The Solution
In order for this complete system overhaul to be a success there needed to be the nurturing of a new organisational culture, with the core of this culture being increased communication between management and users.
A new radical system was put forward, in order to alleviate/combat the growing problems mentioned earlier, and also go beyond this and create a marked improvement in the service. The project manager (Gary Meadows) and Nigel Brown (who provided the original system design) knew they would face numerous problems in implementing and making a success of such a radical new system, especially as the AA had a reputation of being risk adverse; and therefore not always open to innovation. Therefore they knew they had to act as ‘Project Champions’ and handle all potential hazards to the projects success in an effective manner.
They knew it was fundamental to the projects success that they got the employees on their side. As mentioned earlier this was best achieved through a process of change of organisation culture. The main area the Project Manager felt that needed to be addressed was the creation of a culture of communication. As the system was introducing such a radical change it was only natural to expect that there would be those within the organizational ranks who would be dissenting/sceptical towards it. Especially as it would mean the alteration of roles for many employees and suppliers, in particular, dispatchers, road patrols, and employees deciding which dispatchers to use. The new system needed workers to act more flexibly and have a working territory change, which was now directed in a completely automated manner (unlike before where it was decided by the call centre). Through the change in culture emphasis was placed on the numerous benefits to the employees, and also keeping them well supported and informed, so as to win them over. This worked effectively and within 18 months of the system implementation users were acting as champions to the cause.
As stated earlier, Meadows and Brown knew they had to act as Project Champions in order for the AA Help system to succeed and again they recognized that communication was vital, not just to the employees but to the Board, especially knowing the AA’s tendency of being un open to risk and the system being so radical. They knew they had to handle this communication with the utmost tact and guile. This became especially apparent when the project was initially proposed, and ICL (who had strong AA links) did not feel the plan was achievable. They devised a strategy of managing expectation by only offering as much as was needed to substantiate the project; in a sense drip-feeding improvements at regular intervals. The project began in the mid-1990s and the various facilities were introduced in six-month chunks. This maintained a sense of the project being a bunch of small easier decisions for the board to make rather than one major large strategic decision as regards a systems overhaul. The boards overall approval was eventually achieved when carefully selected experts showed support for the design.
Initially it was felt appropriate to have an experimental pilot (test run) of the system in the Lake District, chosen as it was the Project Manager, Gary Meadows own area and therefore he would protect and support the project more effectively. This was felt to be appropriate so as to see the real impact of the changes on a smaller scale, rather than rolling it out nationally and being more open to problems on a larger scale. This also allowed any problems/issues with the system to be resolved/tweaked by the team before it goes national. This was seen as the correct strategy by the project team.
The project was designed totally in house. User, member, business and technological factors were all taken into consideration when creating the design. Most of the key development work was done by AA IT staff, and an interdisciplinary team was created in the IT department for the project, including almost 60 people (25 programmers, and a mixture of users, technical support and external experts). The top-level project board had eight business and three technical representatives. The sub-boards were half IT and half users. Ten users worked full-time on the project, and a small group will probably stay on it for years to come so as to constantly fine-tune the system. Systems were developed jointly by IT and user staff. A team of five users checked all software before it went live (this was to ensure it met the specification) however this final safeguard did not throw up that many problems due to the teamwork in the development stages of the project. Mixed teams of IT and users spoke to staff about the system. There were regular briefings and also meetings for small groups or individuals, so as to get their ideas and to deal with their anxieties. If a conflict arose, management made the final decision. The AA used a self adapted version of the Prince Project management method, removing some of the bureaucracy; this proved immensely successful and is now being used for non-IT projects too. User involvement and the excellent interdisciplinary commitment/vision was a key to success of the project.
Convincing the dispatchers and patrol force about the viability of the new system was the most difficult part of the organisation to bring on board. This was overcome through listening and communicating with the workforce; and making sure they had all the relevant information so as to overcome any ‘fear of the unknown’. This information was in the form of a staff magazine, videos and audiotapes for crews to play while on the road. Managing the change in this way was essential in order to avoid any potential detrimental effect on staff morale and instil confidence too.
AA Help explained
Breakdown calls are now made to a single free phone national number and automatically allocated to the next available call handler, so members don’t have to wait for calls to be answered. The system enables the call handler to find the location of the vehicle and verify the caller's AA membership.
The AA help system prompts the call handler to recognise the member’s breakdown problem, deploy a properly equipped patrol vehicle and give an estimated time of arrival (in fact a patrol can be on their way to the member even before the phone call has finished). The call handler is prompted to ask a number of questions, such as the type of problem, make of car, if the tyre is punctured, whether the car will start, or has broken down on the motorway etc. The answers given help establish the level and kind of breakdown assistance required by the member. Call centre staff access a comprehensive gazetteer and members can tell them where they are (e.g. with local street names and landmarks). Communications between patrols and the operations centre is through Mobile Data Terminals (MDT), showing location, car description, fault, and member contact details. Codes are entered by the patrols so the system knows what is happening at any one time. Mobile units are tracked by satellite: this data, plus information on current jobs, enables the system to automatically allocate and instruct the most appropriate patrol, via data links to a mobile terminal. If a patrol's current job starts taking longer than expected the system can alert an alternative unit. Every year out of six million calls for assistance; 80% are dispatched without any manual intervention and 91% are answered within 15 seconds.
The Outcome
Today the AA is in as strong a position as it has ever been, coming back from a situation of major turbulence and uncertainty as regards the future of its roadside repair service. The AA Help system has cut the average arrival time for a mobile unit by 30%, from 47 minutes to 33 (an industry record), with a quarter of breakdowns reached within 15 minutes, and 9 out of 10 reached within an hour.
The investment in the new call handling and deployment systems and networking (AA Help) has allowed the AA to move from numerous regional call centres dealing with local breakdowns to just four larger call centres taking calls from everywhere. This has brought staff/property savings of £11m and overall business benefits of over £14m a year. Membership decline has been reversed (even in the face of growing competition), and customer satisfaction has never been higher. The system has been so successful that it has met with interest from other emergency service and motoring associations throughout Europe. Indeed, it has proved to be a major continuing success in innovation.
