First post - Asked to formulate SLAs/KPIs for network technicians

[Ditto]

Don’t punish on SLAs. However do use KPIs to identify areas for change.

KPIs can be quantitative or qualitative, and so look at both averages of times to respond / fix / etc. and look at how people feel about how it was handled.

Failure to adapt and change by individuals is an issue to be addressed by training, mentoring, targets and, ultimately, action. This has to be achievable and reasonable. Anything else goes towards constructive dismissal.

I agree in this case, within a school, and given that the OP has clearly explained what the goal is, that to penalise for failure to meet an SLA would be the wrong thing to do. Which is why I think some are advising against an SLA, but perhaps it's more to do with individual interpretations of what an SLA is. For me, let's say my ISP promises to achieve a certain speed and availability. It's a promise they make and I agree via an SLA and a service for which I pay. Too often in such scenarios, when the SLA is not met, the service provider doesn't seem too bothered. With some kind of penalty, perhaps it would focus attention on achieving the SLA.

I do concede in advance however, the SWT scenario doesn't support the theory . In truth they've shown to be more likely to 'game' the figures than improve the service!

[Ditto]

An SLA is the wrong way to go about it.

I sit with my team one on one on Monday's and go through the service desk with them - This way I ensure that all jobs are at least replied to on a regular basis, even if it's just a "We're still waiting for this order to be approved/arrive" - I then set them targets that I want done by the end of the week and we review the following week. Of course I also assign jobs/ask them to do this in the meantime, but it's helpful having a recorded list of targets per week. It also lets me bring up any concerns early & address them. It also lets them do the same

Manage them properly rather than slapping them with a rigid SLA. If you want strong KPIs/SLA then you're only going to get that by outsourcing them and you *will* pay heavily for it.

I'm with you on this one. For me this is an example of leading your team rather than purely managing them.

[DrBeaker]

An SLA is the wrong way to go about it.

 

I sit with my team one on one on Monday's and go through the service desk with them - This way I ensure that all jobs are at least replied to on a regular basis, even if it's just a "We're still waiting for this order to be approved/arrive" - I then set them targets that I want done by the end of the week and we review the following week. Of course I also assign jobs/ask them to do this in the meantime, but it's helpful having a recorded list of targets per week. It also lets me bring up any concerns early & address them. It also lets them do the same

 

 

Manage them properly rather than slapping them with a rigid SLA. If you want strong KPIs/SLA then you're only going to get that by outsourcing them and you *will* pay heavily for it.

 

I used to update my tickets if not on a daily basis then a weekly basis. I had a "ticket" was as an actual problem that went on for months and months, until I managed to find a solution (my colleagues and manager had failed to find one and given up). But all parties concerned were updated on it throughout - even if it was just to say it's a known issue, we're still working on it.

We fixed things as and when we could in a normal week. Anything that needed long-term work, complex fixes or equipment being taken out of service etc. had to wait until a holiday period to get done.

[mavhc]

Assuming your employees actually want to do work, ask them why they don't respond to email requests. I usually don't until I've got something useful to update.

 

Sit with them to create a list of the top 10 most common issues, ask them how long it should take to solve them.

 

Debug the process, what's causing the delay?

 

Where did this £40k number come from? Do you have working processes for onboarding a user, are they emailed the name, position, photo, etc etc? How many accounts do they have to manually create, can that be reduced? I sync SIMS to AD, and AD to O365 and GSuite, and then make people login with MS or Google accounts. Then I bug every website we use that doesn't allow that until they give up and implement it.

 

What's taking up the time? Can it be automated? Do staff need training because they're wasting IT's time? Do IT need training because they're wasting their own/staff/pupil's time. Does anyone know enough about the systems (computer or organisation) to suggest fixes? Does someone have the authority to implement those fixes?

 

Are they worth the money? Should you just fire some of them and replace them? You're spending £40k on stuff, and twice that on IT staff. What's the school budget, £10 million? Are they worth 1% of that? Should you be spending 2% and getting 3x the value?

[mukz]

Personally i would go about this by having regular 1-2-1 with the NM over a monthly period so they can bring out all their issues on a table, as you already know what the Teaching staff are saying.

Are the support staff saying the same?

 

We had a similar situation where it was NM vs Teaching staff and actually it ended up being that whilst the budget was enough it wasn’t helped by SLT supporting the NM with difficult staff asking for various items they wanted.

[KevinB]

Personally i would go about this by having regular 1-2-1 with the NM

 

I have to say +1 for this. It sounds like your IT team are me and my team about 10-12 years ago. We had become an obstruction rather than a service and our new business manager tackled us. The method used wasn't SLAs but a weekly 121 between him and me and bi-weekly 121s between me and individuals in my team plus a weekly team meeting. These 121s were guided by some strict but achievable goals via an annual appraisal with a 6-month checkpoint between them. The goals were there to rehabilitate IT with the rest of the staff and to improve the service such as starting to use a helpdesk, regular updates to all tickets even if it's a "no progress" update, speeding up resolutions, putting a "yes we can" attitude on our faces and not a "go away, I'm busy." It was tough on us as it had become ingrained behaviour but when we emerged from the other side after a year or so we were all better for it and though we resented it at first we recognised the value afterwards. Speaking personally, I owe the BM a lot because he changed me into someone useful, approachable and helpful which I realised that I hadn't been.

 

We now run a very good service for not only our own school but six local primaries to boot. We have SLAs for the primaries as it's a paid-for service but internally the SLA timers on the helpdesk are guidance only and nobody is pulled up on them unless they are massively taking the mickey which, I'm glad to say, doesn't happen any longer.

 

I know that's just one piece of anecdotal evidence, but from reading what you've said elsewhere in the thread it sounds to me as though this approach might be more successful with your IT team than pressing SLAs on them, because as someone has already said, it's not an agreement if it's imposed.

 

Just my $0.02

 

Edit to add: after the process was complete the me<>BM 121s became bi-weekly and the me<>team 121s became half-termly but we still have a weekly team meeting over coffee for 30 mins. We also all still have annual appraisals with a 6-month check in between which are now useful tools for personal and organisational development rather than something to forge us back into shape.

Edited February 25, 2019 by KevinB