Letter of the month Dear Sir
From the tone of your ‘comments’ leader there appears to be an acceptance that failure to deliver within an operational environment is acceptable.
As a service professional and a consumer of service products, ie HomeCare, I find it some what dismaying that the question you ask is even contemplated.
As a customer I pay for a SLA’d service which I expect to receive, otherwise what's the point of paying for it in the first place? I might as well just phone up the local plumber.
As a deliverer of SLA’d services to customers I have a duty of care to ensure that the size of my operational infrastructure is equal to the workload that is put on it.
We put a less than 100% achievement SLA’s to allow for peaks in the workload and publish it so our customers know what they are getting for their hard earned cash.
Anything else is in my opinion is taking money under false pretences, ie, obtaining money by fraudulent means.
I assume that this organisation had the right to reply, if so, its own KPI's would have destroyed any argument put forward, always assuming they are meeting them, my point above again applies.
If they did not have the right to reply then again there are legal methods of recourse.
Having got that off my chest, nice try at provoking dialogue, good to see that I didn't fall for that one!
Ken Smith Editor’s note: Curses! Methinks I’ve been rumbled. |
