LACE (CCSQ Lean Agile Center of Excellence)

Page tree

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Current »

Story 1

Author: Antwyn Jackson HCD, Ventech

Original Story:

Purpose:
The purpose of the research effort is to examine the current ADO ticket handling process with a focus on identifying recommendations for implementing a consistent, streamlined, and improved user experience.
Goal:

The goal of this feature is to improve the ticket handling process (including case escalation) and conduct user feedback sessions with stakeholders to understand and improve overall UX - ADO Ticket Handling Process, Online Whiteboard for Visual Collaboration (miro.com)

Process for outreach:

Pre-reqs:

  1. Get reports from PM3 from ticket escalation with ADOs (their research findings) 
  2. Reach out to "service center leads" for each Active ticket assignment groups to obtain ticket workflows with customer interactions highlighted if possible (see ADO ticket handling process excel for lead info)
  3. Ask leads to connect us with agents who handle tickets from each assignment group if needed

Process:

  1. HCD to coordinate with CSM team to schedule sessions with all ADOs (meetings to be scheduled via Doodle)
    1. Interview each ADO (the final list is TBD) to learn the existing customer interaction process 
  2. HCD to conduct user interviews with ADOs prior to recommending any ticket handling process changes 
  3. HCD to conduct user interviews with ADOs after making ticket handling process changes to ensure user/customer satisfaction

Risks:

  1. If the HCD team is unable to get ADO participation for research meetings, then the low participation will impact overall findings and potential recommendations
  2. If the scope of the research changes during the project, then the timeline and project deliverables must be reevaluated before work continues to ensure we are on target with expectations
  3. If an ADO lacks a documented ticket-workflow process, then it could require more discovery sessions to understand the customer experience

Constraints:**

  1. The HCD team assumes the Service Center, ServiceNow, and Customer Success Management teams will support the research effort with various input, subject matter expertise, and helping coordinate outreach to the relevant POCs
  2. The HCD team assumes that all ADOs (unless otherwise noted by CMS) are part of the research effort
  3. The HCD team assumes that CMS stakeholders can reinforce the research effort goals with ADOs if there is resistance to engage with HIDS

Assumptions:**

  1. Resource constraint - the HCD team is a shared resource on HIDS. This large, enterprise research effort is considered a high priority, so if other efforts are also identified with equal priority levels we will have to evaluate resource availability.
  2. Time constraint - the HCD team will have to work with ADO schedules to participate in customer interviews which could be impacted by summer schedules, other prioritized efforts, and limited resources to meet with us. The team will do our best to be flexible with the ADOs.

Objectives/goals:

Ticket handling process:
• identify likes/dislikes
• understand pain points
• outline customer interaction points
• streamline overall user experience

Interview Questions: 

  • Who are the typical callers and what is their reason for calling?
  • Are they normally transferred or directed to you from another source?
  • What are the steps taken toward resolution?
  • How do you keep track of the outstanding issues?
  • Are there training documents to assist agents in getting issues resolved? 
  • Do any issues work in tandem with an open ServiceNow case/incident?  Are they tagged and updated there? 
  • Are there metrics tied to resolving customer issues?  How are these measured? 
  • Is the system/format used working?  Why or why not?
  • What would you change about the current state?  For the agent?  For the customer?
  • Are there any changes that are coming that will help the current state?

 Deliverables:
• Reports of individual ADO feedback (this is what we did, this is what we heard, here are the next steps)
• Discuss results in internal meetings with ServiceNow Team Charlie, Service Center Leads, and CMS stakeholders
• Present consolidated findings and recommendations to CMS (estimated: Fall 2021)


Notes:

Beneficiaries: Support and Software Development Partners (ADOs)

Benefit: Lower Resolution time

Outcome: A redesigned process for the support value stream

Value: Reduced customer wait for issue resolution

Revised Story:

As a member of a software development partner in ISG, I want lower resolution times on support tickets so that I can deliver software to my customer unimpeded.


As a Service Center Executive Stakeholder, I want to understand my customers concerns and pain points so that I can make improvements to the support process that result in lower resolution times and better service.

  1. Verify that findings are synthesized in a findings report
  2. Verify that the findings report includes feedback from service center leads, agents, and ADO
  3. Verify the findings report includes existing service center process information
  4. Verify that current performance information and performance targets are included in the report



Story 2

Author: Charles Stump 

Original Story:

As a cloud customer, I want to know which EBS volumes are over-provisioned so that I can reduce my AWS costs.


We have tried to use New Relic to obtain this information, but NR is not a good fit for many reasons. The optimal solution is to have the EBS storage usage information added to the EBS Listing Report as those reports


Refined Story:

As a cloud customer, I want to to view my EBS volume allocated storage on the EBS Listing report so that I can identify over-provisioned storage.


Acceptance Criteria Column "Allocated Storage" is present on the EBS Listing Report "Allocated Storage" shows the actual storage in MB allocated to the EBS volume at the time the report was generated


Notes. Test this by comparing the allocated storage value in the report to the value available in the AWS EBS Console because other reports or views of this data may not be 100% accurate (i.e. comparing the value to New Relic provided storage values is known to not be accurate)See HCT EBS Listing Report Spec for the updated specification for the EBS Listing Report. NOTES: Historically, this type of EBS reporting has been problematic due to the Nitro-based volumes. We cannot get storage and storage % used on volumes because of Nitro based volumes name/identifier changes at boot time.


As a cloud customer, I want to to view my EBS volume allocated storage on the EBS Listing report so that I can identify over-provisioned storage. See https://qnetconfluence.cms.gov/display/HIDS/HCT+EBS+Listing+Report+Spec for the updated specification for the EBS Listing Report. NOTES: Historically, this type of EBS reporting has been problematic due to the Nitro-based volumes. We cannot get storage and storage % used on volumes because of Nitro based volumes name/identifier changes at boot time. Acceptance Criteria Column "Allocated Storage" is present on the EBS Listing Report "Allocated Storage" shows the actual storage in MB allocated to the EBS volume at the time the report was generated Test this by comparing the allocated storage value in the report to the value available in the AWS EBS Console because other reports or views of this data may not be 100% accurate (i.e. comparing the value to New Relic provided storage values is known to not be accurate)


Notes:

Beneficiary: Technical Cost Manager

outcome: not wasting money

output: information empowering decision making

Revised Story:

As a Finance manager for a Software Development Partner, I want identify over-provisioned AWS storage so that I can reduce waste in operations costs


Acceptance Criteria

  1. Verify that the amount of allocated storage is present in the EBS Listing Report 
  2. Verify that the amount the of storage used storage for a specific EBS volume is shown 
  3. Verify that the amount of allocated storage matches the in the AWS EBS Console
  4. Verify that the amount the of storage used storage matches the in the AWS EBS Console


OR


As a Finance manager for a Software Development Partner, I want see over-provisioned AWS storage in the EBS Listing Report so that I can reduce waste in operations costs


Acceptance Criteria

  1. Verify that the amount of allocated storage for a specific EBS volume is shown
  2. Verify that the amount the of storage used storage for a specific EBS volume is shown 
  3. Verify that the amount of allocated storage matches the in the AWS EBS Console
  4. Verify that the amount the of storage used storage matches the in the AWS EBS Console


because other reports or views of this data may not be 100% accurate (i.e. comparing the value to New Relic provided storage values is known to not be accurate)

See HCT EBS Listing Report Spec for the updated specification for the EBS Listing Report. NOTES: Historically, this type of EBS reporting has been problematic due to the Nitro-based volumes. We cannot get storage and storage % used on volumes because of Nitro based volumes name/identifier changes at boot time.

Notes: 

Beneficiary: Technical Cost Manager

outcome: not wasting money

output: information empowering decision making

  • No labels