Data Analysis and Interpretation
ProExpress is a private package delivery organization with a specific and relatively unique niche in the market. The company has been experiencing steady revenue growth, and the owners want it to stay this way. The Marketing Director (MD) is concerned with the figures of the Customer Satisfaction Report (CSR) and, in particular, with the performance of one of its Regions. Given the importance of customer satisfaction for a company’s performance, the concern of MD is understandable. The Regional Director (RD) of the Region 3 has not been interviewed; the MT states that he does not consider the decrease in figures to be an important issue. Most of the MT members agree with him.
The customer rating of the key aspects of delivery (timely delivery, the integrity of the package, friendliness of the employee) that has been termed as Customer Satisfaction with the Delivery Process (DP) is established with the help of service phone call. Customer Satisfaction with Phone-Based Representatives (PR) rating includes only two parameters: the meeting of the needs of the customer and the friendliness of the employee who has been performing the call. The copy of the latest annual CSR is provided.
From the CSR, it follows that the Region 3 is the biggest region of the company: it has five areas; its n amounts to almost the half of the total Ns for both DP and PR. This fact emphasizes any issues that the Region might have. During the past year, the overall DP of the company has not decreased while the PR has dropped by 0.1. At the same time, the DP has fallen for Region 2 and remained unchanged for Region 3 (with three separate areas improving their performance and two of them experiencing a 0.2 drop in customer satisfaction). Concerning PR, the Region 2 is the only region that shows improved performance.
All the representatives of the Region 1 team demonstrated a 0.2 drop in their PR. The Region 3 experienced a 0.5 drop in three of its representatives’ performance; the performance of employee E has not changed, and the last one demonstrated an improvement. The Region 3, however, has been underperforming for two years when compared to the rest of the Regions. To sum up, certain undesired fluctuations can be traced in every Region and especially in their service team performances.
However, these fluctuations can be considered a “fluke,” as an RD calls it. Still, the performance of the Region 3 and especially its PR team shows the tendency of underperforming with respect to other Regions.
Apart from that, the analysis of the ns of the Team 3 demonstrates that their standard deviation is unexpectedly large. While it appears to correspond to the associated ns of the DP, it is still rather confusing that the n of the representative D is more than twice lower than that of the rest of the agents. The standard deviation of the same employee is 2.1, which is the highest of the figures presented. These facts make it more difficult to offer assumptions concerning the performance of the team members.
Additional Data
From the information presented above, it logically follows that additional information is needed. First of all, while the CSR allows suggesting that the Region 3 has certain issues, which should be attended, other Regions also experience “flukes.” The easiest way to ensure that they do not demonstrate a negative tendency is to request the CSRs for the previous years. Apart from that, they might reveal additional trends in the performance of the Region 3.
The Region 3 becomes the focus of the future study in the company. That is why the involvement of its RD is vital: his extensive comments on the issue are necessary. Apart from that, given the performance problems of the Team 3, their interviews (and that of their Call Center Manager) would be extremely helpful: they could reveal the true reasons behind their deteriorating performance.
It is would also be nice to require the information that would provide the concrete explanation for the Region 3 Team ns discrepancy so that no false assumptions could be made.
Problems and Causes. Suggested Solutions
The problem of the Region 3 can be described as a relative underperforming (with respect to other Regions) that is demonstrated by the PR Team. The drop of performance by 0.5 points is unlikely to be just a fluctuation. As for the underperformance of the Region’s DP, it is within the “fluke” definition and will not be mentioned before additional information concerning the previous years provides the evidence to a negative tendency. The same refers to the fluctuations in the other Regions’ performance.
As it has been highlighted by MT, the Region 3 has its specifics, and some of them could condition the worsening of the performance. In this case, the need for studying and mitigating the said issues becomes more urgent. The fact that almost all of the team appears to suffer a similar drop in performance suggests that the problems could lie in management issues. Most certainly, it is an aspect of performance management that is deficient: for example, inconsistent tasks, unclear goals, lack of feedback, lack of employee training and development, inadequate motivation and various subcategories of these issues (Smither, 2012; Riggio, 2015).
The Call Center Manager, as well as the employees themselves, could provide the necessary insights. Given the significance of the Region and the notable drop in performance, it appears logical to inform the MT about this issue and suggest that researching the problem is worth the trouble. The research would provide the specific information concerning the issue. Once the problem is defined, it will be possible to suggest concrete solutions.
It should be mentioned that the research could take the form of action research, which would facilitate the involvement of the employees and ensure their understanding of the issue, which would promote the process of the change (Coghlan & Brannick, 2014). If the explanation to the problem of the n discrepancy does not contradict the conclusion about the problem, the research proposal may be presented to the MT.
Perspectives: Management Team Discussion
The APA (2010) Code of Conduct is applicable to the work of an I/O psychologist (p. 2). Given the fact that the current situation appears to “point” at a person (Region 3 RD), it is necessary to maintain an objective stance and ethical behavior, following the APA (2010) guidelines. Apart from that, the RD is a key figure in the current situation. It is absolutely necessary to explain the discrepancy in figures and expectations to him as well as to his Call Center Manager. However, while the latter will be able to facilitate the PR research and change, only RD is capable of testifying whether there are other concerns, the signs of which he might have overlooked before.
Naturally, the issue should also be explained to the rest of the MT. Their insider knowledge and preunderstanding of the company can present most valuable insights, and the properly articulated problem will provide them with the impetus for action (Coghlan & Brannick, 2014).
References
APA. (2010). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Web.
Coghlan, D., & Brannick, T. (2014). Doing action research in your own organization (4th ed.). London, UK: Sage Publications. Web.
Riggio, R. (2015). Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. London, UK: Routledge. Web.
Smither, J. W. (2012). Performance Management. In S. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (pp. 285-329). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Web.