ............................................................................ 9 Best-in-Class Strategies.........................................................................................10

Chapter Two: Benchmarking Requirements for Success.................................12 Competitive Assessment......................................................................................13 Capabilities and Enablers ......................................................................................14

Chapter Three: Required Actions .........................................................................23 Laggard Steps to Success......................................................................................23 Industry Average Steps to Success ....................................................................24 Best-in-Class Steps to Success ............................................................................25

Appendix A: Research Methodology.....................................................................27 Appendix B: Related Aberdeen Research............................................................29

Figures Figure 1: Pressures to Mobilize.................................................................................. 7 Figure 2: Increasing Dispatch Trends ....................................................................... 7 Figure 3: Strategic Actions in Support of Mobility ..............................................10 Figure 4: Fixing First-Time Fix..................................................................................11 Figure 5: Investment in Mobile Automation .........................................................17

Tables Table 1: Importance of Mobility in Field Service ................................................... 5 Table 2: Current Performance Assessment............................................................ 6 Table 3: Top Performers Earn Best-in-Class Status.............................................. 8 Table 4: The Best-in-Class PACE Framework ....................................................... 9 Table 5: The Competitive Framework...................................................................14 Table 6: Mobile Deployment Success for the Best-in-Class .............................15 Table 7: Impact of Collaborative Selection ...........................................................16 Table 8: Available to Field Technicians ..................................................................18 Table 9: Device Trends..............................................................................................19 Table 10: Preferred Devices for Field Service......................................................20 Table 11: Integration of Service Information........................................................21 Table 12: Technology is an Enabler ........................................................................26 Table 13: The PACE Framework Key....................................................................28



Table 14: The Competitive Framework Key........................................................28 Table 15: The Relationship Between PACE and the Competitive Framework.........................................................................................................................................28



Chapter One: Benchmarking the Best-in-Class

Mobility - The Extension of a Business Strategy As stated in previous Aberdeen research on mobility, the provision of devices and applications is only the first step on the path to mobile empowerment. The information provided via these tools and the investment in the accuracy and validity of that information defines the true path to mobile success.

In field service, the importance of mobility cannot and should not be down played. In Aberdeen's January 2011 report Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management, 56% of leading organizations indicated that the investment in mobile tools was the top strategic action outlined to drive field service performance. This level of importance is further confirmed when evaluating the results of 213 service organizations that participated in the complementary field service mobility survey which launched in May 2011. Responding organizations acknowledged the immense impact of mobility on customer satisfaction, while recognizing the significance of mobile tools in driving operational and financial results particular to service (Table 1). In fact, the average organization polled indicated that mobility was 'very important' (4+ on a 1-5 scale, with 1 being not important at all and 5 being extremely important) in increasing productivity and efficiency and also being vital in reducing errors and eventually in boosting service profitability.

Table 1: Importance of Mobility in Field Service

Importance of Mobility

Average. 1- Not Important at All,

5-Extremely Important

Improving customer satisfaction 4.3

Driving field productivity 4.3

Reducing errors 4.2

Increasing workforce utilization 4.2

Improving service consistency and standardization 4.1

Enhancing service efficiency 4.0

Growing service profitability 4.0

Eliminating service cost 3.9

Increasing service revenue 3.7

Source: Aberdeen Group, June 2011

“Mobility improvement is important to our business for three main reasons: to improve efficiency and lower cost of operations, to provide better experience to customers and employees, and to remove the need to have a ‘live’ person on both ends of the service workflow.”


Services DIRECTV

Fast Facts

√ Dispatch volumes have increased more than 6% over the previous five years

√ The cost of a single truck roll amounts to approximately $220 for all service organizations

√ Best-in-Class organizations report a 76% level of workforce utilization, compared to 57% for all other organizations

√ 47% of organizations report that 'no part available' is the primary reason for issues not being resolved on a first-visit basis

Aberdeen’s Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management research indicated that service organizations were seeking better productivity and utilization, the top goals for their field organizations in 2011. This search for


http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/6837/RA-field-service-management.aspx





increased productivity continues, and for good reason as organizations responding to Aberdeen's mobility survey indicated a sub-par 62% level of workforce utilization, matched by an equally sub-par 69% level of first-time fix. Indeed, service organizations are looking to drive more from their service teams without making significant investments in hiring new service workers (see Sidebar).

To that end, field service workers need to be equipped with better tools and information. In fact, analysis of data shows that responding organizations perceive their ability to resolve service tasks, or have the desired information and parts to resolve service issues as merely "average;" and this simply will not suffice in the extremely competitive and demanding arena of field service and customer support (Table 2).

Table 2: Current Performance Assessment

Capability

Average Result. 1-Poor, 3-

Average, 5-Excellent

Enable technicians with ability to complete tasks on a first-visit basis

3.5

Provide technicians with necessary parts to complete tasks 3.4

Provide information to technicians as and when needed 3.4

Provide technicians with necessary information to complete tasks

3.4

Attain complete visibility into service parts in technician position

3.2

Reduce paperwork tied to work orders 3.2

Integrate captured information with back-end systems and applications

3.0

Minimize technician-dispatcher voice-based interaction 3.0

“Having field service tools provides our teams with access to information and capabilities that will allow them to reduce repeat visits, become more efficient and effective and communicate with other teams, their management and head office much more readily. These tools will also allow managers to schedule work more effectively, thus reducing return to office trips and unnecessary travel.”

~ Chris Howard, IT Manager,

Australian Service Organization

Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management Data

√ Planned increase in field workers in 2011 - 4%

√ Planned increase in dispatchers in 2011 - 1%


Regardless of the current level of service and support, customers are demanding and will continue to demand improved service performance, from a speed and efficiency point of view. It isn't just about getting the technician to the customer site on time, but about ensuring that the technician who gets to the customer site on time has the right expertise and the right tools to ensure service issue resolution. Given the sub-par first-time fix rates identified earlier, it isn't surprising that customers continue to demand and seek better service performance, the primary market pressure faced by service and support organizations in mobilizing their service operations (Figure 1).




Figure 1: Pressures to Mobilize

26%

42%

50%

76%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Shrinking revenue per customer

Increasing volume of service requests - Growingservice market

Competitive pressures

Customer demand for improved service (speedand / or efficiency)

Percentage of respondents, n=213

26%

42%

50%

76%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Shrinking revenue per customer

Increasing volume of service requests - Growingservice market

Competitive pressures

Customer demand for improved service (speedand / or efficiency)


“Our customer satisfaction has improved due to real-time service notifications and dispatch.”

~ Director Business Development/Sales,

Global Medical Device Manufacturing Organization

Note: Respondents asked to select Top Three Source: Aberdeen Group, June 2011

Service organizations also need to improve service performance as a means to differentiate themselves from an ever growing base of competitors in the service and support space. As product margins and revenues have been compromised due to increasing competition, organizations have to rely on their service capabilities to keep and draw new customers and net new revenue streams.

As noted earlier, service leaders are being tasked with driving increased service performance at current resource levels. This becomes even more taxing with an increasing volume of incoming service requests which ultimately require a dispatch. This growing service market, identified as a pressure by 42% of organizations, has resulted in dispatch volumes increasing more that 6% over the previous five years for the average service organization (Figure 2). The perfect storm of increased work, increased internal and external demands and static resource levels has driven organizations to push for better mobile tools and information in field service.

Figure 2: Increasing Dispatch Trends

6.3%

5.0%

3.7%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

5 years ago 3 years ago 1 year ago

Per

cent

age

chan

ge in

dis

patc

h vo

lum

es

6.3%

5.0%

3.7%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

5 years ago 3 years ago 1 year ago

Per

cent

age

chan

ge in

dis

patc

h vo

lum

es





The Maturity Class Framework “Mobility has led to an exceptional improvement in customer feedback capabilities, more productivity by the field engineers (more calls per day) and less administration overheads in the office.”

~Steve Jenkins, State Manager,

Datanet Asia Pacific

The successful navigation of external market pressures and internal operational and financial goals is the true mark of the Best-in-Class. As such, Aberdeen's framework to determine the Best-in-Class (Table 3) is based on a combination of metrics that reveal proficiency in the management of customer needs and internal mandates regarding productivity, utilization, and profitability. As the table reveals, respondents are rewarded not only for the success in current performance but also for their ability to move these metrics in the right direction.

Table 3: Top Performers Earn Best-in-Class Status

Definition of Maturity Class Mean Class Performance

Best-in-Class: Top 20%

of aggregate performance

scorers

82% First-time Fix 76% Workforce Utilization 93% SLA Compliance 16% Increase in Productivity over the previous 12 months 15% Decrease in Service Cost over the previous 12 months

Industry Average:

Middle 50% of aggregate performance

scorers

75% First-time Fix 66% Workforce Utilization 87% SLA Compliance 7% Increase in Productivity over the previous 12 months 4% Decrease in Service Cost over the previous 12 months

Laggard: Bottom 30% of aggregate performance

scorers

47% First-time Fix 39% Workforce Utilization 66% SLA Compliance 2% Decrease in Productivity over the previous 12 months 1% Increase in Service Cost over the previous 12 months


Efficiency is a hallmark of the Best-in-Class and is reflected in an average 82% first-time fix rates when compared to a 65% performance for all other organizations. Not only does this have a significant impact on the customer, considering that a service issue that isn't resolved on a first-visit implies that the customer is saddled with a non-performing and non-revenue generating asset, but it also has a significant impact on cost.

Data Insight: Service Revenue

While not considered in the Maturity Framework to determine Best-in-Class, service revenue was a key area of differentiation for leading organizations. In the previous 12 months, service revenue increase amounted to (Average):

Best-in-Class - 18% Industry Average - 7% Laggard - No change

• Aberdeen's research has shown that most unresolved service issues require at least one or more additional service visits (average of 1.6, according to Aberdeen's March 2010 Mobile Field Service Research) for complete resolution. In addition, Aberdeen's 2011 Service Mobility research found the cost of a truck roll for service to be approximately $220 across all organizations. When considering that number of additional truck rolls required for 'complete' issue resolution on the 35% of secondary visits for non Best-in-Class organizations, the cost ramifications across the service enterprise can be quite significant. With their focus on providing their service technicians with updated and pertinent service information, the


http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6339/RA-mobile-field-service.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6837/RA-field-service-management.aspx




Best-in-Class are sidestepping significant customer and cost challenges inherent with lower first-time fix results.

Frequent secondary visits also impact and reduce productivity, when measured by the number of service issues closed by field technicians. For Laggard organizations, the mass of secondary visits has played a significant role in reducing field service productivity to the tune of 2% over the previous 12 months. This pales in comparison to the 16% increase experienced by the Best-in-Class during that timeframe. In addition, the Best-in-Class are able to support higher levels of workforce utilization, 76% compared to 57% for all other organizations, thereby keeping a check on overall service-related costs.

Overall, leading organizations have also significantly impacted time to resolution over the last 12 months, cutting it by 20% compared to a 1% reduction for all others. As a result, they are much more likely to meet contractual commitments and customer expectations for service. This leads to lower contractual penalties and lower service-related costs (Table 3), but more importantly leads to a higher level of customer satisfaction and retention, thereby increasing the probability of additional customer spend and service-based revenues.

The Best-in-Class PACE Model Aberdeen’s PACE framework is designed to highlight the key strategies and capabilities employed by firms that attain Best-in-Class status through their excellence in meeting and overcoming internal or market pressures. The framework serves as a roadmap for firms to duplicate the strategies enforced and capabilities developed by Best-in-Class firms to improve their service performance (Table 4).

Table 4: The Best-in-Class PACE Framework

Pressures Actions Capabilities Enablers Customer demand for improved service (speed and efficiency)

Provide technicians with the tools to manage their work in the field Improve integration of data captured in the field with enterprise back-office systems

Collaboration between service leaders, IT, and users on needs analysis, development, and support of mobile solutions Real-time integration of data captured in the field with enterprise systems Standardized mobile strategy across the enterprise Service performance information shared across the entire organization - sales, marketing, HR Provision of performance-based incentives for field technicians

Automated capabilities for field technicians: - Access service ticket/task details - Close out ticket - Add service notes - Record parts used and time and expense - View service schedule - View past service history - View parts required for service - Access resolution information (in knowledgebase) - Reconcile parts needed with inventory in truck Integration of field data with: - ERP System - Service Management System - Parts Management System - Field Service Solution

- Service Analytics




Best-in-Class Strategies The Best-in-Class strategic roadmap to overcome productivity requirements and customer satisfaction pressures via the use of mobility in service is supported by key actions aimed at improving the quantity and, more importantly, the quality of information available to service technicians in the field (Figure 3). While more than 54% of leading organizations are looking to provide their field technicians with better tools for work management in the field, nearly 50% are looking to make sure that the field and the back-end service enterprise are in tight alignment with regards to the back and forth flow of information. As Chapter Two of this research report will reveal, the Best-in-Class have already taken significant steps to ensure that information captured in the field is integrated with field service, enterprise resource planning, customer management, and parts management systems. With this tight level of integration, these organizations can ensure that all parties in the service ecosystem and beyond have an updated, accurate and complete view of the customer and the entire service ecosystem. Empowerment of service technicians isn't tied to the provision of the mobile device, but the provision of the 'right' service information so as to improve their ability to complete service work, enhance the end customer experience, and reduce the amount of time taken up in unnecessary search for information or in the completion of non value-added administrative tasks or paperwork. Aberdeen's March 2010 research, Mobility in Service: The Agenda for 2010, highlighted how 79% of service tasks required the completion of two or more paper-based forms. The time spent by technicians on these forms accounted to more than 40 minutes thereby impacting the actual number of service visits made by field technicians.

“The integration of information between the field and enterprise systems is very important, especially as it relates to accurate device history records in the medical device space.”

~ Director Business Development/Sales,

Global Medical Device Manufacturing Organization

Figure 3: Strategic Actions in Support of Mobility

29%

35%

49%

40%

35%

38%

46%

54%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Establish systems and metrics to track serviceperformance in real-time

Enable real-time tracking of service technicians

Improve integration of data captured in the field withenterprise back-office systems

Provide technicians with the tools to manage theirwork in the field


Best-in-ClassAll others29%

35%

49%

40%

35%

38%

46%

54%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Establish systems and metrics to track serviceperformance in real-time

Enable real-time tracking of service technicians

Improve integration of data captured in the field withenterprise back-office systems

Provide technicians with the tools to manage theirwork in the field


Best-in-ClassAll others

Note: Respondents asked to select Top Four


Leading organizations are also looking to integrate captured service information with their analytics or performance management systems, preferably in real-time, in order to develop visibility into potential issues that might emerge on a day-to-day service delivery basis, or in understanding general trends in service performance that ultimately govern





planning decisions around investments in and allocation of field resources and technology.

Aberdeen Insights — Integration with Parts and the Impact on First-Time Fix

An often overlooked element of integration is the tie in between field service and parts management. In a recent report on parts management (Service Parts Logistics, May 2011) 52% of the leading organizations indicated that the management of parts fell under overall service oversight. Only 37% of all other organizations currently managed the parts organization within the service ecosystem.

The impact of ineffective integration is felt directly on first-time fix. In Aberdeen's recent mobile field service survey, organizations indicated that the primary reason for technicians not being able to resolve a service issue on the first visit was that they did not have access to the necessary part. Another 17% indicated that while they did have access to a service part, it wasn’t the part required for the service task. Fifty-four percent (54%) of Laggards, with a first-time fix performance at 47%, indicated that 'no part available' was the primary reason for an issue not getting completed on the first-visit.

Figure 4: Fixing First-Time Fix

18%

19%

28%

47%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Field technician doesn't havenecessary expertise to repair

Field technician doesn't have accessto the necessary information

Improper diagnosis prior to call

No part available


18%

19%

28%

47%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Field technician doesn't havenecessary expertise to repair

Field technician doesn't have accessto the necessary information

Improper diagnosis prior to call

No part available

Percentage of respondents, n=213 Source: Aberdeen Group, June 2011


http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/7012/RA-service-parts-logistics.aspx



Chapter Two: Benchmarking Requirements for Success

As highlighted in Chapter One, a successful mobile field service initiative requires much more than just the purchase of mobile devices and applications. The success of a mobile initiative depends on the supporting cast of organizational capabilities and processes in place. The identification of these vital capabilities, specifically around the selection, deployment, management and ongoing support of mobility, and the organizational gaps that need to be overcome to put these in place will help service firms ascend to the status of Best-in-Class.

Case Study — DIRECTV

DIRECTV is a leading provider of digital television entertainment services throughout the United States and Latin America for residential and business customers. The company has approximately 15,000 field service technicians; nearly 6,000 in-house owned-operated techs and 9,000 outsourced to a third party.

Prior to 2008, DIRECTV supported its field workforce with basic call center and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) capabilities. Field technicians received manual paper worksheets at the start of the workday. Interactions tied to service activation or workforce changes were handled through phone calls with the back office support team. This manual process led to errors in service workflow transactions leading to increased costs of completing a customer service issue. Not only did this process impact the cost of operations, more importantly the manual nature of this workflow negatively impacted the customer experience through delayed issue resolution, long hold times and a lack of visibility into service delivery timelines.

In 2008, the company looked to transform its field service operations through advanced technology and improved internal processes. In order to ensure that this type of wholesale transformation was accepted and maximized by the field, support team and management, the company made sure to involve all affected stakeholders. The company first included the field technicians in the process to ensure that they were truly a partner in the selection, implementation and deployment of any new service technology.

continued

“We needed to provide a better experience for customers and our employees. Better, faster service was the goal of our transformation of technology and process. Techs can’t wait around for information, and the customer must not be made to wait for service.”

~Ron Hyland, Vice President IT, Home

Services DIRECTV

Fast Facts

√ 70% of the Best-in-Class currently leverage a mobile application compared to 31% of Laggards

√ 50% of field processes are paper-based for Laggards, compared to 28% for the Best-in-Class

√ Laggards are nearly four times as likely as the Best-in-Class to have mobile deployment times extend more than a year

√ 63% of field service workers are equipped with a mobile device.




Case Study — DIRECTV

Not only were field techs consulted in regard to the changes, but they were also aggressively trained on the new technology to ensure that there would be no ‘surprises’.

In implementing this mobile transformation of its field services, DIRECTV found that different technician roles needed varying levels of technology and hardware. Through this attention to the specific needs of its employees, the company introduced technology that was device and platform agnostic. This open and tailored approach allowed the technician to leverage the device needed for the role and helped build buy-in from the staff and adoption of the technology.

As DIRECTV continues to improve its field service operations, the company has seen measurable gains in a number of key metrics. These key metric improvements tied directly to the business pressures that faced the company prior to its mobile deployment in 2008 and are the ‘fruits’ of DIRECTV’s field service initiatives. The company has been able to reach approximately 80-90% online activation; a key goal was avoiding the need to have a ‘live’ person on both ends of the service chain. This increase in online activation not only helped to reduce costs tied to internal resources needed for service delivery, but it also empowered field technicians to ‘own’ service delivery to the customer impacting speed of service and customer satisfaction. DIRECTV has also seen productivity and efficiency gains as a result of its technology improvements.

Looking towards the end of 2011 and into 2012, DIRECTV will continue to leverage process and technology advances to continue to transform the customer service experience both for the end customer and the field service team. DIRECTV understands that mobility is not just an application tool, but a piece of the broader IT strategy that enables better, more timely information throughout the field service chain.

Competitive Assessment Best-in-Class service firms, as determined by their performance in key indicators, exhibit several of the capabilities highlighted in Table 5 that fall into the five categories of Aberdeen's Competitive Framework: (1) process (steps taken to insure the uninterrupted flow of information between the back office and the field); (2) organization (focus of the organization on the collaborative deployment and support of mobility); (3) knowledge management (making service data available to stakeholders that can act on the information to impact profitability); (4) technology (the selection of appropriate tools and the intelligent deployment of those tools); and (5) performance management (the ability of the organization to track / measure performance, and to make service delivery process changes with the aid of enhanced performance information).



Table 5: The Competitive Framework

Best-in-Class Average Laggards Collaboration between IT, business owners, and end users on the selection, deployment, and management of devices and applications

55%


54% 37% Test of net new mobile deployments or enhancements in the field prior to complete roll out

Process

51% 38% 25% Service leader has access to dashboards for real-time visibility into performance

49% 34% 20% Third-party service workers use same mobile solution

42% 21% 31% Standardized mobile strategy across the organization:

Organization “The single most important mobile capability available to our field technicians is timely and accurate retrieval of business data.”

~ Project Manager, Manufacturing

38% 38% 25% Service performance information shared across the organization - marketing, sales, product management

46% 32% 25% Service performance shared with HR for improved learning initiatives

Knowledge

32% 15% 12% Leverage a mobile application for field service

70% 61% 31% Real-time integration of mobile data with back-end enterprise systems

62% 44% 18% Use of unlimited data plans

Technology

59% 44% 24% Real-time measurement of service performance

41% 29% 20% Service technician incentive compensation tied to work order completion, first-time fix and other performance metrics

Performance

35% 28% 12%


Capabilities and Enablers The Competitive Framework (Table 5) highlights that Best-in-Class performance isn’t predicated on excellence in one of the support categories. Best-in-Class organizations exhibit a comprehensive focus on all of the following support structures to execute against planned strategic actions (Figure 3).



Process and Organization For Laggards, Aberdeen's data finds that 50% of field processes are paper based when compared to 28% for the Best-in-Class. The investment in mobile tools by the Best-in-Class is backed by a strategy that streams from needs identification, all the way through deployment and support. For nearly 40% of the Best-in-Class (25% of Laggards, 33% of all others) this mobile strategy is standardized across the entire organization thereby impacting other mobile workforces in sales, marketing etc.

For service in particular, the strategic focus on mobility starts from the very beginning. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the Best-in-Class, compared to 49% of all others, involve all stakeholders in the needs analysis, selection, deployment, and management of mobile solutions. These stakeholders primarily include service executives and managers, IT staff, back-end support agents, and field staff. Organizations, as in the case of a large cable provider in the United States, have also been known to include HR and legal teams in the selection and deployment process in order to ensure the appropriate use of information captured as a result of mobile deployments. HR can also play a significant role in determining training programs tied to the use of mobile tools, or in providing improved capabilities to workers based on performance assessments. These capabilities will be elaborated on further in the 'knowledge management' section of this chapter.

Table 6: Mobile Deployment Success for the Best-in-Class

Percentage of Respondents

Best-in-Class Laggards Deployment times > 1 year 12% 44%

'Significant' level of customization required on mobile application

35% 63%

Time to recoup investment > 1 year 20% 38%


Upfront collaboration has an impact on deployment times, customization requirements and Return on Investment (ROI) from mobile solutions. For example, Laggard organizations in Aberdeen's research, which also were significantly less likely than the Best-in-Class to follow a collaborative approach, were nearly four times as likely as the Best-in-Class to have solution deployment times lasting more than a year (Table 6). A major reason for this delay was the significant amount of customization required to tailor the already purchased mobile solution to their specific needs. With the aid of their collaborative approach, the Best-in-Class were much more likely to have identified all their needs prior to solution purchase, thereby allowing for a more intelligent investment.

“We have undertaken a search model which includes meeting with our current strategic partners to determine what tools, capabilities and service offerings they have which may provide us with benefit. Additionally, our business managers have been meeting with business related suppliers to garner information about possible solutions and services. We have a small joint business/IT team who are coordinating these efforts with a view of doing a few proof of concept exercises and making recommendations from there.”



From an ROI perspective, the ability among the Best-in-Class to recoup their mobile service investment more quickly than all other organizations (the combined Industry Average and Laggard) is reflected in several ways:




• Best-in-Class organizations have seen an 11% increase in productivity from their mobile investments when compared to 3% increase for Laggards. In fact, all organizations in Aberdeen's survey data that indicated they followed a collaborative development approach reported better performance improvements in cost, productivity and time to resolution when compared to those organizations that indicated they have yet to leverage a collaborative development approach.

Table 7: Impact of Collaborative Selection

Average Change since Mobile Investment

Organizations with

collaborative approach

Metric No collaborative

approach

Workforce productivity 8% 6%

Service cost -2% -1%

Time to resolution -3% -1%


From a mobile deployment perspective, there are two other key elements to the Best-in-Class strategy:

• These organizations are much more likely (51% vs. 33% for all others) to conduct pilots of net new deployments or enhancements prior to complete roll out. This allows all pertinent stakeholders to iron out the technical and other kinks, develop additional functionality, or make desired aesthetic changes in order to truly provide the field workers with the desired mobile experience

• They are nearly two times as likely as all others (42% vs. 24% for all others) to extend their mobile strategy and solution to partner organizations that are involved in the delivery of service and support. As Aberdeen's Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management research indicated, more than 20% of service requests are handled by third parties that can have a significant impact on the end customer service experience. A standard mobile strategy and solution set across the entire service delivery ecosystem can greatly impact the delivery and integration of necessary service information.

“The first factor that is most important when selecting a new mobile solution is of course that it allows us to meet our business requirements – this being that we need an easy to use ‘web-based’ tool our field services team can use to respond to work with. The field should be able to populate content in structured or unstructured format (engineering drawings, photos, etc.) which can be easily shared and linked to specific assets. Our second set of requirements would be more of the non-functional type such as availability, integration with our current OS and software platforms and ultimately cost upfront and on-going to manage and support.”



Technology With the support of a well rounded and collaborative mobile strategy, Best-in-Class organizations are much more likely than their Industry Average and Laggard counterparts to have a mobile application in place (Figure 5). Of those Best-in-Class organizations with an application in place, 50% have had an application in place for more than four years. In comparison, only 30% of






all other organizations indicate they've had a mobile service application in place for more than four years.

Figure 5: Investment in Mobile Automation

Top 10 Capabilities Prioritized for Automation in 12 Months (Percentage of all respondents who do not currently automate)

√ 61% View service schedule

√ 53% View current service issue requirements

√ 48% Access service ticket/task details

√ 41% View past customer service history

√ 40% Accept/reject service work

√ 40% Close service ticket

√ 37% Update current status

√ 37% Record parts used and time and expense

√ 35% Add service notes

√ 34% View ticket summary

31%

61%

70%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Laggards

Industry Average

Best-in-Class

Percentage of respondents with mobile application in place

31%

61%

70%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Laggards

Industry Average

Best-in-Class

Percentage of respondents with mobile application in placeSource: Aberdeen Group, June 2011

The mobile solutions leveraged by the Best-in-Class range from mobile extensions to ERP and service management systems (31% of those with applications in place respectively) to stand-alone mobile field service applications (19% of the Best-in-Class).

As a result of the investments made by the Best-in-Class, their field agents are much more likely to have an automated view of key work order, schedule, customer, parts and knowledge management capabilities. While Table 8 highlights some of the key capabilities available for the Best-in-Class technicians, it should be noted that across the board the leading organizations were less reliant on paper-based records and notes than their Industry Average and Laggard counterparts.

To dig deeper into the importance of some of these capabilities:

• Those organizations that provided their field technicians with automated access to resolution information in a searchable knowledgebase experienced a 9% advantage in first-time fix rates (73% vs. 67%) when compared to those that do not

• Those organizations with automated reconciliation of part requirements with truck stock experienced an 10% advantage in first-time fix (74% vs. 67%) over those that do not

• Those with automated access to customer location information and turn-by-turn directions experienced a 19% outperformance in workforce utilization (68% vs. 57%) when compared to those that do not have the same level of access




Table 8: Available to Field Technicians

Percentage of respondents indicating capability is

automated Function

Best-in-Class All Others Access service ticket/task details 76% 56%

View service issue requirements 76% 49%

Close out ticket 73% 48%

Add service notes 68% 44%

Record parts used and time and expense 65% 38%

View service schedule 65% 55%

View past service history 59% 46%

View parts required for service 57% 39%

View location on map and get turn-by-turn directions

51% 30%

Access resolution information (in knowledgebase)

49% 29%

Reconcile parts needed with inventory in truck

46% 24%

“The capabilities that are most important to our field technicians are real-time job dispatch, job acceptance / reject, and the ability to complete electronic documentation while in the field. [It is also important that the field techs have] the ability to complete their Job Safety Analysis (JSA) and Occupation Health and Safety (OH&S) forms, and email them to the client as PDF files before they begin work on a site.”




Overall, the assistance of automation to support key field service processes and workflows has enabled the Best-in-Class to shave nearly 43 minutes of time spent on administrative tasks and paperwork for their service technicians per day. This has played a significant role in aiding the Best-in-lass to drive workforce productivity and utilization levels.




Aberdeen Insights — Offline Mode

Of organizations polled, 62% indicated that they are currently looking to purchase new solutions, upgrade current solutions, or replace solutions entirely. For these organizations, the key criteria in solution selection centers around integration of information with back-end enterprise systems (4.3 on 1 to 5 scale with 1 being 'not important at all' and 5 being 'extremely important'), security of data (4.2), compatibility with device operating platforms (4.0), and device management capabilities (3.9).

Also of interest for organizations that indicate plans to purchase mobile service solutions in the next 12 to 24 months is the ability to support full functionality in an 'offline' mode, a capability that is rated a 3.9 on the same 1-5 scale. As nearly 30% of field service tasks are conducted in areas with little or no wireless coverage (average for all respondents), it is becoming increasingly vital that technicians are able to access application functionality even if they aren't in an area of coverage.

To allow their technicians to access the various capabilities highlighted in Table 8, field service organizations are currently leveraging and evaluating a number of mobile devices. Organizations report that nearly two-thirds of their field workers are currently equipped with a work-specific mobile device, and intentions are to raise that number to 80% in the next 12 months (Table 9).

Table 9: Device Trends

Average Result (All Respondents) Device Data

Percentage of Field Workforce Equipped with a Mobile Device - CURRENT

63%

Percentage of Field Workforce Equipped with a Mobile Device - IN 12 MONTHS (ESTIMATE)

80%

Number of Devices Leveraged Per Technician 1.9

Number of Device Types Used in Field Service Organization

2.3


On average, a field worker is carrying up to two separate mobile devices to complete service work. In addition, organizations are leveraging and supporting more than two specific device types in the delivery of service work therefore inferring that a certain group of field workers may be using smart phones while another group of workers are working with laptops. With the increased availability of new device types and operating environments, it is vital that service and IT leaders develop a flexible and scalable mobile strategy that allows for the seamless inclusion and

“New devices do affect our [mobile automation roadmap] a bit – but we focus on having a rugged reliable hardware with customizable robust software to go with it – which is paramount to the solution’s success. New devices are not deployed on their features alone – they have to prove they can provide an extra benefit first.”






integration of these varied platforms (available currently or in the future), should they be deemed most appropriate and secure for field service work.

Table 10: Preferred Devices for Field Service

Avg. Percentage of Workers Equipped with

Device (All Respondents) Device Used

Cell phones 70%

Consumer Laptops 53%

Smart phones 45%

Ruggedized laptops 13%

Fully ruggedized handhelds 8%

Semi-ruggedized handhelds 8%

Consumer tablets 6%

Ruggedized tablets 5%

Planned Adoption of Devices in 2011 and 2012 (percentage of all respondents)

√ 33% Smart phones

√ 24% Consumer laptops

√ 16% Consumer tablets

√ 15% Cell phones

√ 11% Ruggedized tablets

√ 10% Ruggedized laptops


Aberdeen Insights — Consumer Tablets

The increased availability and adoption of tablet computers in the consumer space as well as in the enterprise, has raised the discussion of their applicability in field service. In Aberdeen's Enterprise-Grade Mobile Applications: Secure Information When and Where its Needed research (November 2010), 56% of organizations reported using some tablets for business purposes, with every indication of increasing their use in the following 12 to 24 months.

Given that field service organizations in Aberdeen's service mobility survey indicate that about 6% of their field workers are equipped with these devices, it is safe to say that a majority of organizations are still in the 'wait and see' mode. Of those organizations using tablets, 65% are using these devices primarily for email or for the use of web-enabled applications with another 42% leveraging other web-based functionality available on the tablets. Only 35% indicate that they are running installed workforce management applications. Interest in these devices for field service work is rising as 16% indicate their plans to adopt consumer tablets in the next 12 to 24 months.

“The integration of information between the field and enterprise systems to ensure the maximum return from a mobile investment is extremely vital – we rely on our ERP to be the centralized point of validated corporate information.”


In addition to the reliance on a flexible and scalable automation roadmap, the true success of the Best-in-Class strategy is tied to the focus on the integration of mobile and back-end enterprise systems that ensures that data available to all parties is timely, up to date and accurate. Sixty-two percent (62%) of the Best-in-Class integrate data between the field and the back-office in real-time when compared to 34% of all other organizations.

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6527/RA-enterprise-mobile-applications.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6527/RA-enterprise-mobile-applications.aspx



For the Best-in-Class, the interaction of mobile data occurs with a number of solutions and systems ranging from larger ERP or service management systems to more specific parts or service performance management systems. As seen in the 'Strategic Actions' section of Chapter One, integration continues to be a strategic focus for the Best-in-Class moving forward in order to continue to maximize the returns seen from an investment in mobility.

Table 11: Integration of Service Information

Percentage of respondents System / Solution

Best-in-Class All Others ERP System 51% 31%

CRM System 49% 38%

Field Service Application 49% 34%

Service Management System 41% 26%

Parts Management System 38% 28%

Service Analytics 38% 16%


Performance and Knowledge Management Table 11 also highlights how the Best-in-Class are more than two times as likely as all other organizations to integrate field-based performance data with their service analytics or performance management solutions. This focus on improved performance management has been a consistent focus of the Best-in-Class as touched upon in Aberdeen's Service Intelligence and Performance Management research (March 2011). Leading organizations in that research were much more likely than others to have a structured approach around the collection, organization and use of performance data for service business improvement. They were also more likely than all others to make performance information available across all levels of the organization. For example, 58% of leading organizations (compared to 50% of others) indicated that they shared performance data with their field technicians on a quarterly or more frequent basis.

In the June 2011 service mobility research, 50% of the Best-in-Class indicated that their service leaders had on-demand access to service performance via dashboards and other performance tools. From a field worker perspective, 35% of the Best-in-Class indicated that their technicians had automated access to personal performance reports via their mobile applications. Of other organizations, only 18% indicated the provision of personalized performance reports.

“When determining the ROI of our mobile investment, the metrics that will be most important are reduction in response times to faults or work orders, greater effectiveness and measured output from the field service crews, and measured reduction in total cost of delivery support services to our customers.”



With the aid of improved performance data, the Best-in-Class are also more likely to be working to link technician incentives with improved service performance. While only 35% of the Best-in-Class were currently leveraging performance-based incentives for their field workers, they were 59% more

http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/6962/RA-service-intelligence-performance.aspx




likely than all other organizations to have these incentives in place. Incentives can service as a powerful tool to drive productivity as reflected in the following:

• 9.2% increase in productivity over the previous 12 months when compared to a 5.8% increase for those that did not provide performance-based incentives

• A 73% level of first-time fix as opposed to a 68% level for those that did not leverage performance-based incentives

Beyond the visibility into performance data across all levels of the service organization, the Best-in-Class continue to focus on sharing service information and performance across other functional groups in the organization. Forty- six percent (46%) of the Best-in-Class indicated sharing service performance data with other groups such as sales, marketing and design, in comparison to 29% of all other organizations. As seen in data presented in Aberdeen's State of Service Management (September 2010) and Service Intelligence and Performance Management (March 2011) research, collaboration between different groups can yield significant results in productivity, revenue and asset quality.

“We needed to ensure that the field technicians did not see this improvement in technology and process as ‘Big Brother’ watching. The last thing we wanted was for the technology not to be adopted as a result of technicians not understanding that these changes were put in place to empower them and make their jobs easier.”


Services DIRECTV

An interesting strategy being worked on by the Best-in-Class is tied to the increased sharing of performance data with Human Resources (HR) to drive training and learning initiatives. While in place at only 32% of the Best-in-Class, this collaboration was deemed an area of focus in the next 12 months by another 25% of leading organizations. Only 14% of all other organizations were focused on driving improved collaboration between service and HR. Those organizations that were focused on the service-HR link saw slight advantages in first-time fix (72% vs. 69%) and workforce utilization (64% vs. 61%) when compared to those organizations that weren't.


http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6397/RA-service-enterprise-management.aspx




Chapter Three: Required Actions

Fast Facts

√ Best-in-Class organizations are nearly two times as likely as all others (62% vs. 34%) to integrate field data with enterprise systems in real-time.

√ Best-in-Class organizations are15% more likely than all others (38% vs. 33%) to have a standardized mobile strategy across the enterprise

√ Best-in-Class organizations are 49% more likely than Laggards to leverage a cross-functional mobile taskforce

Whether a company is trying to move its performance in field service delivery and mobile integration from Laggard to Industry Average, or Industry Average to Best-in-Class, the following summarized actions, will help spur the necessary performance improvements:

Laggard Steps to Success To advance to Industry Average performance in service mobility, Laggard organizations need to take the following actions to start driving up their workforce utilization and service efficiency performance:

• Understand the current state. Before rushing out to acquire a mobile application to drive field service performance, Laggard organizations need to understand their current state of performance in order to prioritize areas and steps for improvement. This begins with benchmarking their current performance in key metrics such as first-time fix and workforce utilization. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Laggards, compared to 27% of Industry Average organizations (and 13% of the Best-in-Class), either don’t know or don’t measure workforce utilization. Similarly, 26% of Laggards don’t measure or know their first-time fix performance. While 47% of Laggards are prioritizing real-time performance management capabilities in the next 12 months, they would be well served by at least beginning with a snap shot of current performance in key metrics.

• Involve all stakeholders in scoping mobile requirements. This cross-functional approach to developing mobile requirements cannot be emphasized enough, not only with regards to the purchase of a mobile solution, but also in terms of the identification and prioritization of processes that need to be mobilized. While Table 7 highlights the advantages seen by organizations that focus on upfront collaboration for all organizations, even Laggard organizations that do collaborate report a shorter time to recoup their investment in mobility. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of Laggards following the collaborative approach reported deployment times of more than 12 months when compared to 60% of those that didn’t collaborate. Only 37% of overall Laggards indicated the use of a collaborative strategy compared to 54% of Industry Average organizations.

• Build a scalable mobile roadmap. The wide array of options available around devices, solutions and deployment models can make the mobile investment decision extremely challenging. What is known today is that there will be many different device types and operating environments available tomorrow or in the next five to 10 years. With 63% of Laggards evaluating the purchase or upgrade


http://assessment.aberdeen.com/ehsELH8yME/index.aspx



of mobile solutions, their roadmap for mobile deployment should be flexible and scalable enough to accommodate and integrate net new operating environments that might be available and of interest in the near future. The foresight to develop such a roadmap also requires the existence of a collaborative partnership between service and IT.

• Reduce the paper burden. With a collaborative mobile strategy in place, Laggard organizations need to start eliminating the paper burden that is placed on their field technicians, especially in the management of basic tasks. As reported earlier, 50% of field tasks for Laggards are paper-based when compared to 39% for the Industry Average. Basic capabilities such as the access to a service schedules, or access to basic work order information or customer service history is much more likely to be paper-based at Laggard organizations when compared to the Industry Average. For instance, 41% of Laggards give their technicians a service schedule on paper when compared to 25% of the Industry Average.

• Test new deployments or enhancements with a pilot group prior to final rollout. Compared to 38% of the Industry Average, only 25% of Laggards actually test or pilot net new mobile deployments or enhancements prior to roll out. A test group is vital to identify potential glitches and issues from a technology perspective, but can also assist in enabling user adoption as the pilot group can serve as a reference or knowledgebase around best practices in the use on mobile solutions and devices.

Industry Average Steps to Success As the Industry Average inch closer to Best-in-Class performance in efficiency and productivity metrics, they need to continue to work on the integration of various aspects of the service business to capitalize on cost management opportunities:

“The integration of information between the field and enterprise systems is very vital – once the field work is done – it needs to match with the financial records to ensure income is invoiced.”



• Focus on integration. While Industry Average organizations have made investments in mobile applications, they have yet to invest in the integration of information captured in the field with enterprise and other systems. Compared to 62% of the Best-in-Class only 44% of Industry Average organizations integrate field service data with enterprise systems in real-time. Specifically, 33% of the Industry Average (compared to 51% of the Best-in-Class) link field information with their back-end ERP systems and 40% (compared to 49% of the Best-in-Class) link data with field service applications. Tight integration is not only aids the service organization with an accurate and timely view of service performance, but also enables the business to measure the impact of ancillary functions (i.e., supply chain or HR) on service performance.

• Link service parts with the field. On the topic of integration, Industry Average organizations need to do a much better job of linking their field technicians with accurate parts availability data.




Only 31% currently integrate field data with parts management systems (compared to 38% of the Best-in-Class) which greatly impacts first-time fix rates and overall service cost. Forty-seven percent (47%) of Industry Average organizations noted that lack of availability of a service part as the primary impediment to issue resolution on a first-visit basis.

• Add mobile capabilities. In tracing the path of a scalable mobile development roadmap, Industry Average organizations should prioritize the automation of the following mobile capabilities:

“The presence and explosion of newer devices and operating systems has made corporate IT re-think supported platforms (operating systems, applications and wireless security technologies); we are proceeding with adoption of new devices (tablets, smartphones, etc.) as a result – we don’t want to get burned by a device selection that is later dropped by the marketplace.”


o View parts required for service (47% automated vs. 57% for the Best-in-Class)

o View past service history (52% automated vs. 59% for the Best-in-Class)

o Access resolution information (41% automated vs. 49% for the Best-in-Class)

o Receive turn-by-turn directions (34% automated vs. 51% for the Best-in-Class)

o Make schedule changes (40% automated vs. 54% for the Best-in-Class)

o Record parts used and overall expenses (48% automated vs. 65% for the Best-in-Class)

These development and support of these capabilities will enable these organizations to improve their workforce utilization and first-time fix rates.

Best-in-Class Steps to Success While distancing themselves from all other organizations with regards to key operational and financial metrics, the Best-in-Class still have an opportunity to drive additional gains in productivity and efficiency:

• Continue to drive collaboration with HR. While the Best-in-Class are much more likely to share service performance data with HR (32% vs. 14% of all others), there still is a large opportunity to leverage the performance data for training and learning initiatives. Nearly 25% of the leading organizations are looking to increase the collaboration between service and HR to drive better productivity and performance results. With regards to driving mobile technology usage, 47% of leading organizations are also looking to increase the frequency and availability of training around the use of mobile tools and applications.

• Extend performance incentives. Improved service and HR collaboration can also lead to the development and administration of incentives to technicians tied to improved service performance. While leading others in the provision of these incentives (35% vs. 22% for all others), a significant proportion of the Best-in-Class have yet to develop a performance-based incentive strategy. That said, 24% are looking to put such incentives in place in the next 12 to 24 months.




• Equip field agents with up-sell and cross-sell capabilities. With the increasing focus on revenue for service organizations, as seen in Aberdeen's Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management research (January 2011), it is surprising that only 30% of the Best-in-Class are providing their service technicians with automated access to and prompts for up-sell or cross-sell opportunities. While most revenue from service is tied to the renewal of service contracts, Best-in-Class technicians are in an opportune position to advise customers on complementary products and services that can enable those customers to improve asset or product use.

• Keep an eye on data/device security. Given the increasing amount of enterprise and customer data that is available on mobile devices, service and IT leaders need to take key steps to improve device and data security and develop back up plans in the case of device loss or data compromise. In addition, best practices and policies around data security and device usage need to be constantly communicated with service technicians. With 38% of organizations reporting that employees use their personal devices for service work, the potential for a security breach is raised significantly.

“Instead of the mobile device solely being an application, we are looking at the mobile device as a portal into the enterprise. It’s not just a CRM and workforce management tool, but it should be a productivity, knowledge-base tool that allows for better access to the enterprise from an employee and customer perspective.”


Services DIRECTV

Aberdeen Insights — Summary

Mobile solutions are key enablers of field service processes. Devices, applications and networks form a conduit through which the back end of the service organization can connect with its resources and technicians out in the field. That said, the maximum return from mobile solutions is derived by organizations that have clearly mapped out field service processes that need to be mobilized and rely on a collaborative development and deployment framework to support decision making around mobility. More so, the organizations that stress and focus on the tight integration of data captured in the field with the enterprise back end are those that are truly mobilizing Best-in-Class results from their mobile investments (Table 12).

Table 12: Technology is an Enabler

Average Change since Implementing Mobile Solution Metric Best-in-Class All Others

Workforce Utilization 12% 6% Workforce Productivity 11% 6% Customer Satisfaction 10% 4% Service Revenue 7% 3% Time to Cash -6% -2% Time to Resolution -4% -1% Service Cost -3% -1%







Appendix A: Research Methodology

Between May and June 2011, Aberdeen examined the experiences and intentions of 213 service and manufacturing enterprises in the use and selection of mobile devices and applications. A research survey was launched for the collection of this data with the assistance of Mobile Enterprise Magazine.

Study Focus

Responding service executives completed online surveys that included questions designed to determine the following:

√ The degree to which mobile technology is deployed in their field service operations and the financial implications of the technology

√ The structure and effectiveness of existing implementations

√ Current and planned use of mobile tools, functionalities and applications to aid service processes

√ The benefits, if any, that have been derived from mobile initiatives

The study aimed to identify emerging best practices for mobile technology usage in service, and to provide a framework by which readers could assess their own management capabilities.

Aberdeen supplemented this online survey effort with interviews with select survey respondents, gathering additional information on desired mobile functionalities, field service strategies and resulting benefits of mobile technology.

Responding enterprises included the following:

• Job title / function: The research sample included respondents with the following job titles: C-Level executive (27%); Vice-President or Director (21%); and Manager (24%).

• Industry: The following industries had the largest representation in the study: IT Services (20%); Telecom (17%); Industrial Equipment or Product Manufacturing (16%); Medical Devices and Services (12%); Utilities and Mining, Oil and Gas (10%); Computer Equipment and Peripherals (10%); and Facilities Management/HVAC (9%).

• Geography: The majority of respondents (60%) were from North America. Remaining respondents were mostly from the Asia-Pacific region (12%) and from EMEA (22%).

• Company size: Twenty-nine percent (29%) of respondents were from large enterprises (annual revenues above US $1 billion); 27% were from midsize enterprises (annual revenues between $50 million and $1 billion); and 44% of respondents were from small businesses (annual revenues of $50 million or less).

• Field Service Headcount: Thirty-five percent (35%) of respondents were from large service enterprises (field technician headcount greater than 400); 28% were from midsize service enterprises (field technician headcount between 50 and 400); and 37% of respondents were from small field service businesses (technician headcount less than 50).




Table 13: The PACE Framework Key

Overview Aberdeen applies a methodology to benchmark research that evaluates the business pressures, actions, capabilities, and enablers (PACE) that indicate corporate behavior in specific business processes. These terms are defined as follows: Pressures — external forces that impact an organization’s market position, competitiveness, or business operations (e.g., economic, political and regulatory, technology, changing customer preferences, competitive) Actions — the strategic approaches that an organization takes in response to industry pressures (e.g., align the corporate business model to leverage industry opportunities, such as product / service strategy, target markets, financial strategy, go-to-market, and sales strategy) Capabilities — the business process competencies required to execute corporate strategy (e.g., skilled people, brand, market positioning, viable products / services, ecosystem partners, financing) Enablers — the key functionality of technology solutions required to support the organization’s enabling business practices (e.g., development platform, applications, network connectivity, user interface, training and support, partner interfaces, data cleansing, and management)


Table 14: The Competitive Framework Key

Overview The Aberdeen Competitive Framework defines enterprises as falling into one of the following three levels of practices and performance: Best-in-Class (20%) — Practices that are the best currently being employed and are significantly superior to the Industry Average, and result in the top industry performance. Industry Average (50%) — Practices that represent the average or norm, and result in average industry performance. Laggards (30%) — Practices that are significantly behind the average of the industry, and result in below average performance.

In the following categories: Process — What is the scope of process standardization? What is the efficiency and effectiveness of this process? Organization — How is your company currently organized to manage and optimize this particular process? Knowledge — What visibility do you have into key data and intelligence required to manage this process? Technology — What level of automation have you used to support this process? How is this automation integrated and aligned? Performance — What do you measure? How frequently? What’s your actual performance?


Table 15: The Relationship Between PACE and the Competitive Framework

PACE and the Competitive Framework – How They Interact Aberdeen research indicates that companies that identify the most influential pressures and take the most transformational and effective actions are most likely to achieve superior performance. The level of competitive performance that a company achieves is strongly determined by the PACE choices that they make and how well they execute those decisions.





Appendix B: Related Aberdeen Research

Related Aberdeen research that forms a companion or reference to this report includes:

• Service Parts Logistics 2011: Driving Improved Performance via Tighter Integration; May 2011

• Service Intelligence and Performance Management; March 2011

• Field Service 2011: Trends in Workforce Management; January 2011

• State of Service Management 2011; September 2010

• Mobility in Service: The Agenda for 2011; March 2010

• Advanced Scheduling Execution; December 2009

• Powering Productivity in the Field: Industry Trends in Mobile Field Service; December 2009

• Trends in Mobile Printing; November 2009

• Workforce Scheduling: Managerial Strategies for Driving Costs Down While Escalating Customer Service; May 2009

• EMEA Firms Make the Case for Mobile Field Service; February 2009

• Mobile Device Trends in Service; December 2008

• Mobility for Service in Asia-Pacific; December 2008

• Mobility in Today's Service Organization; September 2008

• Making Money via Mobile Field Service; July 2007

Information on these and any other Aberdeen publications can be found at www.aberdeen.com.

Author(s): Sumair Dutta, Senior Research Analyst, Strategic Service Management, ([email protected]) Aly Pinder, Research Associate, Strategic Service Management, ([email protected])

For more than two decades, Aberdeen's research has been helping corporations worldwide become Best-in-Class. Having benchmarked the performance of more than 644,000 companies, Aberdeen is uniquely positioned to provide organizations with the facts that matter — the facts that enable companies to get ahead and drive results. That's why our research is relied on by more than 2.5 million readers in over 40 countries, 90% of the Fortune 1,000, and 93% of the Technology 500.

As a Harte-Hanks Company, Aberdeen’s research provides insight and analysis to the Harte-Hanks community of local, regional, national and international marketing executives. Combined, we help our customers leverage the power of insight to deliver innovative multichannel marketing programs that drive business-changing results. For additional information, visit Aberdeen http://www.aberdeen.com or call (617) 854-5200, or to learn more about Harte-Hanks, call (800) 456-9748 or go to http://www.harte-hanks.com.

This document is the result of primary research performed by Aberdeen Group. Aberdeen Group's methodologies provide for objective fact-based research and represent the best analysis available at the time of publication. Unless otherwise noted, the entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by Aberdeen Group, Inc. and may not be reproduced, distributed, archived, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent by Aberdeen Group, Inc. (2011a)

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/7012/RA-service-parts-logistics.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/7012/RA-service-parts-logistics.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6962/RA-service-intelligence-performance.aspx


http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6397/RA-service-enterprise-management.aspx


http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/6024/RA-scheduling-execution-service.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/6472/AI-mobile-field-service.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/Aberdeen-Library/6472/AI-mobile-field-service.aspx

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/perspective/6419-AI-mobile-printing-service.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/5875-RA-workforce-scheduling-software.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/5875-RA-workforce-scheduling-software.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/sector_insights/5918-SI-mobile-field-service.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/perspective/5778-AI-mobile-device-service.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/sector_insights/5777-SI-mobility-service-asia-pacific.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/5304-RA-mobility-service-management.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/summary/report/benchmark/4125-RA-mobile-service.asp

http://www.aberdeen.com/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Mobility in Service Enterprise