| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 178.1 | I remember D.H-J. | KERNEL::ADAMS | Brian Adams CSC-Viables '833-3026 | Mon May 09 1994 02:07 | 27 |
|
I think we need to try to regain the situation the we had with Debbie.
It was a much better service, with her sitting with the group, and only
being responsible for one unit. I appreciate that Angie has to look
after two groups, but the problem is that those groups do not do many
similar calls. There is the "expectation" that systems will help out
devices, when there manpower is short, but if we are short, then we
are expected to cope.
With our work, being more aligned to VMS, then I feel that one
controller for those two groups, would involve less conflict of
interests.
As to what should a controller do, then we only have to look back to
what Debbie did, to identify the requirements.
1. Deal with contract issues on calls in the queue.
2. Re-route calls wrongly placed in the systems queue.
3. Deal with incoming dump tapes.
4. Chase customers for tapes not received.
5. Put received dumps onto the system & update/move the calls.
6. Deal with chargeable issues on calls.
7. Deal with ECSO.
8. Control the rota/leave/courses etc.
9. Handle TZONE type calls, and other "Route straight to branch" calls.
|
| 178.2 | I second previous reply | KERNEL::BLAND | Norman Bland 833 3797 CSC, Basingstoke | Tue May 10 1994 14:13 | 6 |
| I believe Brian (.1) has covered it adequately. If Angie could become
proficient in all of thes areas (in time) it would be of great
assistance to the SYSTEMS group. It may however look somewhat daunting
to Angie.
Norman
|
| 178.3 | | KERNEL::WRIGHTON | I'll call you back later, alright ! | Tue May 10 1994 18:34 | 12 |
|
re -1
>> It may however look somewhat daunting to Angie.
Probably not as she is not a member of this conference.
Should she be ???
Dave
|
| 178.4 | watch this space :-) | KERNEL::BLAND | Norman Bland 833 3797 CSC, Basingstoke | Tue May 10 1994 23:14 | 1 |
|
|
| 178.5 | | KERNEL::ANTHONY | | Wed May 11 1994 01:42 | 83 |
|
I too have an action on this from the CIG, but first I would like
find out from the group what our thoughts are:
It seems to me from .1 that we want to use Angie for lots of
different and unrelated tasks. This was fine with Debbie because
she sat in the group and was in constant contact with us to discuss
the issues.
If we are to contimue with Angie in the way we work now i.e.
sharing her time with Storageworks, then I think we have to slim down
the tasks so she can do a good and effective job.
from .1 :
1. Deal with contract issues on calls in the queue.
2. Re-route calls wrongly placed in the systems queue.
3. Deal with incoming dump tapes.
4. Chase customers for tapes not received.
5. Put received dumps onto the system & update/move the calls.
6. Deal with chargeable issues on calls.
7. Deal with ECSO.
8. Control the rota/leave/courses etc.
9. Handle TZONE type calls, and other "Route straight to branch"
calls.
1. really? what about contract validation group? they have access
to the data, why duplicate the task?
2. maybe, but Debbie (sitting in the group) would ask : what about
this call or that call.. It's very difficult to do this if you
do not sit in the group. not sure if this an effecient way of
working for Angie, so it's a no from me.
3. dump tapes, yes a good idea.
4. Yes
5. yes.
6. yes.
7. maybe, ok yes
8. no, I think this should be done from within the group. me?
9. maybe, but again we have the problem of her sitting remotely.
It's interesting that Brian's list did not mention highlighting P1
calls to us.. or even calls that have been waiting a long time.
My action from the CIG resulted from an input I made..
Very occasionally we have a political situation with a major
customer that needs carefull handling. Often this detracts from
the "diagnosisng" and problem solving tasks we do. It is here that
a high level RC who can speak to a customer at a high level and
handle the flack would be of most benefit to the group. Because
invariably these calls also involve VMS (backup support) I
suggested we should use Chris Hall.
To summarize (I believe)
We should use Angie for the day - day dump tape processes
(lots of work here.. including loading the dumps)
We should use her for the chargeable call process
ECSO
nothing else.
We own the queue's, the rota and everything else.
We use Chris Hall for high impact customer issues,
This will leave Angie to concentrate on the running of the
Storageworks queue's, chargeable calls and do the dump tapes as a
background task.
So, what does the team think?
|
| 178.6 | My Role | KERNEL::NASHA | | Wed May 18 1994 20:22 | 75 |
| Well, where to start! I think that all the comment that have been made
to this notes file are valid. On my first week with the group Mike and
I went through all the duties that Debbie dealt with as a r/c and I
decided that I would endevour to carry all of these out(see BA's list)
on a "see if it is possible basis". The result of this is clear to see
from the comments that have been made, the group is not aware that I am
dealing with these issue already. Why? What I beleive is required is a
set down procedure i.e. BA's list with amendments.
1) Contract issues - I thought that there was an arrangement for
systems to pass query cover calls to validations, I am happy to deal
with contract queries via the contract administrators/account managers
if this fails.
2) Re-routing - I agree, to do this effectively I would have to be sat
in the group on a permanent basis, but if you put it in my que with a
comment I am always monitering it!
3) I am doing this already, what I see to be the problem is because of
my movements between groups I may not see that the tapes have arrived,
but I do go back to my desk in operations on a regular basis, they can
be left there or alternatively - ring me.
4) Ditto - JT will back me on this! although I must get my lsdt time
correct, 11.00am or 15.00pm (thankyou John)
5) Loading tapes - With pleasure, just need some training which has
been offered,but time as usual is the problem, would an out-of-hours
situation be best.
6) All chargeable calls should be route directly to my qu "nasha" were
I will obtain the purchase order number and authorised signature, when
this is achieved the call will appear, as if by magic, back in the system
qu with a relevant update.
7) Esco - I will need some coaching on this one have not come across
it before - is it to do with policies and procedures?
8) Rota/leave/courses - As per brian adams comment - We liase!
9) Isn't this a repeat of (2)
In addition to the above I have already agreed to send tapes back to
customers - call is placed in my qu with requirement, I complete the
rest. I can also deal with your make letter requirements for the
patches and will shortly be handling the making of the patches for
Storageworks so why not for Systems.
P1 calls - Resource control procedures dictate that I should make the
group aware of a p1 call going into the qu and a comment showing that I
have spoken to someone in the group should be placed in the service
wsh, I have only recently been advised of this and it will be happening
in future.
With reference to high impact/political situation calls, may I assure
the group that I am quite capable of dealing with any customer query,
from the highest to the lowest. Chris is my Team Leader and I will
consult with himon any issue that is deemed to be sensetive or of a
high impact. From this consultation with Chris I gain valuable
knowledge and I would object to having this knowledge denied me by
passing the responsibility over to chris completely. Where is the
learning process in that?
I enjoy a varied and demanding role and welcome a challenge, my
organisation of tasks needs to be addressed, but apart from that, I am
confident that I can fulfil the above requirements in a timely and
professional manner.
Constructive criticism welcome!
kind regards
Angie
|
| 178.7 | Go to it Angie :-) | KERNEL::BLAND | Norman Bland 833 3797 CSC, Basingstoke | Wed May 18 1994 23:24 | 7 |
| Angie,
I welcome your enthusiasm. I am certain that members of the Systems
group will give you all the assistance you require to fulfil this
useful function.
Norman Bland
|
| 178.8 | how's this? | KERNEL::ANTHONY | | Thu May 19 1994 08:18 | 33 |
|
Thanks for your input Angie, I appreciate your enthusiasm !!
I've re-read most of this string,
I think the point is that we are all trying to make the System
Group run efficiently. The long list of tasks for a resource
controller was for Debbie who was full time AND sat in the group.
I believe that the best solution would be to share a RC with
VMS, our work is much closer to them, and nearly all the escalation
problems have VMS involvement. So angie. fancy changing groups?
However if we are to carry on with sharing Angie with SWorks,
I feel that a simplified list would be better, and reading
Angie's input I think we agree.
contract issues we route to suk_spa
re-routing of calls WE deal with
everything to do with dumps on tape Angie does, along with
chargeable calls and ECSO, and with training she can also make up
patches etc. She will also Highlighht P1 calls to us.
But the day-day running of the live systems queue is down to us.
finally, the high impact/political situation calls, I'm sensitive
to Angie wishing to take this on, so I'm happy for her to do so.
Brian
|