Search...

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

February 24, 2021 | 15 Mins Read

The 5 Most Common Servitization Fumble‪s‬

February 24, 2021 | 15 Mins Read

The 5 Most Common Servitization Fumble‪s‬

Share

Building off of the creation of recent special report The Service Centricity Playbook: 7 Phases of Morphing from Product Provider to Trusted Advisor, Sarah and Hilbrand Rustema, Founder and Managing Director of Noventum, discuss the five most common areas where companies go wrong on the Servitization journey.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today we're going to be walking through the five most common Servitization fumbles. I'm excited to welcome back to the podcast today Hilbrand Rustema, managing director and founder of Noventum. Hi Hilbrand, how are you?

Hilbrand Rustema: Hi Sarah, I'm good. Thank you for having me back.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely. So Hilbrand and I met a few years ago and I've really enjoyed his insights. Noventum works with a lot of different organizations on their service transformation journeys, and having experiences with companies in different industries and in different phases of transformation, he has a wealth of insights. Hilbrand and I recently paired up to create The Service Centricity Playbook: 7 Phases of Morphing From Product Provider to Trusted Advisor. That special report is available now, both on futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com, as well as noventum.eu. And of course, we would love for you to check it out. We are not going to be redundant in this episode with the content that's in that report, but instead, we're going to talk about the five most common fumbles playing off of the playbook title, but the areas in which that this Servitization journey is most likely to go awry. So with that said, let's go ahead and dig in to the first one. So the first area, Hilbrand, that is an area of potential challenge and concern is looking at services from the inside out. So let's talk a little bit about what that means and how that can be problematic.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah, so it is a very common one where companies look at what they can do or what they are used to do, what their own capabilities is, and then they start to imagine all kinds of services that they can provide. Maybe, of course, looking at other companies. But an essential element that is often forgotten in that process is to listen carefully to your customers and to have a good, hard look at your capabilities, your abilities to deliver any type of service, if that is a real good fit with what your customers really need. And when I emphasize these last two words, what they really need, the challenge here is, very often, if you ask your customers, what do you want? Nine out of ten, a customer will not have a very good idea. They may not be able to articulate what they need or even what they want.

Hilbrand Rustema: And that is because it's a process whereby you have to investigate, what are your customers' challenges? Not just the technical challenges of using your equipment, but more like the business challenges. And then to try and figure out how can you, with your products, obviously with your equipment, your technology, but also with your knowledge and maybe your network of partners, how can you create a better answer to the challenges that your customers have? And that involves usually a lot of knowledge, not just technical knowledge, understanding of the processes, of the business model of your customers, of the industry. And that's how you then create services. And while you are identifying possible new services and when you are developing those, it's highly recommended that you do that as a co-creation process with your customers. And the emphasis is on customers, not just a customer, because there's no such thing as the customer.

Hilbrand Rustema: I think you would have to start with developing a reasonable segmentation along these different service needs, so you say, "Hey, these are, whatever, a do-it-yourself customer. And this is a customer that is a strategic thinker and buyer or a value buyer or whatever you want to call them," and go along those categories or segments of customers, and then try to work through their needs together with them. And we do that a lot with workshopping, in-depth interviews, showing them maybe prototypes of, let's say, the business model, and then eventually go through a pilot process whereby, yeah, you really sort of keep on trying, keep on getting it right until your customer or customers tell you you've got it right. And then the last step in there is making sure that you have created a scalable service, so it's not just uniquely fitting for one customer, but it's for a whole group of customer that you can scale it, preferably on a global basis.

Sarah Nicastro: Right, okay. That makes sense. And I think, the key to Servitization is delivering outcomes that your customers find imperative to their business. And it's just not possible to do that if you don't lead with what those outcomes are that they need from you, so that makes sense.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Okay, so that makes sense. So outside in versus inside out is the first important point. The second point or the second fumble is overlooking the need to master the basics. So looking at really getting ahead of yourself in terms of your transformation before you have put tools in place to kind of build a strong foundation. So talk about this.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah, so what we see a lot now is that a company sort of got the digitalization bug and started experimenting with the most fantastic digital services and sometimes ignoring a bit those basics. And what we mean by that is delivering very smoothly your basic services, like, let's say, getting a field engineer locally, on time, when it was agreed upon, with the right skills and the right parts in his hands, is something that looks easy to do because many companies do it. But yeah, unfortunately, there's also still a lot of companies that think, okay, well, that's more or less fine with us, so we can move on. The problem is that your customers have a certain reason to do business with you.

Hilbrand Rustema: And very often, it's not the product you sell or it's the service even that you offer, that's usually very similar to what your competitors do, but it is a certain intangible value that you have in your brand, yeah? And if you wonder what that is, well, try asking around why customers really do business with you and you will find a reason and they may say, well, you're, whatever, the leader in the market, or you really are flexible, or you understand... These type of, yeah, sometimes very intangible reasons to do business with you. Now, you want to make sure that you deliver on those basic promises. And if you cannot, if it's too often that you cannot deliver that spare part on time, there is a certain continuum in what your customers are willing to buy from you as a next stage in the evolution of the relationship that you have with them.

Hilbrand Rustema: And if you don't do these basic things right, so if the expectations of the brand of your company are not being fulfilled, you can absolutely forget that they're going to buy more sophisticated services whereby a higher level of trust is needed from that customer because they're going to be a lot more depending on you for these more sophisticated services. So, yeah, one element before you embark on these outcome-based services, the more sophisticated services, do you have all the basics working very well? And not just on your own opinion there, but what do your customers say about that? And if they are, say, generally very positive, you get good marks on that, then you can continue.

Hilbrand Rustema: There's a second reason to have those basics right that when you start with the more sophisticated services, they're typically more knowledge intensive. And if you don't have your basic processes and systems in place, you don't gather, you don't harvest, the type of knowledge and data that you need. For example, if you go from preventive services to predictive services, your knowledge management processes have to be top-notch, otherwise it's not possible to start with predictive services. So that's another reason why you need to look at the basics and start with those. And it's okay to do some experiments, but just remember that those experiments won't scale if you don't have the basics right.

Sarah Nicastro: Right. That makes sense. I always say that trying to skip over some of those basics is like building a house of cards, right? So you want to make sure that you have a really strong foundation from which to build otherwise it could all fall apart at any given moment. Good, okay. So fumble number three is either thinking too small or thinking too big, so the need to balance pragmatic versus big picture thinking. So let's talk about this.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah, so I think that there's a lot of companies that are very good at execution. For example, they want to implement a new system, they really focus on it, they do that very well. But if you don't have that big long-term vision, if you have no unifying, energizing vision whereby everybody understands what you are aiming for in the long-term or what your business stands for, it's going to be very difficult to stay focused. So you can do all kinds of successful short-term projects, but if that is not helping you to get closer to achieving that long-term vision, why are you doing it? So you often see that well-intentioned projects, let's name some examples, a drive to standardize your global service operating model, is really going well. And at some point, whatever, after one or two years, the company achieves it, but then it has taken so much effort and time and sometimes pain that people have forgotten why they're doing it. And they're done and then it sort of plateaus while this was only a prerequisite to implement a bigger vision.

Hilbrand Rustema: And very often, and it's unfortunate, there are companies that have this sort of quarterly-based focus, they just live from one quarter to the next. And maybe sometimes, yeah, managers are not in a role long enough to achieve anything like a long-term vision. So I think that is a balance that you have to find. What I would say is that pragmatism and achieving short-term goals is obviously driving success, but without that bigger picture and not just a picture for the service business, but for the entire business and understanding what is the role that your service organization plays in the bigger strategic vision of the company, without that, it's very difficult to be successful.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. So execution is obviously important. I mean, that goes back to kind of our second point, which was building that strong foundation, right? I mean, you have to be able to execute. You have to be able to be on time and have good first-time fix rates and all of those key things. So execution is important, but innovation is equally important. And I think what you just said about the fact that this vision for service and this strategy for, where are you taking the company over the next two, three, five years? It has to be company-wide, not just within the service function. I mean, that's one of the biggest challenges I see within organizations that are trying to sort out their outcomes-based service or Servitization journey is they're trying to do so within a silo of the service function, not at the company level.

Sarah Nicastro: And unfortunately, there's just no real way to... Maybe you can make some incremental changes and improvements, but to really seize the opportunity that's here, it has to be done at the company-wide level. So you need people that can do... In some ways, service leaders have it tough right now because, typically, people as human beings are geared toward either being more pragmatic or being more innovative and big picture thinking, right? And to a certain extent, service leaders need to be able to force themselves to do a bit of whichever doesn't come as natural to them. But from a company perspective, you also need to make sure that you're looking at putting skill sets in place that can accomplish both of these functions in a way that can drive the business forward to meet that strategy and those growth goals.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah, I would add to that, Sarah, is that one of the interesting challenges that service leaders always have is when they have that vision clear for themselves on where they want to be in a couple of years' time, let's say they want to go to these outcome-based services and maybe, whatever, offer their equipment as a service or managed services or whatever they want to do, it is so challenging to get all the other functions of the organization along with your own vision. So therefore, there is a role here for the C-suite, and normally, I would say they are really driving it. And as a service leader, to get where you want to be, you need to interact with all these other functions. You need them all, yeah?

Hilbrand Rustema: Like let's talk about sales. If you have a very strong sales force that is good in selling products or projects, they need to be really aligned with that portfolio of services that you are trying to sell along. And at some point in time, it may join together, where you're really selling solutions.

Hilbrand Rustema: Let's look at marketing, doing product marketing is a different discipline altogether than if you would want to do something that I would call service marketing.

Hilbrand Rustema: Look at the finance function. The finance function, particularly if you're going to do as a service propositions, they need a lot of new skills in terms of asset finance management, financial risk management, which don't come natural to any manufacturing organization.

Hilbrand Rustema: Let's look at the supply chain organization, that may be very good at the traditional Ford manufacturing supply chain business, but when it comes to parts management, it's almost the opposite dynamic, yeah? So you're not trying to manage large quantities of the same products in a few directions. No, parts management is trying to move to many different delivery points very small quantities. And your objective is not to lower inventories, but to have the right service level, whereas traditional manufacturing or supply chain organizations look more at the inbound manufacturing part.

Hilbrand Rustema: So, it's all these different disciplines that have to develop an understanding of what your new service business model means to them. And there is a very big educational component in that. And it's simply a, yeah, if you want to have people doing different things, it takes time. And that vision, that common vision, that unites everybody is only the starting point.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yep. Okay, good. So moving on to fumble number four is the inability to combine ambition and agility.

Hilbrand Rustema: Right. Yeah, I sometimes find the term "agility" very confusing. We see obviously a lot in the IT organizations, yeah? So meaning the agile development of new IT applications, which is a good thing. It is definitely very successful as a discipline. But if you want to try to work in an agile way in other disciplines, it often gets misinterpreted. And that is that making small incremental changes is something different as developing an agile application. I think agile is a bit of a fashionable term right now.

Hilbrand Rustema: If you do not have a clear understanding, if your project, if you're running that with agile methodologies, if your project is really contributing to achieving that strategic goal, which is part of that vision, then you probably are just using an advanced project management technique called agile. But it may not really help you to get into the right direction. You can have very successful, agile organizations developing completely in the wrong direction, if you know what I mean. And it is tempting to say everything is agile and confuse that with only short-term views and short-term results and to get into an iterative mode whereby if you contrast that with, yeah, more long-term, let's say, strategic view of the business whereby, according to a plan, you are achieving bigger milestones, that will bring you much further than just always do that small iterative change.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative), mm-hmm (affirmative). So that's why we're saying you have to combine ambition and agility, so the ambition is, what is your ambition for the company around service? Where are you trying to go? And it's okay to make iterative changes to get there, but you need to be working towards those bigger objectives.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah, agile is a tool.

Sarah Nicastro: Right. Yes, good point, that's a good way to put it. Good. All right. And the last number, fumble number five, is prioritizing IT-driven change rather than business-driven change.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah. Ooh, I could probably talk another half hour about this, but we only have a few minutes left. Yeah, I would say, IT-driven change is one whereby there's a lot of focus on implementing a certain tool and a certain application. And usually, under the name of we have to keep it standard, we have to stick to the IT strategy, this is what you have to live with, you see that a lot of limitations are imposed on the business, particularly the service business, for example, companies that try to promote ERP systems in service organizations, they find that very challenging, rather than customer-centric IT solutions. So business-driven change is the situation whereby, at the end of the day, if some decisions on change have to be made, the one and only final criteria is, are we going to improve our business with this? And not, are we going to comply with our IT standards, our IT strategy? And continuously looking at the business goals, how are we going to achieve those? And if that sometimes means that you have to sacrifice your ideal IT strategy or your ideal IT landscape, I would say so be it.

Hilbrand Rustema: In terms of mentality, I would say there's people that fully understand business-driven change. Usually, it's run by people that have a lot of business experience. And you have people that are put in charge of maybe large service transformation initiatives that have a very strong IT background. And I clearly see the differences in outcome. So in the end, you have with the IT-driven approach, you have a working system, yeah? The system works. But is anybody using it? And is it delivering the right results? That's the question. No. And with the business approach, it's quite the opposite. So are we achieving our results with this solution? If not, let's change it, let's tweak it. And I'm not saying this is the blank check to just start all kinds of customization of your IT solutions, no, in the contrary, I would say most, let's say, mature IT platforms, they can deal with most of the, I'd say, the requirements that are out there nowadays.

Sarah Nicastro: Sure.

Hilbrand Rustema: But yeah, the challenge is the attitude and the type of background of the people.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, that makes sense. And I think, as digitalization has become a path to growth, then IT needs to support that growth, rather than just, to your point, serving as a means for compliance and just operational. So that makes sense. Okay. So those are the top five fumbles that we see people make on the journey to Servitization or outcomes-based service. Again, the report that we just published is The Service Centricity Playbook: 7 Phases of Morphing From Product Provider to Trusted Advisor. And these are the five most common fumbles, but that report outlines those seven phases and it provides not only Hilbrand and I's perspective from our years in the industry, but also the real-world perspective from some of the companies that are on this journey. So certainly check it out. Hilbrand, thank you so much for coming back and spending some time with me today and for working with me on the report, it's been really fun and I'm hoping that people will find it very useful.

Hilbrand Rustema: Yeah. Thanks a lot Sarah.

Sarah Nicastro: All right. You can find the report and more information by visiting www.futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com. You can also find us on LinkedIn as well as Twitter at The Future of FS. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more about IFS service management solutions by visiting www.ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

February 17, 2021 | 27 Mins Read

Where Does Service Fit in Your Organizational Structure?

February 17, 2021 | 27 Mins Read

Where Does Service Fit in Your Organizational Structure?

Share

February 10, 2021 | 20 Mins Read

Icelandair Explores Predictive Maintenance

February 10, 2021 | 20 Mins Read

Icelandair Explores Predictive Maintenance

Share

Lilja Scheel Birgisdóttir, Reliability Engineer at Icelandair, talks with Sarah about the immense complexities and interdependencies of airline operations and the role predictive maintenance will play in the airline’s future.

Sarah: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today, we're going to be talking with Icelandair about their exploration of predictive maintenance. This is a conversation that I think you'll find quite interesting. Because when you talk about service complexity, I don't know that there is a more complex environment than the airline industry. I'm excited to welcome Lilja, from Icelandair, to talk with us today. And Lilja, I'm going to let you introduce yourself fully, because I know that I would not properly pronounce your last name. So, please tell everyone about yourself.

Lilja: So hello. I'm Lilja Scheel Birgisdóttir. So, we are from the airline, Icelandair. I have my team with me. We are a team of reliability engineers. We consist of three. And it's Harpa Rún Garðarsdóttir and Unnar Már Sveinbjarnarson. And then, we have our IT specialist with us who is Bjarki Elíasson. So, if I just introduce Icelandair briefly, it's an airline that has celebrated over 80 years, birthday, if you can say that. So, we track our history back to 1937. So it's only 34 years after the Wright brothers took off, we took off, not in the form that we are today. It has a longer history of mergers, but we've been flying under the name of Icelandair since 1973. So, not many airlines that can say that, especially when we're just a tiny airline flying from a tiny island in the middle of the ocean.

Lilja: We have a specific business model which has been very successful. It's called the Via. I'm not sure on the pronunciation, but Via market because we fly from Europe to the US, and we offer the great deal of free stopover in Iceland for up to seven days, which is kind of intriguing for many people, and at no extra cost. So this is a unique model that not many can replicate based on our geological position. What is kind of unique about us, I would say, but maybe the global market does not know, is that we have what could be explained as the heart of Iceland there, or heart of Iceland. And we have felt it very strongly, especially in the 2010 and '11 volcanic eruptions, from the very well-known volcano, Eyjafjallajökull, which every reporter struggled with pronouncing the name of back then.

Lilja: But throughout this Corona situation, we have felt it, again, beating strongly when our day-to-day work changed a lot overnight. And we have had to say goodbye to over 2000 fellow colleagues. So, it's been a hard time. But again, we have been feeling this strong unity. And amazingly, Icelandair is so well liked, and by the Icelandic nation as well. So many of them, they experienced their home when they step on board of our aircraft on their way home. So, they feel the Iceland spirit and the Icelandair spirit. So, that's a little bit about our company, who we are. If you want to know, understand, what we do as reliability engineers? So, what we do is collect and monitor technical data, so that we can evaluate how well our planes are doing. We monitor technical dispatch reliability, or/and... So, we're monitoring basically the health of our fleet. And if we are seeing any off trends, we notify someone who can take action on those. So, that's a little bit about us.

Sarah: Excellent. Well, thank you, Lilja. I have heard of the via structure. And it is very compelling. I have not had an opportunity to visit Iceland, but would love to. So, once travel picks back up, I will put that on my list. And I know that-

Lilja: You should.

Sarah: I know that for everyone in the airline industry, 2020 has been a very, very difficult year. So, certainly appreciate that. And I think most of the conversation we'll have today is not necessarily talking about business as it's been recently, which is uniquely difficult in a lot of industries really, but talking about the complexities in the airline operation and for Iceland in a more normal state of business, which I think is what most folks intuitively think about when they think of flying, because a lot of people are used to also being able to travel far more than we have over the last year.

Sarah: Well, thank you for the background. So, what I do want to talk about next is some of that complexity. So, we had a call to kind of set the stage for this recording. And I had shared with you all that I've never really thought about the weight of complexity on an airline. I guess I should have. But I just really have only thought about it through the lens of a passenger or a consumer, and not necessarily all of the different aspects of complexity. Some, I think, are intuitive because they're more of the customer facing things that you would notice or experience. But there's far more to it. So, I want to just talk about some of the different facets of complexity that makes managing and optimizing an airline operation quite, quite challenging. So, to start, let's talk a little bit about... The first area is customer expectations, right? So, maybe talk about that one first?

Lilja: I mean, as a customer, you want good service. You want reliability. You know, you want to be there alive and on time, basically. I mean... and smooth and enjoyable travel experience.

Sarah: Yes.

Lilja: And that's where on-time performance is a critical thing. But, I mean, it's the same for every airline. It's the same expectation. We have the same customer group, basically. So, I mean, that's the main thing.

Sarah: And it's the most intuitive and easy to understand, right?

Lilja: Yes.

Sarah: Because the vast majority of us have been on a flight that ends up delayed or canceled. And then, you... So, that frustration of the interruption to your life, and your schedule, and all of that is... It's the easiest to comprehend in terms of the complexity. But let's talk about... Then, when there is a disruption, obviously it impacts the customer experience. But talk a little bit about what happens... It's really a chain reaction, so there's a huge trickle-down effect of one issue throughout the system. So, what are some of the things that happen or areas of impact once you have some sort of issue, or failure, or downtime?

Lilja: I mean, what's happening is there are a few cases that can take place. I mean, you can have one part that is faulty, and the... In the cockpit, they see a light, and they just... They know they can't take off. It can be that it's late from another flight. It can be that it's late from a maintenance. So there are few things that can happen that causes a delay, or an AOG situation, aircraft on ground. I mean, in the case of we have a faulty part and they have the light than the cockpit, we're seeing 15 minute delay, and up to a few hours. This can lead to an AOG, where your flight is delayed, canceled, whatever. And sometimes, we can resolve it right on time, especially if the aircraft is in their home base. It's easier. If the situation occurs at an out base, it's a bit more cumbersome.

Lilja: And, I mean, for the customer, it can lead to missed flight, missed train. They have to book a new hotel. There's so many things that can... the trickle-down effect. So, I mean, if you have an AOG situation that's a longer time. The aircraft cannot take off. It can... You might end up where you have to get a new aircraft to pick up the passengers. So, then that's lost revenue when you have to fly a new aircraft empty to pick up all the passengers, and then fly the broken aircraft when it's been repaired. So, I mean, this is... There are many things we need to consider when this happens.

Sarah: Right. And the other thing is, if you think about the kind of interdependencies of air travel, right? Like you can't... When you have a delay, or you have an AOG situation... Now, I sound like I know what I'm talking about. Then, you can't just, "Oh, okay. Well, we have it fixed. So, let's just take off." Right? I mean, you're reliant upon all of the other travel happening in the air, all of the other... the air traffic. You're relying on a lot of different things. And so, to your point, there's an issue when it comes to customer satisfaction. So, how frustrated are your customers getting in those situations? But there's also a very real issue of cost complexity. Right? So, to your point, I've been in situations before, if it's extreme enough, where a flight's canceled or what have you, you end up getting some sort of compensation from the airline. So, you have that cost.

Sarah: You have the cost of flying empty planes, and all of those things. So, it becomes quite intense, in terms of the impact of that. And I think you also can't under emphasize the criticality of the number one objective, which is keeping everyone safe. Right?

Lilja: Exactly.

Sarah: So, I always think about... I've been in... Anyone that's been in a situation where a flight is significantly delayed or canceled understands how frustrating it is. But I always find myself annoyed with people that throw a temper tantrum about it. And yes, it's frustrating. But the number one thing is you don't want someone to take off in an airplane that they know they shouldn't, or something isn't properly taken care of.

Sarah: So, it's always like... Yes, I know it's frustrating, but they're acting in our best interest, even though it's inconvenient. Right? So... Anyway. But the other thing is... that I had never really thought about prior to our conversation is some of the complexity that exists in being able to rectify issues, or make necessary repairs, to be able to move along. And so, talk a little bit about... I guess I just never thought about the fact that, if you have an aircraft in some location, you can't just have any mechanic come and do a fix. You don't know if you'll have the part you need. So, talk about some of the complexities when it comes to the regulatory side, and some of the inventory, and those sorts of things.

Lilja: Yeah. I mean, we have a lot of regulatory bodies. We have FAA. We have EASE. And they have different regulations. And Icelandair, flying in both regulatory bodies, we need to abide to both. So, then we of course have the... from Boeing, everything we have to just obliged from there. So, everything is highly regulated. And you wouldn't believe the paperwork that goes with one aircraft. I mean, it's tons of paper.

Lilja: So, everything that's done has to be written down, signed off. And the person that's signing it off, as you said, has to have the permission to do so. So, the person has to be trained and licensed to do this thing. Even though you're an aircraft mechanic, you're not necessarily have the license to work on avionics, so the computers on board. So, if something comes up, you need to be sure that the person has the specific certification before they can come aboard and do the work. So...

Lilja: And the parts that we have, even though we have two 757s, Boeing, standing side by side, doesn't necessarily mean that we can use the same parts in both, because they have different specs, they have different modifications. So, they are... We might need two different parts, even though the same one failed. And these parts aren't just laying around in every stock room. We might have a AOG situation in Boston, but the part is available in Europe. And you have to transfer the parts. And you need to make sure that the part is certified properly, with the paper work that we require, with the mud status that this aircraft requires. So, there's so many things that need to align when something comes up.

Sarah: Yes. Ooh, it's not a job... I don't think I would want... I don't think I would want it. It's a lot of pressure. So obviously, you have to handle those situations when they arise. But the more you can avoid them through both traditional maintenance and what we'll talk about in a bit, predictive maintenance, the better off we are. So, the ultimate goal is to minimize and eliminate as much as possible, any sort of issues.

Lilja: But I must add that. I mean, it takes a lot of people to cover these things. So, it's not only one man job, thankfully.

Sarah: Yes, yes.

Lilja: As you say, you would not want this job. You're only getting a tiny part of the whole scenario.

Sarah: Right. Right. I don't... I just don't... I don't know that I would want... I just don't know that the airline thing would be for me. I don't know. I get anxious as a flyer, let alone being responsible for all of that. But it isn't... It is... over... holistically, not just yourself, but everyone in the industry. It's an important job.

Lilja: It is.

Sarah: Like I said, I mean, it's... People's lives are in your hands every day. And when you look at some of the industries where... You talk about mission critical situations. And sometimes, people refer to that term in terms of downtime costs money. And yes, that's important. But when there are situations like with this, or in certain medical applications and things like that, where it's lives, number one, I mean, you're talking just about a different level of importance of, of everything working, and of managing and optimizing, and paying close attention, and, and all of that. So, a lot of respect for what you're doing.

Lilja: Thank you.

Sarah: So, let's talk a little bit about the kind of historical and present-day maintenance world for Iceland. So, you use IFS Maintenix to manage the planning and orchestration of all of the maintenance of the aircraft. So, tell us a little bit about how that works, and the value that IFS has contributed to Icelandair's operations.

Lilja: Yeah. So, we've been using Maintenix from IFS since 2014. We started the implementation in 2013, so... Wow. Eight years almost? That's crazy. Yeah. We use Maintenix to keep the aircraft everywhere. They keep track of all our scheduled maintenance activities, planning actions, and... Yeah. So, it's covering most of the processes that we do.

Sarah: So, you have Maintenix in place to manage the maintenance operations. But you're obviously continually looking for ways to minimize and eliminate any sort of delays and AOG situations. So, this is sort of the thought process behind investigating predictive maintenance for critical parts on the aircraft. So, tell us a little bit about how you view predictive maintenance potentially helping Icelandair.

Lilja: So, if we get a tool that can predict maintenance, we can improve our whole planning overview. We can start ordering parts beforehand, so cost saving. We can plan the maintenance action before it happens, before we get an technical delay or AOG. So again, we're saving costs and we're increasing our on-time performance. And, I mean, we could start... We could send the aircraft with the parts that we know is about to fail, so that it can be replaced wherever the aircraft is. So, I mean, we could take... I'm not saying that, that's an ideal thing to do. But we could know beforehand what we can do, when we can do it, and how we should do it. So, it would give us so much more insight and preparation time than we have today. So, in the long run, we would get shorter technical delays, reduce AOG situations, and reduced problems when we need to order parts that possibly is in somewhere in Europe, or America, when we need it in Iceland. So, there are so many things that... predicting the need before it happens.

Sarah: Okay. Tell me how this works on... You have an older Boeing fleet. Right? So, how do you determine what components you want to use predictive analytics with? How do you sort of put that in motion with the fleet that you have?

Lilja: Let's say there are certain part groups that we know that we don't need to monitor, because they're just you use and replace, so fully excluding those. So, we are looking at multiple part groups and part types. In terms of an older fleet... I mean, we know that our 757s are kind of old. The bad thing there is that they don't have as many sensors as the types that are coming out today. So definitely, that does not help us in the predictability. But with the coming fleets, we have a few max, 737 max. So, they have more sensors. So, we know we're going to get more data there. But then again, it's also just mathematics and statistics. So, we know that the models that they make in such a system are using historical trends.

Lilja: So, that helps us. Even though the 757s do not have sensors to assist with the predicting, we know that we have statistical data with us. So, that's going to help. And it's not impossible. So definitely, there is some future there. And it's so much fun to be in this place because, all of a sudden, we're taking part of the future happening.

Sarah: Yes.

Lilja: When we see... We're taking the step into predictive maintenance. It hasn't been as much viability before as it is today and tomorrow.

Sarah: And why do you think that is? Why do you think predictive maintenance is more viable today and tomorrow than it has been for Iceland air historically?

Lilja: I mean, the technical advancement has just been so great in the past years. Computers are getting more powerful. I think also, because of how highly airlines and maintenance is regulated, it's not been so much in the computers. I mean, every work that we do... Some airlines do have what's called e-signature, where the sign off on the papers are online, if you can say that. We do not. We have not implemented that yet. So, I mean, getting the data into the computers is just happening today. And it's really slow process because it has to fulfill all those rules, regulations. We have the CAAs that have to approve everything. So, it's a slow process.

Sarah: You wouldn't want to be an early adopter in the situation you're in. You need something that is more proven, and has... I can understand that. So...

Lilja: At least you have to have a lot of money if you want to be the first one.

Sarah: Yeah. That makes sense. Okay. So, you have a proof of concept around predictive maintenance in place with IFS to explore this more. Tell us about the project and its intended objectives.

Lilja: So, the basic goal is just to build a view which displays some fancy graphs and information tables. So, that's the thing. It's going to be... As we've stated, it's going to be so useful for us to be able to see the predictions down to the serial number of the components. If that part is expected to fail within a certain time, this information would then be fed to our planning team or the maintenance control for further action. This seems very simple when I say it like this. But the calculations behind the predictability, the model training, is... Those things are fairly complicated to do. And it has to be good data that is fed in. So, that's also a very critical factor. So... But the goal for us is to be able to predict a component failing before its time.

Sarah: Okay, you touched on this a little bit, but I want to dig into some of the ways that this really benefits Icelandair and its customers if it works well. So, if you are able to successfully migrate to this predictive model, it... To me, it gives you better control, and it gives you more time to react, and it takes a lot of the uncertainty out of the situation. Right? So rather than, you have a flight land in Boston and someone calls and says, "Hey, uh-oh. This light is on. This part, it has an issue. And that part is in Iceland, or that part is in Europe. And you don't have the right person there to fix it. And you need to..." You know? So, there's all this time then that passes to align the right situation to fix it, and then comply with the air traffic and everything to get the flight back in the air.

Sarah: So, if you knew, to your point, "Okay. Well, this part is nearing end of life," or "We know that there's going to be an issue," you can orchestrate a repair before that failure occurs, or at least put yourself in a position where you have the appropriate resources where they need to be. So, you're more able to precisely align resources when, or even before, failures or issues occur. So, talk a little bit about that. So, you can... The different components you're... And you're focusing on tracking components that are more of those critical components, so things that would ground a plane, not the things that you have, like you said... I can't remember the term you used, but like a use and replace, that are more readily available. Right? You're talking about the things that would take time to fix. So, with the predictive model, you would have the visibility into when and where things will be occurring so that you can align the resources to those situations. Right?

Lilja: If something comes up for parts that are flight critical, you cannot fly. But if it's not a critical part, you can... I'm not completely familiar with the process, but you can ask for an extension of life, so that... I mean, you can get permission to wait for two weeks or fly the airplane home. So, there are processes there. But these are the components that will ground the aircraft. And knowing beforehand if these components are going to fail... Yeah, we're going to reduce costs. We're going to reduce problems and unpredictability. It's going to be great with failure prediction

Sarah: And you're also obviously improving the customer experience. Right? I mean, anytime you're able to minimize or eliminate a delay or a grounded flight, you're improving that as well. Talk a little bit about how the data could be leveraged over time to analyze patterns that could help Icelandair, so looking at patterns of faults and failures and how you could use that information within the organization to make changes.

Lilja: That's basically the goal of the reliability engineer. That's to identify trends and patterns, and try to see why they're happening. And we have always, what's called a reliability meeting where there's a reliability control board that meets. And we inform them of everything that's happening, trends, and things that we are seeing, the things that we have seen. And then, this boards, which persists of... I'm not very good with stature... status names, but like all the people that are required. We have pilots. We have mechanics. And everyone that's needs to know about the things and have something to do with it, they come there. So, it's a joint board where we can discuss these things. They can decide on future steps, or like the board can decide on future steps what needs to be done.

Sarah: So, over time, you can use the data that you're gathering in the predictive maintenance program. And if I'm understanding correctly, it also... The more data it gathers, the more it learns. Right? And the more accurately it can predict.

Lilja: Yeah. That's how the predictive maintenance system will work. It's a learning process.

Sarah: So, you can use this to look at different ways to make changes within the business to, again, just kind of operate more effectively because you have that far improved visibility. Right?

Lilja: Yep.

Sarah: Now, what about external implications? Once you have data that maybe shows you things that they... Let's say you... I'm just making this up. But let's say you have some part that you're noticing is continually failing prematurely, or you notice that there's an issue. Are you also able to take that data and leverage it with your external partners to make improvements out... kind of outside of the business?

Lilja: Yeah. When we see such a trend, we often look at which repair shop has been servicing the parts. And if it's just this part, sometimes we just have an odd one out. And then we just take it out of operation. We don't want to see it anymore because it's unreliable. It's costing us a lot. So, if it's just a single part, we can just throw it out. We just scrap it. But sometimes, we see it with the same part number. They're keep failing again, and again, and again, before it should. Then, often we look at the vendors to see if maybe they are not doing their work properly. Is it always... Are they all coming from the same vendor, or multiple vendors? So yes, this information will help us also to identify those. And this is a lot of costs that's... Parts cost a lot. A repair costs a lot. Everything in the airline industry costs a lot, except for the airline tickets.

Sarah: Right. So, there's significant opportunity to optimize and save. And it's interesting. There's a lot of potential value here in terms of you have sort of the customer facing benefits. You have the benefits for Icelandair, in terms of more visibility, better ability to align resources, cost savings, and all of those things. And then you have the ability to leverage the data externally, where it's relevant to improve some of the vendor and partner relationships, and give them feedback as well if you're able to pick up on those trends. It's really interesting Lilja. And I think that... I understand your point about why, in the airline industry and for Iceland in particular, you want to move pragmatically. You want to take your time and do this the right way. But our platform talks across industries. And this move to predictive is a huge, huge trend.

Sarah: And I think, to your point, in the last few years, the technology has just become so much more accurate and more accessible to people for a variety of different reasons. And it's exciting to see it sort of come to fruition in different industries, in different use cases, because it is really powerful. And the way that it will change how Iceland operates and how different businesses operate is really exciting. So, I appreciate you coming and sharing. And I'd love to have you back in a bit, when you are further along in the proof of concept, and talk about some of the things you've found, and some of the ways you're using the data and putting it to work, and kind of talk about the progress. I think that would be really cool.

Lilja: Yeah, definitely.

Sarah: Well, thank you so much for your time. I appreciate it. And thank you for sharing.

Lilja: Thank you.

Sarah: You can learn more about predictive capabilities and other trends by visiting us at futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com. You can also visit us on LinkedIn, as well as Twitter, @TheFutureOfFS. The future of field service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more about IFS service management by visiting us at www.ifs.com. As always, thanks for listening.

February 3, 2021 | 22 Mins Read

Jotun’s Keys to Digital Transformation Success

February 3, 2021 | 22 Mins Read

Jotun’s Keys to Digital Transformation Success

Share

Trond Aune, Global ERP Manager and Henning Haugen, Group Technical Manager – Maintenance, both at Jotun, join Sarah to discuss the role of company culture in innovation, how a single source of truth was an imperative foundation for Digital Transformation, and how they’re building on success with the move to predictive maintenance.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today, we're going to be talking through another journey of digital transformation. I'm welcoming to the podcast today, two gentlemen from Jotun, Trond Aune, the global ERP manager and Henning Haugen, the group technical manager for maintenance. Trond, can you give a brief introduction to Jotun and introduce yourself?

Trond Aune: Yes, thank you, Sarah. I am the ERP manager of Jotun. And Jotun is one of the largest paint companies in the world. We are producing paints for different purposes. And we are into four different segments. One segment is the marine segment, where we are painting ships actually. We are painting every fourth ships in the world with Jotun paints. Another segment is a protective and industrial painting. Where we are painting large assets of our customers like infrastructure, power plants, oil platforms and so on. The third important segment is what we call the decorative cell segment. That is more beautification and protectional. Our homes and buildings and the fourth segment is powder, where it's actually industrial and decorative protection of steel and wood and other stuff. So Jotun is a major player within the paint manufacturing. And we actually have a turnover of almost three billion US$ and 10,000 employees globally.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay, great. And Henning can you introduce yourself and tell folks about your role?

Henning Haugen: Hi Sarah. Yes, of course. My role is group technical manager, maintenance. So my team is in charge of the setting the corporate requirements guidelines and tools, to be used by our maintenance teams across the world. So that's the short introduction.

Sarah Nicastro: Good, good, excellent. Well thank you both for being here. I'm excited to talk through your story. We have companies on the podcast all the time that are at some point in their digital transformation journey, right? And so we're going to be talking about some of the different aspects of yours today. But one of the things that I've learned over time is how critical culture is, when you're talking about any change. And using your company culture to really anchor that change. Whether that's digital transformation or a change in business processes or business focus, whatever that might be.

Sarah Nicastro: And Jotun has a really unique culture, it's the penguin culture. So Trond, can you start by telling us a bit about the penguin culture, and what it means to Jotun. How it originated, what the core values are and how it sort of permeates everything that the company does.

Trond Aune: The penguin culture is in the veins or all employees in Jotun. We, as all other companies across, we have some core values. For Jotun, that is respect, boldness, loyalty and care. That is not unique. What is maybe more unique is the way we in Jotun actually utilize this. Even though that we have excellent products and we have a fantastic infrastructure to produce and distribute those products to our customers, the most important asset we have is our employees. And by you saying, "the penguin culture," which is kind of a branding of the way we behave to each other. The way we behave to our customers, to suppliers, the thinking we are doing when taking decisions, how we treat the environment, how all these important aspects, when we take decisions every day, this is as I said in the veins of us and that is actually how we are succeeding also.

Trond Aune: This has been supported and promoted by the management in the company for so many years. And we really see the benefit of this now. And it's not only some expressions being used in the brochures, it is actually really into the company. The penguin is there, obviously penguin is an animal. And we relate to it very much. It is surviving in very tough conditions. It is a nice animal. It behaves very nice to each other, take care of each other. And obviously it's a bold creature in so. So this is things that's fits very well into our thinking. And of course it's also a great marketing tool, both internally, but also externally. And Jotun has actually got quite well-known and almost famous about how we are utilizing this strong, strong business culture.

Sarah Nicastro: I think that's... it's so interesting to me. And we talked a little bit about this before Trond. And I know that, to you it's more what it means than the visible emblem of it. But the comment I made is, I can see how having that visible emblem, that mascot, that brand, could be so helpful in reinforcing the traits that are so important to the company. And really having a way to regularly remind employees of the mission to create a common language around it and to create alignment. So I think it's a really interesting point for listeners, just to think about, how do you take the important traits or characteristics of your culture and what are some of the ways that you can really, whether it's visually or otherwise, permeate that through everything the company does in the way that Jotun has with the penguin? So the characteristics, respect, boldness, loyalty and care. There's one that stands out to me and it's boldness. And I love that that's included. And I want to talk about some of the ways that boldness is encouraged at Jotun. Can you share a little bit about that?

Trond Aune: Yeah. Obviously Jotun has over many years grown organically. And we grow in areas and countries which is early in the phase of economic development in many cases. It was one or the first companies entering Myanmar, one of the best first of the Western companies after the country open. And of course that is boldness. And they use this expression as a boldness, in order to show that, yes you are allowed to do mistakes obviously and that is part of our culture. Take decision, be bold on your decisions, be bold on your point of view. And that has proven, that openness and that philosophy has proved to be very important for Jotun and actually for Jotun growth. That all the work we are one of the really fast, most fast growing paint companies in the world.

Sarah Nicastro: I was just going to comment that I love that that trait is emphasized. Because I think that, when you talk about... today we're talking about digital transformation. When you talk about any sort of innovation, any sort of growth mindset and what it takes to be successful there, I think this emphasis on boldness makes so much sense to me. I think you want a company culture where everyone feels empowered to speak up. To share new ideas, to challenge thinking in an inappropriate and respectful way. To really, that elevates the company's mission overall because everyone's contributing. So I just really like that aspect. And I think that as it relates to the topic of today's conversation in digital transformation, I think that promoting boldness and giving people an opportunity to speak up and weigh in, is part of what's required to successfully manage change, which is what we see often as the biggest, or one of the biggest obstacles when it comes to successful digital transformation. Is change management and adoption and that sort of thing.

Trond Aune: And Sarah there is one more dimension to it actually. Jotun has very wide geographical footprint. We are into more than 50, 60 countries. And of course the cultural diversity is so huge. And we are European and Americans. We are bold when it comes to actually to speaking out and to push forward our point of view. But when it comes to other parts of the world, people are more careful. And in that respect also the boldness thing is very important, to give people real opportunity to speak out the commuter gear, to give their idea. So this is actually more than just a word. It is really an important part of our culture.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes, that's a really good point. Okay, so let's shift gears and start talking then about the digital transformation journey. So one of the big aspects of that is that Jotun has undergone a major effort to consolidate disparate ERPs into a global instance of IFS apps which is used in more than 50 countries. So the overarching objective of that I guess, was to create this single source of truth. So tell us a little bit about that project and some of the challenges you were looking to overcome and what the goals were there.

Trond Aune: Yeah. I think that when we took that decision back in 2004, that decision maybe it was more bold than what we expected to be. Because it has proven really to be a challenging journey. But we are now at the really end of that journey. We are about to complete the last country, so we're a lot of IFS in the 50 countries we are into. And we now really see the benefit and we are extremely happy that we started that journey. Obviously we saw a lot of benefits of having one instance, one thing is the data and then one truth. The other one is across the standardization of processes, to do things the same way in all the companies. The third one I recall, it was the huge internal trade we are doing in not in between all the companies that is not fully automated, which was impossible when all companies have their different solutions.

Trond Aune: And of course, the fourth one was the transparency and actually to Jotun was growing. Has been expanding a lot, and it's there's of course a need for control also from the corporate side. And all of these things has been fulfilled by the one instance set up of IFS in our group. And it's I think it's quite unique to have such a big setup, with all the challenges it's represent, all from a technical point of view. With access and performance and connections, but also on the solution side and the legal side, with all the problems related to the legal requirements, specific business requirements and of course the standardization of business processes. Which is not only an IT project, it's a huge business project actually to implement all this. So this has now, it's now about to give us a really our payback time. We are going into the payback time for this huge investment. And we are really happy to have done this journey.

Sarah Nicastro: Good. So, you touched on this a bit, but let's talk through... it's a huge undertaking, right? To, as you said, not just on the IT side, but on the business side. You can summarize it in a couple of minutes, what you've accomplished. But it really is a significant undertaking to consolidate to that degree and to really bring in that single source of truth. So talk through... I want to talk about two aspects of that. First, let's kind of recap some of the benefits. What have been the major benefits in introducing a single point of truth into the business?

Trond Aune: Obviously consolidated reporting on sales profitability on customers, on products, that is a huge benefit. Of course we have much better control than if you have a lot of truth. But I think even more important, is the benefit and the wins we have had, when it comes to the internal alignment, because the ERP system is not only a transaction system, it is actually a carrier of standard-standard business processes. And it is an enabler to improve your business processes as well. As I mentioned earlier, especially on the advanced and complex setup we have, when it comes to delivering paints to moving targets as a vessel, a big ship is moving. So one day you have to deliver in Rotterdam and the next month it might be in Singapore. And then it might be in Korea the next time. And of course the complexity of handling that kind of customers, that is the global rollout of why IFS has really been helpful a bit.

Trond Aune: But it has also enabled us to start utilizing, not only the core ERP functionality, now we are also looking into expanding the utilization of IFS and linking up new modules. Where we actually can see that, the one source of truth, the standardized processes and the one instance and one database is really helpful and might make it much easier to implement a new functionality as well.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah, that's another thing we talk about a lot on this platform, Trond. Is the importance of setting a strong foundation. Which is what I look at, at the ERP journey as. It's a major undertaking to set a strong, consistent, cohesive foundation that then you can build upon, with your digital transformation journey by adding different functionality and different technologies and different capabilities. When companies get enamored by some of the sophisticated tools that exists today, without having done those foundational efforts, they can make a lot of investments for not, right? Because they don't really have the basics, solid, to be able to expand on, so that makes sense. Before we move on, the other thing I wanted to ask related to that project and the breadth of experiences that you gained through it is, what would you say is the biggest lesson you learned?

Trond Aune: We have a fantastic support from group management, from top management in the group when we started this project. And that support has been maintained throughout the whole project. And I think that is at least one of the most important key success factors, that you have a strong ownership throughout the business, from the users up to the top management. So that has been an important things to have with you. We have also learn that building the competence internally, in our company has been important. We not only implementing implementation ERP, it's actually implementation of new business processes. And that where we, though that learning beyond the project lifetime and into the lifetime of their company, that is difficult if you have too many external. So we have actually built a strong team internally to do it, that is another learning. The biggest frustration and the biggest problem has been on the legal side. To implement the legal and to fulfill the legal requirement in countries like Brazil, Russia, India, Vietnam, Korea, Mexico, it's extremely challenging.

Trond Aune: That has obviously, we underestimated that complexity that has caused the project to be more time consuming and more costly than we initially thought. But we are now happy that we was patient. We carried that through. It was times when we were so close to give it up. We didn't do that because of the patient, our management, our shareholders. And now we have our solid setup in all these countries as well. Many other companies actually gave that up and do local installations. And if you do that of course, you breach the chain or the one truth will breach the chain of your supply chain in order to have that as our quinoa one integrated supply chain. So that has been important for us

Sarah Nicastro: Persistence and dedication, okay. Can you talk to me next a bit about how Jotun is embracing Servitization?

Trond Aune: Yeah. Traditionally of course, Jotun has been selling products. And we have been good at selling products and we have excellent products to sell. Jotun is a high-end supplier of paints. We are not competing in the low-end. Our focus is to have high quality products. Still and we have been very successful in that. The last few years of course, we have seen that it has gradually gone from not only selling products, we are also selling some services together with the products. And now we are seeing the gradual turn into more Servitization that our customers don't own, they don't want our products, they want the outcome. They want us to sell the outcome of what our products can give. Jotun has a lot of focus on innovation and our innovation has now also turned into Servitization and we will still paint. Selling paint will still be the major business, of course.

Trond Aune: But we are having examples where we, for example, are offering our customers information and data about climate conditions, sea conditions on how they can plan their routes from A to B in the most efficient way, by reducing the resistance on the whole of the ship. Because we have that data, with all the experience we have. We are also are going into a more environmental friendly and sustainable approach to this. And are offering products and services which actually clean the hull of one huge ship. So we are offering both the hardware, the software, the services, to clean the hull of the ships and of course reduce the fuel consumption of a ship and increase the profitability for the owners. And I know course giving Jotun both are environmental, putting us in a more in-mind friendly position, but also supporting our customers, into the right direction by not only selling paints, but also adding services and package our products in such a way that it's fits into the customer's needs.

Sarah Nicastro: It's really interesting to me to hear you talk about Servitization. Because I guess, I talk about it a lot and I realize how pervasive it is. But at the same time, even I don't know that I've thought of it as something that a supplier of paints would get into. So it's just a really good example of exactly how important of a trend it is. If we look at a specific example, I believe one of the ways that you're doing this is in the marine division, right? And so can you walk us through the example of how you track ships and then provide this service on, I believe sort of a subscription basis?

Trond Aune: Yeah. How we do it? We actually put sensors on the propeller exits on the huge throstles. And we are monitoring sort of the efficiency of the engine, or the ship. Combine with weather conditions, wind, seas and the climates they are into. Put this, a lot of this information together. And then of course we are tracking the ships in addition to, as I said, sell that kind of information to customers at least, offer that information to customers so that they can improve their profitability as well.

Sarah Nicastro: Interesting.

Trond Aune: So that is utilization of data and information we have, of course. And we are of course, developing good products, to get not only the service, but we are also supporting all of this with good products, improving our products according to the learning, we have this kind of information.

Sarah Nicastro: Good.

Trond Aune: Jotun our digitalization approach is not to be the most fancy and utilize whatever exist or digital tools. We are very focused on doing this, either because it serves our customers, or because it improve our efficiency. So we are not jumping in all kinds of digitalization trends, but we are very focused on those activities we start. And of course digitalization has a very high attention in Jotun these days, that is for sure.

Sarah Nicastro: Good, good. And I think that's a really smart approach. So good, all right. And Henning, I want to talk about another initiative in Jotun's digital transformation journey which is a proof of concept that you're working on, related to predictive maintenance in your production line. So talk to us a bit about the goals of migrating to a predictive approach.

Henning Haugen: Yes, to answer that, I think we should go a little bit back into our maintenance journey in Jotun. Earlier our maintenance organizations was often seen as a cost driver. So and where the main strategy was the reactive maintenance. There was often missing maintenance strategy and how proper maintenance could support efficient operations, both locally and from group. So in 2009, group maintenance also established and with that, we established a maintenance belt program. Like a corrupter thing, where we needed the one level before we can go to the next. And together with that, we also set the first standalone, computerized maintenance management system. This was required to be used at the all sites, except Norway. Because they were already in IFS and using a maintenance module.

Henning Haugen: So during this maturing process in maintenance, moving toward IT the preventive, reactive maintenance ratio, we start to see some of the limitations of the system. And it was because it's separate databases, there's no single source of truth. You need to go into each server database, if you would like to collect all the data from all the sites. Must know system support or cost control, or no links to other company function as purchase, some things like that. So it's not a complete standalone system. So, second half in 2018, we started to set up a global solution for our planned maintenance module. And using the experience from our Norwegian factory as a basis, and planned a rollout to 35 factories approximately, from second half to 2019 and 2020.

Henning Haugen: But as everybody knows, during that period, we have the COVID happening. And of course that put a stop to our onsite training. So we had to take one step backwards and think okay, what should we do now? What kind of options do we have? So we were thinking, okay, we need to do something online. And we moved all of our training to Teams. we did some piloting to ensure that they got the quality we wanted. So we have that small delay of two months. But, two months delay in a plan that first made two years back involving actually several hundred people in total, I think it will be quite reasonably good even without COVID.

Henning Haugen: So I am still pretty satisfied with that process. So until now, we have actually been very focused on preventive maintenance by a time-based money maintenance. But, last autumn we were introduced for this project and moving more towards a condition-based or predictive maintenance. As I think time-based maintenance is the most cost efficient to run maintenance. As we are probably are over-maintaining or under-maintaining the equipment. Because it's difficult to cope with the variations we have in having production module, or product types. And a real part lifetime and things like that. So for us it has been the next natural step now, it has to be to look into the cost condition-based functionality and the predictive maintenance opportunities.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay.

Henning Haugen: So by that, we expect that should thoroughly reduce the maintenance cost and maintain or increase equipment reliability and uptime. And also release more time for our technicians and spend more time on the other linear tasks, less manner of data logging and find new monitoring methods to increase equipment reliability.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay, okay. So you're working on shifting from maintenance, which is done at time intervals, to maintenance that is provided as needed based on predictive analytics.

Henning Haugen: Yeah.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay.

Henning Haugen: That's true, yeah.

Sarah Nicastro: Good. And Henning, how will the addition of predictive maintenance capabilities, help you when it comes to building on the success of Jotun's partnership with IFS? So building on that foundation that Jotun has created with the ERP project?

Henning Haugen: For us to say it's a great motivation boost, in a project like this. I think it will push our organization to look into more functionality and make us able to take better decisions and be more efficient. When it comes to utilizing other huge amounts of data, that is actually created by the equipment and the systems are much faster. Trying to manually handle and analyze all this data, to get something useful out of it, is really resource demanding. And we are often too late to implement required to changes.

Henning Haugen: So if we can have some more automate this process into the system and then giving us a triggering task when it's needed, due to the conditions on the equipment or predictable by the system, that will help us a lot. So for us, it's interesting and motivating to work here, together with the IFS on this. To be in the forefront and develop new functionality and tools. So if we go, beginning like different future prospects as well.

Trond Aune: And Henning I think it's fair to say that we're utilizing new technology like this, both machine learning and internet of things into our maintenance processes to identify and capture and analyze data, utilizing that to be better in the preventive maintenance has been really a nice and exciting journey for us. It has been often a really good cooperation with IFS in that respect. To be honest, this is tool and areas which we probably not have been gone into without IFS supporting us and helping us into those areas. As I said initially, we are a little bit luggage when it comes to utilizing the forefront technology in that respect. But we are really happy that we had got that opportunity. We really think that that will help us in developing our maintenance process and hopefully reduce maintenance cost over time.

Henning Haugen: And I think we're already much faster than we would have done if this project was initiated by us. So, very good.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I was actually Trond, I was going to come back and ask, you had said, just a bit ago that Jotun is quite, what's the right word? You take projects seriously and you don't just dive into every technology that's out there. So I was going to ask, what about the opportunities of predictive capabilities made you say yes to adding that? So it sounds like part of it is the relationship and the history with IFS and then part of it is driven by the ability to really improve efficiency, right?

Trond Aune: Yeah, but it's all solid feed back to the sort of, our approach to digitalization. We really need to see the benefits of it. And obviously being in the middle of the implementation of the maintenance and modular IFS and starting to see some opportunities. But then boosting that with the machine learning, internet of things part of it, and get though that really gave a boost effect to the whole project. So at least that is what we believe it will do. We have not finalized it yet.

Sarah Nicastro: Sure.

Trond Aune: So it's, yeah. It has just confirmed the way we are thinking around digitalization.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes sense. And we know that digital transformation is an ongoing journey, right? It's more of a path of continual evolution than it is sort of crossing a finish line. So you have this predictive project in the works. And you evaluate new technologies and capabilities quite carefully. What is the thought process I guess overall, at Jotun on this sort of continual evolution when it comes to digital transformation?

Trond Aune: I think I touched into it a little bit earlier as well. We are in some aspects I mean, Jotun was one of the first companies in the world to start to tint paints in the shops. I know if you go into a paint shops and you pick exactly the color you want. You can choose an infinite number of colors. Going 40, 50 years back, you had the maybe 25 colors to choose between. Jotun was one of the first companies in the world to implement tinting technology in the shops. Another example is that Jotun was one of the first, had the most advanced, automated warehouse, when they build a new factory that was I think in 80's.

Henning Haugen: 1977 I think.

Trond Aune: 1977, yeah sorry. And that is examples of area really are in the forefront. Where we see the benefits of it. When it comes to the digital trend of digitalizing everything in your business, I think we are not in the forefront. We are sort of in the middle. But then we saw for example, the way what we have introduced now, the way to offer a solution for us or our customers, to clean the hull of a ship, that is groundbreaking. And so that is a way of thinking. We pick our important areas which make us unique. And that is what we have done several times when it comes to digitalization. It is our customers and it's the efficiency and the profitability and the growth, which is important for us and there. And so I think that is short and sweet, our approach to digitalization. But of course, we are doing digitalization every time and we are implementing e-invoice and online services and all that kind of stuff is of course hitting us as well. And we are doing that together with all the other companies around the world.

Sarah Nicastro: Makes sense. Henning, anything to add?

Henning Haugen: I think Trond has wrapped it up very, very well. But of course yes, we select areas we expect high effect on the likelihood of a success of course. I think that's important. If you are going to jump into all the new trends of digital transformations or other business methods, I think rather this system will run, it will be run by these systems rather than we are running the systems, so yeah.

Trond Aune: What we do see though, Sarah, is that obviously the capability to collect data, the capability to present and analyze data with tools like Power BI for example, has really also boosted the digitalization over the processes, because we've seen all the, really the possibility those kinds of tools gives us to improve in all respects. So that is also an important part of it.

Sarah Nicastro: Going back to how we started this conversation with the penguin culture, it's a really well balanced approach. You as a company, you're very bold, where you need to be and where you've proven it to be beneficial. But you're pragmatic and grounded in not feeling the need to dive into areas that are outside of your expertise, or to try things that you don't know will bring a strong benefit to the company. So it's a really well balanced approach because I wouldn't... you're not a laggard, you're not ultra conservative, you're bold where you need to be, but you're smart about where you choose to apply that. So I think it's a good lesson for anyone listening to think about that. So very good. I appreciate you both sharing your time with us today. It's been a pleasure hearing Jotun's story and talking with you.

Trond Aune: It's a pleasure to share as well so, and thank you very much, Sarah.

Sarah Nicastro: Thank you.

Henning Haugen: Thank you very much.

Sarah Nicastro: You can learn more by visiting us at futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com. You can also find us on LinkedIn as well as Twitter @TheFutureOfFS. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more about IFS service management, by visiting www.ifs.com. As always, thanks for listening.

January 27, 2021 | 26 Mins Read

Lessons Learned in Global Service Transformation

January 27, 2021 | 26 Mins Read

Lessons Learned in Global Service Transformation

Share

Emilie Giraudet, formerly the Head Of Customer Service Business Support & Sales Steering at GEA Group, shares with Sarah her hard-won and valuable insights from more than a decade of work transforming global service at GEA. Insights include practical advice for how to influence and align key stakeholders, how to set a solid technological foundation, and three keys to successful change management.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast. I'm your host Sarah Nicastro. Today we're going to be talking about some of the lessons learned on the journey to advanced services. I'm excited to welcome today Emilie Giraudet. Emilie is a global leader with 12 years’ experience in the manufacturing industry and an expertise specifically in customer service. She was most recently the Head of Customer Service Business Support and Sales Steering at GEA, one of the largest global technology suppliers for food processing. She has a wealth of knowledge and experience and has kindly agreed to join us today and share some of that. Emilie, thank you for being here and welcome to the Future of Field Service podcast.

Emilie Giraudet: Hello Sarah. Thanks a lot for welcoming me in your podcast today. Very pleased to be here today.

Sarah Nicastro: I am pleased to have you. Before we dig into talking through some of the lessons you've learned and some of the experiences that you've had in your various leadership roles, just tell us a little bit about yourself and your background and your most recent role with GEA.

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, sure. I hold a Master Degree in Food Process Engineering and an executive MBA from INSEAD. As you mentioned, I spent most of my carrier within GEA, which is one of the largest global technology supplier for food processing. I dedicated most of my carrier to developing service strategies, businesses and teams, and to driving business and cultural shift towards the more customer centric and performance driven organization. In my last role, I led an ambitious digital transformation project, leveraging customer install-base data through data management and analytics in CRM and analytics cloud in order to steer service revenues and customer experience.

Sarah Nicastro: Good. You make it sound so simple, but we know that it's not. That's what's so interesting about talking through different people's journeys is there really are so many things that you learn along the way. At GEA, you made some significant progress on the journey to advanced services or Servitization and you're here to talk through some of the lessons you learned as you did this. The first area is alignment on vision. What perspective can you share on making the decision to move from spare parts to advanced services, CapEx to OPEX, some of these big, big shifts that manufacturing organizations are making. What perspective can you share on sort of seeing the opportunity to evolve but then creating that alignment around it as an organization?

Emilie Giraudet: Sure. It started with a great vision from top management, that's step by step we implemented in the organization. About 10 years ago, everything started with a visionary top managers at GEA who understood early enough that in order to increase sales and support customers, especially in mature markets, GEA should not only focus on new CapEx investments which were limited in these mature countries and also support existing clients with better services to help them optimizing their plans performance and OPEX management.

Emilie Giraudet: We really had this cultural shift coming from top management, especially looking at the evolving markets in mature organizations, mature countries. In order to achieve this vision, we define an ambitious service strategy with a head of a new after sales and service business unit, a consultant and myself so a very small team at the beginning, working on a strategy that we quickly had approved by the boards. Once the board approved it, we started to implement it in the organization.

Emilie Giraudet: To start and make it easy at the beginning, we built a core team with top service leaders that we picked from the best performing service entities around the world and after that, we worked on building a community around the world, training people, showing the vision, communicating about new service products and new proactive approach that we could bring to the market and at the same time, we started to implement new KPIs to track our performance, to be able really to integrate this culture in the organization and globally, if I look at the progress we made it in 10 years, GEA doubled its service contents from 15% of the revenue to now about 30% of the revenue. Globally service transformation as you know is a long journey. Some more steps are still needed to achieve the company full potential, especially I still believe GEA needs to break down some silos and to foster even more customer experience culture in the organization.

Sarah Nicastro: But I think it's a really good point that even before you start to implement real change or introduce real tech... Different technologies and systems and change processes and things like that, you started the communication and the training on the concept and the culture itself so before you were even saying, here's how you go do this new thing we're asking you to do it was here, understand how big of a role service can play in the organization and what that can look like and really training more on making it a part of the culture. Am I understanding that correctly?

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, exactly. We had some good examples already. We had some countries where they already shifted their culture and who had a lot of revenues coming from services, would develop new concepts, new services, new approaches to clients so we could leverage this internal benchmarking to encourage other to change and to show the direction. So to make it real and possible achievable for countries who were a bit less mature, I would say. Everything started with the vision.

Sarah Nicastro: That's helpful, when you have examples within your own organization of where it is being successfully achieved because that's, it's a bit different than pointing outward and giving examples that way. I can see how that could resonate quite a bit. I want to throw a bonus question at you because I'm just curious your thoughts. One of the things that sometimes comes up in my conversations Emilie is, because you're saying that you had this vision, the vision started from the top down, the leadership saw the potential and the opportunity and then move forward from that point.

Sarah Nicastro: Do you think it is possible to transform in this way if it doesn't initiate at the top? The reason I'm asking that is because I do talk with folks sometimes who lead service functions and they see this potential, but it's like fighting an uphill battle internally. The company culture itself is more, let's keep doing things the way we've always done them, let's stay focused on our product success or what have you and it can obviously be very frustrating for the people that do see that potential when it isn't a shared vision. Is it a lost course? Is there a way to sort of infiltrate the upper level and share that? What are your thoughts?

Emilie Giraudet: Well, globally, I don't think its waste of time, so I believe there is a lot of potential in service and I'm sure that, I mean, when... I mean, people try to drive this initiative, they can be successful already at their level. Then if they want to really roll this out into the entire organization, I believe they will need to get support from top management to a certain extent or else it's very hard to move the organization. Getting buy-in from top management to me is needed to really roll out this big change and big transformation, but I think demonstrating that you can achieve things on your own at a local level or it gives you power to engage and motivate people. For me it's, we're starting but clearly if your ambition is to roll it out into the entire organization, top management support is needed to motivate the rest of the organization.

Sarah Nicastro: I just, I always feel for those folks because I can feel that frustration of seeing the opportunity, but it not being shared so I was just curious your thoughts. I mean, I agree you have to get it to have it really take hold, but it's a good point of find some ways to demonstrate success that you'd have better luck winning people over with that than just conceptually.

Emilie Giraudet: Mm-hmm (affirmative). If you have good feedback from customers it can really help, I guess, engaging top management.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes. Good point. Okay. Moving on to sort of the next topic which is the importance of organizational structure, when we look at expanding the service business. This is something where at GEA you made some changes to set yourself up for success. Tell us a little bit about that.

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, indeed. In the last 10 years we tried three main different approaches. We learned on the way. We started, as I mentioned, in 2011 and especially in one of the division or where I was working a segment process, engineering segment, we created a new after sales and service business unit on top of the existing traditional application business unit. That was really a shift already implementing that. As I explained, we started small with a very small team and expanded a little bit but without having a real dedicated organization.

Emilie Giraudet: Only in 2015, GEA implemented a new organization. For the first time we created a global service organization with about 400 people out of about 4,000 service people globally in the organization. The global service organization was responsible for developing new products, business development, technical support with really experts from different domains. They were in charge also of improving processes and competence management so really a central function in charge of steering and making service organization more professional.

Emilie Giraudet: At the same time, we had this local organization that we try to empower and really to give them local responsibilities for them to steer sales and to serve clients as locally as possible so really trying to get closer to customers. That's our second organization. More recently in 2020, we implemented another organization where we remove this global service organization as such, we implemented five different division and what is new is that GEA appointed chief service officers at the board of each division. Then we have service teams in a metrics organization so reporting on one side to the chief service officer and on the other side to the more operational business units.

Emilie Giraudet: During these years, I have really saw top management focus on service continuously increasing and I believe it's also been supported and encouraged by a profitable sustainable growth. I believe GEA succeeded in defining an ambitious vision to start in appointing dedicated resources to implement the vision and they also managed to develop step by step service talents and mindset across the organization. Even if we try different things, I don't think it was failures. It was just new ways of doing things and taking time to structure and change this organization.

Sarah Nicastro: I'm not sure if this will make sense to you, but in my mind listening to the progression that you just talked through, it almost seems like just that not trying something and it not working, but more of an evolution. When you started this and it was a small team and it was focused, it was because it was new. I mean, it was a new focus for the company. You really were still working on making it a part of the culture and determining how you would have success and then it sort of evolved into the second phase where you made some progress. But to me, it seems the chief service officer point is really an illustration of the initial vision permeating the company culture to the point where it doesn't need to be its own separate entity or business unit. It is truly a part of the business. Does that make sense?

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, it's a part of the business. It has still to be steered so somebody has the vision. Somebody is leading some initiatives and is having power to engage the organization on the change and I believe having this global service organization a bit separate was not sustainable anymore. Globally we are taking care of customers. We want to build customer experience so removing silos, I think it is part of our success and we had to. It's a good way I believe to break down some silos and incorporates better service organization within the different business units.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes sense to me. I think the customer experience is one aspect of it. Again, organizational structure is another topic that comes up a lot in these Servitization conversations because for a company that's really starting as a product manufacturer that's evolving to trying to be a service provider in a Servitized business. I've seen different structures similar to what you've mentioned, sort of a global entity or a separate business unit or a separate function or sometimes people even set it up as a separate business that kind of comes in at the point of after the point of sale and so it seems like it's something that takes some work to your point to try different things and not only sort out what works well and what doesn't, but to evolve as the service success of the business grows.

Sarah Nicastro: But to me, I agree with the point of having it more integrated into the business makes for a smoother customer experience. I also always question the true level of success you can achieve on Servitization if it just remains a separate thing. To me it's, you're really only then buying into the vision of Servitization to an extent rather than I guess doing the work it takes to integrate it fully into the business vision, culture, mission, process, et cetera. It's another very interesting part of the conversation. Okay.

Sarah Nicastro: Next let's talk a little bit about strategy. You have the vision, you've sort of structured yourself in a certain way since start and changed over time and then you have a strategy for how you're going to have success with service, but at GEA this began with needing to have a foundation from which to build and so you uncovered this need of really better defining what the install base looked like and that's where the CRM project that you mentioned earlier came from. Tell us how this tied into the strategy and why it was so important and what that project look like.

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, sure. I'm very happy to talk about this. It's been one of my core focus in the last years and as you mentioned, it's really for GEA the foundation for developing service business. We truly need to know who are our customers, where are their plants located, what type of installation do they have, to be able to segment clients and be more successful in our proactive sales approach, in designing new solution services and developing services better fitting to client's needs. It's really a foundation to become more proactive and more specific in what we do.

Emilie Giraudet: Maybe let me tell you a little story to start and to show you where we started 10 years ago and explaining why we had to change at a certain time. 10 years ago when we built that business unit, we started to explain the concept of structuring an install base as a foundation for growing our service revenues and I really remember that some of the service heads were very successful, had difficulties in understanding this concept. Okay. I see two main reasons for that. The first one is that at that time service people were mainly reactive in our organization so they would not need to have a list of prospects to approach them more practically so that's one

Sarah Nicastro: Waited for the phone to ring.

Emilie Giraudet: Super reactive, no need to know our clients. The second reason is that at that time GEA had a very centralized approach and were servicing clients from the core technology centers that GEA has mainly in Europe and these technology centers, they somehow have information about customers in their local systems so no need for them to have a very well-structured install base to be able to answer to client needs.

Emilie Giraudet: But everything changed with the implementation of our new organization in 2015, where GEA decided to give more power to the local organization and we realized that this local organization had no access to their install base so it was very hard for them to achieve their budgets, their targets, without being able to proactively approach existing clients because they didn't know them. That's really what drove the change and it took us many steps to get there, I would say.

Emilie Giraudet: For a certain part of the organization, we had very limited... I mean, not limited, but we had siloed data. Data were, I mean, spread around different systems, et cetera, so we had a hard job collecting all the information, put it in a very simple global Excel file to start with. Then we had this project already at that time to launch a new CRM, but we had a freeze from the board so we decided to implement an in-between situation, building an SQL server, starting to structure things.

Emilie Giraudet: Finally, one year, two years ago, the cloud CRM was approved and we were able to clean and migrate data in CRM to build a global community of users globally to define governance model and really to progress there. It was really the foundation for us to start with. I believe GEA now has data good quality accessible in a CRM cloud for the entire organization and now GEA can leverage this information to develop sales steering analytics. Okay.

Emilie Giraudet: In terms of analytics, GEA has two main KPIs that they are looking at. One is the market potential. Market potential, we define them and GEA defines how much service business they can generate from each install base. Okay. The second KPI we are looking at is what GEA calls the capture rates. It's basically the ratio between what's the legal entities are achieving in terms of sales and their potential. Two main KPIs that GEA has been using for a while already, what needs to be improved and what we started to work on in the last months, I would say is to make these KPIs more operational.

Emilie Giraudet: The local teams really accepted it's not enough to say, this is your potential, here you go. They want to... They need to trust it and that's where having data of better quality, more accessible, allows us to utilize more advanced concept like machine learning, also engaging people using design thinking concepts to develop more advanced and more detailed market potential calculation. At the same time, we also develop some dashboards to allow people to visualize their data and to be able to really take better data driven decisions based on the reality in their market.

Sarah Nicastro: This had to be a really interesting experience for you and for the rest of GEA leadership because you already had the vision and you already understood the potential without the real data. I mean, it had to be so affirming to then have the data come together and to look at the potential in real numbers and the real scale of what was possible with the service focus. That's really interesting. I wanted to make one point of clarification because I know I got confused by this when we spoke the first time and I don't know if our listeners may be smarter than I am, but, so when you talk about local versus central, so when you started this project, you had the small group to start and then you had the business unit and now you have the chief service officers, but the strategy, the innovation, the technology, those things are centralized, but the execution is localized. Am I understanding that correctly?

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, exactly. Sales and execution are localized. Exactly. To be able to visit clients so I remember two years ago, I visited Chile for instance and I was already responsible of this install base and we organized some workshops to understand how to structure things, what do they need and so on and what came out of this workshop is that, yes, they need the install base to be able to increase their revenues but they had information about the install base, it was very limited so they told me, Emily it's great to know that this plant is in Chile, but Chile is huge. I need to know exactly what type of plan do we have in which city. Okay. Then they had very limited access to our systems so the SQL server we had at that time was not approved by IT for instance so we could not allow global access to our information so having good quality data and being able to see it was really key for local people to visit clients, to improve their knowledge of clients and their performance in service.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes sense. I only point that out because it's another common conversation that comes up is around to what degree to standardize and to what degree to allow some level of regional or business unit or partner depending on the circumstance kind of individualization. That's why I was pointing out that the strategy, the innovation, the technology use are handled at the central level but the execution is at the local level.

Sarah Nicastro: I'm curious in terms of the CRM project and really bringing this data to existence and to life, to be usable by the entire organization. I'm curious what the reaction has been both from the company and what has it been like for folks to have access to this information and what type of feedback did you get there? But also from the customer perspective, this is really, if you're talking about moving from a reactive model entirely where it was, okay, something's wrong, we need to call for service to this level of being able to be far more proactive on providing service and looking for advanced service options and things like that. I'm curious the reaction and the feedback on both sides.

Emilie Giraudet: From the internal perspective, even if 10 years ago it was difficult to convince some people I think that the change of mindset progressed, so nobody was against or not able to understand the concept. I think everybody was in need. Also the fact that we implemented this global organization in 2015, GEA had to work with different divisions and some divisions were more advanced so already had the CRM on premise not on cloud, but had this higher maturity, I would say, in managing their install base. It was quite obvious that it was needed so nobody had to be convinced. Everybody saw the interest. We just had to do the hard work, cleansing the data, migrating the data, training people, so buy-in was already there. In terms of customer perspective, I see different... I receive different feedback. The first one is that GEA is a complex organization and GEA develops different technologies.

Emilie Giraudet: In the past GEA would have some experts in different technologies and would visit client for one specific technology and another expert would visit the same client for another technology. Finally, I think now local people have access to the entire information of the install base for GEA and it's a big advantage for them. So clients, instead of receiving visits from five different experts for their installation, they would receive visit from one person having the entire understanding and visibility on what is installed. That's one.

Emilie Giraudet: Secondly, I mean, with CRM came not only the installed base but a ticketing system. All correspondence with customer can be done in this system and it's transparent, accessible to everyone. It also increases the internal transparency and it's immediately perceived by customers so they don't have to repeat twice the same thing to two different people because we have hold historical information in our system. I think customers now get a feeling that we have a much better global understanding of their installation and not simply experts coming to solve specific problems that they have.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes sense. It's really interesting, you said how hard of a journey it was to cleanse that data, to consolidate that data, but as we talked about at the beginning it is the foundation for anything from that point forward and so you mentioned things like machine learning and it's taking the time and this is something that is always a lesson learned when I ask folks that have transformed service, what's one of the biggest lessons you learned? It's always the importance of good data and it's going to be harder than you think it's going to be, but there are no shortcuts, those types of things so it's interesting. Okay. You had said to me a comment you must show impact to continue progress and I think we alluded to this honestly a little bit earlier when we said if someone is finding themselves in a position where they see potential for the organization that may not be shared, look for an area to make impact, to gain the attention and the buy-in to continue progress but in your instance, tell me what you mean by that statement.

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, sure. I fully agree to convince people to be able to get more resources, more budget in an organization. I believe it is crucial to be able to prove what you achieve so I'm going to share what I personally do usually. I usually do my best to use a combination of analytics and customer centric approaches when I drive my teams and my project. As a Six Sigma Black Belt, I systematically take time at the beginning of a project to define the scope clearly, to define objectives and KPIs that I want to measure and to achieve. Okay. That's to me really crucial and I know a lot of people don't necessarily do it, even if it looks very obvious. During the project, I really take time to monitor my KPIs and also very important to communicate it regularly to key stakeholders for them to see the progress, et cetera, and also for my team to be able to adjust approaches when needed.

Emilie Giraudet: Okay. That's the analytical approach. On the other side, before I start a project I always make sure as well that my teams, my projects are fulfilling our customer needs. Internal, external customers doesn't matter, but you really need to have a clear understanding of what customers really want and as I mentioned, I like to leverage tools such as design thinking, for instance, to really make sure that I have a true understanding of the needs. I believe that then it's easier to show impact when you're able to demonstrate and to measure the progress you've made on delivering customer results okay, to prove your success and to be able to continue progress in your organization.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes. That makes sense. That's really good advice for how you handle that. It always shocks me, but it shouldn't anymore because I hear it often enough but it still shocks me, the amount of people that say, I don't, we didn't measure that, when it comes to KPIs. I think that's a really smart approach, especially because when you look at this project in particular, the CRM project, it really is just the beginning of the potential. I mean, it was setting that foundation and so there will be so many opportunities to build upon that success, but part of that is because you did an excellent job doing it the right way and tracking that progress to make sure that when the next opportunity comes, there's belief in the ability to execute.

Sarah Nicastro: We had a gentleman on the podcast very early on and there was something he said that has always stuck with me and he referred to it as building a strong digital reputation. Meaning if you don't do a good job for whatever reason and we can talk about the many, many things that that could mean, but you ruin your reputation so the next time you try and implement a new tool or a new system, you're going to be met with so much resistance because of that last time so it's important to stay focused on building a positive digital reputation because when you look to build, you need to have a good track record. So that makes sense. Emilie, can you share one of or some of the hurdles that you are proudest for overcoming because we know that this journey is not an easy one. It's nice to be at a point where you can reflect back on some of the success, but there's a lot of really hard work getting there.

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, sure. Probably the biggest hurdle I faced with that project was related to finding the right collaboration mode with IT department to drive such a global digital transformation projects from and for the business. That was really the toughest part. In 2019, I had to drive different projects around install-base management and sales steering analytics and clearly to work on this project, I needed support from it teams. The challenge was really for me to get support from this IT team because resources are limited and at GEA at least you really have to prove that your project is super top priority to be able to get resources and when I knocked on their door in 2019, it was kind of too late and I was probably missing buy-in from this, the organization to be able to prove how important it was.

Emilie Giraudet: Later in 2019, I started to prepare 2020 and I understood that I really had to drive into nearly a complete change management project starting from convincing top management, engaging business leaders around the world, also getting support from the CRM team to be able to demonstrate the strategic importance of my project to IT. It was not enough to knock on their door and say, "Hey, this is super important." But really showing them that I had commitment engagement from top management, from the business side of the organization, from the CRM team. Then finally after a few months, they approved to support my project and they did a great job at it and we were able to deliver our project on time with good quality. So all good.

Emilie Giraudet: What I learned out of this story is that mapping key stakeholders and really understanding their needs, their objectives, their working modes at the beginning of a project is a key dimension to succeed in driving such a broad cross functional and cross geographical transformation project. If you miss one key stakeholder, it can ruin your project so really important to map early enough key stakeholders, talk to them, understand how they work and how you can make it happen together.

Sarah Nicastro: That's really smart. I'm smiling because it's really smart. Also, there's a bit of tenacity thrown in. I mean, you deserve some credit for being resourceful and understanding, well, if it's not going to work this way, then let me kind of go about it in a different way. That's really good. Okay. What would you say outside of this project specifically or related, whatever you want to share, what do you... What would you say is the biggest lesson you as a leader have learned?

Emilie Giraudet: It's kind of related to this project, but not only so I would say it's about change management. When I was younger and especially when I joined this after sales and in service business unit I was really reporting to the managing director, head of the BU so I thought that people would follow what the MD would say naively which was not true. They would always argue and negotiate and not implement things. I really understood early enough that it's not enough to have very high position to ask your people to do things, you really have to engage them and to motivate them.

Emilie Giraudet: To me, there are three main dimensions to succeed in implementing change. The first one is about motivating people. We are human beings so we need a certain level of excitement, enthusiasm to get things done. I believe it's crucial really to find a way to motivate people around your project. The second one is about showing the direction, so being able to create a vision to make it compelling enough to be able to start the change and to motivate people to act. The third dimension to succeed in change management to me is to be able to slice the elephant into actionable and achievable steps so as to reduce the complexity and encourage continuous success. I really believe that being a leader is not about giving people instruction, but really about motivating people, understanding their needs, designing and communicating a compelling vision and executing plans with clear steps and milestones. All these dimensions are crucial.

Sarah Nicastro: That's really good advice. I think... What I was thinking about when you said you realize that they weren't going to just do what they were asked, they were going to push back. Even if they hadn't pushed back, I think one of the important things to think about with really making an effort in managing change the ways that you just outlined, which were fantastic is the goal should not be compliance because the level of success you're looking to have in this type of global transformation, you won't achieve from compliance. Even if they had said, sure, Emilie, we'll do whatever you're asking us to do, you need commitment, you need a real commitment to the mission, not just somebody that's going to do it simply because they're being told and you're not going to achieve that without making that a priority. That's really good advice as well. All right, any other comments or anything, any closing thoughts you want to share?

Emilie Giraudet: Yeah, maybe one last more so we started with explaining that moving an organization used to selling machines to a service organization is a cultural shift. That's also what I understood during this year is that, it's really crucial to drive organization cultural shifts and even if GEA can be very proud of its transformation to a more service oriented companies, I believe there are still better results that can be achieved especially by engaging a broader audience so we went through this different organization that we implemented so indeed we started engaging a part of the organization, the service organization, I believe now to reach more what we expect in terms of customer experience. We really need to engage a broader part of the organization and it takes time. It's not easy to break down silos and to change the culture but that would be for me the next step, I would say, for GEA to truly succeed and really leverage the potential that they have. This is hard to do.

Sarah Nicastro: What other parts of the organization or what piece would come next, I guess?

Emilie Giraudet: I would say people who are involved in selling new plants, new machines to customers, and really to tighten and to build a closer collaboration between pure service after salespeople and people selling new plants. I think we have a, I mean, in all organization interest into building this and a good way for me to do that would be really to map the customer journey so really to step out of internal processes and how things are done in an organization, but really looking at the customer journey and building a map to improve customer experience that would really facilitate collaboration within different parts of the organization.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. I always think too in this type of transformation, the opportunity, once you get into marketing. Like you said, it's every... It takes time. It's a huge undertaking to take a company from being a product business to a Servitized business. But once you start having success and being able to build upon it, it's quite interesting. I was also thinking when you were talking about the CRM project, you're really starting rightly so with a focus on how to wrap your arms around and better serve the install base but even once you're better serving them, then you have the opportunity to start brainstorming with them and thinking about adjacent services or new digital services or what have you. I mean, it really is the potential is limitless and it's exciting, but also overwhelming, particularly for people that are inclined to want to spearhead this type of transformation. It's a really interesting topic and you've had some wonderful points to share. Thank you so, so much for joining and talking with us on the podcast. I really appreciate it Emilie.

Emilie Giraudet: Thanks a lot Sarah. My pleasure.

Sarah Nicastro: You can learn more by visiting us at www.futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com. You can also visit us on LinkedIn as well as Twitter @TheFutureOfFs. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS. You can learn more about IFS service management by visiting www.ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

January 20, 2021 | 22 Mins Read

The Business Model Blueprint for Successful Servitization

January 20, 2021 | 22 Mins Read

The Business Model Blueprint for Successful Servitization

Share

Tim Baines, Professor of Operations Strategy at Aston Business School and Executive Director of the Advanced Services Group, makes his third appearance on the podcast sharing with Sarah insights into one of the most-discussed aspects of servitization: how to create revenue.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to The Future of Field Service Podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today we're going to be talking about the business model blueprint for Servitization success. I am excited to welcome back to the podcast for a third time, Professor Tim Baines, who teaches operations strategy at Aston Business School and is the executive director of the Advanced Services Group. Tim, welcome back to The Future of Field Service Podcast.

Tim Baines: Thank you, Sarah. I'm pleased to be here.

Sarah Nicastro: We won't go into details but we had to work very, very hard to bring you this episode today. So, thanks to Tim for hanging in there with us, and I'm excited for today's conversation. I think the biggest question that comes up for me, when I'm talking with folks about the journey to Servitization is how do we monetize it? What are the revenue models? How do we use it to increase revenue? So that is a part of what we're going to be talking about with Tim today.

Sarah Nicastro: Tim was first on the podcast last year, talking about the forces behind Servitization and what that journey looks like for companies, so if you haven't listened to that episode, it's definitely worth revisiting. And in December we tackled some Servitization predictions for 2021 and some of the things that Tim expects to see this year. So today we are going to add on to our nice stretch of podcasts, by talking about business models and revenue models and how to make Servitization work for your business.

Sarah Nicastro: So Tim, to start, can we talk about how does Servitization represent a business model innovation?

Tim Baines: Thank you, Sarah. So the whole conversation about Servitization drags in this idea of the innovation of the business model of the firm. The innovation of the business model of the manufacturing firm. And as you know, this whole conversation is about moving from a world where the business model is largely about the design and the production of a product, and the transactional sale of that product, to a world where the business model is ultimately about ensuring the outcomes, the business outcomes for the customer. And for our business model, as a provider, as a manufacturer, to be based on receiving value, on the capture of value, as our customer consumes the service that we actually offer.

Tim Baines: So the conversation about Servitization naturally leads into conversation about business models. And when we look at business models, look at the business model framework. It's largely recognized as having four elements to it. One element is about the offering, what you put out there, what you give to the customer, the service, or the product, or the product and service. One element is about how you deliver that, so the systems, the technologies, the people. And the third element, and really the focus for our conversation upon revenue models, the third element is about this value capture.

Tim Baines: And I'll just mention for the moment, the fourth element is about the broader competitive landscape and our competencies to compete in that. Before, now I'm moving back to this third element and saying, okay, the processes of value capture, how we get value out of delivering the product or the products and service to our customer, is where we naturally go when we think about revenue models.

Tim Baines: And of course, if you think about an organization putting a service into a customer, they're going to receive value in a number of ways. Some of those ways are going to be very direct, ways in which we can monetize and other ways are going to be less direct. The learning that we get, for example, of working with a customer. That learning flowing back to us.

Tim Baines: But of course, when we talk about revenue models, we're talking really about that way in which we capture direct funding, how we get value, monetary value, out of our offering to the customer. And what becomes interesting, you can look at this area of revenue models and you can reflect upon it and think about the different revenue models which are actually out there. And there is, of course, the traditional revenue model that you associate with a product sale, that the manufacturer gets reimbursed directly and perhaps immediately, and perhaps in full for the sale of a product, right away across to these subscription type models, where we're paying for, on perhaps a monthly basis, for actually the provision of a product or a service.

Tim Baines: And ultimately when you get to the business, the revenue models that we're really interested in, which are associated with these more advanced services, these revenue models consist of a combination of different factors. They consist of a pay-per-use component but they also consist of a lower banding, where every month we will receive some revenue, no matter how much our customer uses our product or service and an upper banding, which is basically a point over which we're saying to the customer, you can't use our products and service any further because we need to have access to that to do some services with. So maintenance work.

Tim Baines: So I hope that's made sense, Sarah. There's an awful lot in this topic of revenue models and it starts with the business model and it starts with the fact that we are undergoing a move to different types of business models. And the revenue model innovation is a really important component of that move to these business models, which are based more around service, rather than the transactional sale of the product.

Tim Baines: So I'll stop there for the moment and just see whether my explanation resonates with what you were seeing, Sarah, what you're being asked when you speak to people.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Tim, that explanation actually had me thinking about our first conversation and talking about some of the forces behind Servitization, Right? And so if you follow me for a moment, what I'm thinking about is the conversation is often led with revenue model, right?

Sarah Nicastro: So I don't have a lot of organizations leading the conversation with me and talking about the more holistic view of business model. They're pretty focused on the revenue model. And what it made me think about is that that's because ultimately that revenue model aspect of the business model is what's going to yield the payoff to them, right? So it's kind of, they're naturally focused there because they're most concerned with, if we're going to invest time and resources on this journey, what's the payoff to us? Does that make sense?

Tim Baines: It absolutely does. And I see that also.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. And it made me think about the conversation in the context of some of the external and internal forces around Servitization, right? So it's, to me, the focus on the revenue aspect only, is sort of an internal focus, where the business model focus is looking at it more holistically, with both, what's the ultimate pay-off to the company, in terms of revenue but also how are we going to deliver value to the customers, that they are in essence, willing to pay for? Does that make sense?

Tim Baines: It does Sarah. And I think there's three threads of conversation which intertwine. When we look at this area of Servitization, if we're not careful, we can just see them as one thing that's happening, revenue models. But of course, as you've just pointed out, you have A, the way in which the customer actually pays us, but B, how that rolls up to be the business case for the organization, the compelling financial argument for us to move forward with services. But also C, what that means in terms of our relationships with other financial organizations or the financial innovations, or the ways in which we might explore, to actually fund some of our own activities. And that third area is in itself, a whole area of conversation, which can take a deep dive into and can be fully immersive.

Tim Baines: But the first two points, I very much agree with it, when we speak to practitioners, we see the same thing. They are interested in, how is somebody going to pay me? How is that going to affect me? Am I going to receive a lump sum or am I going to receive monthly payments? What's it going to look like?

Tim Baines: And then secondly, how do I put together a compelling financial case to the business, which is an argument for us to either move into Servitization, to move forward with Servitization, to expand our Servitization activity. Those are those two levels.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. That makes sense. So you talked about one of the components of the revenue model being the value capture process. So can you talk a little bit about some of the different ways of capturing value?

Tim Baines: So, and this is where I understand this language here can seem a little bit, almost like conceptual and difficult to grasp for a practitioner. But this is the language that the scholars who are working on, on business model innovation, those scholars tend to use. And one of the challenges people like you and I have, Sarah, is to take this somewhat academic conceptual language and translate it into practical terms. And value capture is one of these academic terms.

Tim Baines: But when we bring it right the way down and say, "Well, what are we really talking about, the level of a manufacturing firm," we can simply say, the important bit for us is how do our customers pay us? How do customers pay us? Now, one of the challenges is that manufacturing firms, of course, are very familiar with the idea that our customers pay us when they buy a product. And of course, as we move into these services, which are more sophisticated, these more advanced, these outcome-based services, the way in which our customers pay us tends to change.

Tim Baines: So we're here as a manufacturing firm. We are made aware that when you look at the more sophisticated outcome-based contracts, customers tend to pay for that service as they consume it. And that can give a lot of concerns to the manufacturer because you take the example of a high value asset. Let's say it's a machine tool. Let's say it's a million dollar machine tool. The old world is that the manufacturer makes the machine tool, sells the machine tool, gets a million dollars for it and with that million dollars, has the funds then, to reinvest in the materials, pay for the workforce, et cetera, this sets about making the next machine tool.

Tim Baines: But of course, when we moved to these services and you hear people like myself, advocating it's going to be a pay-per-use, the manufacturer's sitting there and saying, "Right, I'm not going to get a million dollars. I might get more than a million dollars. I might get $2 million. But it's going to take me five years to get that $2 million."

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Tim Baines: "Or three years or two years to get that $2 million." We're going to get more money back because ultimately I'm going to provide more services to go with the product. But I'm going to be getting back over a longer period of time and I'm not going to get it back as a lump sum. I'm going to get it back as a month by month payment. And that gives the manufacturer these alarm bells. And the manufacturer says, "I can't do this. How am I going to pay for all these raw materials that I've just consumed, in providing this machine tool. If all I'm going to get back as a monthly installment, which over two or three years, is going to build up towards this 2 million pounds, but from day one, I'm just going to get a small fraction of that back, how can I afford to do that?"

Tim Baines: Now there's an explanation of how you can do it, but I'll just pause for a second Sarah and say, does that resonate? Is that the type of conversation that people have come to you with?

Sarah Nicastro: Yes. That absolutely makes sense. And I think the implications of that level of change within a company are something that is just not simple, right? I mean, it's something that takes a lot of change management in thinking but also work to put into practice and sort out what that means and how to evolve into that type of model.

Tim Baines: And it's a topic which, when people first started looking at these more sophisticated services, these more sophisticated business model and there were outsiders to it. And they looked at these and said, "This is really concerning." And I always remember some of the very early research papers, that I read about Roll-Royce. And you would see the statement that says, Rolls-Royce no longer sell jet engines, they sell power by the hour. And of course, people took that literally and they said, "Oh, so they're not selling the gas turbine?"

Tim Baines: The answer is, they absolutely are selling the gas turbine, whether it's Rolls-Royce with a gas turbine, where there is a company like Alstom, or GE. Sorry, Alstom with a train system. Whether it's Caterpillar with a big quarry truck, the asset is being sold. So I think that's the first part of the message back to the manufacturer, exploring the Servitization space. They will still sell the asset.

Tim Baines: So back to our machine tool example. I will still sell the machine tool. And I will sell it and I will get that lump sum payment for the machine tool. It's just that the customer isn't necessarily buying the machine tool. And that's what people get confused with. With these more advanced services, I'm still selling the asset. I'm just not selling it to the customer.

Tim Baines: I'm selling it to a finance organization, which becomes an intermediary in this model. And remember, a couple moments ago, I spoke about the three strands. This is part of the third strand, which we could perhaps talk about in more detail at a separate time. But if you look at these organizations, whether it's Caterpillar or whether it's Rolls-Royce, whether it's GE, they all have a financial institution, a captive financial institution. So a financial function with inside their organization, which is taking on, when the product is made, when the machine tool is made, in effect, internally, they are buying that asset from the manufacturing part of the organization and putting it into the finance part of the organization.

Tim Baines: And now there's other businesses out there, which are much smaller than people, like Rolls or GE, who are using external banks to do the same thing. So it hasn't got to be a captive bank, but external bank. Well, that's what happens, is the asset is being sold.

Tim Baines: So the manufacturer actually, going back to our fictitious example of the machine tool manufacturer, what's actually happening, is here I am. I am selling my machine. I made my machine tool. I'm going to sell it. I'm going to sell it to the bank and it's going to go to the bank. So I'm getting a million dollars right away for the transactional sale. And then I've got a guaranteed income then, for the next two, three, four, five years, whatever the contract length is, of another million pounds, another million dollars for those services, which I'm going to provide for.

Tim Baines: And this is where this conversation then, about the revenue model and the compelling case for services get so intertwined because all of a sudden I've now got an income into my business of 2 million pounds, whereas previously, I would have only got a million pounds or two million dollars, where previously I'd only got a million dollars.

Tim Baines: Now that's a very compelling argument to move forward to Servitization. But the argument doesn't exist unless you get underneath the surface of it and start to tease out what the revenue model looks like in the way that you're doing. In the way that you're speaking to me about.

Sarah Nicastro: So Tim, can you walk us through, what are some of the established and emergent revenue models for advanced services?

Tim Baines: Okay. So understand the baseline. So the baseline is the traditional transactional sale of the product. I've made the product. I'm selling it to you, as the customer, and you're paying me directly one single installment for receiving that product.

Tim Baines: So moving away from that, what you tend to hear people talk about more and more is a subscription. A pay-per-use. And notionally, a subscription model is a model we're familiar with. It's the model that you might have on a mobile phone or with a gym membership, is each month, I will have a monthly payment.

Tim Baines: Now, based in the context of what we just spoke about a few moments ago, about the fact that I will still be having my transactional sale of the product to the finance house, which will give me a lump sum back inside my organization, to go and finance my manufacturing system, the customer just experiences their subscription charge. So as a provider, I am getting both a lump sum repaid and I'm also getting a subscription from the customer. The customer themselves is paying a subscription and that subscription comprises of two components. Part of it is going back to me, the manufacturer for my services and part of it is going back to the finance, as to pay for the loan, which they've taken on, in effect, has been taken on the machine. So the customer sees a subscription charge.

Tim Baines: Now, when you look at subscription charges, that is, a lot of people are looking at the moment in time at Servitization and seeing it as being a move to subscription charging for a combination of a product and a service. Now it's more sophisticated than that, of course, when you start to look at more complex machinery because the power by the hour model on a gas turbine isn't simply a subscription. It comprises of three components.

Tim Baines: It comprises of a baseline, which says that, look, even if the asset isn't being used, you will still pay me every month, a base fee. And by contrast, it comprises of an upper fee, that says, "Look, we don't expect you to ever pay more than this top level because we don't expect you to use the asset more than so many hours in a week, so many weeks in the year, type of thing because there's a maximum utilization we would expect this asset to actually have. And it might only be 85% because above that, we need to have access to the equipment to maintain the equipment.

Tim Baines: So you've got a lower band, a higher band and between the two, you've got a variable. And the variable will be based perhaps on the number of hours used or the outcome, the number of products produced, et cetera.

Tim Baines: So some practical examples. If you look at, we've talked about Rolls-Royce, in terms of power by the hour, the idea that the gas turbine thrust, that's an airline operating company buys from Rolls-Royce, is based upon the number of hours that that machine is running for them.

Tim Baines: If you go into food production, you go in the world of food production and you think about the idea of pay per pack. If you imagine a production line and the production line is producing potato crisps. And then you've got each item going through the machine, in effect it incurs a kind of a revenue flow back to the manufacturer of the machine. A pay per pack. And you have that happening with companies like Domino and companies like Ishida, and companies like Tetra Pak. Or people like that who are playing around with these ideas about pay per pack.

Tim Baines: And then you've got this idea of pay per good pack. And if you imagine in food production, you've got a difference between paying per item produced and paying per good item produced. And that's a different form of revenue model. And they're all bundle ups, Sarah. So you've got all these different revenue models, components of a revenue model.

Tim Baines: And one of the challenges when you're thinking about an advanced service offering, is to put together that construct of that revenue model so it works for the customer. So you've got these different components, as I've just talked through. So it's a revenue model, which comprises of those and works for the customer. And it's on the base of the revenue model that the justification, the business case, can then be put in place. And then we go from there.

Tim Baines: So I'm sorry, Sarah. There's an awful lot in the revenue model conversation and I'm mindful that I've spoken at length about it. But is it helping to clarify or am I just adding more fog to an already quite foggy topic?

Sarah Nicastro: No, I think it's definitely helpful. And I think, there are certainly areas where we could really dig in and that gives us an opportunity to have you back at some point and do that. But this is good.

Sarah Nicastro: I do want to ask a couple more questions. The next is around what do you think the future trends are for these revenue models for Servitization? How do you see this kind of evolving?

Tim Baines: Okay. So I see, what I feel I've witnessed over the past few years is people becoming much more aware of a subscription charging approach. So the customer paying a subscription. And you can think about it in terms of if you stream music, you pay a subscription.

Tim Baines: Now the subscription charge is simply a fee, which gives you an availability. And somebody like myself, who lives in a place where my mobile phone reception is poor, still pays the same, if you like, subscription fee that somebody who's living in the center of town would pay. I'm not paying a fee based upon me fully experiencing the outcome that I want. I'm paying a fee which is giving me access. I'm not paying a fee which is based upon the successful receipt of me receiving an outcome. Now, of course, there are, if I look at the contracts, there are terms and conditions about my mobile phone should work under these conditions, et cetera, et cetera, and I can get a refund if I don't get it.

Tim Baines: But without going into the depths of the contract, I think the trend will ultimately go towards charging for outcome. Charging for successful delivery of outcome. And go back to my point, a moment ago, imagine a piece of production machinery inside a food processing plant. And let's say that piece of production machinery is a bottling machine. And at the moment in time, we might talk about moving to a world where the manufacturer, the production machinery is being paid on the basis of the number of bottles which are being filled.

Tim Baines: Actually, the customer doesn't receive income based upon the number of the bottles. We receive income based upon the number of bottles which have been fully filled. Have been filled in a way that the contents remain sterile, let's say, et cetera. Paid per good fill. Okay.

Tim Baines: And that's part of that evolution. So that's where I think it'll go to, Sarah. I think most businesses are quite a way off that yet. They're really in the world of even this idea about moving to a subscription-based approach and partnering with a financial institution, to enable that subscription-based approach. That's where the bulk of business is, just to exploring that.

Sarah Nicastro: I agree. And I was going to point out, one of the things I see companies doing is almost tiptoeing toward subscription but not being fully comfortable with it yet. Meaning some companies I see are still trying to keep the two worlds separate, in the sense of selling the asset, but then trying to offer service on subscription after the fact. And I think that I see how you could feel as though you're kind of testing the waters in that approach but I think ultimately, what you've talked about today makes far more sense and is a truer representation of actual Servitization, If you understand what I mean. Does that make sense?

Tim Baines: I think Sarah... Go ahead. Sorry.

Sarah Nicastro: No go ahead.

Tim Baines: No, I was just going to add something in, which was, I think this move to subscription is a very valuable component of the Servitization journey but it isn't the Servitization journey in itself. And I think it's important to recognize that a customer can still buy a product on what feels like a subscription basis. I know Goodyear will sell a tire to a customer on the basis of a monthly payment of the number of miles or kilometers that tire has gone.

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Tim Baines: Now that's still a traditional product sale. It's just really been paid for in installments. So the shift to subscription doesn't explain the whole Servitization journey. And it's important to recognize that because we have come across situations where, because the subscription model is difficult for the manufacturing organization to grasp, the whole Servitization initiative gets derailed. Of course, Servitization is fundamentally innovation in the customer value proposition.

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Tim Baines: Doing more and more for our customers and of which a pay-per-use subscription model makes absolute sense. But the subscription model itself doesn't explain the Servitization. It's a component.

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Tim Baines: It isn't the journey itself.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes perfect sense. So last question for you today, Tim. What you just said, I think is an important distinction. The Servitization journey is really one that is representative of evolving your customer value proposition. Determining how you monetize that and what the revenue model looks like is one component of that journey. It does seem to be one of the biggest struggles for a lot of people, or at least if not the biggest struggle, something on which they're putting the most emphasis. So for someone listening, that is struggling a bit with this conceptually, what's your best advice or synopsis for how to, as best they can, simplify and make progress in this area?

Tim Baines: I think I would suggest three steps, really. Sarah. I think the first step has to be, to be clear in your mind, exactly what this model actually looks like. And we've talked about it in the sense of this idea that what the customer receives is different than necessarily what the manufacturer offers. And that happens because in the loop now, where we've got this financial organization, whether it's incumbent in the manufacturer or it's independent to the manufacturer, being part of the equation. So being clear in your own mind about what is the structure of the financial flows, I think is my first step.

Tim Baines: And I'm not suggesting anybody goes into huge amounts of detail, but just sits down and sketches it out and says, "Yeah, okay. I understand what the customer's going to get and pay for. I understand what it is that I'm going to produce now. I'm going to receive funds. And I understand that if there is a financial organization in the loop, what they are going to get. What's their slice of the operation?

Tim Baines: I think my second piece of advice would be that I know that this is going... For an organization to invest in this, it's got to have this business case. But of course, the structure of that business case is both dependent upon this revenue model and also the stages of maturity of the Servitization journey. Because if we're at the stage earlier on and going back to our roadmap, where we're just exploring the ideas, then the business case is simply asking for permission to explore the idea further, whereas if we're much further down the road, the business case is about much more strategic investment.

Tim Baines: So I think my second point is really be clear about the basic business case that you need to form, on the basis of the revenue model. So understanding how detailed you need to go, in figuring out the revenue model, really is determined by what's the business case you have to create at this stage of the game? So if the business case is to just get permission to do some experimentation, then at this stage of the game, the revenue model only has to be fleshed out as what it might look like with one particular customer, whereas if we're looking for permission to make a big investment, then the revenue model has to be fleshed out in much more detail with multiple customers.

Tim Baines: So I think that's the second point is be clear about almost like the stage that you're actually at in your Servitization journey and particularly, therefore, what does the business case need to comprise of?

Tim Baines: And then the third piece of advice is, if at all possible, come up with just a prototype and just experiment with one very safe organization that you can use to mutually learn from the experience. Just pilot, to try it. And through that piloting and trying, then both organizations will develop their knowledge and their insights of what this can actually look like. And then that's the platform to move further forward.

Tim Baines: And so you've got these three components really, that are coming out of it. And the first one would be clear about what that structure could look like, think about where I am, in terms of a business case and the sophistication of a business case I need to produce. And thirdly, just think about a very basic pilot at this stage.

Sarah Nicastro: Excellent. Very good. Very good advice, Tim. And we're out of time for today but I could ask you so many more questions. So we'd love to have you back again soon and continue the conversation. As you said, there's plenty of areas here to dig into but thank you so much for joining us again and sharing your perspective. We really appreciate it.

Tim Baines: Now, Sarah, thank you. I've enjoyed the conversation today and yes. Thanks for your tenacity in ensuring I actually get to speak to you today. So thank you. Take care and I hope to speak to you again in the near future.

Sarah Nicastro: You can find more by visiting us at www.futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com and you can also find us on LinkedIn as well as Twitter - @TheFutureofFS. The Future of Field Service podcast is published in partnership with IFS – you can learn more about IFS Service Management by visiting www.ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

January 13, 2021 | 30 Mins Read

Sysmex’ Tips for Effective Onboarding, Training & Retention

January 13, 2021 | 30 Mins Read

Sysmex’ Tips for Effective Onboarding, Training & Retention

Share

Sarah welcomes Bobby Lincoln, Supervisor of Customer Care Onboarding at Sysmex America, to discuss how to make onboarding personal – particularly in our now virtual world, how to train without creating overwhelm, and how to retain field service talent by offering career progression paths.

Sarah Nicastro: Welcome to the Future of Field Service Podcast. I'm your host, Sarah Nicastro. Today we're going to be talking about tips for successful onboarding, training and retention. We know that with some of the challenges that exist in obtaining and training and retaining talent, these are topics that are very, very important to the vast majority of our listeners. I'm thrilled to be joined today by Bobby Lincoln, who is the supervisor of customer care onboarding at Sysmex America. Bobby, thank you so much for being here, and welcome to the Future of Field Service Podcast.

Bobby Lincoln: Well, thanks for having me, Sarah. It's a pleasure to be here.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely. So this is Bobby's area of expertise. And I'm excited to have him here with us today to give us some tactical advice on how to have effective onboarding and training. Onboarding is obviously the very first impression a new employee gets of your company. And with talent that today has many, many options on where they spend their time, it's a very important first impression. So Bobby, before we dig into some of the things we want to touch on today, just tell our listeners a bit about Sysmex, yourself and your role.

Bobby Lincoln: Well, thank you. Yes. My name is Bobby Lincoln, as Sarah said, I supervise customer care onboarding for Sysmex. I'm also responsible for managing a group of field service technicians, which we'll discuss those later on this conversation. In brief it's a national group of field service technicians that we hire to support districts as they get trained to do installations and eventually move into a permanent service engineer role. But I do supervise the onboarding process for everyone in the service organization, I've handled this responsibility for going on little over a year and a half. So pre-COVID and after COVID experience going on. I've been with Sysmex now in year 16, which I hear is unheard of in modern world, everybody switch jobs from every three or four years. But no, I'm a lifer as they say. Sysmex is a medical device company at its core. We're a Japanese based company.

Bobby Lincoln: We are the global leader in hematology diagnostics, we are now broadening our year analysis portfolio. And yeah, it's been a wild ride. When I started with Sysmex, we were... I don't know the exact market share number, but over the course of the last decade and a half, it feels really weird saying that by the way. We've become number one in the United States and the world.

Sarah Nicastro: Awesome. And I agree with you. I think after 2020 everyone should have survived and led through COVID on their resume. It's-

Bobby Lincoln: Absolutely.

Sarah Nicastro: It's a whole skill set in and of itself. All right, so we're going to talk today about onboarding, training and retention. And I kind of lumped them together in the introduction, but they are really three different and three very critical areas. So let's take them one by one. So we'll talk about onboarding first. So to start, just tell us a little bit about what your onboarding process looks like.

Bobby Lincoln: Well, I would like to discuss because it has morphed over the last year. Pre-COVID we would have... We'd spend interviewing. We spent a lot of time on the interview process, which I anticipate most other organizations do as well. We would come into the office, in our United States offices located... Well, there's a couple now actually. But we'd send everybody to Lincolnshire, Illinois, Northwest Chicago, and we'd come in and we'd spend day one just getting to know each other. And then throughout the course of the week, we'd have different presentations, discussions, we would do a tour of the building, we'd literally get to meet the CEO if he was in his office that week, which is pretty cool. A lot of people on day three don't get to meet the CEO of their organization. But really, the big thing about our onboarding process is, the goal is two things. We want to acclimate our new employees to our organizations or better yet our culture, ultras big from where we are.

Bobby Lincoln: Also, there is a few things that we have to hit, certain metrics that every employee needs to go through and all the corporate things, the human resources, presentations, all of those things that many, if not all corporations put their new employees through.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Bobby Lincoln: Yep.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. So one of the big areas of emphasis for you is making the onboarding experience personal. So why is this something that's so heavily prioritized? And I guess, more importantly, what are some of the ways that you accomplish that?

Bobby Lincoln: As I was thinking about this, two quotes come to mind. I'm a big quote guy. It drives my wife crazy sometimes, but you think of the godfather quote, it's not personal, it's strictly business. Well, I like to subscribe to... He's a buffoon in many ways, but I'd like to subscribe to the Michael Scott version of business. And I wrote it down to make sure in case our listeners don't quote me saying it wrong. So I did write it down, where he says, "Business is always personal, it's the most personal thing in the world." And you fast forward a little bit in that episode and he goes, "People will never go out of business." And I really subscribe to that, we subscribe to that at Sysmex, we believe we are in the people business. Why wouldn't we make it personal?

Bobby Lincoln: We hire folks to come in as service engineers, we hire them to do a technical job, but at the end of the day, that's only part of it. Our customers are going to require some fixing as well. So we spend a lot of time on making it personal to welcome them to our family. Really a family. That's our view. That's how we approach it. And when you bring someone into your family, Sarah, you've probably had folks sit down at your dinner table before, and thought, "I don't know. I don't know." We spend a lot of time on the front end so that when we bring folks in, they fit into our family and we want to acclimate them to that culture.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Okay. So when they start the onboarding process, do you have any examples of things that you guys do to make it feel personal to them? So that it's not just employee one, two, three in onboarding session number whatever? What are some tips around creating a more personalized experience for those folks?

Bobby Lincoln: So much of this conversation, I'm going to tailor it more to where we are right now virtually, because in the office when I would host this onboarding process, it's similar, but it's different. So for example, we log in on day one, everybody comes in and I intentionally start our meetings about 15, 20 minutes before all the production starts, if you will. We get to know each other. One of the fun things that we do during this process, is every single class we challenge them with icebreaker questions. And it's no fancy science behind it. I literally Sarah, go to Google and type in icebreaker questions. For example, one of them was what superhero would you want to be and why? My personal favorite is if you could upload one skill to yourself via the Matrix, if you could become Neo about anything what would it be? And we challenge them and talk to them.

Bobby Lincoln: It just naturally generates conversation. And to make it personal, this might sound crazy to some out there, but I want to create the environment of we're sitting around the dinner table where you feel virtually comfortable talking to anyone at that table. That's the atmosphere that we hope to create in our onboarding process.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Now I have to assume being successful at that is more challenging in a virtual environment than it is in person.

Bobby Lincoln: It is especially challenging for people like myself that when I give presentations, I feed off the room. I love the energy in the room, you can look and see it's harder I think, especially using certain platforms where now our new hire classes range anywhere from four to eight individuals. Seeing them on a screen, reading their faces for how they're receiving the information is way more difficult this way. Whereas when you're in the room, you can see it and feel it. This way, you kind of have to... I don't want to say put on more of a show, but make it a little more entertaining, if you will. And that's how I have... I've seen it work very well thus far.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah. And I think that not everyone can control, I guess, size of onboarding class, but when you're doing it virtual, I think considering how many people you have in a group is important, because if it's still not as easy as reading the room in person, but if you have to keep an eye on four, or six, or even eight individuals, energies and reactions on screen is one thing if you were doing a class of 20 or 25, or any more than that, it would become very difficult to give anyone that individualized attention.

Bobby Lincoln: Yeah. We had... This was right before COVID hit last year. The November prior we had a class of 18 people in our room. There's no way we can do that in this format. In fact, we have made the decision based on occupancy levels of the buildings of local in Illinois, of what they allow, our new hire classes can only be a certain size, because of the restrictions that we have at our training center down the line. We have more frequent classes, but they're smaller.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Which in the process you walked us through in terms of how you try and create more of that dinner table dialogue and really get people engaged, if you have four, six people, that type of interaction is feasible and easy to encourage. You don't want them to be able to hide behind the numbers, I guess. Okay.

Bobby Lincoln: Yeah. And I have folks that work with me. We have people throughout the organization that come in and help. And we always have one of the new hires, one of their direct managers is tasked to assist with the process. And a lot of times, depending upon the presentation, or I've got two or three screens going and they get tasked with monitoring faces. That's their job. They got to make sure the room's awake, nobody's falling asleep.

Sarah Nicastro: Right.

Bobby Lincoln: Yep.

Sarah Nicastro: It's important.

Bobby Lincoln: It is.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. So you mentioned this a little bit, but you have these folks come in and you... How long is the onboarding program?

Bobby Lincoln: We have it broken down into three segments. It's onboarding week, which they spend day one that first week, that's onboarding, that's where we have human resources, we briefly get into anything technical in week one, it's a lot of application building, giving them the tools. "Hey, this is what you use this for, this is what you use this for." That sort of thing. Week two is our foundational class where we dive deeper into various processes and then they get put into our technical training curriculum.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. I like the one thing you said though, about the goal is an onboarding for them to have a foundational understanding, but not an overwhelming amount of detail.

Bobby Lincoln: Right.

Sarah Nicastro: So you want to give them the critical overview that they need to be able to move into the training program, but you don't want to overwhelm them with too much at once. So talk about why you think that that concept is important when it comes to onboarding?

Bobby Lincoln: Absolutely. Are you a sports fan? Do you like football?

Sarah Nicastro: Yes, I have given up watching football since I had children so that my husband can do so because it's one or the other not both.

Bobby Lincoln: Very nice. I get the television, I've got three children, and daddy gets TV on Sundays. That's it. Four months of the year, daddy gets TV on Sunday. But I like in our training program to... All right. On day one of training camp, if you were to give your quarterback the entire playbook on day one, there is no way we could have the expectation that they could accurately and precisely execute that playbook in its entirety after that day. Impossible. If I could upload a skill like I mentioned, I would do that. But we can't, we're human beings. We have to absorb information, learn it and implement it. And so I like how we approach training to that. We have a certain progression. Once you can do A, let's do B. Once you can do B, let's challenge you with C. That's The goal.

Bobby Lincoln: Because if we overwhelm individuals on the front end, they're going to get burnt out. We're all human beings, when we get burnt out, we don't like what we do. I don't want that, I never want anybody to feel that overwhelming burnt out where they just want to quit. Any manager, or anybody in charge of any program should not want that for their folks. But it's step by step. And I liken it to the NFL playbook, you cannot expect them to do everything on day one, you have to work in steps.

Sarah Nicastro: Now have you seen a difference, Bobby, in terms of, I guess, bandwidth for consumption? Is that different in person versus virtual? So pre and post-COVID? And how has that changed?

Bobby Lincoln: I think in person I can connect and get more information through in a shorter amount of time. This platform allows, it's just too much distraction. I'm looking outside my house right now, I've got my kitchen there, I've got to say no to all the snacks that are there, or the phone might ring or... I've had folks where their kids are home, my kids have been home. It's challenging right now. It really is.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. And you get the Zoom burnout, right? So when you're doing onboarding in a physical location, you can say, "Okay, we're going to do the first two hours in this room, and then we're going to move to this room." And you can change scenery, you can work in activities, or breaks, or what have you when it's, "Hey, show up for your eight hour day and we're going to spend the whole thing on Zoom, and I'm just going to crush you with information." You'll start to get blank stares after so long. So I would think you've had to be strategic about how you pace things so that you can keep people engaged as well.

Bobby Lincoln: Absolutely. We've had a certain strategy for onboarding for the last six, seven years, and it's just day one, day two, day three, and so on. With this format, we've rearranged it because we don't want to overload their brain on information on one day, because by three o'clock in the afternoon, you can see it, they're done. We only really schedule out of the five days for week one, we're on Zoom half days on three of those days. And so we give them more autonomy to do some of the corporate training stuff that's online and the virtual training that we have everyone do. We give them the time to do that and do it at their own pace, because this is tough. This is tough.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. The last thing I wanted to talk about in terms of the onboarding experience is the emphasis that Sysmex puts on teaching the human side of the business in addition to the technical stuff. So tell us a little bit about that conceptually and then in practice, how you balance that within the coursework.

Bobby Lincoln: Sure. We understand that our customers are... We're in medical devices, that's what we do. Our instrumentation or analyzers, they are what our doctors and our healthcare workers use to save lives. The end of the day, that's who our customer is. It could be me, I don't want it to be me anytime soon, but I know that I will be a customer per se. We work really hard to understand that the end result of our instrumentation is a human being. And you can't do this job effectively if you don't have a passion for people. You just can't. You can fix things, you can do a great job fixing that analyzer, but if you're not good with your customer, that personal side of it, that human side of it, it's just not going to work. And there's a reason why we win so many awards year in and year out. Is because we focus on that. One of my favorite moments in this whole onboarding journey that I've been on camera, and if you ever listened to this, I'm calling you out.

Bobby Lincoln: We were in training and going through what our customer service model and how we approach it. And he raised his hand and he's like, "I thought you hired me to fix instruments, all we've done is talk about people all day." Right, that's what we do. That's what we believe. We firmly believe that if we take care of our customers and teach how to fix instruments, as well as down the road, making sure our employees are happy, it's just a natural circle of success.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). So what are some of the topics that you touch on in onboarding specifically when it comes to the human side? So obviously, you're touching on the technical side, but on this human element, what are some of the things that you start the conversation on in the onboarding process?

Bobby Lincoln: We employ a model and I don't want to give away too many secrets. But we work on human interaction, specifically how to defuse negative situations, there's everybody listening to this that deals in service, most calls from customers are not happy once, there's something that we need to fix. Something we need to resolve. Sometimes it's the instrument, sometimes it's the person, it depends. And so we spend a full day learning, teaching and every time I've given this presentation, I've thought of something new or how to interact with people. You can use it in your personal life. And it really centers around listening to others and having empathy for their situation. And we have been doing this for many years, and we just believe that if we focus on the people and we listen, and we acknowledge them and we hear them out, we can get to a successful resolution on both the technical side and the personal side of things.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Yeah. And it's interesting, this is a topic that comes up more and more in terms of the emphasis on soft skills and the need to focus on that in training and talent development, because we're really beyond a world in field service, where mechanical or technical skills are all it takes to do the job. So to your point, whether you're talking about a break fix type service situation, where you might have a customer who's frustrated or upset or stressed out because they need resolution on that, or whether you're talking about even more advanced services and what it takes in terms of relationship building and being consultative and being viewed as a trusted adviser.

Sarah Nicastro: On any end of that spectrum, it becomes critical to have really good soft skills and people skills and communication skills and relationship building skills, in addition to being able to fix whatever you're there to fix, right?. And I think that that trend in my opinion is only going to continue as we look at the automation of certain tasks using technology and just the changing world of what service is demanding. I think that those skills are only going to become more important.

Bobby Lincoln: Yep. And one of the things that's really neat too, and it took me a while to learn this when I was new in field service, my background is in clinical laboratory science. I worked in a hospital lab for a little over four years and then moved into field service. But you as someone in field service, drive future sales more than you ever imagined. I didn't realize that, I just thought, "Oh, our salesperson came in and did a fantastically good job." And they're like, "We sell because of our team." And we've had customers that have been competitive takeaways, they're... Let's give some props words too. Some of their engineers, they had such good relationships that they worried about what was going to happen to them and vice versa. We don't want to... If you're my service engineer, what would happen to Sarah, if we jumped ship? That's why relationships are so important. It's so important all the way down the line. And that's why we start off with that, because at the end of the day, business is the most personal thing in the world.

Sarah Nicastro: Yeah. Okay. So let's talk then about training. So the onboarding process happens and they go through the two weeks of initiation and then they transition into the training program, right?

Bobby Lincoln: Yep.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. So tell us what the training process is like at Sysmex.

Bobby Lincoln: We spend a week on onboarding, they come in and we acclimate them to culture and build them up and talk a lot about the customer service side. That's week one. Week two, is a foundational training, a lot of the tools that we set up week one, we learn how to use. We get involved in them. We do some introductions to the various analyzers in our portfolio. What's really neat about that particular thing is it's used to be an onsite demonstration, or an onsite thing. Now it's virtual, we're doing this virtual. And what's neat is we've used our various tools and we've got a world class center for learning that does a live stream. So they can live stream this class. It's really neat to see. Then we mix in, it becomes a mix of technical training on site in the classroom style teaching and on the job. And so our philosophy is let's get them in the field, let's start learning who their customers are. Let's hook them up with folks on their team that we trust to be a good mentor and then keep teaching.

Bobby Lincoln: And it's a good six to eight-month process to get through all of the various training that we have. And even at that point, we're very upfront. We expect, you're not going to feel comfortable until you're about 18 months to two years in this job. That's just normal. That's normal. Now everything is a bell curve. So there's some on the front end, some on the back end, but for the majority, 18 months to two years is a fully functioning service engineer.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Okay. So I know you touched on this earlier when we talked about the football playbook analogy, but talk again about, within that six to eight month training program, how you phase in work. Because from what I'm understanding, you do that in an individualized way. So you expand on tasks as they become ready for more challenges. Am I understanding that correctly?

Bobby Lincoln: Yeah, that's correct. We don't want to take somebody two weeks into the job and say, "Here, go walk into the Mayo Clinic and fix their instrumentation." That's not fair. That's obviously not fair for our customer and it's not setting anyone up for success. It really is a... Now there's an unwritten number of time or a tenure with which we gauge. Like, okay, we have to take any job, we have to be able to check the boxes. Some people check them faster, some check them a little slower. But it's really a relationship. Training is absolutely a relationship between our center for learning that gives feedback on the individual. The individual has to take ownership and perform and then their direct manager has to navigate them through their journey of training to start saying, "Okay, you know what? Bob is ready to go out and do some preventative maintenance, let's give it a shot. Go ahead, you have all day to get that done." And we see how he does. Or an installation for example.

Bobby Lincoln: We know a certain analyzer takes a certain number of days on average to fix. Excuse me, to install. Let's see how they do. Get them out there in the real world. We can train, train, train, but eventually you've got to go out on the field and play the game. And so it's incremental for a reason because we want to build knowledge, we want to provide information and then start seeing how the performance is.

Sarah Nicastro: So you build from really simple tasks to harder tasks, both to build their knowledge and expertise, and also to protect the customer experience obviously. Like you said, not having someone brand new go into Mayo Clinic to do this job. And then you pair them with mentors. And how do you determine... Does everyone have a mentor? How does the mentor process work?

Bobby Lincoln: Oh, in a perfect world, we'd all have assigned mentors and that sort of thing. What's really neat about how our districts are structured is that we have entry level folks all the way up to high performing award winners. And each team within your own organization Sarah, you probably have somebody that doesn't have a mentor next to their job description, but you know that you would send someone to work with him. That's our mentality. We know if someone needs some technical training within our group, we know who to send them to. When I was in the field, I was what we call our lead service engineer, which was directly below our district service manager. And I focused a lot on customer skills, administration type things. Technically, I was never the best at it. I'm a solid B+, solid B+ technically. But I excelled where my... I was really high performing in the customer side of things.

Bobby Lincoln: So I would mentor our new folks in that regard. So it's more of a... In the world of unlimited budgets, we'd have this fancy mentoring program, I'm sure everyone listening would love to have that sort of thing. But the real world is we know who we can trust, we go to those people and just because of the type of culture we have, they want to see their teammates do well, because that makes their job easier, it makes the customers experience better. So it's a little bit of both.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Okay. Now, how do you sort of monitor performance throughout training to determine, I guess, both when to add new duties to folks? And then also, when they're ready to graduate from training?

Bobby Lincoln: There are some official documents that we have that are designed to lead a manager to gauge their service engineer’s performance. So there are some boxes they have to check. But I can't look at a team in California and say, if I'm not working with them day to day. Like I focus on my team, I know what I should expect from people as they progress. I'm not dodging the question, that's just the honest answer, it's not something that's they have to do this, they have to do this. They have to obviously, but it's more of... You just know it. It's like watching your kid learn how to ride their bike. They go for a few feet, they go for a few feet, and all of a sudden, they're riding down the street and you're like, "Hey, where did you go?" They pick it up. You know. It's feeling.

Sarah Nicastro: Correct.

Bobby Lincoln: And that's the mentality that we have. We know when our service engineers are ready, you can just tell. And we introduced them based off of the maintenance tasks, to installations, to the full blown troubleshooting job that it is.

Sarah Nicastro: So when they're ready to graduate, what happens next?

Bobby Lincoln: Oh, we throw them a big party, we send them out to dinner, and the CEO gives them gift cards. We have this really neat... Well, it's like I said, pre-COVID, we had a full graduation week which was really neat. So they would come in and there would be specific, but we would bug the analyzers in the training department and they had to fix it, they had to go in and pretend that our technical trainer was the customer, we'd have to go through the entire experience. And they had to do it unsupervised, using only their team, their tools, the resources that they had. And at the end of the week, it was, you get a little certificate and we do... I wasn't joking, we would have a very nice dinner and celebrate. Because it really is a journey. It's something that we should celebrate. I just recently finished a master's degree not that long ago. And-

Sarah Nicastro: Congratulations.

Bobby Lincoln: Thank you. Thank you. I went out for Baltimore's best crab cake and celebrated. It's fantastic. So you should celebrate your successes.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Absolutely. Yeah. And that makes them feel acknowledged for their hard work and appreciated. Now when they graduate from training, this is going to kind of segue us into what happens next but what sort of the path from training on?

Bobby Lincoln: Then you get... So on onboarding, we're going to acclimate you into the company culture. From there on out, it's a slow acclamation into your specific territory, your customer base, that sort of thing. Once training is done, then you're going to be on your own more, you're going to slowly get your own territory. And as you perform and as your successes begin to mount and you prove that you can indeed do this job, then we're going to continue to expand it until we get to where we consider a fully... Not fully functional, that's not the right word. We have a certain number of designated instruments that each engineer is expected to service and carry and maintain that sort of thing. So full work load, if you will.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Okay. So after training, they come into your team as a field technician. That's what you referenced earlier in terms of the team that you manage?

Bobby Lincoln: Yeah. So we've got the entry... We have two levels of entry into our service organization. One is entry level position. It's what we call our field service technician, and I'll use the acronym FST. The other way is the service engineer, which I'll call the SE. So the FST, the field service technician is an entry level position. These are folks when I'm hiring for them, I'm looking for fresh out of college graduate, folks that want to get into field service. Like right now in my team, I've hired people that had previous experience, I had somebody that had no experience in field service, they had an electronics degree, clinical lab folks, shout out to all the med techs in the room. I have someone that went to college for sales that's on our service teams. So we really have a broad scope of individuals that we look at for the FST position. The next transition to that is service engineer. So I like to describe it to use another sports analogy.

Bobby Lincoln: The FST is almost like the minor leagues. When a service engineer position arises anywhere in the country, that my team, my pole of FSTs will be the first place that we look at for, "Hey, we've got an opening in Baltimore," which is right down the street from where I live. We have an opening in Baltimore, are there any FSTs? Before we look at... We obviously open up a job wreck, but we have folks that are trained, that are ready to go, that can graduate, if you will, into that promotion of a service engineer. But we also hired directly into that role based on experience.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). So it's like your farm team.

Bobby Lincoln: Yeah. I like-

Sarah Nicastro: Just trying to keep the sports analogies.

Bobby Lincoln: It works.

Sarah Nicastro: I'm doing my best, Bobby.

Bobby Lincoln: That's good. That's good, I like it.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay. All right. So I can see how that benefits Sysmex. So now we're kind of talking about a few different things. I think that if you listen back to some of the podcasts that we've recorded on the topics of retention and talent and things like that, we've had a number of conversations about the fact that if your only strategy is to hire based on experience, and you think that you can continue to do that indefinitely, you're mistaken, because you're just going to run out of it. So this idea of... I like the examples you gave of all of the different backgrounds you have in your pool of folks right now, right? So they don't have to have that experience, but they have an interest, they have an aptitude, they have some abilities to develop in this role. And you bring them on at that level and you work with them to develop all of the experience they would ultimately need to do that as a role.

Sarah Nicastro: So I think that's a really smart approach from the Sysmex perspective, because you're giving yourself a source of talent by working a step or two back in the value chain, rather than just expecting to be able to hire people that have done the job for X amount of time. But the flip side of that is, it gives an opportunity to foray into field service for folks that wouldn't have the opportunity to join Sysmex that they didn't have that experience. So as you're bringing these people into the fold, talk a little bit about how an organization can structure and offer that career progression and why that's important when you're hiring younger people.

Bobby Lincoln: Oh, gosh! My immediate response would be who wouldn't want to go to work for an organization where they didn't have the opportunity to advance? I certainly wouldn't want to go into a role that had no opportunity for growth or advancement, or there are people that do. God bless them, there are people that are looking for the seven to 3:30 punch in, punch out and that's okay. I think the younger workforce that we have coming out of college, there's a few things. They want to make an impact. Everyone wants to make an impact, how does what I do today affects somebody tomorrow? What's really cool about this particular job in field service in healthcare in general, especially now, is I've taken instruments out of laboratories that had somewhere in the neighborhood of five million cycles through them. That's five million people that I helped indirectly, but I helped them. That's cool. I like that. That was neat. What I really enjoy about what we do is we not only hire people that are ambitious and fit into that culture, it is a culture, we look for folks that want to do that.

Bobby Lincoln: One of my favorite questions asked on an interview is, "Are you looking for a job, or are you looking for a career?" And it's okay. I want career people. And we have various levels of hierarchy within the service organization. So you start out as an FST, or an SE and then the natural progression is to the next level and up. And what's really fun about working at Sysmex, it's in our mission statement by the way, is we challenge each other. We challenge each other. So my boss will sit down with me and he'll say, "What do you want to do? Where do you want to go?" You'd be reasonable, you don't say, "I want to be CEO next week," that's not going to happen. But I want to go here and here and here. And so we go, "Okay, well, here's how I can help you get there. Here's been my experience that got me to where I am."

Bobby Lincoln: And so I like to do that with the folks that work for me is, I ask them, "Where do you want to go? What do you want to do?" And that opportunity, just having the opportunity to work for an organization that provides that, that pushes it, that in some ways incentivizes that, along with the impact of knowing that my job every day is going to effectively save lives, what's not to love about it?

Sarah Nicastro: Right. And those are good points. I think that in the conversations I've had with people about managing an older generation versus managing the younger generation, those are a couple of key points. One is I get your point, I'm built the same way like, who would not want to progress in their career? But if you think about a lot of tenured field technicians historically, we're happy to do the same job for 20, 25, 30 years. And they didn't have that same... I'm over generalizing. Some people do, some people don't. But if you look as a group, at the older generation of field technicians, I think you had a greater likelihood of people being happy to just do their job if it was a good job and not necessarily have that burning desire for continual evolution. And I think that's something that the younger generation looks for in an employer. And then your other point about playing to the impact and communicating the difference that your employees are making in lives, is something else that has some real appeal for folks.

Bobby Lincoln: Yes. What I like also too that we do, and it's not just... Even I had a conversation with someone who will just leave it as they're a seasoned service engineer, the PC way, right? We were having a conversation a couple weeks ago about him playing out the string, if you will. "What do I want to do?" But yet, he also called me to talk about how can I improve this specific process that my team manages? So even though we have people on the twilight side of their career, it's still a constant... There's no way to describe it, other than you got to live it and feel it. It's an innovative group that we are. And whether you're day one, or year 35, it's really the same goal. And I think we do a good job of hiring the right people, but also protecting our culture of who we are, that fosters that type of environment.

Sarah Nicastro: Mm-hmm (affirmative). That makes sense. Okay. So in terms of your evolution from the medical lab, to field service, to heading up onboarding and managing a team of field service technicians, what's the biggest lesson you would say that you as a leader have learned?

Bobby Lincoln: Oh, good grief. Don't expect me from you.

Sarah Nicastro: Okay.

Bobby Lincoln: That was a tough thing to learn moving into management, if you will. I have a certain way of doing things, I have a long track record of performance of processes that I've particularly employed, ways I handle customers, way I talk to customers. Not everybody does that. And so I learned very early on that I can't have my own expectations for my team. I can set them, I can put the bar, "Here's where I want to be. Guys, here's where we are, here's how we're going to get there." But everybody is going to do it a little differently. And so for me personally, that was one of the toughest lessons to learn. And to step back, when you're in field service, you measure success very differently than you do in managing field service. Every day you walk in, "I fixed that, I did that." When you're working with people, it's different, it's a longer game. So that's my biggest piece of advice for any new leader, is don't expect you from other people.

Sarah Nicastro: That makes sense. I like that. Any final thoughts or closing words of wisdom for our listeners on the stuff we've talked about today, onboarding, training, retention, anything related?

Bobby Lincoln: The virtual nature of everything we do now, I have found the greatest success thus far has been a couple of things. And this might sound a little crazy, because we're in corporate world, but when I say make this process entertaining, make it entertaining. However, that needs to happen. Some things that we like to do is ask silly questions or play videos during... I've restructured half of the week with entertainment in it, click on YouTube things, that sort of thing. Just because, gosh-

Sarah Nicastro: I will say Bobby and I were exchanging some messages real quick this morning on LinkedIn in preparation for our recording today. And at the end, you sent me a meme and it was just such a little thing, but it made me laugh out loud. And it's a small example. But to me after what we've been through as a world in the last year, there's no reason to not introduce a bit more levity and just personal connection to exchanges. So, yeah.

Bobby Lincoln: Make it fun. Gosh, we're doing this for eight, nine, 10, 12 hours a day, some of us. Gosh, have fun. Life's too short. Have some fun with it.

Sarah Nicastro: Yes. That's a very good point. All right. Well, Bobby, thank you so much for joining today and for sharing. I really, really appreciate it and hope you will come back and visit us again soon.

Bobby Lincoln: I would love to. This has been a blast. Let's do it again.

Sarah Nicastro: Absolutely. You can check out more of our content by visiting us at www.futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com, you can also find us on LinkedIn as well as Twitter @thefutureoffs. The Future of Field Service Podcast is published in partnership with IFS, you can learn more about IFS service management by visiting www.ifs.com. As always, thank you for listening.

January 6, 2021 | 1 Mins Read

Top 10 of 2020 Part 2

January 6, 2021 | 1 Mins Read

Top 10 of 2020 Part 2

Share

Here's the second half of our New Year's two-parter. To celebrate the end of a unique and challenging year, Sarah is joined by podcast producer and fellow website contributor, Tom Paquin, to discuss their favorite conversations and lessons from the past year.

Guests include:

  • Linda Tucci, Global Sr. Director of the Technical Solutions Center of Ortho Clinical
  • Reeve Bunn, President of DSL
  • Klaus Glatz, Chief Digital Officer of ANDRITZ
  • Sonya Lacore, VP of Infight Operations of Southwest Airlines
  • Mita Mallick, formerly the Head of Diversity and Inclusion and Cross-Cultural Marketing at Unilever and now the Head of Inclusion, Equity, and Impact at Carta

If you enjoy our content, be sure to visit www.futureoffieldserviceref.ifs.com

December 30, 2020 | 1 Mins Read

Top 10 of 2020 Part 1

December 30, 2020 | 1 Mins Read

Top 10 of 2020 Part 1

Share

To celebrate the end of a unique and challenging year, Sarah is joined by podcast producer and fellow website contributor Tom Paquin to discuss their favorite conversations and lessons from the past year.

Guests include:

  • Jamie Beck, Sr. VP of Field Operations at Peloton
  • Roel Rentmeesters, Director of Global Customer Service at Munters
  • Sae Kwon, VP of Customer Experience at Cisco
  • Henrietta Haavisto, Head of Service Transformation Change Management at KONE
  • Tim Baines of Aston’s Advanced Services Group at Aston Business School

December 23, 2020 | 1 Mins Read

Spreading Holiday Cheer

December 23, 2020 | 1 Mins Read

Spreading Holiday Cheer