1

Implementation of Remote Desktop End-User Support Forum As a Means to Reduce How-To Support Contacts

by Rochelle M. Sweeney A Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of Science Degree in Technology Management

The Graduate School University of Wisconsin-Stout May, 2011

The Graduate School University of Wisconsin-Stout Menomonie, WI 54751

Author: Title:

Sweeney, Rochelle M. Implementation of Remote Desktop End-user Support Forum as a Means to Reduce How-To Support Contacts

Graduate Degree/ Major: MS Technology Management Research Adviser: MonthrYear: Number of Pages: James Keyes May, 2011 42

Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6 th edition

Abstract End-user support is an essential business service. The technology used to provide support can vary widely from phone to Web-based contact solutions. Achieving the highest level of user satisfaction most efficiently and cost effectively is a business priority. Remote desktop support provides the support specialist with real-time access to an end-user's computer. The specialist is enabled to more quickly assess, identify and resolve the support issue because remote desktop access allows the specialist to see and if granted permission by the end-user, assume control of the desktop. The more quickly a support resolution is achieved the greater time and money savings are realized, as well as greater end-user satisfaction. Providing a remote desktop support forum allows the specialist to resolve individual support issues as well as simultaneously providing the

same knowledge to multiple end-users. This may result in a reduction of repetitive as wells as time-consuming individual support inquiries.

Acknowledgments I respectfully acknowledge and thank my research advisor Dr. James Keyes for his expertise and guidance throughout this thesis project. I would like to dedicate this thesis project to my husband Edwin for his unwavering support and encouragement.

Table of Contents

................................................................................................................................................... Page Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 2 Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... 4 List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 7 Chapter I: Introduction .................................................................................................................... 8 Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 9 Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................... 10 Assumptions of the Study ................................................................................................. 10 Limitations of the Study ................................................................................................... 10 Definition of Terms .......................................................................................................... 11 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 11 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 13 Chapter II: Literature Review ....................................................................................................... 14 Support Source .................................................................................................................. 14 Support Method ................................................................................................................ 15 Figure 1 ............................................................................................................................. 19 Support Inquiry ................................................................................................................. 20 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 21 Chapter III: Methodology ............................................................................................................. 22 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 22 Subject Selection and Description .................................................................................... 23 Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 23

Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 23 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 24 Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 25 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 25 Chapter IV: Results ....................................................................................................................... 26 Issue Resolution Type Results .......................................................................................... 26 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 27 Forum Attendance ............................................................................................................. 28 Key Considerations ........................................................................................................... 28 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 29 Chapter V: Discussion .................................................................................................................. 30 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 30 Risks and Challenges ........................................................................................................ 30 Limitations ........................................................................................................................ 31 Influencing Factors ........................................................................................................... 31 Recommendations ............................................................................................................. 31 Summary ........................................................................................................................... 33 References ..................................................................................................................................... 34 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................... 36 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 37 Appendix C ................................................................................................................................... 39 Appendix D ................................................................................................................................... 41

List of Tables Table 1: Streamlining help desk operations .................................................................................. 20 Table 2: Sample summary table .................................................................................................... 24 Table 3: March 2011 marketing project management application issue tickets ........................... 26 Table 4: April 2011 marketing project management application issue tickets ............................. 27

Chapter I: Introduction

Providing end-user support has been a necessary expense for achieving end-user satisfaction ever since the proliferation ofthe desktop computer as a business tool. Every time a company implements a new business system or application information technology management team must decide how to provide end-user support for that system or application. Developing an end-user support strategy can be challenging given the multitude of options available. The means by which end-user support can be provided varies and is continually evolving as technology evolves. Some companies outsource end-user support to third-party providers in the U.S. and abroad while others hire and train employees to provide end-user support internally. Internal end-user support teams can be required to provide centralized, company-wide support or decentralized, business-specific support depending on the needs of the company or business group. End-users may contact support via the phone or by electronic means, such as email or Web-enabled support request forms. Retailer X operates a national chain of retail stores from its headquarters in the Midwest. The well known retailer maintains and supports both desktop and laptop computers for store and headquarters personnel. Retailer X provides internal end-user support utilizing both centralized and decentralized support models. The marketing operations group at Retailer X provided decentralized, business-specific end-user support for a marketing project management (MPM) application. The marketing management team determined that directing end-users to a decentralized, business-specific support specialist rather than the centralized, corporate client support center would provide the most relevant and expeditious user support experience. This required the marketing operations group to hire and train a single support specialist dedicated to providing marketing project

management-specific support. A dedicated email box and a custom-designed, SharePoint list were the available means for end-users to request support. The well known retailer is continually seeking to improve operating efficiency while reducing operating expense which resulted in a recent reorganization of the marketing operations group. This reorganization required that the dedicated support specialist spend less time providing individual end-user support to devote more time to business-critical technology projects. Individual end-user support is time-consumingon average requiring five to eight minutes per support contact to provide issue resolution and often for a redundant issue. This research proposed the implementation of a remote desktop end-user support forum as a means to reduce the quantity of client procedural or how-to support contacts thus increasing the effectiveness of the end-user-support provided for the marketing project management application. Fifty percent of all marketing end-user support contacts were for the marketing project management application. Of those support contacts 50% were client procedural or how-to questions - user isn't sure how to use the application however with the correct knowledge the user was capable of resolving the issue without support intervention. This volume of client procedural support contacts for a single application jeopardized the ability of a single support specialist to maintain the proposed service level agreement of issue resolution within four to eight hours per each support contact for all marketing applications. Statement of the Problem Due to the comparatively high volume of how-to support contacts for the marketing project management application, the quantity of client procedural contacts needed to be reduced

10

by five percent within one month to maintain the current service level agreement.
Purpose of the Study

Due to the reorganization of the marketing operations group, the single end-user support specialist was required to reduce the amount of time spent on individual support contacts. The support specialist proposed a bi-monthly remote desktop support forum to provide marketing project management end-users with a critical understanding feedback loop which is difficult to achieve through email. The forum exposed mUltiple end-users to support issues and the resulting resolution, frequently asked questions, and an online source of application self-service as a means to reduce redundant marketing project management application support contacts. Remote desktop support allowed end-users to experience support resolutions visually to promote knowledge retention. The bi-monthly forum supplemented monthly training classes while providing sufficient frequency to remain responsive to end-users support needs.
Assumptions of the Study

The bi-monthly remote desktop support forum was intended to supplement monthly marketing project management application-specific training classes, a dedicated email box and custom-designed, SharePoint list for direct and immediate support requests.
Limitations of the Study

1. This study applied only to the marketing operations group of Retailer X. 2. For the purposes of this study the remote desktop support forum applied only to end-user support of the marketing project management application. 3. This study only reviewed support contacts for the marketing project management application collected and compared from March and April 2011.

11

Definition of Terms Forum. A public meeting or lecture involving audience discussion (Merriam-Webster' s

Collegiate Dictionary, 2005, p. 494).

Remote desktop. A feature in the Windows operating system (OS) that allows the

machine to be run remotely from another Windows machine over any dial-up or local area network (LAN) connection. Remote Desktop is the Windows-based technology used to exchange only keystrokes and screen changes (PC Mag.com, 2011).
Service Level Agreement (SLA). A contract between the provider and the user that

specifies the level of service expected during its term. They can specify bandwidth availability, response times for routine and ad hoc queries, response time for problem resolution (network down, machine failure, etc.) (PC Mag.com, 2011).
SharePoint. A family of Windows software from Microsoft that is used to set up

internal Web portals (intranets) for document sharing and search, team collaboration, lists, blogs, wikis and company news (PC Mag.com, 2011).
Methodology

The support specialist prepared a proposal for the remote desktop support forum including objectives and risks and challenges. The proposal was then presented to the marketing operations manager and group manager for approval. Once approved by the manager and group manager the proposal was presented to the marketing operations director. A pilot of the remote desktop support forum was planned after the director approved the proposal. Objectives of the proposal included:

12

Provide end-users with convenient access to a support forum at their desk, thus minimizing disruption to busy schedules

Utilizing remote desktop technology to demonstrate to end-users the steps to follow for issue resolution

Solicit end-user questions during the forum as well as review of top five frequently asked questions (F AQs)

Provide end-users with an additional source of support

Risks and challenges of the proposal included: End-users unfamiliar with or intimidated by remote desktop application End-users register but fail to attend Remote desktop support frequency may not meet end-user's needs or expectations This study analyzed end-user client procedural support contact data for the marketing project management application collected in an existing custom-designed, SharePoint list between March and April 2011. The number of client procedural support contacts for the marketing project management application was collected for a period of 30 days prior to the implementation of the remote desktop end-user support forum and compared to the same support resolution type for a period of30 days during the implementation of the remote desktop support forum. The data was then exported into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and converted into a PivotTable report for analysis of the client procedural issue resolution contact type by month for the marketing project management application. A PivotTable report is a feature of Microsoft Excel that enables the analysis of numerical data in detail by subtotaling and aggregating

13

numeric data and summarizing data by categories and subcategories. The interest or demand for continuing the remote desktop support forum was determined by attendance. Summary Providing end-user support is an essential business service however the manner in which the support is provided various greatly. The available time and resources devoted to end-user support often influences the delivery method. This research proposed a remote desktop support forum as a supplement to individual support contacts. The study results provided the marketing operations group with an understanding of the benefit to the support specialist of offering a remote desktop support forum to the end-users of the marketing project management application in the comparative number of client procedural support contacts, as well as the level of interest among the end-users for the remote desktop support forum format.

14

Chapter II: Literature Review Help desk is a generic name typically associated with an end-user support center. There is insufficient information to determine when the first help desk was established. However it is generally accepted that it was first established about twenty years ago (Leung & Lau, 2007). Prior to the creation of a dedicated help desk, end-users often resorted to contacting a friend or colleague for assistance. Today's savvy technology managers realize that it is critical to transform outdated "help desks," which rely primarily on telephone communications, into efficiently managed "service desks" that efficiently and economically accommodate multiple forms of interaction - from voice and data to email and instant messaging. They also understand that by transitioning to self-assist and remote incident resolution they can reduce service desk operational costs by half, while dramatically improving the quality of service provided (CompuCom, 2006). Support Source Determining an end-user support strategy requires serious evaluation of the needs of the end-user, the cost and the overall value to the company. Building an in-house support staff or outsourcing to a third-party provider is a central consideration of any end-user support strategy. Outsourcing support can refer to both onshore as well as offshore vendors. According to a survey of 175 information technology (IT) and business managers conducted by Information Week Research about technical support practices found that internal, centralized help desks are the most prevalent assistance being provided (D' Antoni, 2001). The survey went on to state that forty percent of participating managers work for companies that use third-party vendors to resolve IT difficulties. However, outsourced support is generally provided in conjunction with

15

existing in-house services; only three percent of managers said their support is entirely outsourced (D' Antoni, 2001). The challenge of finding and retaining help desk employees is leading more companies to turn to automated products as well as outsourcers according to Tony Adams, an analyst at San Jose-based Dataquest (Dash, 2000). Outsourcing is a trend that is clearly growing. Forrester Research projects that by 2005 nearly 600,000 U.S. jobs - including many customer service and technology support positions - will move offshore; by 2015, that figure could reach 3.3 million (Kandra, 2005). Outsourced help desk prices range from $7-$64 per user per month or charging may occur on a fixed price per call or call bundle (Romney, 2004). Support Method Once the source of the support has been decided, how the support will be provided is another primary consideration. Frequently an end-user's first contact for help is not to the dedicated help desk. End-users often find consulting a trusted colleague who has previously demonstrated proficiency with the application or issue in question a more convenient manner in which to receive help. While consulting a colleague may seem expeditious and will reduce contacts to the help desk the information provided may be inaccurate, incomplete, and may obscure a more serious technical issue. Calling the help desk is generally the preferred method of contacting the help desk. According to the research firms Data-quest and Jupiter Research, most end-users seek support through the telephone (Metz, 2000). Phone contact is understandably preferred as it allows the end-user to interact with the support specialist providing the user with an opportunity to clarify and expand on issue details.

16

Although the telephone is the preferred method of seeking support, end-users can encounter frustration when calling the help desk. End-users often lack confidence that they will be able to adequately describe the issue they are experiencing or fear embarrassment for their lack of application and or computer knowledge and skills. This can lead to confusion and misinterpretation for the support specialist as they attempt to resolve the issue. Concern over a language barrier is a potential drawback of phone support as well. The end-user may become frustrated and abandoned the call before their issue is resolved if they're unable to understand a support specialist due to a thick accent. As a result of these attitudes, end-users may postpone contacting the help desk. This will ultimately result in a delay of their issue resolution. A study by the Help Desk Institute (HDI), based on a survey of information technology managers, directors and other personnel at approximately 800 businesses, government agencies and organizations, found that 67% of survey respondents reported that calls had increased at their organizations during 2010. The study concluded there's no single explanation for the continuing increase in support calls (Thibodeau, 2011). While phone support is convenient it is also expensive, the cost for a typical support call is between $10 and $15 according to Giga Information Group customer relationship management analyst Erin Kinikin (Bertolucci and Aquino, 2001). Electronic support or e-support as it is referred to, often encompasses all other forms of end-user support including email, Web-based incident initiation, Web-based chat, Web-based self-service and remote desktop applications. Email is probably the most common e-support means of contacting the help desk. While email is widely available and easy to use the outcome is often less than satisfying for the enduser. According to a PC World Reliability and Service survey, between 65 and 70% of

17

respondents who have tried to use email-based support say the answers they received didn't resolve their problems (Bertolucci and Aquino, 2001). Also, email often doesn't meet the enduser's expectations for speed of resolution. David Daniels, a Jupiter Research analyst stated, "We've found that 55% of consumers expect a resolution to their email inquires within six hours and that only 20% of companies were meeting those expectations." (Metz, 2000). As our society becomes increasingly self-service oriented from self-checkout at the grocery store to scheduling a doctor appointment online, end-user support has also moved towards a self-service model. Web-based, self-service support allows the end-user to use keywords to search a Web-enabled knowledgebase for frequently asked questions (FAQs) and troubleshooting tips to potentially resolve their technical issue without intervention from a support specialist. The cost of this model is also considerably less expensive than other forms of support at $1 or less per incident (Bertolucci and Aquino, 2001). Tom Sweeny, an analyst at ServiceXRG, contends that organizations allocate a disproportionate level of resources to delivering content through one-to-one channels rather than creating content for self-services. Even with self-service making such strides, he says, many companies still have the model where one support specialist is fielding 30 calls daily on the same simple subject. It's grossly inefficient when this does not get captured and used in a knowledge repository (Parature, 2009). Companies electing to implement a self-service solution for end-user support should focus on getting users over the cultural barrier of depending on technology not individuals -

for help. That means actively promoting self-help sites and making sure the content in these Web-based knowledge bases is continually updated, relevant and easy to use (Stackpole, 1999).

18

In a 2005 user survey, Gartner asked what was necessary to improve the self-service experience. Specifically respondents were given a list of improvement areas and asked to consider the benefits, effectiveness, and ease of use of self-service solutions, and identifY which are needed to significantly increase the use of self-service solutions (CompuCom, 2006). The results were: Easier to find solution for a specific problem Organized to make it easy to find the right tool Content that is more relevant to the context or problems Content that is specific to the application or operating system Content that is more comprehensive in scope and depth Increased performance of Web-based self-service Support site and content personalized to my needs Tailor site to my unique IT environment, rather than IT products Security of automated remote monitoring and management Easier to log in

According to Matt Healey, an analyst at Framingham, Mass.-based International Data Corp. (IDC), the market for clientless remote-support tools is still emerging. Sales of these tools are expected to more than double in the next four years, from an estimated $156.4 million in 2008 to $335.7 million in 2012 (Wong, 2008). See Figure 1 for a detailed breakout of cost by external support, service provider, and internal help desk.

19

Figure 1. Worldwide clientless remote support tools spending, 2007-2012 400 350 300 250
~

'-"

200 150 100 50 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

External support 0 Services provider

Internal help desk

Adapted from "Using Web-based support tools to improve customer service," by Gilhooly, K. 2009. Retrieved from http://www.supportindustry.com/whitepaper2009/whitepaper09 .pdf. Although remote desktop software can't resolve every type of support call, it can dramatically reduce the time spent on some support tasks as shown in Table 1. For instance, demonstrating via remote desktop the resolution for a how-to question can shorten the time spent on 70% to 80% of those tasks and avoid 5% of future calls.

20 Table 1 Streamlining help desk operations

% of Tasks Where Time was Saved % of Calls Avoided

Type of Call How-to Break/fix Service request Moves Adds Changes Password reset Outage

70-80 10-30 0 0 15-30 15-30 0 0

0-5 0-5 0 0 0 0 0 0

Adapted from "Remote control a la enterprise," by Phillips, K. 1999, 87. Support Inquiry End-user support is no longer primarily focused on whether or not the technology is working but also how the technology should work in the specific business environment in which it is being used. Many support inquiries are for how-to questions - user isn't sure how to use the application however with the correct knowledge the user is capable of resolving the issue without support intervention. Rather than contact the help desk for assistance, these how-to questions could easily be resolved through the use of self-service Web-based knowledge bases. The ten most common support actions that could easily be handled by self-service methods include: Clear temp files; clear cache; reset password; check exchange server connectivity; check network connectivity; fill out questions and answers; empty recycle bin; create Webmail icon; clear Web browser history; map network drive (CompuCom, 2006). According to Greg Oxton, executive director of the Customer Support Consortium (CSC)

21

in Seattle, between 60% and 70% of service calls are known problems that have been answered before. Better access to information could prevent some of the repetitive questions (Girard, 1997). Knapp and Woch have found that 80% of inquiries made to the help desk often require no specialized technical knowledge. As a result, the help desk staff is overwhelmed by the increasing workload and is no longer available for business-critical projects, proactive support activity or training because their time is mainly occupied by resolving these simple and routine contacts (Knapp and Woch, 2002).
Summary

The literature review suggests that the implementation of e-support tools can reduce the number of contacts to the help desk. However, e-support tools such as self-service must be supported and aggressively promoted by management to encourage end-users to adopt and routinely utilize these methods rather than expecting a personal interaction with a support specialist. As technology evolves so must help desk support. As with many technological advancements adoption requires time and promotion.

22 Chapter III: Methodology Introduction A recent reorganization of the marketing operations group at Retailer X required that the business-specific, dedicated support specialist spend less time providing end-user support to devote more time to business-critical technology projects. This research proposed the implementation of a remote desktop end-user support forum as a means to reduce the quantity of how-to support contacts and increase the effectiveness of the enduser support provided for the marketing project management (MPM) application. The support specialist prepared a proposal for the remote desktop support forum including objectives and risks and challenges. The proposal was then presented to the marketing operations manager and group manager for approval. Once approved by the manager and group manager the proposal was presented to the marketing operations director. A pilot of the remote desktop support forum was planned after the director approved the proposal. Objectives of the proposal included: Provide end-users with convenient access to a support forum at their desk, thus minimizing disruption to busy schedules Utilizing remote desktop technology to demonstrate to end-users the steps to follow for issue resolution Solicit end-user questions during the forum as well as review of top five frequently asked questions (FAQs) Provide end-users with additional source of support

23

Risks and challenges of the proposal included: End-users unfamiliar with or intimidated by remote desktop application End-users register but fail to attend Remote desktop support frequency may not meet end-user's needs or expectations Subject Selection and Description Intended subjects were all marketing project management application end-users. During the study period there were approximately 350 active marketing project management application end-users. The remote desktop forum was promoted to the end-users through the distribution of a regularly scheduled weekly email (Appendix A) sent to all members of the marketing team. Endusers interested in attending the forum registered using a Web-enabled email registration tool. Instrumentation Marketing project management application end-users registered for the remote desktop support forum using a Web-enabled email registration tool. After interested end-users registered they received an Outlook meeting invite. The meeting notice contained a conference bridge phone number and meeting number, a link to Adobe Connect, and an agenda. Adobe Connect is software used in part for Web-conferencing and remote desktop sharing. Data Collection A custom-designed, SharePoint list form (Appendix B) containing 36 questions, of which 23 were required, was used to gather support contact data for the period March through April 2011. The support specialist spends approximately two minutes per issue to complete the issue form as the issues are received. A custom view was created in the SharePoint list to include the data columns, filters and sorts necessary to capture the required data. The data was exported

24

from the SharePoint list by clicking Actions and selecting "Export to Spreadsheet" (Appendix
C). For the purposes of this study the how-to issue type was indicated by the "client procedural"

resolution type. The interpretation being the user was capable of resolving the issue without support intervention. Data Analysis All support contact issue details were entered into an existing custom-designed, SharePoint list. The export to excel feature in SharePoint was used to export the data for further analysis. The data was then exported into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and converted into a PivotTable report to summarize the issue resolution type by month for the marketing project management application. The data collected will be entered into a summary table as shown below in Table 2. Table 2
Sample summary table

Issue Resolution Type Client procedural Corporate support Marketing support No response from the user Not supported by marketing Request center request Grand Total

Total

A PivotTable report is a feature of Microsoft Excel that enables the analysis of numerical data in detail by subtotaling and aggregating numeric data and summarizing data by categories

25

and subcategories. A baseline of marketing project management application support data was collected prior to the implementation of the remote desktop support forum in March 2011. This provided a total quantity of support contacts for the marketing project management application by issue type for the previous 30 days. The support data from the previous 30 days was then compared to 30 days of data collected during the implementation of the remote desktop support forum. A reduction in support contacts related to how the marketing project management application should function in the marketing environment - also known as client procedural thus resulting in a reduction in the total quantity of support contacts was expected to indicate that the remote desktop support forum achieved the desired outcome.
Limitations

Results and recommendations of this study were limited to marketing project management application end-users. Data gathered was exported to Microsoft Excel from an existing, custom-designed SharePoint list and summarized in a PivotTable report. The data represents only the support contacts collected during March and April 2011 for the marketing project management application utilized by the marketing operations group at Retailer X.
Summary

The end-user issue tickets created for the marketing project management application during March and April 2011 for the marketing operations group at Retailer X were collected and analyzed. The number of client procedural resolution type tickets for March 2011 was compared to April 2011 to detennine if the implementation of two remote desktop support forums had any effect on the number of client procedural issues reported.

26
Chapter IV: Results

The purpose ofthe study was to reduce the quantity of client procedural or how-to issues reported for the marketing project management (MPM) application used by the marketing operations group at Retailer X. Issue ticket data for the marketing project management application was collected during March and April 2011 and summarized and compared. The end-user interest was determined by attendance. The results were used to determine the effectiveness of continuing the remote desktop support forum.
Issue Resolution Type Results

The client procedural support contacts for the marketing project management application during March 2011 are shown in Table 3 below. Table 3 March 2011 marketing project management application issue tickets
Issue Resolution Type Total

Client procedural Corporate support Marketing support No response from the user Not supported by marketing Request center request
Grand Total

10 0 10 1 0 1
22

The client procedural issue resolution type represents approximately 45% of the total resolution types reported for all marketing project management application issues during March 2011. This percent is slightly lower than the historical average of 50% of all marketing project

27

management application issue resolution types per month. The client procedural support contacts for the marketing project management application during April 2011 are shown in Table 4 below. Table 4
April 2011 marketing project management application issue tickets Issue Resolution Type Total

Client procedural Corporate support Marketing support No response from the user Not supported by marketing Request center request
Grand Total

14 2
6

1
24

The client procedural issue resolution type represents approximately 58% of the total resolution types reported for all marketing project management application issues during April 2011. This is 8% higher than the historical average of 50% of all marketing project management application issue resolution types per month. The April 2011 client procedural issue resolution type total represents a 40% increase over the March 2011 total. The desired result of the implementation of the remote desktop support forum was a 5% decrease in client procedural issue resolution type contacts.
Data Analysis

The client procedural support contacts have obviously increased rather than decreased during the remote desktop support forum pilot period. This increase is not necessarily directly

28
attributable to the implementation of the support forum pilot. An increase in client procedural support contacts could be the result of an increase in contract employees that have not yet attended marketing project management application training. April is the fiscal quarter end for Retailer X which may have resulted in an increase in finance-related client procedural contacts as indicated by the increased number of Financial Codes issue type in Appendix D as compared to Appendix C. Forum Attendance The first forum was conducted at the end of March 2011 and was attended by five members of the marketing operations group. The second forum was conducted the middle of April and was attended by two members of the marketing operations group. The low attendance at the second forum might be explained by a technical issue. The Web-enabled registration tool that users were directed to use in the email promoting the forum was offline for six hours the day before the forum preventing users from registering. Although attendance was small those who did attend were satisfied with the content of the forum and received answers to their support questions. Key Considerations The marketing operations group should consider the following options when determining whether or not to continue the remote desktop support forum: Promoting the remote desktop support forum through email as well as active, public encouragement from management Increasing the frequency of the suppOli forum to weekly Providing an incentive for attending the forum

29 Summary A remote desktop support forum for the marketing project management application at Retailer X was conducted once at the end of March and again the middle of April. The support contacts for the marketing project management application were collected for March and April 2011 and compared. The quantity of client procedural issue resolution type contacts increased by 40% between March 2011 and April 2011. The remote desktop support forum did not achieve the desired results of a 5% decrease in client procedural support contacts.

30

Chapter V: Discussion

The purpose of the study was to reduce the quantity of client procedural or how-to issues reported for the marketing project management (MPM) application used by the marketing operations group at Retailer X. Issue ticket data for the marketing project management application was collected during March and April 2011 and analyzed. The end-user interest was determined by attendance. The results were used to determine the effectiveness of continuing the remote desktop support forum.
Conclusions

The literature review suggested that transitioning end-user support from a personal experience with a support specialist to an e-support or technology support experience would require a culture shift. The culture shift would need to be actively not just passively supported by upper management. The transition would most likely be gradual and may require the support specialist to actively direct the end-user to the e-support tools while resolving the issue.
Risks and Challenges

Risks and challenges to a successful implementation of the remote desktop support forum were considered prior to implementation. A link to more information about the Adobe Connect remote desktop technology was provided in the email promoting the forum as a means to inform end-users who may have been unfamiliar with or intimidated by the remote desktop technology. All end-users who registered for the forum attended. The risk that the frequency of the forum did not meet end-user expectations may have been realized as attendance at both forums was lower than expected. Each forum was scheduled on a different day of the week and the first was scheduled before lunch while the second was scheduled after lunch. This was a conscious

31

decision to determine if the day of the week or the time of day of the implementation was a factor in attendance. Limitations Results and recommendations of this study were limited to marketing project management application end-users. Data gathered was exported to Microsoft Excel from an existing, custom-designed SharePoint list and summarized in a PivotTable report. The data represents only the support contacts collected during March and April 2011 for the marketing project management application utilized by the marketing operations group at Retailer X. Influencing Factors The results of the remote desktop support forum may have been influenced by several unanticipated factors. The first was the departure of the support specialist from the marketing operations group in March. The support specialist who proposed the remote desktop support forum continued to conduct the sessions however the support contact volume from end-users may have been positively or negatively influenced. Second, the Web-enabled registration tool that users were directed to use in the email promoting the forum was offline for six hours the day before the second forum preventing users from registering. Recommendations Although the client procedural support contacts increased rather than decreased during the remote desktop support forum pilot it is apparent from the literature review that e-support is a more efficient and cost effective method of providing end-user support. In addition to evaluating the promotion and implementation of the remote desktop support forum for possible modifications, the marketing operations group at Retailer X should continue to pursue e-support alternatives. Insistence by the support specialist that management frequently and enthusiastically

32

promote a future implementation of the support forum should be considered as the literature substantiates increased adoption of e-support alternatives when upper-management is actively engaged in its promotion. The content of the remote desktop support forums could be tailored to meet the needs of how specific teams within the marketing operations group use the marketing project management application rather than providing broad, one size fits all content. The remote desktop support forum format could also be presented at a marketing operations group meeting. This would provide team members with a preview of the remote desktop technology and potential content and discussion points. Team members would be given an opportunity to provide feedback on the format and the content of the support forum during the meeting. Although a twice monthly support forum may not provide adequate frequency to accommodate the on-demand nature of end-user support, remote desktop technology should continue to be considered as a supplement to one-on-one support contacts. Once the proposed modifications have been implemented, the support specialist should conduct another pilot or'the remote desktop support forum. The cost to provide one-on-one support versus e-support alternatives, that require little or no support intervention, should be calculated and compared. The resulting cost data could be used to develop a cost-effective support plan. Individual self-service may be a more effective method of delivering support to the marketing operations group rather than a group forum. This could be accomplished through the development and active promotion of a Web-based knowledge base of how-to instructions and frequently asked questions. Developing a team of marketing project management application subject matter experts, who themselves routinely use the application, who could be a first resource for support is another option. As previously stated approximately half of the support contacts pertain to procedural questions rather than technical issues, these

33

individuals would be knowledgeable about the specific business use of the application and very capable of quickly responding to and resolving procedural questions. The marketing operations group could also consider conducting a survey of marketing team members to determine preferences for requesting and receiving marketing project management application esupport. Summary In this study the marketing operations group support specialist at Retailer X proposed and implemented a remote desktop support forum as a means to reduce client procedural support contacts for the marketing project management application. A pilot was implemented at the end of March 2011. Support contacts for the marketing project management application were collected and the client procedural issue resolution type totals were compared before and during the pilot in March and April 2011. The client procedural issue resolution type increased rather than decreasing during the pilot. As a result, several options were recommended for providing end-user support that could effectively reduce the quantity of client procedural issue resolution type support contacts. The first recommendation was to modify the promotion and content of the remote desktop support forum and conduct a second pilot; calculate the cost to provide one-onone support versus e-support then use the resulting cost data to develop a cost-effective support plan; develop a team of marketing project management application subject matter experts; and finally the marketing operations group could conduct a survey to determine how end-users prefer to request and receive marketing project management application support.

34

References
Bertolucci, J. and Aquino, G. (2001). Get the help you need. PC World, 19(6),86-95. CompuCom. (2006). White paper: The evolution of the IT help desk to the service desk. An examination of current and future trends. Dallas, Texas: Frantz, M. Retrieved from http://www.compucom.comlPublishingImages/whitepapers/WPServiceDeskMFrantz.pdf D'Antoni, A. (2001). Tech support: Mostly an inside job. Information Week, (832), 98. Dash, J. (2000). Help desk outsourcing rises. Computerworld, 34(26), 14. Girard, K. (1997). Help desk standards aid information sharing. Computerworld, 31 (11), 3. Kandra, A. (2004). When help is half a world away. Some PC users complain about overseas tech support representatives. PC World, 22(4),53-55. Knapp, M. & Woch, J. (2002). Towards a natural language driven automated help desk. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, 96-105. Leung, N, & Lau, S.K. (2007). Information technology help desk survey: To identify the classification of simple and routine enquiries. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 47(4), 70-81. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. (2005). (11), 494. Metz, C. (2000). Help! Where to get it & how to give it. PC Magazine, 19(20), 176-196. Parature, Inc. (2009). White paper: Using Web-based support tools to improve customer service. Vienna, Virginia: Gilhooly, K. Retrieved from http://www.supportindustry.com/whitepaper2009/whitepaper09. pdf. PC Mag.com, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia. Phillips, K. (1999). Remote control a la enterprise. PC Week, 16(49), 87-89.

35

Romney, J. (2004). Help the help desk. Intheblack, 74(9),34-39. Stackpole, B. (1999). Cooking up self-service support. PC Week, 16(8), 91-95. Thibodeau, P. (2011). IT Help Desk Calls Up Again in 2010. Computerworld, 45(1),8. Travis, P. (2005). Help-desk support meets worker expectations. InformationWeek, (1044), 72. Wong, W. (2008). Taking control. Baseline, 91(30). Retrieved from htlp:llwww.baselinemag.comlc/aiInfrastructurelTaking-Control-of-a-Call-Center-withRemote-Software.

36

Appendix A Remote desktop support forum email announcement BE INFORMED: TOPIC: INTRODUCING MPM REMOTE DESKTOP SUPPORT FORUM (Applies only to marketing team members who use MPM) Marketing operations group The marketing operations group is piloting a new way to receive MPM Remote Desktop Support using Adobe Connect. Adobe Connect makes it possible for you to join an MPM working forum from your desk. Click here for more information about Adobe Connect. The first session has been scheduled for March 25 from 10llAM. Follow the steps below to schedule the meeting on your calendar: 1. 2. 3. 4. Click on the link MPM Remote Desktop Support to register. Click on the Marl 1 link Click on 03/2512011 10:00 AM Click submit

Area/Contact: Overview: Key Points:

Once you register you'll receive two emails: Meeting invite email: please click Accept and the meeting will appear on your Outlook calendar. Specific meeting details and agenda will be available in the meeting invite. Attendee email: lists you as the "Organizer" along with any additional attendees that you registered on the site. No action required on this email.

37

Appendix B Issue Ticket Form

Field Description Contact Type* Any Additional Information User Name* LANID* Any Additional Users Have you been though training?*

Type of Field/Selections Web Form; Email Free text field Free text field Free text field Free text field Yes; No - not yet, but will; No - don't plan to; No - how do I sign up? Yes, No PC, Mac Application 1, Application 2, Application 3, Marketing Project Management application Free text field Free text field Free text field Free text field No, Yes Free text field Yes, No Calendar date selector Free text field Free text field Access; Details tab; Downloading;

Would you like desk side coaching?* Computer Type* Application*

Brief Description * What is the issue?* Steps to recreate the issue* ID Number* Other ticket* Other ticket number Screenshot* Date Created Assign to* Information requested Issue Type*

38
Enhancement request; Financial codes; Filters; General question; Login; Non-marketing issue; Notifications; Project status; Project workflow management; Reports; Roles; Search; Schedules; Suppliers; System issue; Tasks; Training Support Team* Marketing support; System administration; Development support; Corporate support; Vendor support; Other support

Number of contacts * Days between contacts* Work log* Ticket number Vendor Vendor ticket type Vendor ticket number Resolution Date* Resolution Type*

1,2,3,4
Free text field Free text field Free text field Vendor 1 Issue, Defect Free text field Calendar date selector Client procedural; Defect; Enhancement; Corporate support; Marketing support; No response from user; Not supported by marketing; Request center request Free text field Free text field No, Yes Free text field Free text field Only select if yes

Brief resolution description* Resolution communication to the user* Send an update?* From the user - reason to re-open the ticket Update to the client Global ticket * Indicates a required field

39

Appendix C
March 2011 Marketing Project Management Issue Tickets

Ticket Number

Issue Type Project Status

5940 5935 5944 5957 5952 5953 5964 5962 5961 5969 5932 5943 5942

Support Application Team Marketing MPM Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support

Date Created
311/2011

Resolution Type * Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Client Procedural Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support

Schedules

MPM

3/1/2011

General Questions

MPM

3/912011

Project Status

MPM

311712011

Financial Codes

MPM

311712011

Access

MPM

3/18/2011

Project Status

MPM

3/22/2011

Project Status

MPM

3/24/2011

Project Status

MPM

3/24/2011

General Questions

MPM

3/28/2011

Details Tab

MPM

311/2011

Roles

MPM

3/9/2011

Roles

MPM

3/9/2011

40

5946 5945 5947 5954 5963 5968 5967 5975

Details Tab

MPM

Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support

311012011

Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing SuppOli No response from the user

Schedules

MPM

311 0/2011

Access

MPM

311412011

Access

MPM

3118/2011

Project Status Project Workflow Management

MPM

3/2112011

MPM

3/28/2011

Reports

MPM

3/28/2011

Details Tab

MPM

3/30/2011

Marketing Request Center 5955 Access MPM Support Request 3118/2011 *The how-to issue type was indicated by the "client procedural" resolution type.

41

Appendix D

April 2011 Marketing Project Management Issue Tickets

Ticket Number Date Created
4/6/2011

5981 5982 5983 5984 5985 5987 5989 5990 5992 5998 6001 6002 6008

Issue Type Financial Codes Project Status Financial Codes Project Status

Application Support Team Marketing MPM Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support

Resolution - Type* Client Procedural

MPM

4/612011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/6/2011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/6/2011

Client Procedural

Access Financial Codes Project Status Project Status Project Status

MPM

4/612011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/8/2011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/1112011

Client Procedural

MPM

411112011

Client Procedural

MPM

4111/2011

Client Procedural

Filters Financial Codes

MPM

411912011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/2112011

Client Procedural

Filters Project Status

MPM

4/21/2011

Client Procedural

MPM

4/2112011

Client Procedural

42

6009 5977 5980 5988 6003 6005 6000 6006 6004 6010 6011

Project Status

MPM

Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing Support Marketing SuppOli Marketing Support Marketing Support Corporate Support

4/22/2011

Client Procedural

Access

MPM

4/412011

Marketing Support

Details Tab

MPM

4/5/2011

Marketing Support

Reports

MPM

4111/2011

Marketing Support

Access

MPM

4112/2011

Marketing Support

Access

MPM

4115/2011

Marketing Support

Access Project Status

MPM

4/20/2011

Marketing Support Not Supported By Marketing Request Center Request

MPM

4118/2011

Access System Issue

MPM

4114/2011

MPM

4/27/2011

Corporate Support

System Corporate Issue MPM Support 4/2712011 Corporate Support *The how-to issue type was indicated by the "client procedural" resolution type.