Posts
Cost cutting is a fact of life across public and private sectors.
At some point every few years (or every year in some cases) organisations decide that the most effective way to improve productivity or profits is to reduce expenditures.
Intranets are a common target of cost cutting, either by delaying improvements to infrastructure, cancelling new functionality, reducing author training or cutting intranet staff numbers.
In some cases these decisions are justified, however with intranets often lacking high-level representation and sponsorship, there are cases where these cuts have serious negative impacts on the entire organisation.
So are there ways to position an intranet to avoid damaging cost cuts, and even increase the budget to the area in order to generate savings elsewhere?
I believe there are - and ways to make the intranet a central tool in a cost savings approach.
It may seem counter-intuitive to some, but I often advocate increasing intranet funding during cost cutting exercises as a lower cost channel for engaging staff and sharing information.
However for this to get traction, there are some preventative steps I believe an intranet manager needs to take to position the intranet,
1) Quantify and promote usage and satisfaction with the intranet
The value of an intranet is largely measured on the amount of use it receives by staff. This measure is, however, often more driven by perception than by actual numbers.
This is because senior leadership is generally the group least likely to make extensive use of an intranet - they have staff to make use of it on their behalf. However this group may (mistakenly) believe that intranet usage reflects their own personal use of the channel.
Quantifying and promoting the actual levels of intranet usage and satisfaction (and what functions staff are using) helps senior management understand the true value of the channel to the organisation beyond their personal experience. This leads to according it a higher priority within organisational planning.
During cost cutting this knowledge can shift the discussion from the potential savings in cutting back on intranet services to the increased cost of shifting to less efficient (and more expensive) communications and information sharing channels.
2) Identify a senior-level sponsor
Given that an intranet can benefit all parts of an organisation, provided the intranet's benefits and usage are quantitified and promoted, it becomes easier to identify a senior-level sponsor.
The most useful sponsor (for an intranet manager) is the senior executive with most to gain from an effective intranet - normally from a group with a significant need to share information or communicate in the most efficient way possible.
It is also important that the sponsor's area is regarded as business critical by the organisation, thereby ensuring they are well listened to in senior meetings.
3) Take appropriate steps to increase intranet awareness and usage
This should be an ongoing activity for all intranet managers.
Find out what tools or information would aid staff, make them available via the intranet and promote their availability.
This progressively grows an intranet's presence within an organisation while providing cost-savings as people aggregate towards the channel rather than using less efficient ways of accessing the tools and information they need in their roles.
4) Identify business processes the intranet can perform more cost-effectively than via other channels
This is the 'meat' in the cost-cutting sandwich. Before, or during, cost-cutting initiatives, it is important to identify productivity gains and business process efficiencies that can be moved by shifting functions to the intranet channel from other channels.
Start by building a list of potential efficiencies based on areas of savings including;
With the above preventative measures in place, the next time your organisation needs to cut costs your intranet can be positioned as a tool to support cost savings rather than as a service to be trimmed.
Also see:
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Cut costs by expanding your intranet | Tweet |
Monday, September 01, 2008
Use the right online metrics for the job | Tweet |
One of my mantras in professional life is 'you can't manage what you don't measure'.
Therefore it always worries me when I encounter organisations or individuals with a less than firm grasp on how to measure the success or failure of their online properties.
Depending on the type of web property, different metrics are most important for regular tracking and I believe it's the responsibility of top managers to understand the online metrics they use - just as they need to understand business ratios or balance sheets.
After more than twelve years of trial and error, below are the metrics I most and least prefer to use to track different types of online media.
What are the best metrics to use?
Standard websites
Visits
This tracks the total number of visits by users to a website over a period of time (month, week, day). This can include the same unique visitor returning to the site multiple times - which is the same way calls are commonly tracked for call centres.
Visits gives you an overall view of website traffic and, when divided by Unique visitors, provides a measure of 'stickiness' - how often people return to your site.
Note that for an unauthenticated site, a visitor is essentially an IP address, a computer. As multiple people can use a single PC, or a single person can use multiple PCs and it also may track search spiders and other bots, visits doesn't provide a perfect measure of human traffic but it's sufficiently good for trend analysis over time.
In addition, caching by ISPs or organisations can also influence visits - reports based on AOL from a few years ago indicate that visits reports may under report website traffic by as much as 30 percent due to caching - though this is less important today.
In comparison 'readership' is a much looser metric, but is often held in high regard in the print trade.
Unique visitors
Unique visitors tracks the individual IP addresses used to visit a website and as such provides a rough count of the number of actual users of a site, no matter how many times they visit.
This equates to 'reach' for a site - with growth in unique visitors indicating more people are coming to a website.
This is affected by the same IP versus human issue as visits, however is again still far more accurate than 'readership' figures provided by the press or 'viewer' figures provided by TV and radio - which are based on a sample rather than a population (as unique visitors is).
Pageviews
Pageviews are a more specific measure of the views of specific pages within a website, and is most useful for tactical website tracking, allowing the identification of high and low traffic pages and the impact of different navigational or promotional approaches.
Looking at pageviews also provides a psychological view of your audience's top interests - allowing you to quickly prioritise content to be expanded and which can be downplayed.
Pageviews is becoming less important as technology cocktails such as AJAX are more widely used to load part of a page's content automatically or in response to user actions. In these cases a single pageview may not track what the user views in the page.
Authenticated website (transactional services)
Active users
Active users tracks the actual use by authenticated users (real humans) in a time period.
This is the best measure of an authenticated site's success as it tells you how well you've encouraged ongoing use of a website, rather than simply how good a job you've done at getting people to sign up.
Many authenticated sites prefer to talk about Registered users as this is a much larger number, however if a user has registered but never returns, your organisation gains no value from it.
A low ratio of active users to registered users can indicate site problems, and should prompt website managers to ask the question why don't people come back?
Transaction funnels
Transaction funnels track the completion of transactions step-by-step in a service - and isn't necessarily only for authenticated sites.
This provides a website manager with tactical insights into any issues in a transactional process (or workflow), allowing them to diagnose which steps have the greatest abandonment rate and redevelop the process to improve completion.
Generally improving transaction funnels results in more transactions and more active users, which means greater utilisation of the service.
Multimedia (video/audio/flash)
Views
For any type of rich media, the number of views of the media is critical in determining success. However it has to be weighted against the Duration of views to determine if users spent long enough viewing in order to take away the message, or just viewed the first few seconds.
Duration of views
The duration of media views is a more granular measure of the effectiveness of the presentation - tracking whether the media actually communicated its message to users.
Looking at the average duration viewed, compared to the actual duration of the media (where such exists) provides a very strong effectiveness measure.
Shares
One of the keys with the success of media content is how much it is shared with others online - the word of mouth factor. For media with a 'refer to a friend' tool, tracking the use of this will provide a strong indication of how positively users view the material, and therefore how viral it will become. Media that is rarely shared is probably not getting the message across in a memorable way, whereas highly shared material is correspondingly highly memorable - at least for a short time.
Documents (pdf/rtf/docs)
Views
Often 'downloads' is used to track documents. Personally I prefer views as there are some technical issues with tracking downloads of files such as PDFs. In effect the two measures should be identically, but as PDFs, and sometimes other documents, download by segment, they can significantly overreport downloads (which becomes almost as useless as 'hits'), whereas views is a more accurate measure.
There are ways to fix this within reporting systems - which I've largely done in my Agency's system - however this is not possible in all systems.
Social media
Activity by user
Like authenticated sites, the goal of social media is to encourage participation - whether it be forum posts/replies, wiki edits or social network updates/messages.
Each of these represents activity - which may need to be tweaked by the type of social media.
The more activity by users, the more engaged they are with the site and the greater the prospects of longevity.
Views
The other useful measure is views, measuring the passive involvement of users with a social media site. Not all users will actively post, however if they return regularly to view, they are still engaged to some extent with the site.
Commonly the breakdown between active and passive participants is divided as 1/9/90 (Very active/active sometimes/passive observer), however in practice this varies by medium and community.
While that 90 percent doesn't add to the content of the site, they are vital for the other ten percent to participate.
Search
Top searches
Search is also an important area of sites, with the top searches providing another insight into what people want from your site - or what is not easily findable in other navigation.
Tracking this over time provides another perspective on the psychology of your website users. It helps you understand their terminology for navigational purposes and can help prioritise the content you should modify or add to in the site.
Zero results
Any search terms which result in zero results in your site should be looked into as a high priority.
Generally this reflects areas where your website lacks content or uses the wrong context or different language to the audience.
What are the wrong metrics?
Hits
Probably the least useful metric of all time, Hits is still the best known measurement for websites, despite having no practical business uses.
Hits measures the number of files called from a web server, with each separate file accounting for a single 'hit' (on the server).
On the surface this doesn't sound so bad - however webpages consist of multiple files, with the base page, style sheets, graphics and any database calls or text includes each accounting for a separate hit.
A webpage might consist of a single file, or it might consist of 20 or more - meaning that there is no clear relationships between hits and actual page views or user visits to a website.
To increase the number of hits to a website it simply requires the website owner to place more file calls in the page - potentially calling extremely small (1 pixel square) images, therefore hits can be easily manipulated with no effect on the actual number of website users.
So while hits figures are frequently impressive, even for small websites they can easily reach millions each month, they don't provide any useful business information whatsoever.
Monday, July 14, 2008
What should egovernment focus on? | Tweet |
There's a great article up on BuzzMachine titled Google as the new press room.
It makes the point that newspapers are in the content business, not the printing and distribution or website business.
As such they should focus on what they do well (create excellent content) and outsource the non-core activities.
The specific example is to have Google, or someone like AP, provide the technology platform and allow newspapers to focus on providing content.
This philosophy applies for government as well.
In the public sector we seem to invest a great deal of money into creating new websites in order to deliver content to different stakeholder groups - I'm guilty of this approach as well.
However what does government really do well, and what do we do badly?
Firstly I'd go out on a limb and say that we do websites really badly. Most Australian government websites function differently, using different content management platforms, different technology platforms and different workflows.
The quality, structure and depth of content varies widely, as does design and the use of different enabling technologies such as Flash, AJAX and Livecycle, blogs, wikis, forums and RSS.
Realistically, across government, we could have a single web content management platform, with appropriate enabling technologies usable by any agency - including a consistent search tool and reporting system (imagine being able to see how all government websites were performing side by side!)
A central design team could provide web quality assurance - enabling agencies control over their distinctive look, but preserving a common high level of usability and accessibility.
A centralised editorial team could provide oversight for information quality and depth, allowing departments to focus on being content matter experts.
A central transactions and forms/workflows team could oversee the development of agency forms - ensuring they use consistent terminology, provide contextual support and make it as easy as possible for citizens to interact with the government.
This would allow government departments to focus on what they do best - provide specific customer services, be content matter and policy experts.
Sounds like a pipe dream?
I'm seeing the fringes of this starting now. The central DHS Letters and Forms Secretariat, AGOSP with it's single sign-on, Smartforms and geolocational services, AGIMO's existing GovDex wiki and Funnel Back search solutions.
These are all pieces in the overall puzzle.
The challenge moving forward is to overcome departmental silos, satisfy the interest groups and provide a robust centralised framework with sufficient funding and support to bring it all together.
It's a vision with enormous benefits for citizens and for governments. It just requires people in government to share the big vision and drive it forward.
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
How do you rate your agency online? | Tweet |
How do you rate your agency in the online world?
I currently use a lot of different tools to build a picture of how our agency is doing, but I have not yet unified these into a simple set of metrics that tells me how we're doing.
Tools I use to rate my agency online include:
Site metrics
- Webtrends for site performance and detailed analysis (unique visitors, visits, page views, time on page)
- Hitwise for benchmarking and demographics (Ranking vs National Government sites/all sites, site demographics, Mosaic, search trends, upstream/downstream sites)
- Google analytics for reality checks (traffic trends, search trends, browser/resolution)
Search metrics
- FunnelBack site search engine reports (site searches, unsuccessful searches within the site, best bets)
- Hitwise (top terms, unsuccessful searches, other destinations)
- Google trends (search trends, top terms, site comparison, hot terms)
Customer metrics
- Technorati for blog posts (mentions, tone)
- Summarize for Twitter mentions (mentions, tone)
- Wikipedia entry status (accuracy and interest)
- Alexa (views)
- Manual forum checks (checking of mentions and tone across a selection of forums)
Media metrics
- Google alerts for media mentions including blogs
- Hitwise media alerts for commercial media mentions
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Google trends launched for websites | Tweet |
Google Trends is a great tool for tracking the ebb and flow of ideas, products and personalities in the public eye.
I've used it, for example, to track customer awareness of an agency name change - which gave my agency a good handle on the speed at which our communications was shifting perceptions.
This is important for comms people in government bodies changing names due last year's Federal election (such as FAHCSIA vs FACSIA)
Google has now launched Google Website Trends.
In the words of Google, A new layer to Google Trends
Today, we add a new layer to Trends with Google Trends for Websites, a fun tool that gives you a view of how popular your favorite websites are, including your own! It also compares and ranks site visitation across geographies, and related websites and searches.
What does that mean for you?
In other words, communicators can now track the level of community awareness of their brand over time aggregated by all the search terms used in Google to reach their website. The reports also provide insights into the search terms used, and the other sites visited by these people.
For example a trend on Centrelink demonstrates how popular searches on the baby bonus have been in driving traffic to the site.
This can also look at the impact of campaigns on driving traffic (via Google) to a new site over time - such as this trend on the Do Not Call website (looks like ACMA needs to rebuild awareness of this site).
Here's a comparison of searches for the ATO and Centrelink sites as an example of the tool in action.
How do you use Google Trends?
Friday, June 13, 2008
Tell me the topics you'd like covered in my eMetrics presentation | Tweet |
I'll be speaking at Ark Group's conference Driving Interoperability and Collaboration in eGovernment in Brisbane in late August on the topic of eMetrics - using them to benchmark and drive the ongoing success of eGovernment initiatives.
If you're planning to attend this conference - or even if you're not - let me know via comments to this post the areas you'd like to see covered within the eMetrics topic and I'll endeavour to cover them in my presentation.
My presentation will be posted on my slideshare site and blog after the event.
For an extract from one of my previous conference presentations on the eMetrics topic, see my post eMetrics primer
For the full presentation I gave on web strategy recently at a conference, see my post Web Strategy in Sydney
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
eMetrics primer | Tweet |
eMetrics is a personal interest of mine.
Being able to measure what actions people take and what information they use is, in my opinion, one of the key differentiators between the online channel and other communications mediums.
I find that the insights into customer and staff behaviour gained through eMetrics provides a solid basis for improvements to websites and intranets. It's also hard evidence that can be used to bring others onboard.
However using the wrong eMetrics can lead to all kinds of problems. I feel it's vital to understand what you are measuring, and why you should be using it.
Below is a brief primer using slides from a presentation I gave at a conference in 2007.
Sunday, June 01, 2008
eGovernment in Australia is like a chocolate éclair | Tweet |
There is some exciting activity happening in the Australian eGovernment scene.
States such as Victoria, Queensland and WA have taken major steps to standardise their online approaches across departments. At local level South Australia has introduced a phenomenal content management system that allows every council to have a well structured website, providing access to the key services they offer while still supporting individuality and innovation.
However at a Federal level it appears to me that eGovernment activity is more patchy.
Certainly there are fantastic applications such as e-tax from the Australian Tax Office (ATO), and the 2007 eCensus from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS).
But across the Federal Government there is little consistency as to how websites and eGovernment applications are designed, built or managed. Standards for reporting to allow ready comparisons across government sites do not exist and there are few efficiencies in coding or content management across departments or even within agencies across websites and intranets.
AGIMO (the Australian Government Information Management Office) did some sterling work a few years ago to develop a set of Better Practice Checklists and Guides for Federal government sites, however these are not enforceable, aging and do little to 'rein in' Agencies who go their own way.
Personally I've spoken with AGIMO several times to get their position on email marketing, wikis, blogs and participation in stakeholder forums and social media - unfortunately there are no guidelines and little knowledge of what is actually occurring in these spaces across the Government sector.
On this basis, while eGovernment does have a firm outer later, full of chocolatey goodness, the core is simply mush.
There are a number of steps I have identified that would allow Australia's Federal Government to begin realising the efficiencies and benefits that could be delivered via the online channel.
These include:
- Auditing the online channel within all Government departments to gain an understanding of the websites/intranets/extranets they run, support or engage with, the (software) systems they use, the governance in place and their strategic plans for the channel.
- Establishing and maintaining a register of key people working in the online area (business and IT people) across Departments who can cross-fertilise and support agency initiatives.
- Establishing appropriate and standardised reporting metrics that can be audited by the ANAO and guarantee that senior management and ministerial staff are provided with the same type of information no matter which agency. This may also include standardising on a core set of web measurement technologies.
- Establish strong guidelines on appropriate governance across website, intranet and extranet management.
- Create guidelines for engagement via the online channel - approaches for using social media and two-way communications tools in an effective, responsible and governable manner.
- Create National and State panels of suppliers across key areas, such as content management, search technologies, web design, mobile web design, rich media development, email marketing, mobile marketing and similar online areas that any Agency can draw on.
- Establish national standards around interface design - as simple as whether to place 'OK' or 'Cancel' to the left, using the same term for 'Firstname' and as complex as is needed. Due to how Agencies are so tied to their existing 'standards' no matter how different it is from other Agencies', there needs to be muscle to enforce this, perhaps with the involvement of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO).
- Negotiate Government-wide head-level agreements with key providers so that smaller Agencies can access the tools and services they need to develop their online channel at an appropriate cost and support level.
- Build a government-wide library of common tools, code and 'widgets' which Agencies can draw on and reuse within their own systems. If the ongoing management and development of these common tools is an issue I'm sure appropriate arrangements can be developed to allow Agencies to contribute what they can afford while still benefiting - after all we're all the same eGovernment and all the money comes from the same source.
- Establish National training standards for staff in the online area - both business and technical - to ensure that citizens receive a similar standard of service online, just as is expected from telephone or face-to-face services.
The situation isn't all gloom and doom (how gloomy can a chocolate éclair be) - there are some initiatives which have begun to address some of my goals above.
Govdex is a prime example, a centrally provided wiki system (using Confluence - my second favourite wiki system behind MediaWiki) that any Agency can use to facilitate engagement. I have implemented two wikis using the system and while it appears not all agencies 'play nice' as yet (it's hideously slow in our office), I have nothing but praise for the organisation supporting the application and for AGIMO's work in providing the service.
Another initiative is the AGOSP program, also from AGIMO - which will see Agencies be able to access a central forms system for citizen forms, as they can already do for business forms and aims to strengthen Australia.gov.au as the central point for online engagement with Government.
However from my perspective it appears that most Federal Agencies are siloed - each doing their own research, design, development, system selection, governance and ongoing management - taking few learnings from others and definitely not sharing experiences to any great extent.
Perhaps one day in the far future eGovernment in Australia will develop that extra hard gobstopper core - but for now, in my humble opinion, it remains an éclair.
Friday, May 16, 2008
To eTransact, or not to eTransact - is that the question? | Tweet |
I've been looking through AGIMO's 2007 report on Australians' Use of and Satisfaction with e-Government Services within the context of the channel research my Agency has been undertaking.
AGIMO's report make it clear that the online channel has become THE channel of choice for Australians to engage with Government.
To quote the report's executive summary,
This has been driven by citizens' desire to engage Government at the time and place of their choosing. To avoid queues and phone wait times. To be in control of the relationship.The internet is now the preferred way to contact government.
- Two in five (41%) people would now prefer to contact government by internet. This is a substantial increase from 2004–05, when less than a third (31%) nominated the internet as their preference.
- At the same time, there has been an ongoing decline in preference for in-person contact; this has fallen from 33% in 2004–05 to 20% in 2007.
Naturally Government in Australia has sat up and taken notice. Massive funding is pouring into the online channel and Agencies are busy planning the closure of many of their outlets and call centres.
NOT
Many Agency maintain a phone-first philosophy.
This is driven by 'common knowledge' that their customers do not use the internet, that they are happy contacting Government strictly between 8.30am and 4.45pm (excluding international customers) and that only via phone can customers receive the level of personal service they crave (except for those customers who refuse to call Government agencies).
While I have expressed the view above in an emotive way, it does reflect the thinking of many senior people across the Public Service.
And they aren't totally wrong.
AGIMO's report measures both actual use and intentions. As they say about the road to hell, you can find yourself in very hot water if you plan for intentions while ignoring day-to-day reality.
Certainly online is a growing channel - growing faster than the wheels of Government can turn.
Certainly also people find phone and face-to-face engagement frustrating. Both require them to be in a certain place at a certain time.
And within my own agency - which is also 'phone first', I track more minutes of website use per month than our total inbound customer calls (and more visits than phone calls).
However Government in Australia is not yet ready to change the balance from calls or face-to-face to online transactions.
People say they are willing to transact online and, in many cases, the Australian Government has those services there, online, waiting for people to use.
When they begin using them in great numbers and the phone volumes drop off Agency Heads will revisit their channel strategy.
However until agencies see that occurring their philosophies will remain in place, notwithstanding the efforts on those, such as myself, who see the online channel as being the best way to effectively deliver consistent customer service to citizens in a cost effective manner.
Of course this is based on a few assumptions;
- that the right services are provided online and they are usable and accessible,
- that Agencies will resource and promote their online channels so people realise they have the choice to not call, and
- that senior management in the Public Service - most of whom are baby-boomers, will adapt their reality to match customer behaviour, rather than attempting to follow the approach that has served them so well for thirty years.
I'm certainly interested in seeing what will happen.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
We built it - but why do they come? | Tweet |
April was a record month for the Agency website I manage.
We've been on an uptrend for awhile, but this month saw the traffic (measured in visits and unique visitors) jump north to an extent I did not anticipate.
It's definitely a nice surprise and gratifying to be able to claim that the website is growing faster than the average website growth rate in Australia (using Hitwise to prove this).
However how much is due to the work of my team and I, or that of the ICT team who actually code and deploy the site?
Websites are at an unusual end of the marketing and communications spectrum.
While they exist in a public (albeit virtual) space, there's realistically little passing trade who can stumble upon them.
Websites rely on people discovering about them through other means such as word of mouth, advertising, search engines and other websites.
Without these discovery approaches any individual website is virtually invisible except by lucky chance.
If your role is to manage a website, but you do not have influence over the communications going out from your organisation, you have to really consider whether you have much impact on the website's success.
Certainly the content can be kept timely and accurate, the navigation well-thought out and the design superb.
But if you built a shop in the middle of the Nullarbor Plain you'd probably get more passing trade (though they might glow a little).
So how does a website manager solve the audience drought problem?
If you listen to an SEO enthusiast, the secret is in optimising your search engine listing - Search Engine Optimisation (SEO).
This involves a collection of techniques to ensure that when someone is searching online for appropriate keywords your site is up the top of the results list.
It can also involve paid search advertising, where you place paid ads next to search terms that may lead someone to your site. The bonus is that you only pay when someone clicks on the ad, making them a very cheap option.
There is also link exchange - where you agree to link to someone else's website if they link to yours. This works well if the other site already has the audience you want to attract, otherwise it can be a waste of time.
There's online advertising - banners, pop-ups, spots, and all the different shapes and sizes available. This is less targetted, but can still deliver good results if ad sites are well selectd.
Sponsorship and social marketing are also possibilities - sponsor another website or post your web address in appropriate topic forums and blogs.
However there's a vital ingredient all of these online tools lack.
- They're all online tools and don't reach your audience when they are not online, also
- if your audience doesn't know they need to visit you, why would they click on you in search results, a banner ad or a sponsored site anyway?
Your comms
My role as Online Communications Manager means that besides looking after the website and intranet (and advising on online advertising), I also poke my nose into any Agency communications or marketing activity just to make sure that our website is front-and-centre.
To ensure that my nose doesn't take any damage in all this poking, in return I give the people preparing the material the one thing they cannot get on radio or TV, in print media, in our own printed materials or in any other form of communications outside the web - unlimited space for their messages.
- You're restricted to a 30 second spot on radio?
No problem - tell the audience to come to the website and we can provide a home page item and 50 pages of background material. - Your new printed customer publication is restricted to a 64 page fold (due to print and envelope stuffing costs)?
No problem - let's convert the document into a 120 page website section, which includes all the detailed information you really, really need to tell customers but cannot fit in a shorter form.
I've found this kind of tit-for-tat trade a powerful tool to both ensure that the website gets the coverage it needs to be found and help reinforce in peoples' minds that the web isn't simply another distribution tool for the same material.
Your staff
The other very powerful and influenceable way to get your site into customer minds is via your call centres and other staff. This involves communication within your organisation.
To get your staff to recommend your website you must first convince staff that your site has something of value for customers.
To do this you must first identify and provide appropriate tools and content. This includes material of high value to your customers as well as content that staff find difficult to explain over the phone, or tools that allow them to complete calls faster.
Once the tools and content are in place there needs to be an ongoing commitment to educating staff that your website is the place to go. Call centres often experience higher turnovers than other areas of an organisation and staff can only keep so many things in mind at once, so a once-off campaign won't deliver lasting results.
So how do people find your website?
