joanna.darby@ifs.com, Author at Future of Field Service

Sarah shares a synopsis of the topics discussed at the Future of Field Service Live Tour 2023 stop in Düsseldorf on June 21st.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today I'm going to be sharing with you a bit of a recap and summary of the fifth out of six Future of Field Service live tour of events for 2023, which we just wrapped, which was in Dusseldorf, Germany. I can't believe that five out of the six events have passed in sort of a flurry of activity and look forward to our sixth and final event, which will be in Stockholm on October 10th, but had a great time in Germany and a really good lineup of speakers, really good attendance and very engaged audience. So let me share with you a little bit of what went on.

So the first session we had of the day was a session on embracing the power of remote capabilities to create modern service delivery models. This was with Nina Li, who is the senior director for Global Enterprise Operations Center at Johnson Controls. So Nina talked a lot about some of the changes that Johnson Controls has made in centralizing its remote capabilities to really start to dig into creating synergy in the customer experience and in the service delivery model of how remote is used, how it compliments and ties in with field service capabilities from a global standpoint. So it was really interesting to hear how they're looking at this, what they've done. She talked about the fact that these centralized remote centers give service technicians some really good opportunity to kind of start a new phase of their careers. That's where a lot of those employees are coming from.

She talked about how to, well, first we talked about why remote is so, so important for Johnson Controls, how it impacts the future of the organization in terms of just being effective and also working within the context of today's talent realities and then also how it impacts both Johnson Controls and its customers in terms of sustainability initiatives and the benefits that exist on both sides.

So we also talked about how teams are interfacing with one another and how the company is working to make sure that the service experience is seamless for customers. We talked about some of the misconceptions that arise when we talk about remote so employees being fearful that it will replace their jobs and customers objecting to the idea of people being onsite or visible less and how Johnson Controls is mitigating those things. And Nina said at the end of the session in response to a question from the audience, the reality is if you're not investing in remote and figuring out what this looks like for your organization, you may very well be out of business in a couple of years. And I think that's a really good point. This is an area of immense opportunity for service organizations and I think it's very much the way of the future. So that's a very good piece of advice to heed.

Next up, we had a session on bringing service into the DNA of a historically product-centric business with Lucas Rigotto, who is the Chief Service officer at GEA. And Lucas shared a lot what his journey at GEA has looked like so far. He's been there for around nine months, and how big of a mindset shift it is to really ensure that service is top of mind and has a voice in an organization that traditionally has been very, very product focused. So he talked about the huge potential that service holds for GEA and the realization of that potential at the top, how important that is to be able to really undertake the change that he is leading within the organization. And really, we talked a lot about how that type of mindset shift and evolution is such a people-centric thing.

So Lucas spoke a lot about how he is spending time with teams, how he is making leaders all the way down to frontline employees feel a part of the shift that's going on. We talked about how incorporating service into a company's DNA does not have to mean that you omit or overlook or deprioritize your product legacy. It's simply a matter of complimenting that and really just talked about some of the things that are challenging, but also some of the things that he is very excited about.

We broke out for some great round table discussions on some of those topics. And then in the afternoon we had our next interview session was on embracing the full potential of cloud-based customer service. That was with Razvan Nanciu, who is the General Manager of CSSD at KYOCERA Document Solutions Europe. So Razvan really talked again about this idea of eliminating silos within the customer experience and looking at service holistically to make sure that functions are working together, to make sure that the customer experience is again, seamless, intuitive, that companies are getting insights that are valuable to them as a part of the overall value proposition. He talked a lot about sort of the commercial side and what goes into considering how you sell service when service is evolving significantly for an organization, making sure that teams are educated and equipped to have those value-based conversations.

And I think another important point that Razvan made is that there are so, so, so many technological capabilities that are really ready today to be leveraged and that it's important to start with a strong foundation, which KYOCERA did with IFS, but also to be pushing to avoid complacency, to continue to leverage automation capabilities, AI capabilities, to continue to refine internally how effective and efficient you are and externally, continuing to evaluate how you can grow and expand your value proposition and continue to get close and stay close to your customers.

Next up, we had a session on how a predictive approach to spare parts boosts service efficiency with Ivo Siebers, who is the Senior Vice President for Global Logistics at TK Elevator. So some of you may remember that Ivo was not too long ago on the podcast and talked about this project that TK Elevator has undertaken around spare part business excellence. But I think it was a really interesting conversation, obviously sharing what they have done in terms of using predictive capabilities and automation and really making the most of today's technologies in terms of its spare parts business. But there were a lot of elements of this conversation that could be applied to any area of the service business where you're looking to increase automation, become more predictive, really reduce manual efforts. So TK Elevator's story around its spare part business excellence project is really impressive. Before this project technicians had parts available for about 20% of cases, and with the new system and really just being in the early stages of the new system, they're already at 80% availability. So very impressive.

Ivo spoke about some of the elements that maybe surprised him a bit on the journey. So the idea of individuals, humans tend to maybe overshoot on how well optimized we think things are versus the reality, how important data integrity is when you're looking at anything related to predictive analytics. Also, the idea of, again, change management. So he also spoke about facing the emotions from some team members that if they're going in a predictive path, would that impact jobs. I think this is a recurring theme that we need to be very aware of because we sort of spoke at the event that as leaders in this space who know the realities of the talent gap, that's not really even crossing a lot of minds, but for people on the frontline who feel that maybe their knowledge or skills will become redundant if they don't have that reassurance that they are still needed in even a different capacity, that can be quite concerning.

Our last interview session was on balancing today's business needs with preparation for the future, which was with Helge Bruemmer, who is the Global Field Service Manager for Global Service Operations at Alfa Laval. And what we talked about here is really the tight rope that all service leaders walk between meeting the present day needs of the business, including putting out fires that would impact customer experience, hitting business metrics and quarterly annual goals with also looking ahead and putting time into innovation, transformation, service evolution, et cetera.

So Helge shared some of thoughts on how and why that is so challenging and also maybe some of the things that we need to consider to do things differently. So whether that's having a team dedicated to the longer term or making sure that people have the time and ability to look longer term, making sure we're focusing enough. One of his points was on not only the talent topic, but on continual improvement of talent training development. So it was a really good conversation that I think everyone in the room related to because to some degree everyone's walking that tightrope.

We had a couple more round table discussions in the afternoon and then a quick summary and some cocktails and networking. It was a great day. I have been a little bit rundown with all of the travel, all of the events, but this was such a wonderful note to press pause on.

I feel like I repeat this a lot, but some of the feedback I heard is that people just feel so much less alone when they're in a room of their peers and understand that others face the same or very similar challenges. People comment on how much they have in common and how surprising that is when they're in a room with people that are in very different industries of their own. People told me that they were inspired by points that were made, attitudes people presented, thoughts that people shared, and I've said this before, but I just feel so thankful to be in a position to bring folks together. To me, that's what it's all about. I enjoy writing articles and recording podcasts, but there's nothing about what I do that I love more than building community and helping people in similar roles come together in ways that they can stay in touch and help one another. So it was a great event from that perspective and greatly appreciate our five wonderful speakers and everyone that joined and made the day a success.

As I mentioned at the beginning, we only have one event left for 2023, which is in Stockholm, October 10th. So if you are in the Nordics or can get there for that event, go ahead and head to the website to register. I'm sure it will be wonderful. You can also register for the Future of Field Service Insider so that you are getting the latest content delivered to your inbox every other week. Make sure that you can peruse the articles and podcasts and stay up to date on anything relevant to you.

The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more at IFS.com. As always, thank you for listening.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

It’s exciting to see more service organizations rolling out remote service initiatives, but a technology that is still in its nascent stages with the potential to have big implications when it comes to service is digital twins.

A digital twin is a digital representation of a specific physical object that can be updated in real time via data received from its real-world counterpart. For field service veterans, that probably sounds a lot like the Internet of Things (IoT), and that's a pretty good assessment of where things stand in most industries – but digital twins can take that concept a lot farther.

Digital twins link together IoT technology, simulation, modeling, analytics and big data advancements to create full digital versions of real-world things (from consumer electronics and car parts to entire airplanes and even factories). Conceivably, the digital twin can provide a real-time, virtual view of how an asset is operating in its environment as a 3D model. What's more, that model can be manipulated in a virtual environment, which is where things can get pretty interesting from a service perspective.

Scenarios Where Digital Doppelgangers Prove Useful

For predictive maintenance, digital twins can provide accurate data about actual usage which can make it easier to manage scheduled maintenance and repairs before failures happen. Companies are already doing this with sensors and direct connections to customer equipment but serialized digital twins can give you a more granular view of these assets.

For manufacturers and third-party service organizations, digital twins can open up the possibility of offering better lifecycle support contracts. And because digital twins are asset specific, service organizations can do a better job of scheduling service based on actual utilization. Digital twins can also provide a much better understanding of how equipment is functioning over time, and that data can be fed into product lifecycle management or asset performance management applications to create better recommendations around not just service, but installation and even design.

There are already major software vendors linking together CAD, service, and enterprise data management applications to help close that design-service loop so that design engineers can improve next-gen products based on feedback from field technicians.

Because digital twins are a full-scale virtual model of an asset, they can possibly create some new applications that can make service easier and more effective, too. Using simulation tools, you could perform virtual repairs and see, with fairly high accuracy, what effect they may have on the actual equipment. Even with a technician on site, a more experienced engineer can view what's happening in the digital twin as the on-site tech performs tests and repairs and offer remote guidance or feedback.

All these potential service applications for digital twins are even more valuable for remote assets – offshore oil and gas equipment, mining equipment, cell towers, etc. From a diagnostic and even repair standpoint, being able to have this real-time view into specific pieces of equipment can save multiple truck rolls. In some industries, those truck rolls cost thousands of dollars each, so the savings can be significant.

While a lot of this is still future state, it’s interesting to see the potential that exists. A lot of legacy equipment may never have enough sensors or connectivity to work under this model, but a lot of new products do. BMW even leveraged some technology from NVIDIA to build a full virtual model of an entire factory – before it even broke ground. They did so to iron out any potential kinks before construction, but the same model can be tied to the actual factory once it's built for maintenance and monitoring purposes.

While digital twin deployment is still relatively low the continued shift toward more digital, more connected service models give these virtual representations of actual machines an increasingly important role to play. If you have thoughts (or experiences!) about digital twins and service/maintenance applications, feel free to send them my way.

Sarah shares a synopsis of the topics discussed at the Future of Field Service Live Tour 2023 stop in Minneapolis on June 15th.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. I cannot promise you the highest quality podcast that you have ever watched or listened to. I am recording this at the United Club in Chicago and it is busy and loud, and I'm probably informing some people around me about field service and educating them on things they might not be aware of, but we're just going to make it work.

So I am on my way home from Minneapolis. Just a couple of hours ago, we wrapped the Future of Field Service Live Tour, Minneapolis edition, and wanted to do a recap of today's event. By the time you are hearing this or listening to this, we will actually be doing the Dusseldorf event the day that this will come out. And that is our last event for the spring/summer months. We have our Stockholm event in the fall.

So today's event in Minneapolis was another great event. I know I say that every time, but for me, one of the things I love about doing these events is every location has a unique lineup of speakers, which means even though the format is similar from city to city, the content is very different and that, obviously, as the person that's doing the interviews, keeps me interested and engaged and really just makes every event different and exciting. And I've said this before, but being able to bring people together to learn from one another, and it came up again at today's event, just to feel that folks are not alone in the challenges that they face is a great thing to be able to do. So grateful for that.

So today's speakers, we were joined by Dr. Elizabeth Moran, who spoke about the neuroscience of change management. And Dr. Moran was on the podcast. I'm going to see if I can find the episode. I should have looked it up before I started recording, but I didn't. But she was on the podcast talking about these five elements of neuroscience that factor into change leadership, and she was able to join us at the event, which was amazing. And obviously, change management, change leadership, is something that comes up in so many conversations that I have.

And so we talked about the five elements that she shared on the podcast, but she was able to also host two of our breakout sessions where the attendees got to talk to her a bit more and do some almost live coaching, really, talked through some different challenges and examples that they're having where she could really work with them on those specific things, give some suggestions, some feedback. So it was great that she was able to come, and it was really cool to be able to see some of those concepts that we had talked about on the podcast come to life in a way that was related to the people that were there and the things that they are up against.

So if you haven't listened to the podcast that she was on, that is episode 200, so certainly check that out and have a listen. I think the concepts that she covers are in her book, Forward, and that's a content that is well worth the time to have a look at. And so Elizabeth was our first speaker of the day, talking about that neuroscience of change management topic and then doing some breakout sessions with people and getting into some of the specifics. So that was great.

Our second speaker of the day was Jorge Mejia of Tetra Pak, and Jorge joined to... It was a great follow-up to Elizabeth's session because Jorge was talking about some of the lessons learned in digital transformation. So Tetra Pak is in the midst of a really significant, large, global service transformation that has some different phases, different aspects, that the company has various goals in place for leading up to 2030. And part of that is the implementation of IFS, so field service management planning and scheduling optimization, to create a global standard for service operations and to bring about a lot of positive change.

However, it's a significant change in the way Tetra Pak is asking its field teams to work and just service operations overall, really. And so Jorge spoke about this idea that when they kicked off the project initially, everyone looked at it, as I think people commonly do with digital transformation, as an IT project. And Jorge gave a lot of specifics around his really big learning, which is that it really shouldn't be approached as an IT project, but rather a people project with an IT component, so essentially picking up on a lot of the themes that came up in Elizabeth's first session around change and how people react to doing things differently and really sharing the experience that Tetra Pak had in taking this solution-centric approach and then realizing once they got going that they really needed to prioritize the people aspect and put people first.

Sorry, I know I am distracted, but as I mentioned, I'm at the United Club, and they have a Robbot bus machine that's going around to collect or move dirty dishes. I've just never seen that before, so apologies for my distraction.

Okay, so Jorge shared that and that was wonderful and really brought almost like a case study to some of the points that Elizabeth mentioned in the first session. And Jorge gave a lot of detail on how they recognized that the mentality they had about the project needed to shift and what they did to go back and put a lot more people centricity around the project that they have underway and how in a very significantly positive way that has changed the trajectory of their transformation. So that was great.

Next up, we had Robb Origer from Sleep Number, and Robb, before he joined Sleep Number, I think about three, three and a half years ago, he was at Dish for quite a few years, so he has really quite a well-rounded set of experiences in service. And what he spoke about is how the contrast between those two businesses in the sense of the maturity of their field service organizations and just how he is taking a lot of the experiences he had at Dish and things that he was able to do there and looking at the commonalities of how a company like Sleep Number might benefit from, not doing the same things because they're very different businesses, but bringing his knowledge in to really look at increasing differentiation through service, which traditionally, Sleep Number has been really focused on the differentiation they create through the retail experience, so how service can augment that. And we talked a bit about what that looks like in terms of focusing on customer experience, but also making sure that you're balancing that with the realities of the business and operational efficiency and all of those things. So great conversation, as well.

Next, we had Matt Ganus with Whirlpool, so also talking about service differentiation. Whirlpool, though, does that through exclusively independent service providers, so they do not have their own on staff field technicians. They work exclusively with independent service providers. And we had a really good conversation about how a lot of companies that have some hesitation about that should realize that that model does not need to mean, or shouldn't mean, hands off. And so Matt spoke about how they put time, money, effort, resource, thinking, into creating really mutually beneficial partnerships where the service providers are bringing regional expertise and customer loyalty and relationships to the table.

And Whirlpool is creating some really good training and enablement and soft-skills training and product expertise and resources and governance and things like that so that they can work together to achieve success. And Whirlpool has had a really good track record of doing that with this exclusively independent model without sacrificing the customer experience, the brand perception, any of those things. So Whirlpool was on the podcast speaking a bit about this topic previously. That's episode 207 if you want to go have a listen to that. But Matt also hosted some breakout sessions and answered a lot of questions people had about how to create those positive working relationships with independent providers and gave a lot of detail around what they're doing there. So that was great, as well.

And last but not least, we had Gyner Ozgul, who is the President and COO of Smart Care Equipment Solutions, talking about the tenants of scalable service success. So Gyner spoke at last year's U.S. Future of Field Service event about their service transformation and implementation of, again, IFS as their foundational system. Now that they have that underway and that transformation is, I don't want to say behind them because there's always a transformation, but they have that work done, he talked about how they're building upon that foundation. He talked about his focus on company culture and talent development and what that looks like in today's landscape. And finally, he talked a bit about how after the tumultuous times of the pandemic, now that Smart Care has reached a level of stability, what he does as a leader to really not get complacent and to continue to focus on continuous improvement, not only with their technology, but with their people and teams and culture, et cetera. So another great conversation.

We had some breakout discussions throughout the day, as well, and there was some really good points shared there related to everything from how do we make our frontline workers feel more respected and appreciated and acknowledged, to how do we make them feel more connected to their colleagues and their peers for those that are really quite isolated by the nature of not coming into an office, et cetera. We talked about how the frontline role could change over the next few years and what that might mean with the incorporation of more remote service, more automation, more artificial intelligence, and things like that. We also talked about recruiting, of course, and retention and those types of topics, as well. So it was a great day of discussions and connection and community, which is something you know is near and dear to me. So really appreciated the five amazing speakers that we had, as well as everyone that joined us. So thank you.

And if you missed it, go back and check out Elizabeth on podcast 200 and Whirlpool on podcast 207. Also keep an eye out here on the Future of Field Service platform as we release some of the sessions from our Live Tour events, and hopefully, you can join us for an event in the future.

So thank you for listening. You can learn more at futureoffieldservice.com. Be sure to sign up for the Future of Field Service Insider so you can stay up to date on all of the latest content. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more at ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

Companies today are focusing more heavily on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives for a variety of reasons, some perhaps more virtuous than others. Motivators can include repercussions of not being seen as a diverse employer, a tactic to try and combat the labor shortages, but the best motivator is the understanding that DEI truly matters. These companies embrace DEI not because they feel they “have to,” but because they recognize that a more diverse and inclusive organization leads to more creativity, innovation, and better results.

While DEI is often mentioned as an acronym, the three components require quite distinct focus and effort to achieve. Perhaps the hardest of the three is inclusion, because it is in many ways more ambiguous than diversity (which you can set targets for) or equity (which can be assessed). Inclusion is very tied to company culture and leadership, leaving plenty of room for bias and even toxicity to creep in and exist in a manner than can be very challenging to pinpoint, address, and rectify.

This challenge is exacerbated by the fact that many leaders and organizations would prefer not to dive into some of the realities that can cause a hard look in the mirror. So, I was excited to hear of the book Mita Mallick is writing, Reimagine Inclusion: Debunking 13 Myths to Transform Your Workplace. Mita was first a guest on the Future of Field Service podcast in episode 68 and I’ve been a fan of her work ever since.

Mita is the Chief Diversity Officer at Carta, co-host of the podcast Brown Table Talk, and a top LinkedIn Voice. She is passionate about DEI work and related topics and outspoken on social media about things many remain quiet on. In fact, her mission in writing this book is to “say all the quiet parts out loud of what holds us back from making meaningful progress in inclusivity work."

On last week’s podcast, Mita came to give a sneak peek into some of the myths covered in her upcoming book – a conversation I believe is important for everyone to listen to and reflect on. No matter what industry your company is in, what role you have in the organization, or where you are today with your efforts around inclusion, doing better is going to be imperative when it comes to not only attracting and retaining top talent but also for achieving the diversity of thought that is essential for innovation.

Here's a partial synopsis of the myths Mita and I discussed on last week’s episode:

I'm all for diverse talent as long as they're good. “That myth really goes to how we have different standards for different people. A lot of companies have systems and processes in place to help with creating inclusive and equitable cultures. And yet, at the end of the day, it's all about the leader. It's all about Mita and how she shows up to work. And if I can't interrupt my bias, it's going to be a different result that actually might go against the system or the process,” she explains. “And so, when we say things like, ‘I'm all for diverse talent, as long as they're good,’ would we ever say, ‘I'm all for non-diverse talent as long as they're good? These are the things we have to ask ourselves. And then, as a result of questioning it, what I say next and what I do next will be different because I interrogated it.”
We protect the A-holes because our businesses wouldn't run without them. “A lot of companies, especially big public companies, private companies, have systems and processes in place. But we make exceptions,” Mita says. “You have a toxic leader on your team. How many people need to leave? How much hurt or harm does this person have to cause for you to say, ‘I'm walking away.’ How much is your personal relationship more important to you than the impact on the company? Are you really listening to all the feedback? Are you going to protect this one person versus protecting the company? Because here's the thing: We always set up in our mind, it's the employee versus the company. Employees are the company. They're one and the same. The company doesn't exist with those employees.”
We need more people of color in leadership. Let's launch a mentorship program. “I have been over-mentored and under-sponsored in my career. I have had so many amazing mentors. But here's the thing: Mentors are not the same as sponsors,” cautions Mita. “When you think about a mentor, they could give me career advice. Sponsors are typically going to be someone who's two levels above you in an organization. They have access to big budget, P&L, they're in the room when the doors are closed and people are talking about your career. They have access to the C-suite. They might be in the C-suite. They know about roles that are coming up that haven't been listed, special projects, assignments. Sponsorship is people with power and privilege in the organization taking an interest in other individuals and actively saying they're going to help them advance their career.”
Of course, we support women. We just extended maternity leave. “This is the notion that all women want to become mothers, and it actually ties back to a lot of the cultural stereotypes, the gender norms we grew up with in our homes. This idea that we extended maternity leave is enough for mothers that we check the box,” says Mita. “Also, in this myth, I talk about gendered ageism. Women are never the right age. We're too young or we're too old. It's like that one year where we had the perfect moment, right? But gendered ageism shows up at the workplace a lot.”
These DEI efforts don't benefit me. My voice as a white man doesn't count anymore. “The white men that I've worked with in my life, many of them do express that they have at some point feel shamed, named, blamed, demonized,” explains Mita. “So, in my role as the Chief Diversity Officer, if white men come to me asking questions, I have the space to answer those questions with grace and kindness, and to help educate and teach. And at the same time, white men listening need to understand that they do have a place in this work, because the world of work for everyone can't change without them. There’s a very, very long action list of things that men can be doing to show up. Interrupting bias in the moment, taking parental leave, if you're on a panel and it's all white men, give up your spot, make recommendations. Are you paying your teams fairly and equitably? There are so many ways.”

The full conversation is well worth a listen, and you can pre-order Mita’s book now on Amazon.

Sarah welcomes back Mita Mallick, corporate change-maker and Chief Diversity Officer at Carta who is soon to release her first book: Reimagine Inclusion: Debunking 13 Myths to Transform Your Workplace.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today, we're going to be having a discussion to debunk the myths that are impeding workplace inclusion. Really excited for today's chat, and really excited to welcome back to the Future of Field Service podcast, Mita Mallick. Hi, Mita.

Mita Mallick: Hi, Sarah. Thanks for having me back.

Sarah Nicastro: Of course.

Mita Mallick: I'm a second-time guest. Very excited.

Sarah Nicastro: Uh-huh, that's right. You're part of the club now.

Mita Mallick: Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: Mita was on this podcast in a former episode. I should have looked at what number. I did look, it's number 68. Okay. So, we're in the, I don't know, 200s.

Mita Mallick: Wow.

Sarah Nicastro: So, it's been a while ago, and we had a really great conversation at the time talking about having courageous conversations on race. But if you missed Mita's first appearance, let me tell you a little bit about her. She is a corporate changemaker, whose passion for inclusive storytelling led her to become Chief Diversity Officer and also to write her first book, which is what we are going to be talking quite a bit about today. That book is forthcoming and it is titled Reimagine Inclusion: Debunking 13 Myths to Transform Your Workplace. So, that is very exciting.

Before we get into it, is there anything about you that you want to share that I didn't cover in that very, very quick little bio introduction?

Mita Mallick: You covered almost everything, except for the most important thing we talk about, which is our children, right?

Sarah Nicastro: Yes.

Mita Mallick: Biggest job we have is raising kind and inclusive human beings. So, biggest job I have is parenting.

Sarah Nicastro: Yep.

Mita Mallick: Jay, who's 10 going on 20. Priya, who's eight going on 18. I remember when we talked, it was right during the pandemic. We were…

Sarah Nicastro: We were in the throes of it.

Mita Mallick: Yes. So, I just have a memory of us talking during that time. Very vivid One. Very vivid one.

Sarah Nicastro: On the brink of absolutely losing it.

Mita Mallick: Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: Here we are a couple years later, we were-

Mita Mallick: Yes, we're still here.

Sarah Nicastro: ... maybe still losing it, but we're here. Okay.

Mita Mallick: We're still here.

Sarah Nicastro: All right. At the time, when you were on... You were with Unilever, right?

Mita Mallick: Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: You've only had one change since. To Carta, is that correct?

Mita Mallick: Yeah, I'm still with Carta. Yeah. I did what a lot of people did, which was change jobs during the pandemic. For me, it was a big job. That was lots of lessons learned. But I believe I had started writing the book before we did that first podcast. I wrote this book four years ago. I'm losing track of time now, but it's been certainly a labor of love to finish it, and then also to get it published.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I think the conversation we had in episode 68, having courageous conversations about race, certainly related to what we're going to talk about today, and all kind of part of that. I know that you are very passionate about diversity, equity, and inclusion. While it is not my role, like it is yours, it's also something that I feel very strongly about. And so, I think the work you're doing to not only make these conversations front and center, but to get into some of the things that people shy away from, I think is just so important. So, thrilled to chat.

The book that you wrote four years ago, that's going to soon be coming out into the world, I love... It says, "The premise of the book is to say all the quiet parts out loud of what holds us back from making meaningful progress in inclusivity work." I just love that. I always say cut the BS, let's get to-

Mita Mallick: Let's get into it.

Sarah Nicastro: ... let's discuss what is everyone not saying? What's really going on? I think it's so important to have someone be brave in initiating some of those uncomfortable conversations.

Mita Mallick: Thank you.

Sarah Nicastro: You've been passionate about these things for a long time. You've been in roles where this has been a part of your professional life also for a long time. What led you to the point where you felt you needed to put this in book form and get it out into the world?

Mita Mallick: There's a lot of great books about diversity, equity, inclusion, and leadership out in the marketplace. Like you said, I wanted to say the quiet parts out loud. I felt like there were myths and stories we were holding onto that stop us from making meaningful progress, because we just believe these things are true and they hold us back. I guess I'll use your language, let's cut through the BS, let's talk about what's really happening, because we can't change what we won't discuss. If you're not going to talk about the tough thing, the hard thing, whether that's at home or at work, how are you going to actually see progress happen? You won't, because you're keeping it undercover, keeping it hidden.

And I think about our conversation, that's one of my myths in the book. One of the myths in the book is, it's time to have some courageous conversations on race. Let's ask employees of color to lead them. I think about our conversation, I think about so many conversations I've had over the years, which is the culmination of this book. It's the culmination of all of my expertise and things that I've experienced, or witnessed, or led, or conversations I've had with thought leaders like yourself. So, I thought, let me write it all down.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah.

Mita Mallick: Let me write it all down and share it with the world, and I know it's going to have big impact, and I'm really excited for that.

Sarah Nicastro: That's awesome. This wasn't on our outline, but I often throw curveballs in here.

Mita Mallick: Of course.

Sarah Nicastro: I'm just curious, how often do... I know this book is specifically gearing these conversations toward what we need to talk about in the workplace, which obviously is relevant for our listeners, but I'm also curious, because I'm thinking about it from the perspective of being a mom. How often do these topics come up in your conversations with your children?

Mita Mallick: All the time.

Sarah Nicastro: Right. Because I feel like-

Mita Mallick: Even if you don't realize it, even if you don't realize it.

Sarah Nicastro: .... you're trying to, you said at the beginning, to raise kind-

Mita Mallick: Inclusive human beings.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes.

Mita Mallick: Yeah.

Sarah Nicastro: Then you have to undo so much of what have existed and-

Mita Mallick: You have to. I'll give you an example. I mean, we'll talk about this as we get more into the details of Reimagine Inclusion, but for anyone who has little people in their life, we have to be careful about the language we use. So, when my kids start to say things like, "Oh, this kid, Mita, in my class is..." Let me start again, "This kid, Mita, in my class is kind of funny, strange, weird, awkward, unusual, different. I don't really like them." Okay, let's get into that. Because when we start to perceive difference, whether we realize it or not, we start to create distance. We start to other, we start to stereotype. Stereotype becomes the gateway to hate. Really watch for that language. And I watch for it, too, because I might be saying something really innocently, "Oh, Sarah is just so awkward and weird. Ha ha ha." Okay, but what do I really mean by that?

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Mita Mallick: Is she awkward and weird? Listen, we're all a little bit weird. So, what is it I'm trying to say? And what am I role-modeling to my children? And watch for that. I say to my kids, "Well, no, let's not use that language. What are you really trying to say?" "Well, she upset me in school today." "Okay, well, then you should tell her that she upset you in school today. Let's not start labeling people." This work starts at home and it starts early on.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I think in terms of not shying away from things that can be uncomfortable, right?

Mita Mallick: Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: Like having courageous conversations. My mother-in-law not too, too long ago, kind of questioned me. She's like, "I feel like you're too honest with the kids." And I'm like, "Okay, well, I don't know if there is such a thing is too honest." They have to learn this stuff somehow, and it's better they learn things from us that we can get into with them when they ask hard questions; not just avoid it and then have them pick up whatever else might be someone's perception or stereotype, et cetera. So it's just really interesting.

Okay. So, how do you find the courage to say out loud some of the things that people tend to keep quiet about? That make people uncomfortable, the conversations they shy away from. What kind of gives you the courage to put it out there, to speak about it? How do you find that?

Mita Mallick: I think it's grown in me over time. I've had so many painful workplace experiences. We've all had. I've had painful life experiences, painful work experiences, and I don't want any of our children to go through the things that I did. The world has changed a lot. Yes, progress is slow, but it's very different from when I was born and raised in the US and how I'm raising my children, and I'm happy for that.

And by sharing all of these things, I really want stories to inspire, to move people and then really ultimately get them to act in a different way. And so, I am now at a place in my life where I do have power. I do have a different level of privilege, right, than others, and there's a responsibility with that. There's a responsibility to really say those things out loud. And they're uncomfortable. They're not comfortable. But I do think because you've gotten to know me, the way in which I try to reach and teach people is not to shame or demonize or to blame or to point fingers, but to say, "Let's unpack this together, and let's try to move each other on our journeys to be more inclusive leaders."

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, and I think that's an important distinction. Because number one, if you were trying to shame people, you're not going to be as effective as you want to be and know you can be. But two, there's a lot of this. I don't know how you would put a percentage to it, but there's certainly maliciousness that exists, right? But there's a lot of this that's just unconscious. It's just really deeply embedded in how people were raised. So that doesn't make it less harmful, but putting shame to that doesn't help someone want to think or do differently, and so I think that's a really good point as well.

So, the book debunks 13 Myths, and while I wish we had time to go through all of them, we don't, and also we want people to read the book. So I kind of hand selected a few that I think would be particularly interesting to our audience, and we will sort of start there. Okay?

Mita Mallick: Awesome.

Sarah Nicastro: So the first is in the book, I believe, myth number four, and it's, "I'm all for diverse talent as long as they're good."

Mita Mallick: Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: So let's talk about this.

Mita Mallick: Yes, let's talk about this. Please don't call me a diversity hire. I earned this seat. I deserve this seat. And so that myth really goes to how we have different standards for different people. And Sarah, throughout Reimagine Inclusion, I really get leaders to try to self-reflect. Because here's the thing: A lot of companies have systems and processes in place to help with creating inclusive and equitable cultures. And yet, at the end of the day, it's all about the leader. It's all about Mita and how she shows up to work. And if I can't interrupt my bias, it's going to be a different result that actually might go against the system or the process.

And so, when we say things like, "I'm all for diverse talent, as long as they're good," would we ever say, "I'm all for non-diverse talent as long as they're good?" And so, one of the exercises I take leaders through is, let's say that you hired me, Sarah, to do a really difficult leadership role in turning around a failed business; didn't work out for all the reasons we might get into; I move on to my next opportunity. Would it make you less likely to hire a woman of color into that role? Because I was the first woman of color you'd ever appointed to lead a division?

But what if I was a white man? I'm going to pick on Jim. I don't know a Jim, but let's say it was Jim. Jim and I had the same story. You appointed him to lead a business that was failing and he couldn't turn it around, and for all the reasons we don't need to get into, he ends up moving on. Does it make you less reluctant to hire another white man?

And so, those are the things we have to ask ourselves. And as I say, the beautiful part of the human brain is that you can have your thought in your head and no one can hear it. Although someone told me the other day, AI actually can now map to thoughts and jeez, come up with it. I'm like, "Oh God, forget that." Let's keep AI out of this. Let's just say no one can hear my thought, so I'm going to hold onto this and I'm going to interrogate it and I'm going to really question what I'm thinking. And then, as a result of questioning it, what I say next and what I do next will be different because I interrogated it.

Also, the other thing I talk about in that myth is really busting the pipeline myth. I think the global pandemic has really showed us that we have access to diverse pipelines across the globe. And so, I talk about working with individuals in the state of Vermont, which in the US is one of the whitest states, statistically speaking. And very clearly, a leader years ago saying, "I want to bring in a Black talent to lead this division. This is my intent. I want to build a diverse slate." That's a really good intent to say, "I want to change the composition of my team, and I want to build a diverse slate to help get there." Awesome. "I will pay for no relocation. I'm going to pay below market standards for the job, and the role needs to be in Vermont full-time."

Okay, so what does that already do? We've created a pipeline issue unknowingly, and then it's like, "Well, recruiting couldn't get me any candidates." But look at the standards you set from the start? You didn't allow. You can say you want a diverse slate, but you didn't allow for your team to help you build that, because you internally set up all these obstacles.

And then the final thing I'll leave you with is also just thinking about how we do interview processes, and I'll give you an example of when we don't have equitable standards for an interview process. Let's say I'm interviewing you, and I'm like, "Oh, I didn't know you went to Stanford. You played lacrosse? Oh my God, wait, you also summered in Cape Cod growing up?" Okay. All of a sudden in the interview process, we discover all these things about each other, and I really start to like you. And because I like you, I just am like, "I don't need for Sarah to go through any more rounds. Let's just move over to the final stage." But then I meet Jim. Something about Jim makes me uncomfortable and it can't put my finger on it. And so instead, what I do is put Jim through three more rounds, versus Sarah, who really just leapt to the end and Sarah just got the offer.

I always say on my own podcast with Dee C. Marshall, Brown Table Talk, we say, "Facts, not feelings. Facts, not feelings." So in the interview debrief, someone says, "Why is Sarah such a great candidate? I just really liked her. We had so much in common." And then it's like, okay, you didn't ask her any of the interview questions. You actually don't know about her experience, because the whole time you were talking about Stanford and lacrosse and where you summered as a child. You don't even get into the meat of what she does in the experience, and so those are some of the examples and discussion I have in that myth.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. So the interview, the equitable, equitable interview process makes sense to me, but going back to the Vermont example. I guess I have two questions, which is, one, is that narrowing intentional. I guess without it being a real example, it's hard to say yes or no. But then also, what are the checks and balances then? Is it just the person writing the job description, reflecting on themselves? Or what should be the next step where someone says, "Hm, you're kind of creating an unrealistic expectation here?"

Mita Mallick: I go back to what you said at the beginning of this conversation. I like to believe, I talk a lot about this in Reimagine Inclusion, intent versus impact. Most people in the workplace, I believe, have positive intent and they don't know how their impact lands. There are the Harvey Weinsteins and the Matt Lauers who make headlines, who deserve to seek redemption and move on from their workplaces. But I would say most people I work with don't operate from that place of having really negative intent, and so perhaps with this leader in the example I gave in Vermont, the leader's intent actually is positive in the beginning and says, "I want a diverse slate. I want to change the composition of my team." But then, the intent doesn't match the impact, because then they start thinking about their own needs, which is perhaps their need for control, that they need to be sitting in Vermont; perhaps the fact that they have a tight budget, so they don't want to pay for relocation or a competitive market.

So that's where sometimes I think to what you're saying, perhaps the barriers are intentional, and sometimes they're unintentional. Because sometimes with our intent, Sarah, we focus more on ourselves than the other side of the equation, which is the impact. Right? We have positive intent, but I also want to make sure that intent is good for Mita, that it works for Mita. I want to make sure, okay, Sarah's going to be positively impacted, but Mita needs to be as well, so let me center myself in the intent piece of it.

So that's the first piece. I think you have a great question about the job description and really making sure that when you're writing it, you don't need a hundred cooks in the kitchen, but making sure cross-functional partners, peers, other leaders, get their eyes on it to see what is it that you're asking of this individual. And then making sure, again, when you're in the interview process, go back to the job description. "Well, Mita doesn't have that skillset." "Okay. Did we ask her that in the job description?" "No, we didn't." "Yes, check we did." Or, is it something she can grow into? Because oftentimes, I think what you're saying is when you have a vague job description and you're not very clear on what you're looking for, that also things get muddied in the process, then you can't really evaluate candidates fairly and equitably.

And the last thing I'll say is, one of the things I talk about in this myth is it's not recruiting's job to find talent. It's all of our jobs. So if you were a leader, always be out for talent. And if you're always getting to know talent, from communities that you don't identify with, it gives you the space to get to know people without judging them versus a job description. Right? Because if you get to know me and my talents, and there's a chief marketing officer role, you might be like, "Well, Mita hasn't done marketing for a while. But oh my God, actually, she's an amazing marketer. She hasn't done it for a while, so I want to actually put her up for this job."

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm. Yeah. That makes sense. I like the point you made about not having very vague descriptions, because going back to the fact versus feelings, if it's vague, it leaves so much more room for feeling, right?

Mita Mallick: It does. Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: Because then you don't have as much fact to base things off of.

Mita Mallick: Love that. Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. Yeah.

Mita Mallick: Hundred percent.

Sarah Nicastro: All right. So the next one is number five. "We protect the A-holes because our businesses wouldn't run without them."

Mita Mallick: Yes, yes, yes. How many times have we seen this in our careers? I've lost count.

Sarah Nicastro: A lot.

Mita Mallick: One of the things I, and this again goes back to a lot of companies, especially big public companies, private companies, have systems and processes in place. But we make exceptions.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. It's really easy to find loopholes, too.

Mita Mallick: Find the loopholes.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah.

Mita Mallick: One of the things I say, Sarah, let's say I'm working for you. Here's how I would coach you. You have a toxic leader on your team. How many people need to leave? How much hurt or harm does this person have to cause for you to say, "I'm walking away from Mita?" How much is your personal relationship with Mita more important to you than the impact she's having on the company? Are you really listening to all the feedback? If Mita has had five women of color resign under her in the last two weeks, at what point do you say, "I need to have a discussion about what's happening on this team?"

And, those are some of the things. What cost is you as a leader? Are you going to protect this one person versus protecting the company? Because here's the thing: We always set up in our mind, it's the employee versus the company. Employees are the company. They're one and the same. The company doesn't exist with that employees. And I just find it fascinating, having done this work for many years now is like, "We will protect one person at all costs." And part of what I would also say to leaders, and I coach them, is succession planning is so key. Because of Mita, and I've heard this, I don't know how many times, "Mita is indispensable. Can't do this job without Mita. The business won't run without her." Okay, really? Is, really, Mita doing all the work, or is she just taking credit for everyone else on the team?

Or, let's step into this space of, let's pretend Mita resigns tomorrow. What would the world look like? Do you know who's going to take over? That's the scary part. Because when we haven't done the work and the planning and the preparation, all of a sudden people become indispensable. And unfortunately, nobody's indispensable, particularly toxic leaders. Where there's smoke, there's fire. That's what I'll say, Sarah. Where there's smoke, there's fire, and so also watching for those patterns at work are really important.

Sarah Nicastro: This is such a fascinating one to me, because like I said, yes, there's always processes, right? And there's supposed to be systems in place to avoid this. But there are so many loopholes and there's so much room for feeling to get in the way of any objectivity for someone that maybe has a relationship. Or maybe doesn't have a relationship, but the reality inconveniences them in some way to just brush it off and say like, "Oh, okay. Well, yeah, but we've talked about it so it'll be fine or whatever." There's so many versions of how people get away with doing things that are harming the culture, the morale of the people around them, individual people that end up leaving the company because they don't want to fight the fight, all of that.

Mita Mallick: I think you said it beautifully at the beginning. You asked me about bravery and courage. Leadership takes bravery. What if we worked together for 30 years? I came to your son's wedding; you came to my daughter's wedding; we've done softball together; we've traveled together; we've built this business together. You're the president, and you start hearing rumblings of me bullying, of me harassing, and it's hard for you to hear it because you feel like you know me in a different context, and you can make 25 excuses of, "That's not the Mita I know. That's not how she shows up for me." And so there's bravery and courage to say, "But there is evidence of this individual, this leader, Mita, harming so many people." I need to sit and listen to this, and I need to take action.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think this one intrigues me. Okay. All right. But we don't have time to just-

Mita Mallick: Yeah, I know. She's like, let's move it along.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay, so the next one is number seven, "We need more people of color in leadership. Let's launch a mentorship program."

Mita Mallick: Yes. Drum roll, please. I have been over-mentored and under-sponsored in my career. I'll say that again: Over-mentored and under-sponsored in my career. And every time I say that, some people will come after me. I have had so many amazing mentors. I wouldn't be here, you wouldn't have invited me on this podcast; I'm here today because I continue to have great mentorship.

But here's the thing: Mentors are not the same as sponsors. When you think about a mentor, they could give me career advice. You and I could be peer mentors for each other, talking about how to do podcasts, giving me advice about work, all sorts of things. Sponsors are typically going to be someone who's two levels above you in an organization. They have access to big budget, P&L, they're in the room when the doors are closed and people are talking about your career. And yes, people are talking about your career and doors are closed. I never really realized this when I first started in corporate America. They have access to the C-suite. They might be in the C-suite. They know about roles that are coming up that haven't been listed, special projects, assignments.

And so, the question is, who's advocating for your career other than yourself? And your boss isn't always going to be advocating for you. I've had some great bosses and not-so-great bosses. So that's why career sponsorship is different than mentorship, because a career sponsor is actively helping you advance in your career. I feel like, God, so many times in my career, it's like, let's have the employee resource group launch a mentorship program. Let's talk to HR, let's do a mentorship program. Let's match some people.

It's like, no, that is not necessarily how a person's going to advance their career. I'm not saying that they won't. But I'm saying sponsorship, it's much more game-changing. Because you have people with power and privilege in the organization taking an interest in other individuals and actively saying they're going to help them advance their career.

Sarah, one of the things I think about is when I started my career in marketing, there was never a point in my career when someone early on sat me down and said, "If you want to be a chief marketing officer, here are the four things you need to do in the next few years. Here are the assignments you need. Here are the people you need behind you." No one sat me down to help me think about my career in that way. I just was kind of plugging along, "Okay, let me do this. Let me apply for this. Okay, maybe not do..." I didn't know, and I didn't grow up with parents who had done a marketing track in a corporate company, so I didn't have many people to help me figure it out.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. It's almost like sponsorship is mentorship with a lot more skin in the game. On their behalf, right?

Mita Mallick: It is. You have social capital, political capital.

Sarah Nicastro: Because it's like, mentorship almost gives the illusion of like, "Well, I can give you some good advice, but it's up to you what you do with it." It's also sort of the out of, "Well, we tried to mentor exactly this group of people, but they just didn't really do anything with it." So it's a very unbalanced-

Mita Mallick: I actually love how you just said that.

Sarah Nicastro: ... relationship. It's then if you say, "Okay, you're not mentoring this person, you're sponsoring them. So we expect you will work with them to help them achieve X, Y, and Z." Not, "It's on them, if you just give them a few words."

Mita Mallick: Absolutely. And I'll just say, if we're in an organization and you're my sponsor, I have to show up delivering value. You're not just going to sponsor me because I can have a sponsor. But I will continue to deliver value. I'll put points on the board. I will show you what I'm doing on my team and my part of the organization that can benefit you and also help you in your career. Right? Because here's the thing. Number one job of leadership is to create more leaders. And so, when you think about this idea of sponsorship, if you are going to sponsor, let's say, five women of color, and you have a goal as a C-Suite executive that you're going to help get them to the bench for the C-suite, that's your legacy. That's part of you being a great leader. People are going to look at you and be like, "Look at Sarah. It's amazing. Look at the talent that she helps sponsor, and look at their trajectory." It honestly then becomes reflection on you as well.

Sarah Nicastro: Right. Right. Yeah, that's really interesting. Okay. All right, so the next one is number eight. "Of course, we support women. We just extended maternity leave."

Mita Mallick: Yes. Oh, you're picking some good ones. Oh, they're all good, all 13, but these are good.

So, this is the notion that all women want to become mothers, and it actually ties back to a lot of the cultural stereotypes, the gender norms we grew up with in our homes. This idea that we extended maternity leave is enough for mothers that we check the box. And if you want to create an inclusive workplace for mothers, how much more work it takes.

I mean, you look at what's happened since the global pandemic. There are so many mothers who still can't get back into the workforce. They can't afford to in the US. It is a devastating what's happened to representation of women in the workforce in the US. And I'm surprised not enough people are screaming about it. I'm actually just exhausted from, I've lost my voice. Honestly, this data is alarming and startling.

It also, in this myth, I talk about gendered ageism. Women are never the right age. We're too young or we're too old. It's like that one year where we had the perfect moment, right? But gendered ageism shows up at the workplace a lot. It is about, "Mita looking too young or sounding too young," or, "I don't know if I'd put her in front of a customer or send her to that meeting," to "Mita doesn't have enough energy. I don't know if she could keep up with the pace here. It's really intense. She might be too slow for this place." You're like, "Huh?" Jokes about whether you're tech-savvy, whether you're on TikTok all the time. The intergenerational bias is real.

And so, those are also the things that we don't talk enough about in our workplaces, and it seems like it's the opposite for men on some level. Men aging doesn't seem to really, I don't know if it impacts their career as much. The research doesn't show that. Research shows that women over 50 have had a really incredible time getting back into the workforce since the pandemic, and so those are the conversations we have to talk about. We continue to hold men and women to different standards in our workplaces.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I was just thinking of an example of a courageous conversation. Or maybe not conversation, but objection. I was at an event at the end of April, and there was a gentleman there who was doing LinkedIn live interviews, and he asked me to come on, and so it was not at all scripted planned, nothing like that. But I had just moderated a panel discussion on women in service and creating more diversity, et cetera. And so that was kind of what the conversation centered on. But then he said, "Yeah, we really need more women leaders. Because women, they have that nurturing, motherly instinct, and we need..." And I'm like, "Ugh."

So it took me a second because I'm like, "Phew." This doesn't sit right with me, but we're on a live interview, and I'm trying to think in real time. I just said, I was like, "Listen, I think we need to be careful here because we're putting this nurturing, motherly label on women at large, and there's plenty of amazing women leaders that do not have or want to have a family like that." They're not one and the same. That does not absolutely make them good, and it does not make them not good. So that's not why we need more women at work.

Mita Mallick: No, absolutely. We need more kind and empathetic leaders, period.

Sarah Nicastro: And then the interview ended shortly after that.

Mita Mallick: So you're like, okay. Well, that's amazing. I'm glad you, that's not easy, so that's courage and action to interrupt bias on the spot.

Sarah Nicastro: It's the same thing you said. As much as I can, I try really hard to... It wasn't coming from a place of judgment or, like you said, shame. It was just, if you don't point it out, he wouldn't have thought about it.

Mita Mallick: Yes.

Sarah Nicastro: But I agree. I think the double standards, if you want to call it that, of women and men is absolutely crazy still in 2023. And while I certainly am a fan of supporting women who do choose to have a family and want to juggle that, because I myself have, in no way is that representative of women everywhere, and that shouldn't be the focus. So yes, I love that one as well.

Mita Mallick: Thank you.

Sarah Nicastro: And I think the point, too, about at least in our space, the people that listen to this podcast are constantly talking about talent shortages. We can't find enough people. You had a huge group of women that were forced to leave the workforce during the pandemic. We should be talking about that more. We should be doing more to look for... That's a whole talent pool that exists, that we could potentially find room and roles for if we put some effort behind it.

Mita Mallick: Absolutely, and don't ask about what the resume gap was. It was called the Pandemic. It was called the pandemic.

Sarah Nicastro: Right. Honestly, even if you do have women that took some time off, I would say assess them based on their ability, not on-

Mita Mallick: Assess them on their last experience. In the last few years, there's a lot of different reasons why people have taken leave. Focus on what they did most recently and their skills and what they bring to the table.

Sarah Nicastro: And again, if you have a rigorous and effective enough interview process, then you shouldn't need to be so concerned about where they were six weeks ago. Right?

Mita Mallick: Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: So, good. Okay, last one for today. Myth number nine, "These DEI efforts don't benefit me. My voice as a white man doesn't count anymore."

Mita Mallick: Yes. So I think there's two sides to this coin. The white men that I've worked with in my life, many of them do express that they have at some point feel shamed, named, blamed, demonized. And we talked about earlier, there are men in the headlines who have behaved badly; that's not all men, and they deserve to seek redemption and move on.

So in my role as the Chief Diversity Officer, if white men come to me asking questions, I have the space to answer those questions with grace and kindness, and to help educate and teach. And at the same time, white men listening need to understand that they do have a place in this work, because the world of work for everyone can't change without them. We need them there.

And so in that myth, I do talk about the business case for diversity, which is tired and old, I know, but it's still important. I believe inclusion's a driver of the business. You need diversity of representation in your workforce to come up with ideas you wouldn't have even dreamed of, innovation you wouldn't have dreamed of, serving communities who you've never reached. How are you going to do that if you don't have access to those lived experiences? In the US alone, we're sitting anywhere between 3.3 and 5 trillion dollars of spending power with the multicultural consumer, so anyone who says right now, "There's not growth out there," you're not looking in the right places. There's growth to be had.

And I also, in this myth, leave a very, very long action list of things that men can be doing to show up. Interrupting bias in the moment, taking parental leave and role modeling and taking all of it. If you're going to be asked to be on a podcast or panel, ask to see what other guests have been, and especially if you're on a panel and it's all white men, give up your spot, make recommendations. Are you paying your teams fairly and equitably? Don't wait for HR to do it. It's your job. So if you're shocked that women are paid less than men, oh my God, okay, great. Is that happening on your team? And you don't realize it. It's not HR's job; it's your job to look at the data and go talk to HR and say, "Hey, help me with this. I'm looking, I'm seeing this discrepancy."

So there's so many ways. And I think especially for white men in leadership roles, I asked them, "What do you want your legacy to be?" Right? "How do you want to leave this company different than you found it? And you have, gosh, so much power to do that. And it also reflects back on you as a leader and the impact you've made." So it's win-win for everyone.

Sarah Nicastro: I think, too, whenever someone has an emotional response to, like this statement, "My voice doesn't count anymore." Yeah, there's probably some percentage of that that comes from ego, but I think more so, it's fear-based. Well, what if all of this new diverse talent is actually better than me? And I guess what I think about that is your legacy will be so much bigger and more impactful and positive if you're a part of that change than if you resist it.

Mita Mallick: Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: So, it's going to happen whether any individual leader helps or hinders it. So you might as well see the value and play a part in something positive instead of being the one that's resistant.

Mita Mallick: So you're saying don't resist; be part of it.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah.

Mita Mallick: Don't resist. Be part of it. Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: Exactly, and part of the way they can do that is to read the other myths.

But real quick, one more last question and then we'll tell everyone where to find the book. What do you think sets apart leaders and organizations who are willing to do the work to improve inclusivity, create a positive culture, and those who are really lagging behind?

Mita Mallick: It's really all about whether your employees will stay or leave, to be honest. I mean, if we go back to what is inclusion; for me, what is inclusion? Inclusion is feeling that I'm valued, recognized, and seen at work in all the small and big ways that matter. And if you do that for me, Sarah, as a leader, that is the biggest retention tool. And I'm not going to walk away. Maybe for a hundred thousand. But certainly not for 10, 20. But no, there's no price to that.

As I talk about at the beginning of Reimagine Inclusion, I've been chasing inclusion all my life. And so when I find a place where I feel valued, seen and heard, you can't put a price on that. I'm not going to risk that to go somewhere else. And so that's really what it comes down to, and you will start to see a bifurcation in the market when it's an employee's choice. People will want to be like, "I've heard this was a great place to work. I've heard Sarah's an amazing manager. I know what their values are, and they stand for them, and they put them publicly on Instagram and they stand behind them. They don't slide back on them when it gets tough."

And so those are the things. And then the organizations that are silent, complicit. "We don't talk about these things. We don't have a DEI team," like Coinbase that went a few years ago. "We don't talk about politics." And I say to everybody, really interesting. When leaders say, "We don't talk about politics here." And I say, "Okay, it's the lens in which you view that is political. It's a lens of privilege. Because if I talk to my Asian friends, they wouldn't say that xenophobia is political. It's human rights. And anti-LGBTQ legislation, Black Lives Matter, antisemitism, Islamophobia, the hurt and harm physically that's being caused to historically marginalized communities, it's human rights.

Sarah Nicastro: And not taking a stand is taking a stand. Yeah, for sure.

Mita Mallick: Violence is complicit.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes, absolutely. I think that's really well put, and I think that the people as individuals and the companies that are out there, seen, heard having such good impact in this topic, it's not because they feel they have to be doing it, but because they really truly understand what you said, which is DEI is tied to how well we can innovate, how well we can meet the needs of our customers who are diverse. So there's this understanding of how important it is and belief in it. And I-

Mita Mallick: It's the center of the business. It's core.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely.

Mita Mallick: I see what you're saying.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, and I love that you're doing what you're doing to help more people see that.

Lastly, tell everyone when and where they can find the book.

Mita Mallick: Please pre-order on Amazon today: Reimagine Inclusion: Debunking 13 Myths to Transform Your Workplace. It's coming out October 3rd, but pre-orders matter a lot, so if you've enjoyed this conversation, Sarah, thank you so much. Please go check out the book.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely. Okay, so Reimagine Inclusion. Mita, M-I-T-A; Mallik with two Ls, M-A-L-L-I-C-K. Look it up on Amazon. Get your pre-orders in, and all the best with the book. I'm so happy to have you back. Thank you for coming again, and I love talking with you.

Mita Mallick: Thanks for the impact you're making with your podcast. I so appreciate you. Thank you.

Sarah Nicastro: Thank you. You can learn more by visiting us at futureoffieldservice.com. Be sure to subscribe to the Insider and signup for the next live tour. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more at ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

Field service technicians face a lot of unknowns when they report to work, as well as a lot of risks. Depending on which industry they work in, they may be repairing equipment in a cushy office or noisy factory; they could be working in a dangerous neighborhood, or in a house with an angry dog. Some technicians work in mines or climb tall towers or work to repair heavy, dangerous equipment.

And in addition to their own safety protocols, service technicians often must also follow safety protocols of their customers – which sometimes aren’t in harmony. Different service scenarios bring different safety needs, but no matter the working conditions safety is always critical.

According to Ken Chapman (an industrial psychologist and consultant) and Tony Orlowski (an engineer and executive at McWane, Inc.), authors of the book Safety Beyond the Numbers: A Path to Principled Leadership, workers are probably safer than they have been at any time in the past century, but additional improvements have been hard to come by. In their book, they note that workplace safety statistics have plateaued over the past few decades.

To make the workplace even safer, they say that companies need to embrace a culture of safety, rather than just focusing on compliance. That sounds a lot like many of the conversations we have had here at Future of Field Service around technology adoption and digital transformation, so I was pleased to have a chat with Tony, looking at some of the concepts in the book, from a field service lens.

In the book, you note that workplace safety statistics have plateaued over the last couple of decades. Can you put that into some historical context? How safe are we now compared to prior decades? Is the U.S. more or less safe than other similar countries?

Tony Orlowski: Workplace injury reduction has come a long way. In the 1920s and ‘30s, workplace fatalities occurred at an annual rate of approximately 15 per 100,000 population. By 1970, that rate was about cut in half, and by the 1990s it was cut by half again. Then, it essentially plateaued. The fatality rate has remained largely the same for 30 years while total injury rates have continued to decline. This tells us two things: We have not gotten to a point of diminishing returns where further improvement is impossible and, we are not effectively dealing with the issues that have the most impact on human lives. Technology is and has been responsible for most improvements in workplace safety over time, but its benefits now appear to be butting up against and limited by the human element of safety. That is where Safety Beyond the Numbers can help.

In field service, we have talked a lot about how compliance/punishment-focused approaches to new programs or new technologies are ineffective; you really want manager and employee buy-in. What are some ways that an ownership culture can impact workplace safety?

Tony Orlowski: We think referencing the work of Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman is a helpful way to understand the benefits of an ownership culture. Friedman once qualified the effectiveness of spending money in terms of whose money it was, and on whom it was spent. There are four specific ways, but only two apply here. One way is to spend your money on someone else, such as when you buy a gift for a friend on their birthday. In that case, you will be very careful about the amount you spend, but much less concerned about the quality of the gift you give (It is, after all, the thought that counts!) Another way is to spend your money on yourself. You will still be careful about how much you spend, but you will be much more concerned about getting exactly what you want. Compliance matches the first example. We are asking other people to expend their efforts for the results we want. As a consequence, their effort is always measured, and the results rarely better than “good enough.” Ownership, in contrast, allows you to spend your efforts on you, and on what you want, and we think the logical effect of that on the quality of safety outcomes is self-evident.

Leadership is key in safety (and other) initiatives, in order to get team members to take ownership of the process. But how do leaders themselves get there? In other words, for leaders that have not yet really taken safety as a moral imperative, rather than an issue of compliance, are there good ways for organizations to get their leadership team on the same page on this issue? Managers in some companies tend to view things through a prism of compliance, KPI measurement, box checking – but what you are proposing sounds like it requires a different viewpoint.

Tony Orlowski: It certainly does require a different viewpoint, and you are correct in that it is absolutely necessary for management to “get there” to be successful. Leaders must begin by understanding and embracing the moral imperative. This means choosing not to view business as primarily a profit-making enterprise, but as an economic engine for the common good. That is to say, if a business is perceived by society as not providing it value, then society (the market) will not support it. Therefore, the business will ultimately fail.

Profit remains essential and vital, but rather than being the goal, it is the result, and the “profit” is a measure of the good that is done by the business. From this viewpoint, a business is a moral institution. So, there is no logical argument for harming employees in the process of “doing good.” The validity of this logic lies in the difficulty of arguing the opposite; that the best path to business success is taking advantage of customers (net-negative societal value) and exploiting employees. Few business owners would say they believe in that logic, but the problem is they are not always sure they don’t believe in it. And when they aren’t sure, their leaders (managers and supervisors) are not sure, either. When ownership is ambivalent about the purpose of the business, their leaders’ default to what they are sure about: Profit, compliance to the law and following written rules. But when ownership is committed to a moral view of their business, then leaders and the rest of the team recognize it immediately. They get on board very quickly. It’s really as easy (and difficult) as that.

What are some key strategies organizations can take to improve safety, leveraging the idea that the human factor is a key area that many have not successfully addressed in the past? What are some successful ways that leaders have been able to achieve that type of organizational buy-in?

Tony Orlowski: If we are to break it down into a few statements, we would say: Treat people with respect; tell them, and yourself, the truth; be responsible for yourself and responsible to others. These are simple statements, but with profound implications for the business. If you think about them, you will discover many of these implications. Reading Safety Beyond the Numbers will give you even more to consider.

Field service is also somewhat unique in that technicians are usually working in an environment owned/operated by someone other than their own employers/leaders. How would you recommend that technicians take that culture of safety with them into environments owned by other people?

Tony Orlowski: An organization should never be willing to trade another person’s safety for profit, convenience or approval. That includes at another organization’s worksite. A business should make that clear to all employees, and to the clients they work with. In addition to communicating that expectation internally and externally, training, communication and preparation also help to avoid landing in an uncomfortable and potentially unsafe situation. But there will still be times when a person reaches a site and is unexpectedly thrust into an urgent and unsafe assignment. In that case, you must have developed a culture where it is safe for them to say, “I’m sorry I can’t do what you are asking. It’s unsafe, and I know you would not ask me to risk my safety in doing it. My company would not allow it either. Let’s see what we can change so I can be of help to you.” Any business lost by those statements are customers you almost certainly do not want.

Sarah welcomes Darren Elmore, GM of Service for RICOH New Zealand to discuss the major changes he sees in service delivery and how the company has embraced the possibilities of remote service.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service Podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today we are going to be getting an inside look or listen at Ricoh's mindset meets toolset approach to remote service. I'm excited to welcome to the podcast today Darren Elmore, who is the General Manager of Service for Ricoh, New Zealand. Darren, welcome to the Future of Field Service Podcast.

Darren Elmore: Thank you, Sarah. I'm glad to be here.

Sarah Nicastro: Great to have you. I had the lovely opportunity to hear Darren speak a couple of weeks ago, it feels longer than that, at Field Service Palm Springs. As I alluded to on social media for those of you that follow regularly, I was hoping to have him on here to talk a little bit more about some of the thoughts that he shared at the event. So thrilled to have you. Before we get into all of that, just tell everyone a little bit about yourself.

Darren Elmore: Okay, where to start? I guess like as you said, I am Darren, my current role is GM of Service at Ricoh, New Zealand. But you may pick up by the accent, I'm definitely not a native Kiwi. We immigrated out here from the UK back in 2005, so it's been about 18 years we've been out here now. But I suppose by, I think about the career then, it's about 25 years I suppose we'd call it the technology industry. And that's pretty much been with Ricoh and within the print industry, but all of that time. So I've held quite a few different roles over that period, but it's predominantly been in service starting off as a field service engineer and just taking on different roles as I've got to the level of the GM role that I'm in now. So it's been a fun ride so far.

Sarah Nicastro: Excellent. And when you were in Palms, was it your first time in Palm Springs?

Darren Elmore: It was, yes.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay.

Darren Elmore: First time on the West Coast as well, so yeah, that was really good fun.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Yes. Good. Well yes, when we chatted after your session, I said, "Did you came from New Zealand?" I think Maureen said it's the furthest they've had a speaker travel so far. So yeah. That's exciting. Hopefully you had a chance to enjoy it a bit. So we're going to get into some of the details of Ricoh's approach to remote first service. But before we do that, when you were opening your session, you talked about some of these, you said reasons, which is a nicer way to put it. I say excuses, but some of the things that companies often say or convince themselves of when they are not innovating and one of those, so I recapped those in an article last week. Sorry for the interruption. I recapped those in an article that I shared on social media last week. So we won't go through all of them, but one of them was around the fact that innovation can feel risky and it can feel risky to the business and all of the different people within the business, but it can also feel risky for an individual leader.

I really like this point a lot because you hear all these quotes, "No risk, no reward", or there's one, I don't know who said it, but it's "Only he who risks is truly free", which I really like. "Good things don't come from your comfort zone", all of these things. But they're all great words that don't necessarily do justice to the emotion behind embracing the real risks. So I was just wondering if you could speak to how you as a leader approach that? How do you work through the emotions that come with taking risk and how do you think it's impacted your career?

Darren Elmore: Yeah, well first off, I think it was important to address that as part of the talk in Palm Springs. I think it's one of those things you're trying to get across a message to a group of people, but potentially at the back of the head is like, "What does this mean for me and my reputation?" It's all well and good, the fact that you've done it, but if it fails, what does that mean? So I guess what I first want to do is explain the difference in what I call small eye innovation and big eye innovation. If you think of small eye innovation as just those incremental changes that we make and still they're absolutely essential for that just continuous improvement that we all still need to do. But then the big eye innovation is I suppose more reserve or I suppose the riskier projects.

Another one's that are more likely to produce that disruptive change that I spoke about as well and deliver it's accelerated growth for the organization because essentially that's what we're trying to do, but that's only if they succeed. And I guess this is where that whole idea around personal reputational risk comes in and it really brings me back. I did a master's in commercialization and entrepreneurship probably about five, six years ago now. And vividly, I still remember one of the articles that we were asked to read and it was a HBR article and it was a Wharton professor, George Estee was his name. And it was titled, "Is It Real? Can We Win? Is It Worth It?" And it was a real good article that just spoke about managing risk within an innovation portfolio. And so for me it really resonated with me and I did a lot more research around that. And it was really about how you minimize the risk in big eye innovation.

And so really it's about taking calculated risks. So for me, when a project, what we've delivered sort of first starts to grow length a little bit, it's about doing as much groundwork as possible before hitting the go button. It's about doing your research and really just trying to minimize the risk of failure because I think, as I said, if it's successful, the organization wins. If it fails, it's probably the person who loses. And that's really about your own personal brand and your reputation that you're putting on the line. So for me that was a real big factor in whether we actually do something or not. I mean, yes, it's about doing the research and really understanding whether this is something that will work, but it's also, I suppose about understanding what the risk is to yourself if it doesn't, and try and find that balance between the two as to whether it is something that you're really willing to, I suppose, put your reputation on the line by minimizing that risk as much as possible for it to be the success.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, no, I think that's really, really interesting. And I think the idea of minimizing risk by taking, not only taking the proper preparations, but doing the research and going into it, knowing as much as you can about different challenges that might occur, et cetera, is really smart. I think one point that's come up in some of my previous conversations is if you're looking at upper case eye innovation, you can't mitigate the risk, you cannot get rid of it. I see a lot of companies that are innovating but hedging bets when it comes to they don't want to go all in, right? They're trying to figure out how to curb that risk. And then you're putting yourself in the lowercase eye category essentially. I mean, you can't get the same outcome without that risk. And I think that's true from an organizational standpoint and also as individual leaders. You really have to be willing to place some bets on yourself in areas that you believe strongly in that can have an impact on the business. Yeah, so I think that's--

Darren Elmore: Definitely, it's almost part of the role of any leadership position. I mean, yes, we're talking about service leadership, but across any organization you're kind of in that role to make some of those big bets and let's say it's doing as much as you can to ensure that you are just minimizing that business as much as possible.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, it's interesting. I had an interview for another podcast a couple of days ago and I was talking to someone who is an author, has experience in the industry, has a consulting firm, et cetera, and he was very, very firm on the point that he believes innovation is a science, not an art. I have a really hard time agreeing with that fully. I'm not saying it's both, I think, right? But I think like anything it's not that cut and dry because I think a lot of it is maybe as we're talking through this and I'm thinking you can create the formulaic part in terms of how you want to approach innovation as a business, but you can't put a formula on the individuals that play a role or the leaders to commit to that process to have the courage to see that through. That's where I feel like a lot of the art is because it's about some of those human characteristics and that sort of thing. I don't think you can just plug anyone into that role and they'll succeed in carrying that through.

Darren Elmore: I'd agree. I think there's a component of it that is teachable. I think there is skillset that can be taught, but I'm also a firm believer that it actually comes as part of the culture of the organization. If you've got a leadership team that will support people in taking risks, and even if there is failure, as long as we are learning from failure and still moving forward, that also plays a big part I think, in the mentality of people about whether they're willing to take risk or not.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, for sure. Absolutely. I think that going back to what I mentioned earlier about seeing companies or hearing about companies that are really looking to hedge bets, part of that is the culture, and getting more comfortable with, like you said, it's about strategic risk and it's not about just throwing caution to the wind and making irrational or irresponsible decisions. It needs to be very calculated, very strategic, but when it's done that way, it's important and maybe even essential for businesses to be doing today so.

Darren Elmore: It's getting comfortable with being uncomfortable.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, for sure. Okay, so let's talk a little bit about the journey that you've taken. And so Ricoh has adopted a remote first approach. So just tell us a little bit about how the journey started, where you're at today, what's sort of the lay of the land?

Darren Elmore: Sure. Yeah. So I think as I've said before, I mean really this started probably four years ago now, kind of sitting in my office. I look across the contact center here and it's a blended contact center. So we've got principal teams and cloud support teams as well. And really it was kind of just looking at the resolution boards for our IT support team and it must have been a little bit of envy when you're looking at these guys and seeing around about 80% of all their service tickets are being resolved remotely. And that's a lot more to do with the products and services that they're supporting as opposed to ourselves in the print industry, which is obviously very asset heavy. But it really did start me thinking about what were the opportunities for ourselves on the print side to be able to emulate at least some of what they were doing in our IT services supporting.

At that time we were probably resolving about 25% of all our EM service requests remotely, which was still a fair number I think at the time, but I think it was something that we always thought we could do more. It was good, but it wasn't great. So like I said, that got us to thinking about how we could make some changes and just prior to COVID we'd started to look at even how we measure and incentivize our field service engineers. Could we get them to be looking at doing more remotely? They've got a lot of tacit knowledge in their heads and a lot of time you dispatch them to a job, they could pretty much look at it and go, "Oh, that model, that machine with that particular problem. I know what that is before I even look at it." So we started to encourage some different behaviors there about. Well, if you're pretty sure you know what it is and it's not something that requires physical adjustment or a part to be replaced, how about talking to the customer and see if we can resolve it over the phone?

So we'd started that path already and that's when COVID kind of hit. And as we know, it kind of changed not just the way that we work, but the world that we live in pretty much. And really then it was the feedback from the customers at the time was, "Hey, we've got this problem but we really don't want it to send anybody to site at the moment. Can you help?" I think that really for us then was the catalyst for the big change of the mindset that we really wanted to be able to talk internally and go, "This is what our customers are actually expecting of us now. This is probably the best opportunity that we'll get to really align with both our customer needs and our business requirements as well." And so it was during COVID that I really started to ramp up the tool set side of things as well.

So we needed a tool set that would be able to deliver in a remote first world. And so that really was, I suppose what's got us to the point where we are today and it's almost a massive paradigm shift from where we were, I suppose before we started this journey. It was just built into our industry. Customer makes contact, we dispatch an engineer, engineer goes to site, fix the machine. So to almost turn that upside down and go, "Well, actually we're going to start doing this very different." Those are definitely a few conversations about what if this doesn't work? So these are the things we've had to consider, but we definitely felt that that was the right time to actually really jump into it and really kick in. So we've just wrapped up FY 22 and so we've gone from where we were pre COVID at 25% of remote resolution.

We've just finished off the year of 42%. So we're seeing an increase of 17% over the last four years, which is fairly significant and we're still starting to see that move the dial just a little bit further. Even in the start of now at year '23, we're sitting around 47% year to date so far. So like I said, way back in the day we set this goal of probably not achieving what the IT support team were. I don't think that was ever going to be something that could be possible, but we've got a number in mind of 50% to see if we can get there and we're in touching distance now and so maybe we can get there and go beyond as well. But it's definitely, as you said, it is about how we bring the people on that journey and really start to talk to them about the mindset and the approach of how we actually interact with customers today, what the expectations are from our customers, and how do we get the two to meet together and use a relevant technology tool set to be able to execute on that as well.

Sarah Nicastro: So can you talk a little bit about the importance of that mindset/toolset balance?

Darren Elmore: Yeah, totally. So for me, this has been the biggest part of the change. And so I really believe they hold equal importance. You can create an amazing tool set for the teams to use, but if you're not talking them through what it is we're trying to achieve and probably more importantly the why of what we're doing, then you simply won't get the behavioral changes that you want to see and it just makes it a real struggle to actually execute on that strategy. So I think if I just put it simply that the mindset has to come before the tool set if you want the buy-in from the teams that are going to be using the tools, otherwise you are just investing in a tool set that metaphorically, it's just going to count the dust and you won't get the take-up that you need. Yeah, that's why I honestly believe that you can't do one without the other either is equal as each other.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, I think you would say, or maybe did say during your session that from a mindset perspective, COVID really fast-tracked that. Is that accurate?

Darren Elmore: Oh, most definitely. Most definitely. And like I say, what's the saying about how the crisis comes opportunity and I think for us, we had a little bit of time when we went into that first lockdown to really start to think at that time obviously everybody was pretty much working from home. There was only essential businesses that we were still providing services to. And so it really gave us that opportunity to hit the reset button and accelerate what it was that we were already starting to think about maybe six, 12 months prior to that. And so yeah, we just had to see that as the time for us to really turn our sport model upside down and really shake things up and yeah, as we talk about some calculated risks, but really think that paid off for us customers as well.

Sarah Nicastro: So for a company listening to this that for whatever reason didn't sort of take that opportunity presented by those conditions to put something like this in place but wants to do so now, can you share any advice on either side, the mindset side or the tool set side that you've learned that people could keep in mind as they're going down this path?

Darren Elmore: I think on the tool set side, it's definitely a case of take off the blinkers. I think if you look only within your own industry as to what's going on, you are quite limited in understanding what the possibilities are. I think you really have to cast the net wide and look across all service industries because you'll see things that go. I can see what they're doing there. Doesn't work exactly in our industry, but that's adaptable for something that we could do. It just gives you a greater breadth of understanding of what is available. So I think the first thing is don't limit yourself to what you know. On the mindset, definitely. I think that is such an important piece to ensure that the messages are getting down to those who are doing the work. At the end of the day, they are the most important people, they will be delivering the strategy for you.

So that is the absolute key part of the mindset change is the communication piece. It has to be clear, it has to be understood and it has to be accepted by those who are doing the role. So huge fan of Simon Singh and finding purpose and why into a lot of the things that we're doing, especially when it comes around to change and how we go through change management. And so getting the buy-in and the understanding of why we're making changes is really the thing for me that gives you not just the acceptance, but I think also from the field service teams and remote resolution teams who are doing the work. The understanding that what this is adding not just to the business but also to the customers and also to themselves. It's the triple win the way that we've approached it.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, I always think about when we talk about remote service or even automation in other forms, to some degree I think it tends to cause or can cause fear among the frontline that well, if they're trying to turn all of these visits to remote visits, then what does that mean for my job? I think it's an important point to think about because I mean for most organizations today, they don't have enough field workers, so there's not enough labor to go around to do the work that needs to be done. So no one should really be fearing for their job.

It doesn't mean that what it looks like day to day may not evolve or change, but I don't think many organizations are in a situation today where they're looking to increase automation or increase remote resolution so that they can get rid of a percentage of their workforce. They're doing it so that they can work smarter and be able to take on more work with the talent that is available them today. So I think that's one of the points of concern that might cause some resistance or some emotion that companies need to be sure to address with people.

Darren Elmore: Yeah, I mean we're in a position at the moment where we've got different pillars of our business that are growing at huge rate. So around our connecting collaborate, our cloud services, our meeting room technology. So for us as well it's allowing us to take on some of the support elements for these other business units as well and saying we've already got the labor in place, we're working in a way that's different, so maybe even what those other teams think we do at the moment. So it gives them an insight into the possibilities that we can do adjacency services internally as well, which has the added benefit of demonstrating to our field service teams that there's a wider scope of products and services that we can cross scale upscale and get you guys thinking a little bit differently about your careers as well. So these are all the things that have come out as a result of some of the actions that were taken. So it's been hugely positive across the whole business, really.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Now I know that mean it's still a fairly new journey for you and for Ricoh, but you're further along certainly than some if not many. I do think that adopting a remote first approach is something that presents a lot of potential to organizations to really, like I said before, just work smarter, you shared some of the results that you've seen so far and it's significant. So if you think about where do you see this heading for Ricoh and for others in the industry over the next one to three years. How do you view the potential that exists with remote capabilities?

Darren Elmore: Honestly, Sarah, I think we're right at the precipice of some amazing things at the moment. I think with what we're seeing, the exponential rise of AI large language models, then I think it's the opportunity is not just for remote resolution, but also for customer led self-service journeys to really be improved and it's going to provide both service providers and customers with a level of support that I don't think we've ever seen before. So yeah, I think I truly believe this is probably the most exciting time to be involved in service right now. There's so much change taking place and so many opportunities for organizations who really just want to challenge the status quo, challenge themselves, challenge their own organizations and just begin shifting some of those really long held paradigms of what service traditional looks like. So yeah, I think we're in certain amazing time right now for where the possibilities are for service support to go and that definitely includes remote first as a service strategy.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, I agree. You mentioned earlier the increase that you've seen in remote resolution and you shared some additional thoughts at the event around, not thoughts, data at the event around how that translates into savings for Ricoh and what that looks like, which is really significant. But the other thing you touched on is that there's a sustainability component to this as well. So this is something that I think today people don't talk about as much as the impact to the bottom line or the impact on customer experience, et cetera, but I think that conversation will continue to become more and more important. So is that something that factored into this decision or is it something that's just sort of an added bonus? How do you look at that sustainability piece?

Darren Elmore: I think it crosses a little bit of both. It was a known entity that it would have an impact on our sustainable credentials, but I guess it's also been a nice to have as well. Ricoh globally is a very sustainable organization. It's committed to a 63% production in direct greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 when compared I think to the 2015 levels. And so by us reducing the number of onsite service visits that we complete, we're actively contributing to this goal as well. So I think the environmental credentials that come with this are definitely something that we speak about internally and it's also a really good piece for us to talk about externally to not just our customers, but potential customers as well.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. So we've talked about the sustainability piece, we've obviously from a customer perspective, they're getting faster resolution when you're able to help them remotely. And then we talked about the increase in remote resolution. Is there anything else that we should talk about from the standpoint of what you've achieved so far?

Darren Elmore: Definitely, I think one of the things that we're missing at the moment is the customer satisfaction. We've seen some amazing results in our CSAT scores as well. We conduct surveys, post completion of the service request. And in the free text field, we've had some really good comments. I remember one not too long ago where we had an end user saying how great it was that they felt they were part of the solution, they were able to actually take part in the resolution, made them feel like you got a typical person when they weren't really. But again, that's us leveraging off the tool set and technology that we're able to do things that five years ago just weren't possible. So yeah, we're definitely seeing, you've mentioned it's an increase in our device uptime, so we're optimizing productivity for customers as well. And like I say, when we're getting the feedback where they're actually enjoying being part of the solution as well, then that's a huge bonus.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, yeah, that's awesome. It's always good when you're getting positive comments in the freeform section, right? Okay. So you mentioned Darren at the end of your session in Palm Springs, you said, "As a sales organization, our CEO has never talked more about service than he does today." And I wanted to ask you about that because I'm curious why do you feel that is and what does that tell you about the business today?

Darren Elmore: I think many organizations across a lot of different industries, at Ricoh we operate in on the print side in a very commoditized market. So it's less about the product and much more now about, I suppose, service that's being delivered and how that becomes the differentiator.

So I really believe that then the onus is on service leaders to demonstrate both internally and externally that they have the opportunity to be the difference and promote service in a way that just maybe hasn't been thought of before. So I guess we've almost kind of come full circles as the way to do this is to take those calculated risks, look at how within your organization you can deliver the big eye innovation and these are the things that will capture the attention of those at the top when we start to talk about, "Well, here's something different that you may have not seen before." And it starts then to have some service led conversations inside the company, which then helps with our sales teams as well, famous customer, did you know? And that's something that again, is a differentiator so we can start to lead with things that are a little bit different as opposed to the product itself.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, yeah, it's really cool. To look at the progression and seeing service organizations struggle to feel that they even have a voice within the organization to it being something that you say the CEO has never talked more about, it's a really cool progression and certainly representative of the opportunity that exists so. Now you mentioned you started as field technician and now you're the GM of service for the organization. So what would you say is the biggest lesson you've learned in your own journey?

Darren Elmore: I think for myself, having I suppose done the job, if you like being there, done that at the front lines, and for me, it's just about being really clear in the communications around our strategy. We've got to have a healthy innovation pipeline and just bring your people on the journey with you. But I think definitely what I've learned over time as well, it's about not settling, but just good enough. What's that saying about if you shoot for the moon and even if you miss your land amongst the stars, we've got to be looking to aim high. So I think once you kind of promoted that high performance culture within the division or within the organization, you really get people thinking differently as well. I think that that's what leads to some of those, what if kind of conversations and having the ability to think about it and go, "Yeah, we could do that," is something that you need to take on. So yeah, I think that's it. Just about being clear in what it's that you wanting to achieve, make sure it's communicated really well and aim for themselves.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. And to the point you made earlier when we were talking about the tool set part, you mentioned the importance of looking outside of your own industry. I think that's also important when you think about innovation and just these thinking big and different ideas, different food for thought. You shouldn't just be looking to what is our direct competition doing and how can we one up them by an inch. You know what I mean? You should be looking outside of your own competitive set for those new ideas and those what if could we, you know what I mean? Those are conversations that they shouldn't just be shot down, they should be embraced and you never know what you might come up with if you as a leader and encourage your teams to think outside of the box and to bring those ideas in. I think that's a really good point.

Darren Elmore: Yeah. There's a great example I can give you there again. Here, our national carrier in New Zealand now on global scale. It's a very small airline, but they win lots of awards. And when I was studying, no, again, what makes them different? When they were looking at innovation, they weren't looking within the airline industry about what's new and what's the best. They were looking at organizations like Disney and the best hotel chains in the world, but then it was all about not the flight, it's about the customer experience. And so where do you go to find out where's a really good customer experience, hotels and theme parks?

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah.

Darren Elmore: That's the job. So yeah, I think that's a great example of looking outside your industry to see what is going on and what it is we want to achieve, but don't get blinkered by the industry that you live in.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, really good stuff. All right, Darren, well I appreciate you coming on and sharing with us. So thank you for that. It was a pleasure to meet you in Palm Springs. Pleasure to have you on the podcast and I hope to stay in touch.

Darren Elmore: Sarah, it's been an absolute pleasure talking to you today. Now it's always great to have conversations with people who are passionate about both service and innovation, so I've really enjoyed this time. So yeah, thank you for asking me to join you on the Future of Field Service Podcasts.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely. Thank you. You can find more by visiting us at futureoffieldservice.com. While you're there, be sure to sign up for the Future of Field Service Insiders so that every other week you will have our latest content delivered to your inbox. You can also take a look at the remaining events we have left on the 2023 Future of Field Service live tour schedule, and register for the one nearest you. The Future of Field Service Podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more at ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

I shared on LinkedIn recently that I had a really tough time traveling from the U.S. to London. The experience was so poor that my gut reaction was to take “pen” to paper and document a tirade of each and every misstep. Thankfully, I knew better and waited until I was home, well rested, and had thought clearly about what had happened to write this because while I’ve no intent to blast the airline, I do think the experience is representative of an overall question service organizations really need to consider. That question is, how do we ensure we are balancing the truly impressive capabilities of automation with the irreplaceable human touch when it is indeed needed?

Let’s back up a step and I’ll share a bit of what happened before I get to the assessment and fundamental question it begs. I almost always fly United and was flying from Cleveland, Ohio (the large airport nearest me) to Newark and on to London Heathrow. We departed Cleveland 10 minutes late but made that time up in the air, landing in Newark on time. However, there was no gate for us to pull into so we sat on the runway for an hour and ten minutes until we could de-plane. By the time we did, I’d missed by 10:00 PM flight to London. I saw there was an 11PM flight, so I raced to the gate for that flight to see if I was able to take it – only to be greeted by an incredibly unfriendly (rude) employee.

I did get a seat on that flight, and we boarded around 10:30PM and pulled away from the gate right on time. I was in a different cabin than what I’d booked but was just happy to be en route. After a few minutes of taxiing, however, we returned to the gate and the pilot said there was a light that indicated a mechanical issue that needed to be checked. It took quite some time for that to happen and by then there was an issue that once we were in the air the crew would time out. Long story short, we sat at the gate from shortly after 11PM until 4:30 in the morning at which point they cancelled the flight altogether. I went to a nearby hotel United offered to sleep for a couple of hours and regroup, having to juggle plans for work that I had in London for Monday. I had been rebooked onto an 8PM flight for Monday night, which was the next available, but by the time I woke up after a two-hour nap that flight had already been cancelled.

At this point I was losing faith that I would make it out of Newark on United on time, knowing at this point I had missed not only Monday’s work in London but also wouldn’t be arriving until sometime Tuesday with the Live Tour happening on Wednesday – so very little buffer. I won’t go into all of the details of the many hours I spent talking with United Monday morning, but I ultimately decided to fly Virgin Atlantic out of JFK because I had more confidence in that route. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to personally collect my luggage from United at Newark, so I had to have them return it to my home and leave for a 12-day trip to the U.K. and Paris without any luggage. That’s the overall synopsis (I should also mention that my return flight home from Paris, also United, was also delayed by two hours – but luckily, I made my connection).

How Do We Balance Automation and Human Touch?

Now, that brings me to my less emotional assessment, so thanks for bearing with me! What I want to start with is the positive, which is United’s automated service through their app (and text if you have text enabled). Over the last couple of years, it has become truly impressive – the app will always alert you to gate changes, delays, arrival times, etc. faster than an employee or in-airport signage. It proactively works on fixing any issues, so for instance if it does look like you’ll miss a connection, it offers you next available flights and confirms your seat for you very proactively and reliably. I even had a time not long ago that my luggage somehow wasn’t loaded onto my connecting flight, and when we landed, I received a text apologizing and asking me to schedule delivery via the app – less than three minutes later, I had the claim created with delivery of the bag set to my home.

I’m a pretty skeptical person, so I’ve really tested the app’s reliability – I remember on my way to Field Service Connect in Austin last year, my flight leaving Houston was cancelled and I didn’t trust the app so joined the line of dozens, maybe hundreds of customers waiting to speak to the on-site service staff. After more than an hour in line, they literally told me to use the app – and when I did, I realized I could’ve sorted things out in about ten minutes had I started there. From that point on, I have used the app exclusively and it has proven to be accurate, proactive, and reliable.

This is a real-world example of how powerful automated service can be using today’s technology – and kudos to United for investing in keeping customers informed and ensuring the app can help improve resolution time when issues occur.

Here’s the issue, though. When there’s an issue that does demand human intervention, in my recent experiences, the customer service is horrible. And this is an even more significant problem with the automation in place, because when a customer is calling in or waiting in line because they can’t resolve what they need to via the very capable app, they are probably quite frustrated and stressed. This is where human touch and empathy become incredibly important, something that seems to be truly lacking among the staff today. I had no fewer than ten interactions during this recent situation and each person treated me as though what was happening was my fault – absolutely no apology, empathy, or understanding. In fact, many of the employees argued facts with me or were downright rude. It was truly unacceptable.

So, this begs the question to me of how we balance the really compelling increase of automation without losing the irreplaceable value of human touch when it is needed. There’s so much you can accomplish using United’s app today – and that’s really a helpful and convenient thing. But when you do need help beyond that automated service, the experience is truly subpar, and I think that’s not only a missed opportunity for them but a very important balance for all companies looking to increase automation to be aware of and work to achieve.

What do you think?

Sarah shares a synopsis of the topics discussed at the Future of Field Service Live Tour 2023 stop in Paris on May 24th.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro.

I am coming to you from Paris. We just wrapped our third stop on the Future of Field Service live tour for 2023 in Paris. We had a great day yesterday, a wonderful lineup of speakers. We had a smaller group with us at this event, which was really nice because everyone had an opportunity to really engage with one another, get to meet one another, have some really good breakout conversations in addition to our interview sessions, and I think people really enjoyed that opportunity. I had one person tell me that it felt like we created a Field Service family in Paris, which was really nice to hear. So, I just want to share some of the highlights of the sessions yesterday, what came up at the event, and some of the points that I thought were really interesting.

So, our first session of the day was with Sebastien Garric, who is the Director of Service for France at GEA Group. And Sebastian joined to talk about GEA's service transformation and three major components of that, which is the importance of mindset, customer centricity, and the role that plays, and also remembering to prioritize and continually work on operational efficiency. So, GEA is a manufacturer who, like many, is seeing the massive opportunity to focus more on service within its value proposition. But obviously for a company that has a strong manufacturing history, that's where the importance of the mindset shift and the change management comes in.

One of my favorite things that Sebastien said is advice someone gave him in his career, which is that we should welcome problems and look at them as opportunities rather than a nuisance or something to avoid. And I think that that's a really good point, and one that particularly when you think about some of the major topics in service today that we often refer to as challenges, they are indeed opportunities for companies to get a bit more creative and innovate, and I love that attitude. So that was great. Next up, we had Ravichandra Kshirasagar, who is the Vice President for Digital Buildings and Global Commercial at Schneider Electric.

So Ravichandra joined me to talk about how Schneider is re-imagining the role of the field technician for 2025, 2030 and beyond. So we started our conversation really talking about how he manages his time to be sure that he's meeting the present day needs of the business, but also carving out this time and making sure his teams are carving out time to think about what will 2025 look like, which as he mentioned will be here before we know it, but also 2030 and really starting to put some steps in place today to be preparing for how quickly things are changing and what that will look like.

So obviously he's in charge of digital, and Schneider is really, really focused on helping its customers achieve more sustainable buildings. And they have a really exciting and I think compelling mission for their workforce to be a part of. But internally, we talked a lot about how the field technician's role will change based on technologies that are available for increased automation and a lot more remote service, as well as as the organization continues to look at outcomes that can provide to its customers, how that might change some of the roles that have traditionally been filled by one field technician. So one of the things that I really liked that Ravichandra brought up is that they've actually not too long ago changed the name from field technician to service technician. That seems like such a small thing, but when you think about this idea of leveraging more automation and more remote capabilities, it's thinking ahead a bit about the fact that that role soon or even in some areas today, will not be completely a field role.

So we may have people that split time between an office or even working from home and then going onsite part of the time. So I think simple shifts like that, they sound like, "Oh yeah, totally." They require a lot of thinking ahead and also thinking about what is representative of the role today, what will fit into the future. So we had some really good conversations about how they're thinking of the evolution of that role. And I think that that initial step of changing the name from field technician to service technician, Ravichandra also spoke about how from a digital perspective, as the volume of data that they are collecting and using with their customers increases, they've had to bring in a lot more analysts to really work with that data and make it insightful for the employees that are interacting with customers and for the customers themselves, which we know will certainly be an increasing need as well.

So really great conversation, really good insight into how we can both focus on what we need to be doing today, but also be thinking ahead because we know things are moving quite rapidly. The next session was with Marie Cobessi, who is the Director of Aftersales Service Projects and Transformation at Fnac Darty. So Marie is responsible for essentially determining in service which transformational projects the company will prioritize and decide to take on, and then making sure that they are achieving those objectives in a way that aligns with the strategy for each. So one of the things Marie brought up that I think everyone loved, again, quite simple in nature, but incredibly effective and impactful. Marie spoke about the process that they use for the prioritization of transformation projects, which they refer to as the four Cs. So the first C is customers, the second C is employees, but the French word for employee starts with C.

The third is cost, and the fourth is carbon footprint. So those are the different pillars that the company looks at every time it's evaluating which transformation projects to prioritize its investment and time in next. And I saw a lot of people taking notes and thinking like, "Oh yeah, that's great." And also some folks that shared which of those they sort of currently tend to focus on and why it might be important to take a look at all of those. So Darty not long ago introduced a subscription model to its customers for service. So the company services all sorts of different home appliances. And traditionally that's been done on a warranty basis or I believe also on a per repair basis. And so moving to this subscription model has led to a lot of growth for the organization. And Marie also talked about how to navigate that, but it's a value proposition that has positively impacted the customer base, the organization.

And then we did talk quite a bit about the impact that it's had on carbon footprint, on the ability to extend the lifecycle of products and therefore reduce waste and improve reuse and remanufacturing, things like that. She talked about the focus that the organization has on continuing to evolve from a customer experience perspective, but also from a employee perspective, some of the areas of opportunity that they have to further improve the tools and processes that the field technicians use so that it makes their daily lives a bit easier. And then she also spoke about the program that they have in place, an initiative that they've put in place to bring in new technicians to put them into a training program and to use that as a way to increase their talent pool. And then Marie and I also had a good conversation about her being a woman in service.

So we had two female speakers at the Sydney event, but both, one was an author, one was a consultant, so not necessarily service leaders themselves. Marie was the first woman on stage from that perspective. So that's kind of representative of where the industry is. And so we talked about what that has meant for her. She actually spoke about how she sees that as a positive thing and how in her mind, one of the things that we need to do to get more gender diversity in the industry is to make sure that we're showing and showcasing the ability to have work-life balance. And we talked a little bit about what that means and what that might look like, and it was a great conversation. Next up, we had a session with Jan van Veen, who is the Founder and Managing Director of moreMomentum, which is a community for service organizations in the manufacturing space specifically.

And Jan and I spoke about the gap that lies between the potential of service innovation and some of the reality of where we are today. So we talked a bit about what to prioritize and how, exactly far should we be looking ahead. For organizations that are thinking more about incremental innovation, what could that look like? For companies that want to focus more on disruptive innovation what should that look like? We talked about some of the differences between focusing on digital transformation, service transformation, and business transformation. And Jan brought up some great points, I think challenged me on some of my thinking, which I really enjoyed because as I mentioned to the audience, I really love having the opportunity to learn in these conversations as well. So that was really nice, and we were able to speak with some of the folks in the crowd about those points and compare notes and have a good discussion.

So that was really cool. And the last session of the day was with Emmanuelle Duchesne and Stephane Dabas, who are both from Culligan. So Emmanuel is the customer service director, and Stephan is the IT director at Culligan. So that session was really talking about how to create a productive and collaborative business and IT partnership that can deliver on the customer and employee focused objectives. So it was a really fun session because I didn't realize that Emmanuelle and Stephane had worked together for over a decade, and they have a really fun rapport and relationship. So I joked with them after saying it was kind of like a old married couple. They were finishing each other's sentences. They were kind of poking fun at one another. It was really fun.

But they had some really good perspective on what the relationship or really lack thereof between the business and IT looked like when they started with Culligan 10, 12 years ago and how it's evolved over time, why it's evolved and what it needs to look like today, and the recognition that these technology initiatives really need to be business led and what a productive relationship looks like in their organization. So we talked about the importance of building trust. Obviously we talked about the prioritization of needs. We talked about business case. We talked about how to navigate differences of opinion. We talked about the fact that Culligan is a highly acquisitive business, so they're often bringing in other organizations to their IT ecosystem. And we spoke about what that looks like and how they determine the path as they bring those companies on to what technology to leverage, et cetera. One of the things that came out of that session that again, I think everyone enjoyed is that Emmanuel shared that they have what they call a CX day where they have every function of the business.

So finance, HR, I believe every function of the business, spend time with a frontline employee either in their call center or in the field. And the goal of that is to really make sure that everyone understands that customer facing role and what service looks like in practice and has an appreciation for that. And again, this was one of the points that I saw everyone in the room writing notes on. I had a couple of conversations after that session about how impactful that could be, not only from creating that awareness among the different functions of the business, but also in the sense of making those frontline workers feel valued and appreciated and important because you're acknowledging how critical their role is and how you want everyone in the organization to be aware of what they do. So I thought that was such a good takeaway.

We had some breakout sessions where we talked about some of these different topics in small groups, which were really interesting, gave everyone an opportunity to pick each other's brains, get to meet one another. We had some time over lunch and at the end of the day to socialize and network, and all in all, it was a great day. From the UK and Paris events we do plan to try and release as many of the sessions as we can here on the podcast, so that way you'll have an opportunity to hear more of what was shared in detail. So stay tuned for that.

In the meantime, stay connected with us at futureoffieldservice.com. You can sign up for the insider, which will deliver a recap of the latest content to you every other week in your email inbox. We also have three events left in the live tour. We have Minneapolis on June 15th, Dusseldorf June 21st, and Stockholm September 7th. So if you can make it to any of those locations, would love to have you be a part of our community. Events are free to attend for service leaders, and you can view the agendas and register for any of those events on the website. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can Learn more at ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

By Sarah Nicastro, Creator, Future of Field Service

As we look to determine not only what the role of the service workforce of the future looks like, but how we’ll fill those roles with talent hard to come by, we’d be remiss not to factor in the contract workforce. Some companies have already embraced the contract model, even exclusively. Others have been hesitant to do so for a variety of reasons. But recent trends discussed here may weigh into your strategy.

There are many factors at play: aging workers, a Covid-sparked recalibration among workers when it comes to what they want out of a job, and preferences of younger talent that want a lot more flexibility. According to a recent study from on-site talent management platform Field Nation and research firm Radius, one impact of these factors is an increase in talent preferring an independent contractor role.

I recently had a chat with Mynul Khan, founder of Field Nation, about the trends they are seeing in the IT services sector. Their recent study found that larger numbers of IT service professionals are opting to become independent contractors – 98% of respondents said they preferred independent contracting or a hybrid set-up to a traditional full-time position. (You can download the study here.)

Q: People may think of IT as a market that might face less recruiting challenges than other skilled trades. What is driving the shortage of field service techs in the IT sector?

Mynul Khan: Finding and retaining skilled labor is a significant challenge across all industries, from manufacturing and construction to insurance and high tech. Some reports estimate an industry-wide deficit of 3 million workers across the skilled trades over the next five years, and according to Service Council research, 50% of field service organizations currently face a shortage of resources to meet service demand. And the IT field services profession is no exception.

Today the IT field service industry has more work than ever before, with digitization of customer experience growing exponentially, and not enough skilled professionals who can do the work. That’s what we have been seeing and hearing from the industry consistently over the last couple of years.

There are three major trends in the market that are present, creating that perfect storm, and here for the long-term contributing to the labor shortage crisis.

The first is often referred to as the “Silver Tsunami” which means there is an aging population in field services with one-third of workers 50 years of age or older. This finding is consistent with Service Council’s field engineer survey results – 50% of IT techs are 45 years or older. Whether IT, electricians, plumbers, carpenters, you name it, this issue is plaguing trade workers across the market and the entire community.

Another trend is low unemployment sitting at just below 2% (CompTIA). There are options for people of all demographics to choose in terms of the work they do. Why they are not choosing to get into the IT field services business is not something covered in our research but my experience and in hearing from technicians and customers reveal there are a few things that could drive support – creating more flexibility and autonomous work environments, which is what we heard from the independent contractor study, and the importance of mentorship to drive community and skill-building.

And finally, this unprecedented boom in technology deployment. Massive amounts of technology is being deployed everywhere from retail to home to offices to restaurants to warehouses. And all of these require an expert to install, maintain and refresh, and devices connected to the network. Then comes the infrastructure work with cabling networks and connecting it all to back-office servers.

What’s encouraging is the growth and preference to be and to stay an independent contractor for years to come. From retirees lending their skills to side hustles to professionals choosing to contract as their full-time career, our study found workers of all backgrounds are looking for something that works for their lifestyle, with one-third sharing their desire to stay working for 11-plus years. Embracing a new way to think about your labor model and aligning to your organizational goals is the only way to get ahead of competition and deliver profitable growth.

Q: What has made contract work more appealing for the technicians?

Mynul Khan: According to our recent State of Independent Contracting in Field Services Report, flexibility (36%) and control and autonomy (27%) top the list for technicians in 2023. While income is still a consideration (20%), having the ability to control their work and life, create a schedule that works for them and their families, is at the heart of why field service workers are choosing independent contracting. That insight is critical when designing roles for today’s workforce.

More importantly, these independent IT field service professionals are increasingly satisfied with their decision. 82% say they are satisfied or highly satisfied with their work.

Q: What about the downside? How are techs grappling with things like benefits/insurance, reliable income, and business management?

Mynul Khan: Just like with any role, these are all considerations for independent contractors. Unpredictability in income and schedule were shared as the most difficult things about being a contractor. In some ways, this is the other side of the coin in that flexibility and having autonomy are the top reasons to be an independent contractor. This, along with healthcare, retirement and other benefits, in particular, are something to consider when making the shift to this kind of work. These are difficult issues to work through and our commitment is staying engaged in the conversations with key trade associations, our technicians and customers.

In terms of reliable income, the great thing about working as an independent contractor is you can pick up work where and when you want. These people can also work with more than one client at a time, mitigating risk. If one client cuts budget and goes in a different direction, the contractor may have a couple other clients to lean on. Some of these independent contractors have several sources of revenue, too – IT and field service work is just one stream.

Q: For businesses hiring these contractors, what are some of the key advantages? What makes the use of contractors or a blended workforce more or less appealing?

Mynul Khan: In some ways, companies are being forced to adopt a blended workforce model. IT spend as a factor of revenue has increased 40 to 50% since 2019 (according to research and advisory firm IHL group), which is driving businesses to find new ways to ensure schedule flexibility and widespread availability of IT professionals across locations.

For the businesses that are ahead of the curve, they’re already recognizing that a blended workforce helps them meet temporary workload needs, increases productivity, provides a reliable solution for completing tasks, and keeps costs down. And maybe the most important benefit to hiring contractors right now is the ability to access specialized skills and hard-to-hire talent, nationwide.

However a field service leader decides to divvy up the work is really up to them, but it starts with taking a deep dive into how they can achieve their goals in the most effective and efficient way possible.

Q: How are independent technicians connecting with employers? What technology is helping make this transition easier for businesses and contractors?

Mynul Khan: Increasingly, contractors are turning to digital labor platforms (full disclosure: Field Nation is one such platform). The availability of these digital labor platforms has increased fivefold in the last 10 years, and businesses have taken notice.

According to MBO Partners’ State of Independence in America Report 2022, 41% of independent contractors who provide services to businesses reported finding work on labor platforms, up from 15% in 2015 and just 3% in 2012.

Like anything, being an independent contractor has both tremendous benefits and a few challenges. Finding what works for you is most important. Independent contractors are passionate about their craft, spending time in both the front-end and back-end tasks – from selling and marketing to invoicing and collecting. Over time this becomes burdensome and takes away from the work and quality outcomes they could be bringing to businesses. That’s why on-demand labor platforms are so enticing.

Q: Are there particular market conditions that might change the dynamics of the demand for contract work, either tipping the industry toward more freelancers, or pulling them back toward full-time positions?

Mynul Khan: Market conditions are constantly shifting. So, it’s tough to say what, specifically, would tip the industry one way or another. However, I do think it will continue to tip toward companies using more independent contractors. The average contingent labor share of enterprise workforces is expected to increase from 28% today to 33% in 18 months, and 36% in 5 years, according to the Contingent Labor Imperative Report.

While this shift in labor model is growing, the reality for companies that are moving from W2s to independent contractors is feeling secure in knowing quality outcomes for customers is unchanged which means trust in a tech representing their company like an employee would is critical.

Live Tour 2023: Düsseldorf Highlights

Live Tour 2023: Düsseldorf Highlights

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

Future of Field Service Top 10 of 2023

A Service Transformation Deep Dive with Electrolux

Bringing Service into the DNA of a Historically Product-Centric Business

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

What Are The Opportunities for Digital Twins in Field Service?

What Are The Opportunities for Digital Twins in Field Service?

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Are XLAs the Key Metric You’re Missing? Part Two

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Live Tour 2023: Minneapolis Highlights

Live Tour 2023: Minneapolis Highlights

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

What Lies Between Workplace Inclusion Intent and Impact?

What Lies Between Workplace Inclusion Intent and Impact?

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Are XLAs the Key Metric You’re Missing? Part Two

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Debunking the Myths that Impede Workplace Inclusion

Debunking the Myths that Impede Workplace Inclusion

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Are XLAs the Key Metric You’re Missing? Part Two

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Q&A: How Field Service Leaders Can Encourage Safety Culture

Q&A: How Field Service Leaders Can Encourage Safety Culture

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Are XLAs the Key Metric You’re Missing? Part Two

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

Most Recent

From IoT to GenAI and Beyond: Advice for Building Intelligent Connected Solutions

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service

RICOH’s Mindset Meets Toolset Approach to Remote Service

RICOH’s Mindset Meets Toolset Approach to Remote Service

Share

Stay Connected

Related Content

What Does It Take to Thrive Vs. Merely Survive in the Experience Economy?

Are XLAs the Key Metric You’re Missing? Part Two

Automation vs. Autonomy: 4 Ways to Ease Concerns Around AI in Field Service