A fascinating report has been written on the future of customer service over the next ten years, and how technology and increased international competition means good service will become even more important to a business’s success.

The ‘Service 2020’ report prepared by the Economist Intelligence Unit questioned nearly 500 business leaders from across the world on the customer service ‘megatrends’ they expected to see over the next few years.

The report identified eight expected trends:

• Global competition will drive up standards of customer service: 55 per cent of respondents expected to compete primarily on service by 2020, not quality or cost of their products and/or services.
• Customers will expect service faster, and won’t compromise quality: 82 per cent said their clients and customers expected faster service than they did five years ago, and expected that trend to continue, with companies that save their customers time likely to be more successful.
• Social media will increase transparency and should be used to advantage of business: Customer complaints are more likely to spread and ‘go viral’, and companies will need to be transparent with their dealings.
• Businesses will utilise new sources of data to personalise service: More data is becoming available to businesses, such as from where their website is being accessed or how many people are downloading their phone application. Many businesses surveyed said they’d increase their use of customer analytics and location-based tools to learn more about theit customer base.
• Good employees will remain vital to good service: While there’s more focus on ‘DIY service’, like buying online or using self-serve kiosks within businesses, the importance of qualified, competent staff will remain vital – 82 per cent said personal interaction would remain part of their customer service.
• Outsourcing service will increase: Many companies forecast they would employ specialist experts, perhaps on a freelance basis, to handle specialist queries
• The increasing middle class will necessitate businesses to find new niches: 1.2 billion people are expected to be categorised as ‘middle class’ by 2030, up from 430 million in 2011, and global competition will see a rise in niche offerings and ‘personalised’ services to encourage loyalty.
• Customer expectations will evolve: Technology allows customers to contact a business at any time, and many will expect businesses to have ‘24/7’ service to meet their demands, while physical retailers will be expected to provide a ‘customer experience’ to attract clientele.

“While weaker firms are investing more heavily in standardised service processes, leading firms are prioritising staff training and development, and also working harder to define service standards and goals,” the report concludes.

What do you think about the report’s predictions? How do you see the way businesses serve their customers and clients changing?

An architect has been awarded $50,000 in compensation after he was accused of leaking sensitive information to an ex-colleague who was sacked, and was subsequently dismissed himself.

The man, who had worked for his employer for seven years, met and exchanged personal emails with the firm’s former finance manager, who was dismissed in January 2011 for failing to notify the employer about a number of accounting errors.

Following some redundancies in March, the architect provided a list of the names of redundant employees to the former finance manager, as the latter wanted to contact them to explain he was not responsible for the loss of their jobs. The architect and former finance manager also met for lunch just after this time, where the architect refused a request to act as a referee or provide a reference for him.

In May, the company’s managing director told the architect that he’d been seen having lunch with the former finance manager, which the architect confirmed. He was also questioned about anonymous emails to the company’s directors and denied any involvement.

A few days later, the architect was called into a meeting with the managing director and HR manager, presented with print-outs of his email conversations with the former finance manager, and suspended pending an investigation for providing “confidential business related information” and assisting the former finance manager with an unfair dismissal claim. He was dismissed in June.

At a Fair Work Australia (FWA) hearing, the architect said he had shown compassion for his former colleague and friend by meeting him and maintaining email contact. He maintained that the names of redundant employees could not be classified as confidential as it was widely known who was leaving the company, and said he was only made aware of the former finance manager’s unfair dismissal claim in late March.

Responding to accusations of disloyalty to the company, the architect said he proved his loyalty by continuing to deliver projects and working constructively with other team members.

Handing down his finding, FWA Senior Deputy President (SDP) Jonathan Hamberger said while gross disloyalty could constitute grounds for dismissal, the architect’s conduct could not be considered disloyal, and he was entitled to keep his contact with the former finance manager to himself, “as long as his dealings….were proper”.

SDP Hamberger also found there was no basis on which the list of names of employees who had already been told they were being made redundant could be considered confidential.

“If (the architect) had indeed covertly provided (the former finance manager) with confidential company information to assist the latter take legal action against the employer, this may have constituted an act of disloyalty sufficient to form a valid reason for his dismissal,” SDP Hamberger said. “However I find that this is not what occurred.”

SDP Hamberger criticised the employer for having no evidence to suggest the architect was involved in the anonymous emails or dishonest about the nature of his contact with his former colleague.

The lack of information and evidence presented by the employer counted heavily against it in this case, costing it a $50,000 payout.

Termination can be a complex and evolving matter, and VECCI’s Workplace Relations Consultants recommend seeking advice when undertaking these considerations. For more info, visit the VECCI website or call 03 8662 5333.

VECCI is disappointed with an independent panel’s decision to abandon important tourism projects planned for the Great Ocean Road. These projects would have created jobs and been a positive development for the local tourism industry.

While the panel endorsed the majority of projects, the decision to abandon four coastal projects was a step backwards.

The Corangamite Shire’s original study into tourism opportunities along the Great Ocean Road and the subsequent planning scheme amendment is a sensible and strategic approach by a council seeking to increase the social and economic dividends from tourism in its region.

About 2.6 million people visit the region each year and its iconic natural attractions, such as the Twelve Apostles, but only 18 per cent of these visitors stay overnight in the region.

The study’s recommendations would allow appropriate, sensitive and sustainable tourism development along the coast, which in turn would create jobs, create local economic benefits, improve the welfare of Victorian regional towns and help tell stories to engage visitors.

The abandoned projects would have all been situated on private land. They would not encroach on public land.

The panel’s decision makes Victoria less competitive and less likely to attract potential high-quality investment. Key tourism regions such as the Great Ocean Road ought to seize important tourism opportunities and attract investment, matched to market demand.

We urge the State Government, in particular the Planning Minister, to review the panel’s decision to abandon these coastal projects.

Dianne Smith is the Chief Executive of the Victoria Tourism Industry Council (VTIC).

One of the foundations of business success is a stable and effective long-term plan. Before you and your team commence your next planning session, check out our handy hints on perfecting the planning process.

Predict the future by looking at the past

Before rushing into writing your plan for the coming month, year or decade, take the time to look back and reflect on the past 12 months. Review which strategies and tactics have worked well and which haven’t. If you’re establishing a new business, it may be prudent to learn from the experiences of similar businesses.

Entrepreneur and blogger Andrea Dekker writes that by looking back and reviewing first, you can identify your business’s strengths and also areas for improvement. This knowledge will help you develop a more effective and targeted plan.

Define the purpose

Depending on the size of your business and the industry in which you operate, you may have several plans, ranging from a growth strategy and business model to plans for specific areas such as technology, marketing, human resources and sustainability. Each plan needs a guiding purpose, an ‘executive summary’ that shouldn’t be any longer than a few sentences. This is the anchor to return to when you hit any future bumps in the planning process.

Brainstorm

After establishing your purpose or anchor point, gather your team at a planning event and generate as many ideas as possible about how best to achieve your goal. To make the most of your time, circulate an agenda beforehand to keep the process moving and to stop the discussion straying off course. Spend the first few minutes of the meeting explaining the vision so everyone is clear about what you’re trying to achieve.

If you have a large number of participants, consider breaking attendees into smaller groups and allowing each to focus on one or two aspects of the business. However, make sure the priority issues are addressed first so if you can’t get through the entire agenda, you’ll still achieve important outcomes. This website has great tips on structuring a planning meeting.

Get a second opinion

A successful plan is often one that’s subjected to the most scrutiny. If it’s within your financial means, get a second opinion from a consultant or a mentor, or perhaps another business owner. If they point out some holes in the plan, take a step back, initiate a second, smaller, brainstorming session and discuss the plan’s weakness.

Keep it visible and adjust if needed

The problem with some plans is that once they’re finalised, they’re filed away and never looked at until it comes time for the next planning session. It is important to regularly review your plan and adjust it if necessary. 

As Tim Berry, the founder of US business plan software company Palo Alto Software, tells Forbes.com: “A business plan is the beginning of a process”. “Planning is like steering, and steering means constantly correcting errors,” he says. “The plan itself holds just a piece of the value; it’s the going back and seeing where you were wrong and why that matters.”

Do you have any other tips for perfecting the planning process? Let us know on the VECCI Blog.

Some recent studies have suggested that Australians are working harder than ever in recent years, but new business analysis suggests with the rise in part-time and casual work, we’re in fact spending more time away from work than before.

Forecaster IBISWorld has found the average Australian has 78.1 hours each week for ‘leisure’ activities, compared to 76.4 hours in 2001.

The statistic is an indication of how many Australians are seeking ‘non-traditional’ working arrangements which may reduce their working hours, and also reflects the beginning of the transition of the ‘Baby Boomers’ into retirement or semi-retirement.

IBISWorld analyst Naren Sivasailam told the Herald Sun that workers now had more capacity to free up some time so they could spend it looking after their health or caring for children, and believed the trend would continue in the future.

The forecast is backed up by figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in October 2010. It found that while the number of hours worked by full-time and part-time workers had increased in the past 30 years, the average number of hours worked had declined from about 35.5 to 33, due to a greater emphasis on part-time work.

The ABS found the trend was generally consistent across industries and levels of experience – managers’ hours dropped from 47.6 hours in 1996 to 43.3 in 2010.

The University of Melbourne’s Mark Wooden has also been keen to portray the reality that Australians on average are working fewer hours than before, with part-time employment now accounting for almost 30 per cent of the workforce.

From an employer perspective, the stats show how more people are seeking and obtaining an arrangement to boost their leisure time and balance their work and personal commitments, although other recent stats which suggest the number of hours worked rose in December 2011 due to the current job slowdown, could mean these arrangements will be harder to source at the moment.

Have you increased or decreased your working hours in the last few years, and if so, what have been the reasons for it?

The modern worker and small business owner often has to balance many tasks at once to keep clients and customers happy, pay the bills on time and meet other deadlines.

But the human brain is often not programmed to deal with these multi-tasking demands, and along with distractions from email and/or phones, sometimes it’s close to impossible to achieve meaningful progress.

However, it may be possible to train the brain to increase your focus and manage yourself and your team/s better.

Writing for the Harvard Business Review, psychiatry professor Paul Hammerness and founder of the Wellcoaches Corporation Margaret Moore declare as experts find out more about the human brain and how it works, techniques are emerging to ‘teach’ the brain how to be more productive.

In their article, they declare there are three ways to ‘train the brain’:

‘Taming the frenzy’

When multi-tasking and trying to do many things at once, you may simply become overloaded and feel out of control. Brain studies have found that the negative emotions that result from this have a negative influence on decision-making.

Medical research has discovered when focusing on positive emotions improves the brain’s capacity for effective function and creative thinking, so little exercises like starting team meetings with a joke or positive feedback will lead to better results. One researcher has even created the positivity ratio to ensure you get enough positivity every day.

‘The ABC method’

Distractions are common and can pop up at any time. The ‘ABC’ method has been designed so the impact of distractions is minimised. ABC stands for:

• Become aware of your options
• Breathe deeply and consider your options.
• Choose your option: stop or continue?

‘Set-shifting’

Switching your entire focus from one task to another when necessary can be challenging. ‘Set shifting’ reinforces the idea of having a break and giving your brain a chance to leave the last task behind before commencing something else. This break could be in the form of a walk, stretching, breathing exercises or something physical – and preferably not checking email!

What do you think – would these three techniques help to focus your brain? Or perhaps you use another method? Let us know!

Industrial action in the public sector and at various large enterprises Australia-wide has stolen the industrial relations headlines of late. However, one ‘sleeper’ element of the overhauled Fair Work system of workplace relations legislation re-emerged in late December.

The Victorian branch of the Australian Nurses Federation (ANF), while simultaneously involved in the recent public sector industrial action, has applied to Fair Work Australia (FWA) for a low-paid bargaining authorisation to cover roughly 850 private sector medical centre employers that employ practice nurses.

If successful, such an order would force the employers to bargain in good faith with the ANF for a multi-enterprise agreement that would cover all the parties and potentially a large part of the sector in Victoria.

This application follows a log of claims served upon over 1000 such medical centres in June 2011, and “has been substantially prompted by the very absence of employer claims or responses to [ANF’S] claims”. The claim requested the employers contact the ANF to bargain for an enterprise agreement, with the following just an indication of what was sought:

• A 20 per cent pay increase over three years;
• 12 per cent superannuation;
• 14 weeks paid parental leave;
• six months long service leave after 15 years of service;
• small businesses (less than 15 employees) obliged to pay redundancy pay;
• 2.5 weeks per year of service for redundancy, to a maximum of 37.5 weeks;
• paid volunteer time;
• increased personal leave benefits (i.e. after five years of service, 21 days per year); and
• elder care leave, study leave, professional development leave.

Perhaps understandably, it is apparent many medical practices were not overwhelmingly convinced that bargaining with the ANF on such terms was in the best interests of their enterprise. The ongoing uncertainty for employers regarding bargaining obligations and processes due to the JJ Richards decisions is also at play.

In the current landscape, merely responding to the ANF may have been seen to initiate the bargaining process and all the related obligations under the Fair Work Act 2009. However, if this recent application is successful, employers will be forced to bargain in any instance – perhaps having to contend with bargaining alongside many other organisations for a multi-employer collective agreement.

It is clear any combination of the above claims would increase the costs of running a practice substantially, further limiting the flexibility to offer and maintain services, particularly in rural areas. Indeed, there is a very real possibility such a claim may result in a reduction of such services, thereby indirectly increasing costs for Victorians needing medical assistance. It remains to be seen whether Medicare would bridge such a gap on an ongoing basis, if at all.

This is contrasted with employers traditionally paying more to attract staff to rural areas – however, employers to date have been able to negotiate directly with employees for terms and conditions. Given the number of employers reporting payments above the award terms, it may well prove difficult for the ANF to demonstrate that they are dealing with ‘low-paid’ workers.

Should the ANF be able persuade FWA this is so, a ‘pattern’ agreement containing the proposed inflated base terms and conditions would be a significant increase for affected practices and restrict the flexibility employers have to bargain ‘one on one’ with staff.

Finally, this FWA application and the legal battle that may ensue brings forward the real possibility of the ANF dragging practice centre nurses into the wider public-sector nurses dispute, requiring two orders from FWA to terminate the unlawful industrial action.

This application, combined with feedback from employers indicating a lack of a concerted desire to bargain by the nurses themselves, raises the question whether this is a genuine pay and conditions dispute or, alternatively, a ‘back door’ attempt by the ANF to broaden its influence in the rural and private sector where it has not otherwise been able to do so through traditional membership and bargaining campaigns.

The real challenge in Victoria is to develop and maintain a first class health care system that is accessible and affordable. A ‘one size fits all’ approach across the state, requiring organisations to bargain collectively, severely constrains their ability to make enterprise-level decisions about running their practices. These tasks are difficult enough, without elements of the union movement keen to expand its power in the nursing sector.

Stimulating and open workplaces are more important aspects than rates of salary in driving the growth of successful Australian small and medium businesses, an RMIT study has found.

Dr Carol Tan, the lead researcher for the project, said the results went a long way to proving the theory that “money can’t buy creativity”.

The survey of more than 250 successful SME owners/founders discovered promoting open communication and risk-taking were key characteristics in their enterprises, which tended to have a heavy focus on learning.

“Our study showed providing financial incentives linked to performance does not motivate staff to learn,” Dr Tan said.

“Instead, we found an open workplace culture, where staff can experiment, take risks and question fundamental beliefs and work patterns, is critical to learning.”

While salary and bonuses still have a role to play in rewarding achievement, the research found money had little role to play in encouraging a creative workplace and do not motivate staff to learn.

“In contrast, our study indicated that learning orientation in a firm is only enhanced when high levels of motivation are maintained and employees are treated as valuable resources,” Dr Tan said.

Learning was also found to be a key to running a successful small business in a 2010 Guardian Institute survey of 1100 American small business owners, which identified six key characteristics of successful business owners who prospered through the recession:

• they collaborate and delegate
• they place a high value on the personal fulfilment they get from their business
• they focus on the short and long-term future
• they are open to new methods and seek best practice insights
• they are tech-savvy
• they are more proactive during good and bad economic times.

What do you think about the results of the RMIT study, and how do you encourage learning in your workplace?

A restaurant duty manager who resigned after being told to quit or be demoted has won an unfair dismissal case after a Fair Work Australia Commissioner found her behaviour should have been classified as a performance issue, not misconduct.

The employee was called to a meeting with restaurant management after she allegedly made unauthorised changes to a staff roster, ate during her shift (contrary to company policy) and sat at a customer’s table.

Refusing to accept the employee’s explanations, management issued her with two disciplinary notices and told her they could no longer trust her to work as a Duty Manager, asking her to accept a demotion or to resign. The employee subsequently chose to quit.

After hearing evidence from all parties, Fair Work Australia Commissioner Bruce Williams found the employee did eat on shift and change rosters, which contravened company policy.

However, Commissioner Williams found the employer should have given the employee the chance to rectify her behaviour, and ruled the notices given immediately before dismissal did not constitute an official warning, expressing surprise that the restaurant’s managing director did not allow her the chance to demonstrate she could improve her performance.

In addition, the Commissioner judged that the behaviour was more in line with a performance management issue, and should not have been treated as misconduct.

“It is commonly understood that where employees fail to observe an employer’s policies, procedures or rules that this is a performance deficiency,” Commissioner Williams found.

“Such unsatisfactory performance will normally be addressed initially by counselling with an escalation to verbal or written warnings as appropriate, subject always to the exception that for a sufficiently serious rule breach warnings may not be necessary and dismissal may be appropriate.”

The Commissioner also took into account the inexperience of the Duty Manager, who was only 19 and had been in the position for eight weeks, working two days a week.

The employee was compensated with four weeks’ pay.

A former receptionist for a real estate agency in the American city of Chicago has won her two-year battle for unemployment benefits, after she was dismissed for working through her lunch break.

Sharon Smiley had worked for her employer for 10 years and ‘punched out’ to commence her lunch break on a workday in January 2010, but remained at her desk to work on a project.

Ms Smiley’s manager saw her working and instructed her to take a 30 minute break, as per the company’s policy for lunch breaks.

However Ms Smiley continued to work on the project, prompting the manager to involve the company’s human resources department, who told her that by refusing to take a break, she was in breach of state labour laws.

Her employer was also worried about the impact on her health, given Ms Smiley has suffered a stroke during the previous year and missed three months of work.

She was then dismissed because her refusal to leave her desk constituted misconduct, which subsequently denied her the right to receive unemployment benefits.

“I knew you couldn’t eat lunch at your desk,” Ms Smiley told ABC America. “I was under the impression that because I was punched out I could do what I want.”

After three separate appeals to obtain unemployment benefits were denied, Ms Smiley took her case to a local court, which found her “insubordination arose from her efforts to perform additional work…beyond what was required of her”.

The court also commented that it was the first time she had ever been instructed to leave her desk for lunch, and the meeting preceding her dismissal took only four minutes.

Ms Smiley said she was now employed at a receptionist at another company, with a more relaxed lunch policy.