cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 13,039
Thanks: 4,332
Fixes: 26
Registered: ‎22-08-2007

Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Quote from: Chris
Thanks for your feedback.
I'm going to open this up for suggestions in which I'd like for anyone who reads this thread to give us their thoughts on what we could so do to improve things for you all? If there is something that we can do better, I'll take it further for you - most definitely. I'm interested in finding out what we're not doing so well on.

Blue text is my correction.
Chris asked the above question within the context of another challenging service delivery failure from BTOR.  We see many such failures, here on the forums, leading to user frustration and dissatisfaction with PlusNet.  Whilst PN own responsibility for sorting out those problems, they do not have any control over the resources required to fix phone line faults, nor the ability to manage priorities.  Everyone is at the mercy of BTOR who appear to be accountable to no one.  On a day by day basis, PN are diplomatically working with BTw / BTOR to fix each customer's issue as and when.  I expect that PN (at least the staff dealing with those issues) are equally frustrated.
BTOR are systematically failing both PN and end users.  End users cannot get Ofcom to act on their behalf for a specific service failure; PN appear reluctant to take these issues to Ofcom, or if they are / have they are being quite mute about it.  There needs to be a massive change in the standard of service delivery from BTOR - to bring that about there needs to be a CEO level plan for improvement between PN and BTOR.
So my first answer to Chris' question is "Give visibility of the plans to make this space better, rather than needing persistent day by day fire fighting".  James Bailey has made reference to improvement in the provisioning process due sometime mid 2014.  I suggest something is required sooner than that, if not by automated means, then by daily management inspection..
To fix any systematically failing process, you need to be able to profile and count failures.  The size of the problem then needs to be assessed as a proportion of total activity to provide context.  By the very nature of forums, it is the failures which people write about, not the successes.  These forums are open to all, existing customers and potential customers alike.  If I came to these forums as a potential customer to get a "feel" of PNs service delivery and had no insight as to how the wires service is delivered, I fear I would (incorrectly) perceive PN as being rank incompetent!  For the record, I know this is not actually the case, even if at times it looks like that and (more to the point) there appears to be no plan for improvement.
Having read a large number of posts I suggest that there are a good number of common themes covering everything from ordering through to general operation, which BTOR make more difficult than they need to be, thereby giving rise to excessive recourse to the call desk, tickets and complaints on the forum. These should be the subject of specific plans to perform better.  For what it's worth here are is a list which comes to mind.  I do not claim that it is complete or statically relevant, but it might be a useful adjunct to what is already happening in PN towers... of which there is minimal visibility.
Order failures / rejects
Many failures / rejects not notified to PN or otherwise not seen for proactive intervention until user complains
LLU transfers (TalkTalk)
Previous supplier 'actions' on circuit - I do wonder if this is caused by the supplier or the customer telling old supplier they are leaving?
Ordering BB on non-active circuit
Bad MAC codes
SIM orders!,,
Absence of pre-install checks
Many reported issues at the time of attempted (but failed) installation could have been avoided if there were a pre-install check list used by BTOR / PN / TG customer...
Is there a BT phone line already at the property?
Is there a dial tone?
Is the line number / circuit identifiable?
Does the line already have a NTE5 socket (or other relevant termination)?
Is access to a distribution pole likely to be required, if yes will a hoist be required or is ladder access adequate?
Are there sufficient spare external services - D/E side pairs, frame / line card ports / exchange connections / cards / ports?
Is modem on site?
Are BTOR location address records correct - mine are (were) 15 years out of date
Alternative contact number for customer for BTOR to confirm location
If SIM order has BB capable resource been assigned?
All of the above should be known / confirmed BEFORE committing the customer to scheduling an appointment, as the unavailability of any of the above could lead to a failed install and the necessity for an additional appointment.   The failure to install due to a predeterminable condition should directly lead to compensation to the end user.
Failure on installation date
Claimed appointment is not actually booked
Engineer does not show
Engineer claims they attended, but waiting customer had no contact - sight of van, phone call  or card through door etc, etc
Customer not present
Engineer does to ave right skills /resources eg cabinet keys
POTS line found to be faulty
Insufficient line resources
Exchange fault
Engineer runs out of time
For all of the above BTOR should hold and keep responsibility for completion of the installation direct with the end user - passing the bat and ball back to PN / the end user is not proficient.  Failed installations should not be treat as 'new' faults, but as a failure to deliver service.  With the exception of customer truly not present follow-up should be on free expedited delivery.
Early Life Failure
There are too many instances of service failure within a short time of installation, which become subject to extended waiting times due to next available 'normal' appointment slot or being forced to wait for the 10 day training period.  There is unfortunately too much shoddy installation work being done by contractors.  If the installed service fails to perform to predicted standards immediately after installation, the matter should be considered a failed installation and attended to with urgency (raised priority).

I recognise that there is a whole mountain of issues here, but the mountain needs to be moved, rock by rock.  Visibility of what PN is doing (rock by rock) with target dates would give a lt of confidence that the CEOs are working on a get well plan ... rather than just sitting around and taking the hits in the face from their BT masters!
Cheers,
Kevin
9 REPLIES
James
Grafter
Posts: 21,036
Registered: ‎04-04-2007

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Quote
So my first answer to Chris' question is "Give visibility of the plans to make this space better, rather than needing persistent day by day fire fighting".  James Bailey has made reference to improvement in the provisioning process due sometime mid 2014.  I suggest something is required sooner than that, if not by automated means, then by daily management inspection..

Just to note that this is a complete overhaul of our provisioning engine which has taken many months to date, and we are hopeful for a full release in Q1 2014 (April to June). It's going to have various stages with the first to improve the Fibre order journey in December/January.  This will involve improved automation at our end (meaning less waiting time on the phone) as well as an improvement in the order tracker so that you guys will have better visibility of your order.
It should also improve our handling of KCIs received from Openreach/Wholesale which refers to your point about proactive checking on failed orders and such like. On the point of existing lines/dial tone, this should also be covered as our order journey should check to see if there is a working line.
I'm sure there are various other "good things" that it will bring and we'll supply some more information nearer the delivery dates.
pwatson
Rising Star
Posts: 2,468
Thanks: 8
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎26-11-2012

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Quote from: James
full release in Q1 2014 (April to June).

Most would call April to June Q2  Wink
Mattz0r
Rising Star
Posts: 620
Fixes: 1
Registered: ‎21-07-2010

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Q1 of the Fiscal year.
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 13,039
Thanks: 4,332
Fixes: 26
Registered: ‎22-08-2007

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

@Pwatson,
Most people would, however when talking to bean counters they refer to fiscal years, count the cost of everything, but understand the value if nothing!
@James,
So the cure to all ordering evils is 6 months away.  In the meantime, what proactive process failure detection is presently being operated - eg daily failed / unacknowledged order  query subject to management review and remedial action.
What is being done about missed appointments and failure to install on first visit?  Given that you are the complaints manager, one might reasonably expect that you have some insight into what is happening there too?
Regards,
Kevin
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 1,884
Thanks: 470
Fixes: 7
Registered: ‎05-11-2008

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Are PN proactively giving customers of missed (BTOR) appointments compensation, as PN are compensated (£ 45) per missed appointment? 
If not , i am sure it would go some way to ease customers frustrations when appointments are missed.
http://www.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/updates/briefings/generalbriefings/generalbriefingsarticles/gen...
Regards
Mike
Mike
James
Grafter
Posts: 21,036
Registered: ‎04-04-2007

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Quote from: I
Are PN proactively giving customers of missed (BTOR) appointments compensation, as PN are compensated (£ 45) per missed appointment? 

We deal with these on a case by case basis.
I don't have a one size fits all statement for you.
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 13,039
Thanks: 4,332
Fixes: 26
Registered: ‎22-08-2007

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

James,
I guess that one size fits all might be an unreasonable expectation.
So can you give a number of examples of what has been done in a range of 'typical' circumstances please?  For example...
Engineer just simply does not turn up.
Engineer turns up at wrong premises / claims they turned up.
Engineer turns up a right premises but is not able to deliver installation due to BTOR issue which could have been predetermined in advance of the appointment
Etc.
Could you also respond to my previous post please?
Thank you,
Kevin
gnicholson8
Grafter
Posts: 319
Registered: ‎06-11-2013

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

Whilst your speaking about compensation, in my experience I will say PN have been VERY fair regarding this (and without me even requesting it) I had many issues due relating to BTOR and feel PN did do there best.
Whilst I am sure PN can improve things without an improvement from BTOR then there is only so much they can do, and whilst PN can complain to Ofcom, they do also need to think about their working relationship with the company as they are customers of BTOR. (obviously this is not an excuse) but the biggest thing that is required is an entire overhaul of Openreach.
Superuser
Superuser
Posts: 13,039
Thanks: 4,332
Fixes: 26
Registered: ‎22-08-2007

Re: Visibility of PN's BTOR delivery improvement plan

...or proactive management contingency plans that address BTOR failuresBEFORE the end user escalates the BTOR failure back to PN.
In particular failed orders should be detected and addressed prior to failed appointment attendance.
Back on topic, this thread is in response to Chris' request to suggest what PN could do better.  The suggestion is to give better visibility of PN's  management contingency activity to mitigate BTOR failures proactively, rather than wait for user escalation.  Thereby reduce the stress on the call centre(s) and improve the perception of PN's service delivery.
Their supplier must do better - visibility of what PN's CEO is doing about the issues would give confidence that PN is doing something and is not being gagged by BT group HQ.