An Investigation into the Optimal Retention Strategy for a Cyclical Financial Services Call Centre Linda J Horan 09980882

This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Master of Human Resources Management by The Manchester Metropolitan University Business School. The dissertation was sponsored by the Business School and in consultation with Carole Nash Insurance Consultants Ltd Submitted September 2010

Abstract This is a consultancy based dissertation focusing on the examination of retention within Carole Nash Insurance Consultants Ltd. The organization issued a brief to the author requesting support in designing a retention strategy within their call centre with specific focus on whether it would be financially viable to carry over existing staff during the organizations quiet periods as they believed that existing staff out performed new starters, though they did not have empirical proof of that fact. The overall aim of the project was to present recommendations for a retention strategy for Carole Nash Insurance for 2010-2011. The key objectives set in order to achieve this aim were as follows: 1. Identify whether, based on actual performance metrics, it is possible to prove that it is more economically sound to retain surplus staff during the quiet periods as they will perform more effectively than new starters when call volumes increase 2. Establish the optimal number of staff to be carried over 3. Produce analysis of the current attrition statistics and exit interviews and identify trends 4. Recommend interventions which will curb the trends in attrition and facilitate retention of the required number of staff as identified in point 2

The project was separated into two phases. In phase one data on the performance of staff with 12 months service was compared to that of new starters over the period of January to December 2009. Using this data it was proved that staff with 12 months or more of service did in fact outperform new starters, generating in excess of 6000 extra profit per head. It was also established based on the financial information gathered that the optimal number of staff to carry over was 20. Following on from this phase two examined the data available within the organization with regards to leavers, including exit interview data and also involved the gathering of primary data via workshops and questionnaires. The output of this phase identified that there were significant short comings in the organization with regards to the gathering and recording of data on leavers, but did also identify four significant areas of focus for the retention strategy

i.e. promotional opportunities, managerial support, autonomy and involvement in decision making and targets. It was then intended to offer recommendations as to how these areas could be addressed, however due to constraints in terms of the data gathered, recommendations instead focused on what further investigation should be conducted in order to design an effective retention strategy.

Table of Contents Area 1 1.1 1.2 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.5.1 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 3 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.1.1 3.1.1.2 3.1.1.3 3.1.1.4 3.1.2 3.2 3.2.1 Introduction Underlying Rationale and Purpose of the Study Research Aims and Objectives Literature Review Promotional Opportunities Pay and Benefits Role Clarity, Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making Page No. 8 10 11 12 14 17 18 21 22 24 24 26 27 27 29 29 29 30 31 32 32 33 34 34

Job Design and Burnout

Training Batt (2000) Managerial Support Recruitment and Selection Summary of Retention Literature Consultancy Approach Methodology Phase 1 Proving the financial benefit of carrying over existing staff Group Selection Data Gathering Income Generation Data Gathering Cost of Carry Over Data Gathering Profit Differential Establishing optimal number to be carried over Phase 2 Leavers Data Analysis 4

Area 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.3.1 3.2.3.2 3.2.3.3 3.2.4 4 4.1 4.2 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 4.2.3.1 4.2.3.2 4.2.3.3 4.2.3.4 4.2.3.5 4.2.3.6 4.2.3.7 4.3 4.4 5 5.1 Exit Interviews Primary Data Gathering Workshops Questionnaires Other Methods Policies and Procedures Results and Discussion Staff Carry Over Reasons for Attrition Leaver Data Analysis Exit Interview Analysis Workshops and Questionnaires Promotional Opportunities Pay and Reward Managerial Support Training Level of Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making Role Clarity Targets Policies and Procedures Summary of Results Recommendations Data Gathering and Recording 5

Page No. 35 36 36 37 38 38 39 39 41 42 44 46 48 49 50 51 51 52 53 53 54 55 56

Area 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 6 Promotional Opportunities Managerial Support Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making Targets Other Areas Conclusions

Page No. 57 59 60 62 63 64

Table/Figure Figure 1: New Business Department Data Figure 2: Data for Renewals Department Figure 3: Calculations on variety of numbers of staff to be retained Figure 4: Leaver data presented grouped by length of service Figure 5: Exit interview responses to What is your main reason for leaving. Figure 6: Overall trends for attrition identified by each workshop group Figure 7: Overall results from the retention questionnaires

Page 40 40 41 43 45 47 47

Appendices Appendix 1 Brief Given by Carole Nash Appendix 2 Raw Data and Calculations for Carry Over Appendix 3 Leavers Data Appendix 4 Retention Information Gathering Sessions & Output Appendix 5 Retention Questionnaires and Data Appendix 6 Transcription from Interview with Sales Section Head Appendix 7 Exit Interview Structure and Raw Data Appendix 8 Carole Nash Policies and Procedures

1. Introduction This consultancy based research project attempts to examine employee turnover within a specific call centre and present recommendations on a retention strategy which will address the causes of attrition. Further to this the project seeks to potentially justify the organization permitting carryover of excess staff during what they deem the quiet periods to attempt to reduce the volume of new recruits required by the business t o staff up for their busy periods. Employee turnover has important and direct economical implications as it not only increases hiring costs, but also affects performance because of the presence of learning curves for new employees (Askin et al, 2007; Batt, 2002). It also has a significant effect on companies top lines by inhibiting the ability to keep current customers, acquire new ones, increase productivity and quality and pursue growth opportunities (Dawson, 2004). Retention of quality employees should thus be a priority for Human Resources Managers in most environments, but some industries have turnover rates which mean that retention becomes both a key issue and a significant challenge. Call centres are one such industry sector with turnover rates well above the norm for an office-type environment (Kinnie et al, 2000; CIPD, 2009, Dawson, 2004). A call centre can be defined as a work environment in which the main business is mediated by computer and telephone-based technologies that enable the efficient distribution of incoming calls (or allocation of outgoing calls) to available staff, and permit customer employee interaction to occur simultaneously with use of display screen equipment and the instant access to, and inputting of, information (Holman, 2003) A number of studies have examined the call centre industry and in general have not presented a flattering picture. The jobs have been characterised as dead -end with low status, poor pay, intense monitoring and surveillance and few career prospects (Deery & Kinnie, 2002). It is therefore unsurprising that the CIPDs (2009) retention survey showed that whilst the average labour turnover rate across UK organisations was 15.7%, the average call centre rate was more than double at 34%. In recent years several well known organisations including, First Direct, Thompson Directories and Scottish and Southern Energy, have all reported significant issues around retention of staff in their call centres which resulted in major HR measures being implemented to attempt to stem the flow of talent leaving the organisations (Kirby, 2005a; Kirby, 2005b; Pollitt, 2007). Smith (2000:123) highlights that retaining qualified personnel at all levels of the call centre organisation has become a competitive advantage to the winners and a potential disaster to the losers. 8

Despite this and despite the wealth of academic research being conducted within the call centre environment, research focusing solely on retention strategies within call centres appears to the relatively limited. Instead the literature focuses to a large part on the control systems and surveillance exercised. What literature there is focuses for the most part on the causes of attrition and making general statements regarding potential recommendations rather than offering practical workable solutions. For example recognising the influence and importance of training but not specifying the type, frequency or content of the training itself. 1.1. Underlying Rationale and Purpose of the Study A medium size insurance intermediary, known from this point forward as Carole Nash has requested support in identifying their optimal retention strategy for the period of 2010 to 2011. Prior to commencing the MA in HRM the author spent 6 years working at Carole Nash, initially in the Call Centre itself and laterally within the Staff Development team focusing on organisational development and HR project management. Retention within the call centre has been an ongoing issue for Carole Nash during her tenure there and since she left. Knowing the author had an interest in this area, Carole Nash approached her with a view to conducting this research. Throughout the project participants were made aware of the reason for her return to the organisation and thus the dual purpose of the study. Carole Nashs main product is motorcycle insurance and as such the call centre is very cyclical in terms of volume of calls. Volumes peak during the spring and summer months, tail off during autumn and trough during winter. Their recruitment and attrition cycle therefore follows this pattern, they recruit heavily in winter and spring and then turnover (both voluntary and involuntary) follows throughout the recruitment period and during the summer so that by the time calls tail off the staffing levels have also dropped significantly. Between late 2009 and early 2010, Carole Nash recruited approximately 160 advisor level staff. The volume of recruits was based on historical data regarding expected call volume and anticipated turnover. Turnover in the Carole Nash call centre generally runs between 30 and 40% peaking shortly after induction so they have found that in order to achieve the required number of staff at any given time they need to recruit 130% of what they actually require. The recruitment cycle starts late in the year and continues to approximately mid March, or until the required numbers are reached. This recruitment model was used in 2008-2009 and successfully delivered the recruitment numbers required to meet peak requirements in summer 9

2009. Following on from the campaign, attrition was successfully managed in order to hit required head count and payroll targets during the quiet periods. This management of attrition included not trying to buy back voluntary leavers and having strict policies and procedures in place regarding sickness, absence, time-keeping, performance and conduct for staff within the call centre which means that where headcount is too high, managers can very easily, quickly and legally manage staff out of the business if required. Overall, however, it is acknowledged that the annual recruitment model throws up a number of business challenges: The model ties up a lot of HR, training & operational resource in the first 6 months of every year. Ongoing quality meetings consistently identify the need for training and up skilling of existing staff and supporting the roll out of strategic initiatives during the busy season. With the existing training resource and with no change to the recruitment model this will not be possible. Management of attrition is resource hungry on line managers in the call centre and HR It is anecdotally felt that call centre advisors who have been with the business for longer have higher sales conversions, make fewer errors and have higher call monitoring scores than new starters. Consequently the customer journey would be more positive if the call centre advisor population is longer serving and consequently more experienced. Also, income generation would be higher

Carole Nash therefore wish to investigate whether it is financially viable to retain surplus staff during the winter period in order to have a larger proportion of experienced staff available when calls volumes begin to increase. Once this has been established they will then require a robust retention strategy to ensure that the optimal level of staff can be retained each year.

10

1.2 Research Aims and Objectives Consequently the overall aim of this research project is to present recommendations for a retention strategy for Carole Nash Insurance for 2010 2011. In order to achieve this overall aim, the following key objectives will be addressed: 1. Identify whether, based on actual performance metrics, it is possible to prove that it is more economically sound to retain surplus staff during the quiet periods as they will perform more effectively than new starters when call volumes increase 2. Establish the optimal number of staff to be carried over 3. Produce analysis of the current attrition statistics and exit interviews and identify trends 4. Recommend interventions which will curb the trends in attrition and facilitate retention of the required number of staff as identified in point 2

11

2. Literature Review This section reviews the literature that is available regarding retention with a specific focus on call centres. An attempt is made to use the literature to establish whether, via the review, a best practice approach can be identified or extrapolated which can then be used within the project to shape the proposals for a retention strategy for Carole Nash as well as identify areas for investigation within the data gathering phase. One core text, Malhotra et al, (2007), which examines the precedents of commitment within call centres, is used to give the section an overall structure. The findings of this paper are examined in relation to the other literature available in order to attempt to answer the central questions. This paper was chosen as unlike other papers found, it does not narrow its investigation to a specific area of retention, instead it examines a number of different areas which may influence or contribute to retention. In all subsections the author will conclude by linking the findings back to the attempt to establish this best practice approach to retention in the call centre environment. Malhotra et al (2007) In a recent study of four UK call centres, Malhotra et al (2007) examined the issue of commitment within the call centre environment. They particularly focused on the link between reward and commitment, testing the theory that reward plays an important role in building and maintaining the commitment of advisors aswell as ensuring a high level of performance and workplace stability. However, their study was not limited to what we commonly take reward to mean i.e. pay or compensation, instead the study examined various facets of intrinsic aswell as extrinsic rewards and their effects on the three components of commitment: affective, continuance and normative. To examine this they studied four inbound call centres within the UK banking sector. All three types of commitment examined linked to retention: normative commitment is the most obvious link as it denotes employees feelings of obligation to stay with the organization; affective commitment is the employees emotional attachment to, identification with and involvement in the organization which can also affect employees want to remain. With affective commitment, employees also desire to reciprocate the investment that the business has made in them. Continuance commitment is defined as commitment based on cost that employees associate with leaving the organization (Weiner, 1982). This can be as simple as loss of earnings, benefits etc but is also associated with retention strategies such as golden handcuffs, whereby employees are encouraged to remain with the promise of a payment at the end of a defined period and pay-back clauses whereby staff are required to reimburse the 12

employer for any genuine costs of training prior to resignation. Employers also organise this strategy to ensure enhanced maternity pay is reimbursed should the employee not return to work following leave (Taylor, 2002). Malhotra et al (2007) tested the following intrinsic and extrinsic rewards and their affect on normative, affective and continuance commitment in call centre employees: working conditions, pay satisfaction, satisfaction with fringe benefits, promotional opportunities, supervision, team support, role clarity, participation in decision making, skill variety, autonomy, feedback and training. They used a significant sample size of 342 respondents, all of whom were front line customer service representatives and were representative of the call centres studied. However, despite being a cross section of four call centres, the study was only conducted in one organization, i.e. four different sites of the same bank with the same, policies, procedures, pay scales etc. Without a clear view of the practices, demographics and market conditions of these centres it is difficult to establish how representative these centres and this organization are of call centres in general or Carole Nash in particular. As an example the demographic facts we are provided with are the mean age, average tenure and average length of call centre experience of the advisors examined. This was mean age 30, average tenure of between 3.2 and 4.0 years across all four and average experience of 9 to 11 years. This in itself raises possible issues with the studies transferability, as this seems very high by comparison to the average levels across the UK, and is higher than at Carole Nash where the mean age is 26 and average tenure is 1.6 years. However, the study does provide a good starting point in the examination of the issue as it offers an insight into the reason why people become committed and thus the things that can be investigated when considering a retention strategy. As Taylor (2002), Arthur (2002), Dawson (2004) and Steel et al (2002) identify, before embarking on a retention exercise one must first understand the reasons why staff are leaving and the reasons why they are staying. An appreciation of the research in the area allows the practitioner to structure their investigation appropriately. The factors identified by Malhotra et al will now be examined in turn and compared and contrasted with the findings of other authors before examining further factors which the literature also identifies as significant. But first it must be noted that on a practical note, in terms of best practice, the authors above would not agree with simply assuming reasons for attrition within an organisation based on applying the findings of research papers conducted in other organisations as outlined below. 13

Instead, it is acknowledged that for an organisation to gain an understanding of reasons for leaving comprehensive analysis of exit interviews, trends, voluntary versus involuntary attrition etc should be conducted to understand which of the theoretical/possible reasons for attrition outlined below are responsible for attrition within the organisation in question (Taylor, 2002; Arthur, 2002 and Dawson, 2004). The reasons could be a combination of all, or even one, or even an entirely unique circumstance to the organisation, therefore simply addressing possibilities may do more harm than good. 2.1. Promotional Opportunities Malhotra et al (2007) found that of the extrinsic rewards studied (i.e. working conditions, pay satisfaction, satisfaction with fringe benefits, promotional opportunities, supervision and team support), affective commitment was only significantly influenced by promotional opportunities. This supports the contentions of a number of authors within retention literature who identify the provision of promotional opportunities as an essential part of any retention strategy (Arthur, 2001; Taylor, 2002; Bozionelos, 2007; McKeown, 2002). It also ties in with the findings of Moss et al (2007)s study of 14 US call centres. They found that call centres who responded to workforce demands with approaches focusing solely on pay increases met with relatively little success, that employees were more interested in promotion opportunities, thus call centres that provided career growth opportunities reduced turnover (Moss et al, 2007). Barnes (2002) and Dawson (2004) also support this finding pointing out that one of the most common reasons for leaving given by call centre representatives is lack of opportunities for progression, though neither presents full information on the empirical basis of this statement. However, as Taylor and Bain (1999), Belt (2002) and Moss et al (2007) point out, call centres have relatively flat structures. In Taylor and Bain (1999)s study they found that operator/agents made up 71.3% of staff, other clerical workers 11.6% and professional and technical grades 4% of the workforce. Supervisory grades accounted for only 8.8% of staff and managers only 4.3%. These ratios demonstrate the constraints call centre managers are under when it comes to providing career advancement and promotion opportunities. Is it possible within a call centre environment to offer promotional opportunities to all staff who may want them? Or is the challenge to maintain the possibility of promotion? Malhotra et al (2007) argue that call centre workers are aware of the limitations of a flat structure so to them availability of promotional opportunities is perceived as the organization s concern for its employees future prospects of advancement. Indicating perhaps that it is feeling developed and 14

knowing that as and when opportunities do arise they will be considered and/or prepared for it is equally as important as actual job moves/promotions. Kinnie et al (2002)s study would appear to agree with this. In this study the RAC call centre under examination managed to significantly reduce turnover through a strategy which actually reduced the number of layers within the hierarchy of the call centre but did, however, offer training and development to staff and moved towards multi-functional customer service roles and thus offered long term development. Essentially they offered promotional opportunities/personal development via increasing opportunities for expanding responsibilities rather than traditional moves up the ladder. However despite these studies both pointing to similar conclusions, they are not directly comparable. Kinnie et al (2002)s study was based on interviews conducted with 15-20 people in the organization including CSRs, team leaders, and senior managers. These respondents included a cross-section of functions including operations, customer services, IT, and HR aswell as union representatives. This is a very different sample group to that of Malhotra et al (2007) who studied only the customer service representatives. The ways in which information was gathered is relatively similar i.e. interviews and questionnaires, however the conclusions are drawn differently. Whilst Kinnie et al (2002) examined what had been done and what the apparent results of these actions were, Malhotra et al (2007) investigated the emphasis people put on theoretical precedents of commitment and how they correlated to commitment within a call centre environment. A practical versus theoretical dynamic. In terms of a best practice model, regardless of the differences in the studies methodologies their findings point to a similar approach that is, if we are to consider including offering promotional opportunities in our best practice approach to retention, we do not necessarily have to increase the number of hierarchical promotions we make, but we would instead need to demonstrate a commitment to support the advancement and developmental goals of staff and offer promotions where practicable. Moss et al (2008) would disagree. They encourage the addition of hierarchical layers in call centres in order to create internal labour markets with good career growth opportunities for an increased number of employees (Moss et al, 2008; Bozionelos, 2008). They conducted an extensive study of call centres in the financial services and retail sector in the US over a period of seven years and found that whilst most call centres started with relatively flat structures in order to minimize cost, as they developed and strove to recruit and retain a motivated, loyal and skilled workforce their structures evolved to include several hierarchical layers, with some 15

almost doubling the number of layers (Moss et al, 2008). This created more opportunities for growth for valued employees and ultimately reduced turnover. This difference between the findings of two UK based studies and this American one could simply be a matter of the cultural difference between the American versus British employees, perhaps American employees see development and career progression solely in terms of what Moss et al (2008) call upward mobility. Alternatively, the difference could be down to diff ering methodologies. Moss et al (2008) focused on four measures of retention and promotion: (i) Policies on promotion from within, (ii) number of job levels between which workers can move (iii) probability of filling an upper level job from within and (iv) perceived probability and equity of advancement opportunities. They utilized a case study method, with qualitative in-depth interviewing and a cross-industry sample group including organizations focused on insurance, banking, and brokerage within finance; department stores and catalog-based retailers within retail. They also sampled from multiple sites within these companies and interviewed at a number of levels i.e. Customer Service Representatives, Supervisors, Managers and HR Managers. In total 121 interviews were conducted. As with Kinnie et al (2002)s study, i t is a regressive view of what happened in the call centres examined and what the impact was on turnover. However, by comparison the depth and breadth of data sources examined to draw the conclusions is significantly greater. On one hand this could make Moss et al (2008)s findings more relevant, as both Malhotra et al (2007) and Kinnie et al (2002)s findings were based on single organization, be it multi-site, call centres. However, we cannot escape the possible bias of the international element. How transferable is US data to UK call centres? In terms of recommendations for best practice, all studies do still point to what could be deemed career development opportunities being important even if they disagree with how they should be created or defined. So, it would appear that organisations looking to improve their call centre retention, should examine this issue, investigate the opportunities available now, examine whether there is scope for building further opportunities without adversely affecting performance or increasing cost and then encourage internal promotions rather than external hires. The organization should be examined to determine whether additional layers would in fact be beneficial or if alternate ways to support development of employees would be more appropriate. Whether it is via additional layers or via alternative approaches it would seem that every effort should be made to support employees progression goals. This also links to training and development which will be discussed later. 16

As a side note, promoting internally is worth further investigation above and beyond the benefits to retention as it has also been linked to improvements in call centre performance as studies have found that within the call centre environment external managers tend to struggle to adapt (Bozionelos, 2008). 2.2. Pay and Benefits Many authors point to the importance of reward in the retention strategy. As highlighted above Malhotra et al (2007) did not find any traditional elements of reward to correlate significantly with affective commitment, however satisfaction with benefits was found to influence normative commitment. This correlates with the views expressed by Griffeth and Hom (2001) who discuss the link between fringe benefits and decreased quit rates. They also emphasise the importance of relevancy when it comes to the fringe benefits highlighting that whilst higher order needs such pension and medical cover will engender commitment in some employees, others may not see the immediate benefit of these and require what they call softer perks. In terms of linking this to call centres, they maintain that lower paid and less skilled workers respond more to these softer perks such as childcare provisions, product discounts and family friendly policies, than rainy day benefits such pension provisions and life assurance. This has been demonstrated in practice at First Direct when retention rates were dramatically increased following on from the introduction of a number of soft benefits including an on-site nursery, family days, flexible shifts and even a concierge service (Kirby, 2005a). The literature in this area thus highlights the importance of examining the relevance of your benefits packages to the staff that you are trying to retain. There is no point in offering benefits that are not being utilized or appreciated. It will only have an effect if the staff value the offerings. In terms of establishing a retention strategy it would appear that an investigation should be held as to what the particular organisations employees would value in this area and whether it is possible for the organization to provide these. That said, the importance of pay satisfaction should not be disregarded. Malhotra et al (2007) found that pay satisfaction did contribute to continuance commitment among their sample of call centre staff. It is also a contentious point in the literature on retention as studies have found contrasting results. Whilst some such as Tsai et al (2005) and Holman (2002) support Malhotra et al (2007)s findings that pay satisfaction positively correlates with organizational commitment, others have found a negative correlation e.g. Eby et al (1999). Within general literature, pay and compensation frequently features: Arthur (2002) highlights effective financial rewards as an 17

essential component of retention programmes; Barnes (2002) points out that whilst pay is not usually the only factor that encourages employees to change jobs it can be a contributory factor if rates are seen as uncompetitive. Whilst the importance is recognized it is also widely accepted that addressing turnover with purely financial measures will not usually result in successful outcomes. That without addressing underlying causes the pay increase is just a temporary fix (Griffeth & Hom, 2001). It stands to reason that effective HR managers must keep abreast of market rates within their sector. Should another local call centre offer significantly more pay then staff may well leave. Therefore, the effects of pay cannot be ignored. A full examination of the link between pay and retention is beyond the scope of this paper, however in terms of finding a best practice approach, this highlights the need to ensure that rates are not seen as uncompetitive and that employees level of satisfaction with pay should be assessed. 2.3. Role Clarity, Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making On the intrinsic side, role clarity, autonomy and participation in decision making were shown to have a significant positive effect on affective commitment (Moss et al, 2007). Training and feedback were not found to have a significant influence, however they did significantly affect normative commitment and will thus be discussed later. It could be argued that role clarity is easily provided within call centres as call centre roles are typically highly prescribed, monitored and measured. The integration of telephone and computer technologies means that are seen as being at the forefront of increased automation with close monitoring, tight control, high routinisation and labour division (Taylor & Bain, 1999; Koskina, 2006). Each advisor has a role to play and that role is clearly controlled via the systems that they are required to use. The design of call centres thus easily lend themselves to providing this intrinsic need. Little room exists within the structure of roles for advisors to be unclear on what they are expected to do within their roles. Perhaps the challenge to call centre managers will be to ensure advisors have clarity on the standards to which these tasks must be performed and where their role links with overall organizational goals. However, for the same reasons, autonomy and participation in decision making are not so easily provided within a call centre environment (Sergeant and Frenkel, 2000). The study shows the importance of these factors as not only to they contribute to affective commitment they also significantly correlate to normative commitment (Malhotra et al, 2007). This agrees with the findings of Holman et al (2002) who, in a study of customer service representatives in a UK 18

bank, found that greater employee control over methods and procedures, combined with less frequent monitoring and facilitating team leadership positively effects various aspects of employee well-being including job satisfaction while decreasing anxiety and depression and thus intention to remain. They also found that to customer service representatives control over how they talk to customers and how they do a work task is more important than control over when a call is taken. But despite this, autonomy and discretionary decision making is not always possible within the confines of the role structures and high control monitoring and measuring systems which prevail in call centres (Russell, 2008). The prevalent job structures and the way in which advisors interact with the customers and each other is often tightly controlled by the IT system on which they are working and/or the dialer controlling the pace of the calls coming through to them. Advisor performance is also highly targeted within this. This is especially true within financial services call centres where activities are often tightly controlled by regulating bodies and calls are often highly scripted as a result. Malhotra et al (2007) acknowledge this issue and suggest involving employees in higher level decision making about their jobs given that their day-to-day tasks are relatively fixed. They suggest, for example, involving the employees in decisions regarding performance management systems, overall working conditions and scheduling. Essentially, the message is to involve people whenever and wherever possible in order to give them a feeling of involvement, to make them feel valued and listened to. This approach is highly supported by Arthur (2002) who suggests involvement strategies such as suggestion schemes and gaining staff feedback and opinions regarding change in the organization as essential to any successful retention strategy. It also links with theories on the retention benefits of employee engagement and voice. A CIPD (2006) survey found that employees feeling heard contributed to a feeling of engagement which they in turn lead to intention to stay in an organization. However, as Russell (2008) point out specific research into the presence and/or influence of voice within a call centre environment is relatively sparse and conspicuously absent from studies such as that of Holman et al (2002) above and Kinnie et al (2000) below, who examine high performance working in call centres. Russell (2008) maintains that despite the research which points to the advantages to retention of gaining employee involvement in decision making and asking their opinions on working

19

practices, other than occasional exceptions, within call centre environments the treatment of HR issues completely ignores the representational element of the employment relationship. Kinnie et al (2000) examined how organizations could balance the high control management approach within call centres with the organizations needs to develop strategies to increase organisational commitment. They found that the call centres they examined, RAC and Banco, the HR teams developed what they described as developed HR practices which resembled the high commitment management approach, while, at the same time, maintaining a highly controlled and measured work environment. They explored the ways in which these businesses managed to combine fun and surveillance. Employees were encouraged to take responsibility for their own performance and that of their teams and make suggestions for improvements. Pay systems were changed to reward high performers and to encourage more short term incentives and teamworking was introduced. Within call centres team structures are not required in order to complete the required work, however the call centres under examination introduced team working structures in an attempt to exercise normative control over attitudes and behavior and to provide a social dimension both at work and occasionally outside work. They found that the use of these practices not only increased the level of performance within the call centres but also lead to significant decreases in turnover. However, despite the success of the strategies they discussed, it must be noted that all strategies were still peripheral to the role i.e. the central issue of call centre roles being monotonous and highly controlled was not changed, they just added some niceties around the edges. High control management did still prevail but the addition of further incentives and team activities would appear to make this more bearable for the employees. Perhaps this contributes to their continuance commitment. Employees may be aware that the grass is not greener elsewhere. That they may not get these additional benefits and softer HR elements may be lost by leaving. The study did not examine the reasons that staff stayed, it simply recited the conditions and practices of the call centres examined and the effects that this had on the figures around turnover and performance. In terms of best practice the literature in this area indicates that every attempt should be made to provide the staff with discretion and autonomy within their roles as well as involving them in decision making wherever possible in order to increase their feelings of involvement. In line with the recommendations of Russell (2008) the presence or absence of employee voice should be examined and investigations should be included as to whether this can be improved if present, 20

or implemented if entirely absent. Role structure should be examined to determine if constraints are too tight. Is there scope for allowing a degree of discretion to advisors? Perhaps this could be linked to seniority and experience within the department. 2.4. Job Design and Burnout The issue of autonomy in decision making and role clarity leads on to the influence of job design and its affect on employee burnout. These roles have high levels of customer contact, which can often be of an intense nature e.g. complaint handling. Because of this frequency and intensity of customer contact, a number of authors point to the emotional labour of call centre workers and its influence on the incidences of burnout (Holman et al, 2002). As Deery and Kinnie (2002) point out, in their interaction with customers call centre employees are often forced to express emotions they do not feel such as friendliness or happiness or to suppress emotions they do feel such as anger or frustration. This can lead to the employee feeling an emotional dissonance and may result in anxiety or burnout. The link between emotional labour and burnout is not unique to the call centre industry, however it can be argued that the design of roles and management control structures within a call centre environment further intensifies the issues surrounding emotional labour. For example, call scripting in itself forces employees to act a role, to play a part. Employees do not even have the freedom to react to customers in a natural manner, to utilize their own phrasing and build rapport and provide a service to the customer in a way that comes naturally to them. Sustained customer contact with little opportunity to vary pace or methods of work can significantly increase levels of stress and likelihood of burnout (Morris & Feldman, 1996). Added to this are the findings of Deery et al (2002) who found that employees who spent longer on calls experienced a lower level of burnout and that levels of stress were higher where there was pressure from management to maximize customer throughput at the expense of customer service. This does not sit well with a call centre structure that places strict targets regarding call lengths for advisors. Holman et al (2002) recommend that employees job control should be maximised and practices such as insisting that calls are handled within an exact time and excessive call scripting should be resisted. Job demands and role breadth should be such that they provide a challenging environment and one in which the customer service representative has a variety of tasks to do. Again, as previously discussed, these studies do have limitations in terms of how representational they are of call centres in general and thus how transferable the results are, however, the literature available in this area all seems to agree that there is a link between the 21

design of the jobs, the emotional labour involved and employee burnout/lack of well being and thus can be considered significant. In terms of best practice retention one must also consider the design of the roles and its effects on the stress levels of staff. Are targets around call length employed and if so, are they having a negative effect on the emotional wellbeing of the staff? Are the staff experiencing burnout and is this a significant contributor to the turnover levels? 2.5. Training Many authors highlight the importance of providing training to the retention of staff (Arthur, 2002; Barnes, 2002; Taylor, 2002). Malhotra et al (2007) also found that provision of training positively affected normative commitment; that training employees makes them feel more satisfied and confident in their jobs and thus feel more obliged to continue to stay within the organization. The fact that it is connected to normative commitment implies this link is present due to the employees wanting to return the investment made in them, however this may be due to the type of questions asked which were linked to training e.g. induction, without the inclusion of questioning around development. Training c an often be taken to mean just the formalized processes i.e. classroom based but other studies have demonstrated that other forms of continuous development can also have an effect on the commitment of call centre employees. Holman et al (2002) examined the effects of performance monitoring on employee wellbeing and found monitoring can play a positive role in improving well-being when it is seen to be part of a broader system aimed at improving employees skills and abilities that it is the employees increased ability to cope with demand that produces the improvements in well-being. Performance monitoring within call centres is abundant, so much so that they have been frequently compared to twentieth century electronic pan opticans and assembly lines in the head (Askin et al, 2007; Deery & Kinnie, 2002; Taylor & Bain, 1999). Many authors including Holman et al (2002) point to the possible detrimental effects of the intensity of the monitoring on employee well being and commitment to the organization. They found that excessive monitoring may, over the long term, make employees more depressed and less active. In addition, higher levels of anxiety brought about by excessive monitoring may cause employees to devote their resources to dealing with their anxiety, rather than focus on providing a quality customer service. However, if the positioning and approach of monitoring can be examined to give it a developmental focus Holman et al (2002)s findings would suggest that it can have a positive 22

impact, that employees will see it as the company investing in their development, thus increasing their feelings of value. Holman et al (2002) recommend that levels of monitoring should be minimized and effective, developmentally focused performance appraisal and training should be implemented. They also maintain that efforts should be made to ensure that team leaders are skilled in administering performance appraisal and monitoring practices and have a supportive and facilitative style. However, as with most studies in the call centre arena, their research was based within a single organization (be it on multiple sites), therefore one cannot assume that their recommendations, if implemented will be fully effective it differing organizations. Therefore, when considering best practice approach, rather than blindly following the recommendations, an investigation into the current performance monitoring processes should be included to establish (i) the perceived intensity and (ii) the perceived purpose i.e. seen as developmental or punitive? In terms of formal training, Callaghan and Thompson (2002) identified that in a call centre environment it is typical for training to be given initially to all new employees for communication skills, products and work systems and then after that, a regular update on training is provided only to poor performers. However providing ongoing training only to poor performers will not have the retention benefits required. They may encourage the poor performers to hang in there but that is not the object of a retention exercise. Retention strategies are intended to encourage the good performers to remain, as such on-going training and development should be provided to all staff; poor performers to help them achieve the required standards and good performers to help them to further develop their skills and show them that they are valued and that the organization is concerned with their development. This correlates with the opinions professed by Armistead et al (2002) who commented that although all call centres invest in training pertaining to basic procedures and standards required for hard statistical analysis, the more successful centres in terms of staff retention appear to be those who also offer developmental and soft skills training. The exact types of training with the most benefit to retention are not discussed in the literature however, so again, investigation or requirements and desires for training among the employee population must be included in the construction of a retention strategy.

23

2.5.1. Batt (2000) In a study which potentially links with both the sections on training and promotional opportunities, Batt (2000) examined high-involvement HR systems and how they influenced sales growth and quit rates in a cross functional sample of US Call centres. In this study high involvement systems were taken to include three dimensions: (i) emphasis on the selective hiring of employees with high general skills (or formal education) plus a firms investment in initial training, (ii) the design of work to provide opportunities for individual discretion and ongoing learning through collaboration with other employees and (iii) provision of opportunities for continuous learning through participation in "off-line" problem-solving groups (in which employees and supervisors meet periodically) and "on-line" groups (such as self-directed teams) in which groups rather than individuals form the basic unit of production and are responsible for many decisions. As well as various performance related implications, the study also found that greater use of these high-involvement practices is positively associated with lower quit rates and higher sales growth in customer service and sales call centres. It thus further supports the findings of those studies outlined above. However, as this study did not limit its investigation to the individual elements which formed each of the dimensions it took as meaning high involvement HR practices, nor did it manage to fully eliminate the possibilities of influence from other factors it is difficult to accurately assert that the HR practices alone are responsible for the lower quit rates. Nor is it possible to determine whether any of the individual factors within their description of high involvement is most influential. Also, as with the earlier issues associated with the study by Moss et al (2008) the study, though covering a large variety of organizations across multiple states in the US, Batt (2000) did not involve comparison to other geographical locations and thus it is possibly inaccurate to assume that its findings are easily transferrable. 2.6. Managerial Support Malhotra et al (2007) found that feedback from managers or team leaders had a direct positive influence on normative commitment of call centre frontline staff. Their results also indicated that where performance-based rewards are limited, constructive feedback received from superiors can be used as a powerful motivating tool for enhancing normative commitment. This implies that call centre representatives feel more obliged to stay with their organization when they receive due recognition and praise. Malhotra et al (2007) state that this is because they then realize that their efforts have not gone unnoticed. 24

In a study of 477 Dutch Call Centre employees Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2003) examined how different categories of working conditions are related to sickness absenteeism and turnover intentions. In similar findings to those discussed above, they provide evidence that job demands (like work pressure or changes in tasks) are important predictors of health problems leading to absenteeism and affecting an individuals turnover intentions. However, they also found that job resources (like social support, coaching, performance feedback) are predictors of involvement and also determine turnover intentions but this time for the better. They assert that call centre employees who can draw upon job resources such as social support from colleagues and performance feedback feel more dedicated to their work and more committed to their organization, and, consequently, are less inclined to leave the organization. It would thus appear that to counteract the negative effects of job demands, call centre managers should provide their employees with increased job resources. However, this study also has limitations. Though the on-line questionnaire issued had a very high response rate at 88% and is thus a good representation of the business examined, as with other studies discussed above, this study is based on a single organization, so its transferability to other call centres and or other countries is unclear. Also, as with other studies, this data was based entirely on self reports and thus has reliability limitations. This is particularly an issue with this study as they relied on self reporting for number and length of absences as the Human Resources Department was unable to provide this information as record keeping was sporadic. This raises some alarm bells as to the type of call centre and how representative it truly is of the typical call centre as described throughout this paper. As has been discussed, call centres are renowned for the sheer volume of data gathered, recorded and analyzed regarding staff so to be told the HR department are not recording something as vital to call centre operations as absenteeism raises questions. That said, the findings are supported by other authors such as Kinnie et al (2002) who found that increased managerial support was one of the factors which influenced the RACs decrease in call centre turnover. Deery et al (2000) also found that customer service advisors who have supportive team leaders experienced less burnout, which as discussed previously can be a precursor to employees leaving. Therefore, in terms of best practice, it would appear that the literature suggests further investigation into the relationships between staff and their line managers and between team

25

members. Are they feeling supported? Is there an environment of team work and support amongst the team members, are they even structured in teams? On a practical example various initiatives around team working and team socializing have been credited by the management of Thomas Cook for reducing their levels of turnover by over 20%. They cite initiatives such as the introduction of a social club as contributing to increasing the bonds between employees and ultimately increasing team moral and team working. Employees felt more supported by eachother and by management. 2.7. Recruitment and Selection A number of authors have commented on the importance of effective recruitment and selection strategies on retention of staff in the wider business context and within the call centre environment in particular (Taylor, 2002; Callaghan & Thompson, 2002) . As outlined above, call centres present a number of unique challenges to those who work within them. There are the pressures of job design, propensity for burnout, levels of monitoring and performance expectations. It therefore stands to reason that selecting staff who do not have the correct skills, attitudes and behaviours for work will have a significant impact on levels of staff turnover. Research into the leaving patterns of call centre staff has demonstrated that for a number of organizations a significant peak in turnover happens with the first 3-6 months of staff joining the organization (Pollitt, 2007). This could indicate issues with the recruitment and selection practices, and thus identifies their significance in the retention strategy. However, please note, whilst it is acknowledged that recruitment and selection programmes have a significant impact on the turnover levels within call centres a full examination of the presence in the literature of a best practice approach to recruitment and selection within the call centre environment is beyond the scope of this paper. For further information in this area please refer to Townsend (2007), who examined recruitment and induction training and its links with turnover within the call centre environment. Aswell as outlining a practical case study the paper also provides an overview of literature in this area.

26

2.8. Summary of Retention Literature The literature in the area of retention in call centres would appear to suggest various recommendations towards establishing a best practice approach, however as outlined above the studies on which the information is based have a variety of limitations. For the most part each study focuses on one factor and its contribution to attrition/turnover and examines it in depth. The contribution to turnover is measured, tested and confirmed but a practical method which call centres can put into practice as part of a best practice approach for overcoming its influence is rarely given. Also, the majority of the studies are conducted on one centre or multiple locations of the same organization. Without extensive knowledge of the demographics of the call centres examined and the product/service and labour markets that they are operating within it is difficult to assert with confidence that the findings of the studies are transferrable across all call centres. As such what was found is that whilst the literature provides pointers towards a best practice approach, it is more useful in terms of highlighting areas that should be examined by any practitioner looking to implement a retention plan. During the execution of this research piece these areas will be considered as to their importance in the organizational context of Carole Nash. 2.9. Consultancy Approach In terms of the approach to consultancy, it was decided by the Carole Nash HR Team that the author would assume a similar role to that held prior to her departure from the organisation, sitting within the HR department. Relationships with the key stakeholders in the business were already in place as contact had been maintained following departure therefore, typical issues surrounding consultancy such as negotiation of entry and building of trust and confidence was not an issue in this case (Pellegrin-Boucher, 2006). However it was made clear in all interactions with staff throughout the project that the author was working on an external consultancy basis for Carole Nash and that the project had the dual purpose of providing information for the business to form a strategy for retention, but also to form the basis of a consultancy based dissertation. An announcement to the effect was sent to all staff and the message was reiterated during each interaction with employees throughout the project.

27

This approach was appropriate to the organisation given the existing relationship of the author with the organisation.

28

3. Methodology This section will outline the methodological approach used in order to address the research aims and objectives as outlined above. The specifics of the approach taken will be discussed, as well as the limitations identified before and encountered during the undertaking of the research. This will be a consultancy-based dissertation. It is not intended to prove or disprove any theories or hypotheses, but to utilise the resources available to produce recommendations to solve a particular business problem. The HR Manager within Carole Nash issued a project brief (see Appendix 1) which was utilised to construct the overall aims and objectives of the project. The project has essentially been approached in two stages. The first stage concerns the first two research aims: (i) identify whether, based on actual performance metrics, it is possible to prove that it is more economically sound to retain surplus staff during the quiet periods as they will perform more effectively than new starters when call volumes increase and (ii) establish the optimal number of staff to be carried over. The second stage could only be commenced once the first phase was completed and involved addressing the second two aims of the project: (iii) produce analysis of the current attrition statistics and exit interviews and identify trends and (iv) recommend interventions which will curb the trends in attrition and facilitate retention of the required number of staff as identified in point 2 The phases and research aims were agreed by the briefing HR Manager prior to commencing phase 1. 3.1. Phase 1 3.1.1. Proving the financial benefit of carrying over existing staff It was necessary to first prove the economic value to the organisation of carrying over the additional staff as if this could not be proven then Carole Nash did not have need of a retention strategy. They would continue to require staff numbers to be reduced in September to December as business needs decrease and then increase from January in order to prepare for the dramatic increase in demand during May to August. This meant having to prove that staff with 12 months service or more outperform new starters. 29

3.1.1.1.

Group Selection

In order to have as representative a group as possible, all sales staff with over 12 months service as at 1 January 2009 were chosen for inclusion in the group representing existing staff. In the data charts this group is referred to as the core group. In January to December 2009 the sales department was split into two sections, new business sales and renewals. In 2009 the Carole Nash call centre was split into five departments. New Business dealt with the sale of motorcycle insurance policies, Renewals dealt with all policy renewals, Personal Lines sold home and car policies and outbound sold all policies but only made outbound calls whereas the others took only inbound calls. Lastly customer service dealt with all post sales enquiries and policy alterations. For the purpose of this study only New Business and renewals were examined as (i) They are income generating (ii) were the biggest departments in terms of income generation and advisor numbers (iii) the are therefore the most recruited for (iv) they have the highest turnover and (v) given their size they are the only departments where carry over is possible. Also, both departments, rather than just the biggest (New Business) were examined for the purpose of this study as in early 2010 the departments were combined to be one Sales Department. Therefore analysis would need to take both into account. The core group remained constant throughout, i.e. as other staff reached 12 months service they were not added to the core group. Whilst this was is in some ways a limitation of the data, it was necessary as due to recording system of the organisation to extract the data in this way would have been prohibitive to the project given the additional time taken. It was therefore decided to continue with new starters being a growing group and existing staff actually decreasing in numbers over the 12 month period of analysis as individuals from the original core group left the organisation. The number of staff in the two core groups decreased steadily across the 12 month period starting at 24 in new business and 16 in renewals in January and decreasing to 9 in November and December in new business and 13 in renewals (See Appendix 2 for numbers in each group and all calculation figures). Inductions commenced in January 2009 which meant the new starter groups began to take calls in February 2009. As each group joined the sales floor their stats were added.

30

3.1.1.2.

Data Gathering Income Generation

It was initially proposed to utilise performance metrics readily available within the business to compare and contrast performance of between the two groups. It was hoped that the performance against all key performance indicators could be analysed for advisors with 12 months experience or more versus advisors with less than 12 months experience. This would involve examining income generation, quality scores and compliance scores. However, upon commencement of the project it was discovered that this data was not entirely accessible by the business within the timescales required. It was therefore decided, in consultation with the Carole Nash HR Manager, to concentrate on what was seen by the business as the most important of all the performance metrics, income generation. To do this the sales made and the number of calls taken by the advisors in each group were then tracked over the 12 month period from January 2009 through to December 2009. These dates were chosen as they covered the full recruitment and attrition cycle for Carole Nash for one year. These were then used to calculate the average conversion rates of each group. Conversion rate is the number of insurance policies sold versus the number of calls taken and is expressed as a percentage. An average conversion rate for each month was then calculated and recorded based on the number of advisors in the group for that month. The data on conversion rates and numbers of calls taken was provided by the resourcing team at Carole Nash. This was then used to calculate the unit variance which was difference in the number of policies sold by new advisors versus the core group based on the average number of calls taken. This gave an early indicative figure of the income lost by new starters taking calls during January to December 2009. The data was then used to calculate projected income for both groups. This was done by using the average number of calls taken, average conversion rate and the average income per policy during the peak period which was 85. However, it was acknowledged that the data regarding conversion rates is not as straight forward as it may first appear. There was no way of analysing whether the customers who rang and spoke to the new starters and did not buy the policies, called back at a later time and spoke to a member of the core group who then sold the policy, increasing their conversion rates. The system at Carole Nash did not allow analysis of this type. It was therefore necessary to assume that this would happen in both cases, i.e. that there would also be individuals who didnt buy 31

from the core staff group who later called back and bought from the new starters (See Appendix 2 for all data gathered). 3.1.1.3. Data Gathering Cost of Carry Over

From here further analysis was required. First the Finance Department provided figures which calculated the average cost of an adviser per month (see Appendix 2). This took into account the following metrics: salary, overtime, sales bonus, year end bonus, pension, employer national insurance contribution, health care, incentives, cost of recruitment, and cost of training, travel and entertainment. It may be assumed that the training costs would be greater for the new starter group than the existing staff group due to the induction training, however as Carole Nash are proposing that if the existing staff are carried over and the trainers are therefore freed up from inductions, they will use the resource to provide additional training to the existing staff the average costs were still utilised. Also, recruitment costs were taken as an average as at Carole Nash they are relatively low per advisor and it is anticipated that they will be counterbalanced by the HR time used to manage the retention of the existing staff if they are retained. The Finance Teams analysis reported an average monthly cost per call centre adviser of 1621.81. This cost was then used to calculate the maximum cost of carrying staff over the quiet period as if they were not required to take calls they were purely an overhead. Therefore the cost of carry over was calculated as 1621.81 x four months (October January) i.e. 6487.24 per FTE. 3.1.1.4. Data Gathering Profit Differential

The cost of a new starter for the 8 month peak period, i.e. 1621.81 x 8, 12974.48 was then subtracted from the income to give the average profit generated by a new starter over the 8 month peak period. The same calculation was then performed for the core group using their average conversion. However, the costs for the core staff group was calculated over 12 months to take into account the cost of carry over during the quiet period. These figures were then compared to establish whether experienced staff did in fact (even when extra cost of carry over is taken into account) generate more profit than new starters over the same period. 32

3.1.2. Establishing optimal number to be carried over It was originally anticipated that once the data had proven that existing staff out perform new starters a cost benefit analysis could be carried out to establish the optimal number of staff to be carried over. To do this it was anticipated that the projected call volumes and target sales information for 2010 2011 would be available to use. This would provide the optimal number of staff required during the 2010 2011 to take the anticipated number of calls. Knowing how many people would be required during the busy period would, it was expected, give a clear indication of how many could be carried over. However, the information will not be available until after this deadline for the project and too far into the quiet period for the business to make the necessary plans and changes. Therefore the decision was made to present a number of different scenarios based on the metrics gathered to the HR and Finance Managers for them to make a decision based on the information currently available. The output of this decision will be discussed in the results section. Once optimal numbers are established phase 2 of the project could begin i.e. establishing the reasons behind the currently high levels of attrition within the Carole Nash Call Centre and utilising that information to propose a retention strategy which would result in the optimal number of staff being retained during the quiet periods and ensuring where new starters are recruited that they are then retained in the business.

33

3.2. Phase 2 Following the analysis of the metrics in order to justify the potential carry over of staff, analysis was undertaken regarding the leavers from the organisation during the same period of January 2009 to December 2009. The purpose of the analysis was to attempt to identify trends among leavers which could then be explored in order to address common issues regarding retention. For this analysis Carole Nash had requested that all call centre departments were examined, i.e. customer service, new business, renewals, personal lines and outbound sales. This request was made for the following reasons (i) the organisation believes that the issues on the departments will, for the most part, be the same (ii) they believe that if each department is looked at in isolation the numbers will not be statistically significant (iii) whatever retention strategies are recommended will need to be adopted across all departments even if they are not actively seeking to carry over additional staff as they do not wish call centre staff to feel that they are treated differently based on what department they are in. 3.2.1. Leavers Data Analysis Information regarding the leavers was provided by the HR department and included the following: department, hire date, leave date, termination reason, and employment status i.e. full or part time. The information was used to attempt to analyse the reasons for leaving, forced versus voluntary attrition and trends regarding length of service. Reasons for leaving for each employee should be recorded on the company HR system Ceridian. However, when the information was extracted, of the 105 leavers during the period, 10 reasons were not recorded, 17 were simply recorded as resignation with no actual reason for the resignation, a further 21 were recorded as resignation new job with no reason for why they sought a new job. 3 more were recorded as resignation job not suited. Another 9 were dismissed having gone absent without leave (AWOL), again their reasons for doing so were unknown. This meant that other than providing information on the rate of forced attrition versus voluntary these data sets could not be used for further analysis. This left only 48 leavers for analysis regarding actual reason for leaving. Less than half the original total. See appendix 3 for all data. Forced versus voluntary attrition was examined. Forced attrition is taken to mean those who left at the behest of the organisation i.e. probation not confirmed or dismissed due to sickness, lateness, absence, performance or conduct. Voluntary was those who resigned or went AWOL i.e. those who voluntarily made the decision to leave the organisation. 34

The data was also used to analyse any trends regarding length of service. Firstly, the ratio of trained staff to non trained staff was analysed. Trained staff were regarded as staff with at least 3 months service. The 3 month marker was chosen in consultation with the training department who highlighted that staff attend a 4 week induction training period following by a further 8 weeks of settling in on the department with occasional spells back in the training department dependent on need. Only following 12 weeks service are they regarded as fully trained. Also examined was length of service, with average and median length of service being calculated. The length of service of each advisor was then flagged as one of the following, 0-1 month, 1-3 months, 4-6 months, 7-12 months and 12 months plus in order to try and identify any trends in this area. The information was then cross referenced with information from the training team and resourcing department to identify the following: induction group and team leader. It was proposed to utilise the information regarding team leader and induction group to attempt to isolate any trends associated with who ran induction training sessions and which team leaders staff were managed by. As will be discussed later, all of the information gathered was of an unsatisfactory nature. Due to the very limited amount and often absent information recorded on the system in most areas the analysis provided no significant information that could be utilised to establish trends. 3.2.2. Exit Interviews The next step was to examine exit interview output to analyse whether it could bring depth to the basic metrics gathered from the HR department. The exit interviews are all conducted by the HR team and recorded on a central excel spreadsheet. If procedure is followed then all voluntary leavers should be interviewed prior to leaving the business. The data gathered is then made entirely anonymous with only the overall figures for each question recorded against each call centre department. The same questions are asked to each individual with their answers recorded on a scale related to each question. See Appendix 7 for exit interview questionnaire and the data which was provided by the HR department. As will be discussed later the information from the leavers information and exit interviews proved to be for the most part inconclusive due to the inconsistent quality of data gathering and recording, therefore it was decided to gather primary data as outlined below.

35

3.2.3. Primary Data Gathering Two methods of data collection were chosen, questionnaires to all call centre staff and workshops for a representative sample of staff. These methods were chosen for a number of reasons. 3.2.3.1. Workshops

Workshops were chosen to enable the gathering of qualitative data from a range of sources within a short period of time. Workshops are frequently used at Carole Nash to gather data during the scoping phase of projects and thus the employees are familiar with participating in data gathering of this type. Workshops were run with staff from each call centre department with a minimum of 12 months service. It was decided to only include individuals with a minimum of 12 months service as these individuals would be able to comment knowledgeably on why people stay within the organisation as well as provide insight as to why they believed colleagues had left. The numbers in the workshop were decided by the business and based on the number of staff that they could afford to allow off the phones at any given time. Based on the number provided an invite was then issued to all staff with the required service looking for volunteers for the workshops. It was explained within the invite that the workshops had a dual purpose of providing information for the business and for the completion of this report. Participants were assured of the confidentiality of their input at all times. The resource department permitted 5 workshops of 10 participants each. Due to the number of volunteers, holidays and other commitments, 4 workshops were run with a total of 30 participants. The split in the sessions were as follows: 15 Sales Advisors, 8 Personal Lines Advisors, 3 Outbound Advisors and 4 Customer Service Advisors. The format of the workshops was kept simple to gather as much information as possible in the relatively short time available. A copy of the invites issued, facilitators notes and the output of the workshop can be found in Appendix 4. The use of brown paper and post it notes is a common method of information gathering in the organisation. It allows for participants to easily record the output of their conversations regarding the topic and then working as a group, identify trends of their own output. The session was also run for a group of team leaders, invites issued to all 12, 6 attended the session and also 4 of the 5 section heads. The output of these sessions is also in Appendix 4. 36

The output of these sessions was then analysed to identify overall trends in the opinions of the groups and then compared and contrasted with the information gathered from the questionnaire and the other secondary sources. 3.2.3.2. Questionnaires

Questionnaires were chosen as they allowed the collection of data from potentially every member of the advisor level staff of the department without disrupting the business as usual. The questionnaire was designed around the areas identified as significant in the literature review as detailed above but also included a question regarding targets. This was included following on from the workshops where it was identified alongside policies and procedures as a major issue. Also identified as an issue in the workshops but not included in the questionnaires was levels of satisfaction with policies and procedures. This was not included in the questionnaire for three reasons, (i) it was not identified as an area of significance within the academic research and (ii) it was felt that seeking opinion on policies and procedures from the general staff population could create issues internally and (iii) The data in leavers available did not show a significant number left because of the policies and procedures. The policies at Carole Nash are used extensively and have been utilized in their current form for a number of years. Opening the door to possible criticism without a plan of action to address was seen as potentially counterproductive and therefore was mainly excluded on this basis. Also excluded was reference to burnout as it was felt by the HR Manager that, along a similar line to her concerns about policies and procedures, questioning advisors on this area was not appropriate to this medium as it could cause an issue where one may not exist. A simple likert scale was chosen to ensure that the questionnaire could be completed quickly, thus increasing the likelihood of a good rate of return and also ensuring that the completing of the questionnaire did not distract from the activity of the call centre. The questionnaire was distributed in paper form to all call centre staff with instructions regarding how to complete and how to return confidentially. Instructions explained the dual purpose of providing information for the business and for the completion of this report and assured the participants of the full anonymity and confidentiality of their answers. Of the 148 questionnaires distributed, 63 were returned. A response rate of 42.57%. According to the HR department at Carole Nash this was a good response rate. Their typical response rate for annual employee surveys which are 37

distributed and collected in the same way runs at an average of 46% (See Appendix 5 for copy of questionnaires and outline of information provided to participants). Following the analysis of the results of the questionnaire a brief one to one interview was held with the Section Head of Sales during which questions were asked regarding the potential reasons behind some of the results. The time available for this interview however, was relatively brief due to the volume of work she had to complete. 3.2.3.3. Other Methods

Another method which was considered was contacting leavers from the organisation to interview them and gather information regarding their reasons for leaving the organisation. Previous studies such as that conducted by Barnes (2002) found that independent individuals contacting leavers following their departure from organisations, often gain valuable insight from interviewees which they have not previously shared with the organisation. However, following discussion with the HR Manager of the organisation, this was ruled out as she did not feel comfortable contacting previous employees in this manner given the potentially personal or sensitive reasons for departures and the amount of time lapsed since many had left given the study was examining data from January to December 2009. Therefore primary data gathering was limited to workshops and questionnaires. 3.2.4. Policies and Procedures The companys policies around sickness, lateness, performance, KPIs and conduct were examined to attempt to establish whether they were overly strict and thus affecting attrition. This involved desk based research of the policies and examination against the leaver figures.

38

4. Results and Discussion 4.1. Staff Carry over The first key objective of this project was as follows: Identify whether, based on actual performance metrics, it is possible to prove that it is more economically sound to retain surplus staff during the quiet periods as they will perform more effectively than new starters when call volumes increase.

As outlined above this was the first piece of analysis completed. Data can be found in Appendix 2. The results demonstrated that during 2009 experienced staff i.e. the core group, outperformed new starters. As can be seen from figure 1 and 2 the unit variance across both departments was also significant, indicating that on basic metrics existing staff out perform new starters. These figures gave an indicative figure of the volume of policies and thus income which was lost by having less experienced staff taking calls. Over the course of the 12 months this equated to 624,258 (see appendix 2 for all calculations). The figures also showed that on average, new starters converted at 29.94% on new business calls and 58.86% on renewals whereas experienced staff converted at 36.37% and 64.27% respectively. When figures were then extrapolated out for the period in question i.e. September 2010 to September 2011 it was found that the cost of a new starter was 14,596.29. They generated 87,833.60 which gave a 73,237.31 profit. To carry over an existing staff member for 4 months and then carry the cost of the 8 m onth peak period would equate to a spend of 19,461.72, they would generate 99,017.28, a profit of 79,555.56. This meant that for every staff member carried over would generate 6318.25 more profit after all costs than a new starter Therefore it was demonstrated that there is a financial justification for retaining experienced staff over the quiet periods even if there is not enough calls to keep them busy. Even if they are purely a cost during this time, they will during the busy period of February to September generate an additional 6318.25 of profit over a new starter.

39

Figure 1. New Business Department Data Top section outlines conversion rates of each group. Second section is the volume of calls taken. Third section is the number of units lost by new starters i.e. if all staff were converting at the rate of existing staff, this number of additional policies would have been sold.
Conversion Core Jan Feb March May Calls Core Jan Feb March May Unit Variance Core Jan Feb March May Total Jan 26.06% Feb 31.92% 25.57% Mar 38.81% 31.64% 31.23% Apr 33.75% 29.91% 29.66% 28.16% May 31.26% 29.05% 26.43% 28.56% New Business 2009 Jun 41.65% 34.03% 33.13% 31.96% 27.54% Jun 3131 1196 1887 3892 4189 Jun 0 -91 -161 -377 -591 -1220 Jul 39.18% 31.08% 27.87% 29.18% 28.54% Jul 2667 711 1705 3629 2903 Jul 0 -58 -193 -363 -309 -922 Aug 38.84% 31.16% 29.69% 32.04% 29.35% Aug 2294 661 1280 2447 2138 Aug 0 -51 -117 -166 -203 -537 Sep 35.57% 30.15% 32.67% 32.02% 27.97% Sep 2128 408 1050 1771 2035 Sep 0 -22 -31 -63 -155 -270 Oct 33.09% 23.14% 29.93% 31.16% 29.32% Oct 2019 229 922 1242 1204 Oct 0 -23 -29 -24 -45 -121 Nov 27.64% 23.43% 25.65% 25.85% 20.95% Nov 1986 303 768 936 587 Nov 0 -13 -15 -17 -39 -84 Dec 33.37% 29.14% 27.21% 28.81% 30.00% Dec 809 151 438 545 250 Dec 0 -6 -27 -25 -8 -67

Jan 6240

Feb 5442 2249

Mar 4823 2168 2571

Apr 4904 2016 1975 2921

May 4335 1215 1529 3754

Jan 0 0 0 0 0 0

Feb 0 -143 0 0 0 -143

Mar 0 -155 -195 0 0 -350

Apr 0 -77 -81 -163 0 -321

May 0 -27 -74 -101 0 -202

Figure 2 Data for Renewals Department.

Conversion Core Jan Feb Calls Core Jan Feb Unit Variance Core Jan Feb Total Jan 59.06% Feb 65.40% 58.78% Mar 67.91% 63.30% 53.33% Mar 4235 2428 5955 Mar 0 -112 -868 -980 Apr 64.62% 59.33% 57.74% Apr 5633 2781 5040 Apr 0 -147 -347 -494 May 60.67% 60.80% 56.64% May 5860 3051 4790 May 0 4 -193 -189 Renewals 2009 Jun 66.10% 60.47% 58.81% Jun 5634 2914 4503 Jun 0 -164 -328 -493 Jul 63.59% 59.49% 57.83% Jul 4991 1891 3801 Jul 0 -78 -219 -297 Aug 61.13% 60.94% 59.24% Aug 4294 1431 2483 Aug 0 -3 -47 -50 Sep 64.74% 58.72% 57.42% Sep 4039 1422 1832 Sep 0 -86 -134 -220 Oct 62.35% 57.19% 54.21% Oct 3602 549 1568 Oct 0 -28 -128 -156 Nov 65.17% 52.78% 59.42% Nov 2831 144 1136 Nov 0 -18 -65 -83 Dec 70.10% 64.44% 68.54% Dec 913 156 255 Dec 0 -9 -4 -13

Jan 4309

Feb 4734 1999

Jan 0 0 0 0

Feb 0 -132 0 -132

40

The second key objective was to: Establish the optimal number of staff to be carried over. As the figures of anticipated calls for the following year were unavailable for use in the project, the financial figures were presented to the Finance and HR Manager, with the figures relating to the cost associated with carrying over the staff (see Figure 3).

Motorcycle Sales - carry over cost and income (October - Jan - carry over, Feb - Sept - income gen) Number of advisors Cost Income generated Profit 1 19,461.72 99,017.28 79,555.56 2 38,923.44 198,034.56 159,111.12 3 58,385.16 297,051.84 238,666.68 4 77,846.88 396,069.12 318,222.24 5 97,308.60 495,086.41 397,777.81 6 116,770.32 594,103.69 477,333.37 7 136,232.04 693,120.97 556,888.93 8 155,693.76 792,138.25 636,444.49 9 175,155.48 891,155.53 716,000.05 10 194,617.20 990,172.81 795,555.61 11 214,078.92 1,089,190.09 875,111.17 12 233,540.64 1,188,207.37 954,666.73 13 253,002.36 1,287,224.65 1,034,222.29 14 272,464.08 1,386,241.93 1,113,777.85 15 291,925.80 1,485,259.22 1,193,333.42 16 311,387.52 1,584,276.50 1,272,888.98 17 330,849.24 1,683,293.78 1,352,444.54 18 350,310.96 1,782,311.06 1,432,000.10 19 369,772.68 1,881,328.34 1,511,555.66 20 389,234.40 1,980,345.62 1,591,111.22 21 408,696.12 2,079,362.90 1,670,666.78 22 428,157.84 2,178,380.18 1,750,222.34 23 447,619.56 2,277,397.46 1,829,777.90 24 467,081.28 2,376,414.75 1,909,333.47 25 486,543.00 2,475,432.03 1,988,889.03
Figure 3. Calculations on variety of numbers of staff to be retained

Varience from NS 6,318.25 12,636.50 18,954.75 25,273.00 31,591.25 37,909.50 44,227.75 50,546.00 56,864.25 63,182.50 69,500.75 75,819.00 82,137.24 88,455.49 94,773.74 101,091.99 107,410.24 113,728.49 120,046.74 126,364.99 132,683.24 139,001.49 145,319.74 151,637.99 157,956.24

Also taken into account was the current number of staff in the sales department at that time (June) i.e. 64.5. The Finance Manager and HR Manager decided that a realistic figure for carry over into the following year would be 20. This decision was based on the financial cost of the 41

carry over to the business in the 2010 budget i.e. 20 x 4 x 1621.81, 129,744.80, and the number of staff that could potentially be carried over based on current staffing levels. Ultimately the decision was taken by the business based on the facts presented to them. The basis of the decision was mostly financial, i.e. how many can we afford to keep? But also on the HR Managers perception of how many it would be possible to retain over the upcoming months. The Finance Manager and the HR Manager took the decision and then presented it to the board for their approval. The author of this report was not present for the discussions or the presentation to the board due to the discussion being included within a regularly scheduled meeting which included other topics confidential to the business; however debriefing following the meeting provided the insight above as to the reasons behind the figure given. It was therefore accepted that the target retention for October February would be the required FTE to cover the anticipated calls plus 20. For October to December these numbers were available and are 63.5, 60.5 and 59.5. Following on from this decision, the work with regards to establishing a retention strategy began in earnest. 4.2. Reasons for attrition The third key objective for this project was to: Produce analysis of the current attrition statistics and exit interviews and identify trends

According to Steel et al (2002), the retention-policy formulation process begins with the acquisition of data from relevant sources (e.g., exit interviews, surveys) describing the current retention situation. They claim that other forms of information may bear on the issue, but some areas of information are especially pertinent to the problem at hand; these include data on who is quitting and why. It was attempted to gather this information via the leaver data and the exit interview analysis. The following information was found: 4.2.1. Leaver Data Analysis Of the 105 leavers during the period, 10 reasons were not recorded, 17 were simply recorded as resignation with no actual reason for the resignation, a further 21 were recorded as resignation new job with no reason for why they sought a new job. 3 more were recorded as resignation job not suited. Another 9 were dismissed having gone absent without leave (AWOL); again their reasons for doing so were unknown. This meant that other than providing 42

information on the rate of forced attrition versus voluntary these data sets could not be used for further analysis. This left only 48 leavers for analysis regarding actual reason for leaving. Less than half the original total. Of the 95 leavers where reasons were recorded 30 were forced and 65 voluntary. However, anecdotal evidence would suggest that a number of those who resigned were on the verge of being taken down disciplinary action for a variety of reasons so again the data is not necessarily telling the full story. Only 35 of the leavers were classed as new starters. Of these 10 had no reason for leaving recorded, 8 were forced leavers and 17 were voluntary. Of these 17, 5 did not have their reason for leaving recorded other than resignation and 4 went AWOL. This left only 8 where the reason for leaving was recorded. Therefore there were not enough people to generate a meaningful trend or analysis. Of the 70 trained leavers, 22 were forced leavers and 48 voluntary. Of the 48 voluntary, 11 simply said resignation, 19 said resignation new job, leaving only 18 for analysis. Again, not enough for extrapolating meaningful trends. The average length of service among the 105 leavers was 48 weeks, median was 18 weeks. When looked at in groupings of 0-1 month, 1-3 months, 4-6 months, 7-12 months and 12 months plus it can be seen that the lengths of service fell as follows:

Length of service 0-1 months 1-3 months 4-6 months 7-12 months 12+ months

No. of Leavers 9 25 35 14 22

% of overall 8.57% 23.81% 33.33% 13.33% 20.95%

Figure 4: Leaver data presented grouped by length of service Again, the results were relatively inconclusive. The 4-6 category was the most common, but not significantly higher than others. This indicated that any strategy would need to take all levels of service into account. Only the 0-1 month category was low, this represents the period of mainly classroom based induction which is a relatively safe environment for the staff. Analysis of the Team Leaders and induction groups demonstrated that due to resourcing issues within the training team and the team leader team within the sales department a number of trainers were used on each induction and individuals did not always stay with the team leader 43

there were originally assigned to. The data given showed the final team leader they were assigned to but not whether they had been moved from one to another or not. Plus informal conversations with the sales team revealed that some team leaders had teams of existing staff with one or two new starters; others had teams entirely made up of new starters so it was impossible to compare like with like to say that the team leader or the trainer was an influencing factor. For example, Team Leader Woodcock had 13 leavers during the period however also had the highest number of new starters assigned to them. Therefore, whilst at first it would appear that this team leader could be an influencing factor, on closer examination of the facts it appears that other factors are having a significant influence meaning that assumptions cannot be drawn from this information in isolation. As can be seen overall the data available on leavers via the HR system was unsatisfactory and for the most part too limited to utilize to draw any meaningful conclusions or identify any trends which could be followed up on. 4.2.2. Exit Interview Analysis As can be seen from Appendix 7, the data is varied. Some questions have a large number of answers recorded e.g. Section 5.4 with 58 responses, but others are much lower e.g. section 6.4 with only 16 responses recorded. Also the dates of the exit interviews were not recorded so it is not possible to ascertain whether they are relevant to the time period under examination or not. The HR Team are unsure as to exactly when they started recording the information on this spreadsheet but it is believed to have been late 2008/early 2009. However, even if it is to be assumed that they are all within the dates under examination there are not enough to cover the number of known leavers in the period. As the data is made anonymous it is also impossible to track against the information regarding leavers to analyse whether answers are influenced by length of service. It was therefore again, not possible to utilise the information provided to demonstrate any meaningful trends. Exit interviews were not conducted for all staff, those that were held were not recorded in such a way that would allow meaningful analysis, and therefore the data could not be used. In fact, due to the method of recording used it is not even possible to say exactly how many exit interviews were even conducted. If the exit interview is not done, or not recorded fully then the information on why individuals leave is not transferred to the HR system and cannot be analysed as has been the case here. As well as leaving the organization in a situation where trends cannot be analysed, at Carole Nash this has also meant that numerous man hours of the HR teams time 44

has been wasted gathering information which has then not been utilized at all and due to not being recorded in a meaningful way, cannot even be utilized retrospectively. However, the question regarding reason for leaving, though statistically insignificant given lack of clarity regarding the data sources and dates, was examined and compared with the output from further investigations as outlined below. The decision to use the information despite this was taken as the data available on leavers overall was so limited. Here the following information was found:
5.4 Main Reason for Leaving Better benefits package Dissatisfied Career with Family Work Life progression management commitments Balance 2 1 1 4 3 3 1 1 1 3 5 To Resumed Travel/move/ Too much education work abroad travel 1 1 2 1 1 1 2

Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

Career change 1 1 2

Higher salary 3 4 1 4

Location 1 1 1 1

Personal reasons 1 1

1 1

Figure 5: Exit interview responses to What is your main reason for leaving. As can be seen the most popular answers given are career progression followed by higher salary and then work life balance. However, as outlined previously these results are only a guideline and for comparison with primary data gathered, given the lack of clarity regarding their accuracy and origins. The difficulty in finding meaningful data in the leavers information and the exit interview output in itself identified the first point of recommendation for the Carole Nash retention strategy. To properly inform a policy formulation process, data regarding who is leaving and why must be systematically monitored and compiled for use by those designing the retention strategy. This information can be used to pinpoint the loss of critical competencies or to identify areas of the business or of individual departments with abnormal attrition problems (Steel et al, 2002).

Conducting effective exit interviews is essential to fully understanding the current retention situation and making informed decisions regarding how to structure the retention strategy going forward. As Eldridge (2008) found in his survey of 316 companies, HR practitioners make presumptions regarding why people leave the organization. He found that that 61% blamed "lack of promotion opportunities" 49% "inadequate pay" and 26% "poor relationship with manager". However he also found that where anonymous exit data was gathered there were often other reasons given for leaving which were equally as important for HR to understand. In 45

that study these included "uninteresting work and boredom" and "lack of training and development opportunities" (both 25 per cent), "lack of teamwork and co-operation" (19 per cent) and "promises not kept by management" (17 per cent). We can see from the output of the workshops that at Carole Nash people make similar assumptions about why individuals leave organizations. However, it is only from speaking with the people who do leave and fully analyzing the reasons they give that any organization can truly get to grips with the reasons behind their levels of attrition and start to plan a retention strategy. Eldridge (2008) also found that although 57 per cent of respondents to his survey use traditional face-to-face exit interviews as their main source of data to find out why people leave, only half of them aggregate the data to reveal exit patterns and only 4 per cent collect anonymous exit data. This is consistent with what is happening at Carole Nash. Eldridge (2008) suggested that the results of the survey indicate that the exit interview is treated as more of a check-box process than a strategic opportunity. The Carole Nash HR team admitted that this was the case at the organization. They do act on specific issues identified if there are any but no attempt is really made to record the data in a way that would make it useful for statistical and trend analysis. And often if time is pressing, the exit interview does not get done at all. This ties in with the recommendations of McAffee (2007) who claims that the right approach to exit interviews can enable companies to make the right organizational development interventions to retain their most valued employees and pre-empt damaging departures. These recommendations will be explored in Section 5. 4.2.3. Workshops and Questionnaires As the metrics available could not be used to meet the key objective, primary data was sought and results were as follows: The output from the workshops held can be found in Appendix 4. The common themes identified in the output from the groups was as follows:

46

Group 1 Pay and Bonus Job structure and Targets Overtime and shifts Opportunities for promotion Support from Team Leaders

Group 2 Money Career Disciplinaries/Sacking Decision making Team Leader Support KPIs Team Leaders Development Opportunities Pay and Reward Training and Support Recruitment

Group 3 Targets Time Management Team Leaders Promotions Policies and Procedures Communication Section Heads Training and Development Salary and bonus Promotion Policies and KPIs Recruitment Practices

Group 4 Promotion Chances Salaries Scheduling Policies and Procedures IT

Figure 6: Overall trends for attrition identified by each workshop group Overall the themes are similar to those found within the desk based research conducted in advance of the project. The most prominent of the results within the advisor groups were promotional opportunities, pay and reward and policies and procedures. Within the management team of the call centre the output is slightly different. They still believe that pay and reward, promotional opportunities and policies and procedures have a major part to play but recruitment practices, training and development and managerial support were more heavily focused upon. However, even though not as obvious in the overall themes identified by the groups themselves all of the other areas identified in the literature review did feature in some way in the workshop output. Group 1 identified the structure of the jobs as a factor and discussed the psychological impact on staff of stretching targets. Most groups identified the pressurized nature of the role within their discussions of question 1 and 2 however when they came to identify the overall themes they did not focus on it specifically, though all did reference targets in some ways often grouping them with policies and procedures. Building on this the results of the questionnaires were as follows:
Overall Statement 1 - Promotional Opportunities Statement 2 - Pay Statement 3 - Benefits Statement 4 - Mangerial Support Statement 5 - Training Statement 6 - Level of Autonomy Statement 7 - Role Clarity Statement 8 - Decision Making % agree or higher % Disagree 15.87% 47.62% 15.87% 20.63% 26.98% 4.76% 11.11% 52.38% 34.92% 1.59% 7.94% 42.86% 73.02% 1.59% 6.35% 63.49% % Neutral 36.51% 63.49% 68.25% 36.51% 63.49% 49.21% 25.40% 30.16% % Strongly Disagree 11.11% 1.59% 0.00% 1.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 17.46% % Strongly Agree 1.59% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 4.76% 0.00% 14.29% 0.00%

Figure 7: Overall results from the retention questionnaires Please refer to Appendix 5 for the full statements utilized in the questionnaires and full breakdown and analysis of results.

47

As can be seen from Figure 6, the information regarding how individuals feel about the potential causes of attrition differ slightly from the workshops. Perhaps this should have been expected, as the people are answering the questionnaires based on how they feel about each area at that time, not based on why they believe people leave. Also, as they are still in the business, they are stayers rather than leavers. However, understanding how they feel about the academically identified areas of concern is helpful in forming the recommendations for a retention strategy as it identifies actual areas of issue within the current staff base and will assist to structure the prioritization of the steps to be implemented within the recommendations. Each of the areas analyzed will now be discussed in turn: 4.2.3.1. Promotional Opportunities

Promotional opportunities came through as an area of concern with 47.62% of respondents disagreeing with the statement: there are good opportunities within the Carole Nash Call Centre. 11.11% strongly disagreed. Within the Sales based population 56.25% disagreed and 12.5% strongly disagreed. This ties in with the narrative from the workshops where all groups identified that lack of progression opportunities was a major issue. Carole Nash do have an internal development programme called, Xcellerate. Xcellerate was originally introduced approximately 4 years previously and provides the methods by which advisors can move between technical grades in the call centre. In all there are three levels of advisor, and then the next grade is Team Leader. There is not any set number of advisors at each level, thereby apparently giving the opportunity for movement; however, it would appear that these opportunities are not being taken. The Section Head group covered this in the discussions within their workshop by identifying that the current grading structure within the Call Centre did not have enough monetary differentiation to make the work required by Xcellerate for promotion worth doing. Often the reward for moving up a grade can be as low as 200 per year and yet comes with significantly higher targets. Coupled with this the Team Leader population within the department has been relatively stable over the past two years so there has been very little opportunity for promotion into managerial grades. Of the 11 respondents with more than 12mths service, the figure disagreeing with the statem ent was 100%. This suggests that perhaps those with longer service are more inclined to feel disgruntled regarding the opportunities for promotion than those with shorter service. However, 48

the number of respondents with over 12 months service was small in comparison to both the total number of respondents (representing only 17%) and the total number of call centre staff with over 12 months (representing 15%). Tracking the results of this question against length of service we see that initially the 1-3 month individuals are mainly neutral on this topic with 20% satisfied and 80% neutral; the 4-6 month category both satisfaction and dissatisfaction increase to 32% each, from this point forward as length of service increases, satisfaction with promotional opportunities decreases. Much is made in the induction period about Carole Nashs development programme, Xcellerate, it would appear that this initially reassures individuals regarding the promotional opportunities however, as the reality of work versus reward involved with moving through the advisor grades and the very small number of team leader vacancies becomes apparent satisfaction decreases dramatically. This area will therefore need to be focused on within the recommendations. 4.2.3.2. Pay and Reward

Though existing staff felt that people left because of pay and reward when it was examined in the questionnaires, it did not come through as a significant area of concern for current staff. This finding ties in with Malhotra et al (2007)s findings that none of the tr aditional elements of reward to correlate significantly with affective commitment. The overall questionnaire results were inconclusive with 15.87% agreeing, 20.63% disagreeing and 63.49% having a neutral response to the statement : the pay at Carole Nash is competitive within the call centre marketplace within this locality. The results remain relatively consistent across the different lengths of service other than those with over 12 months who are noticeably more negative with 45.45% disagreeing with the statement and 54.55% neutral. Of these 9.09% strongly disagreed. Overall it does not appear to be as much of an issue as the academic research or the workshops may suggest. Each year Carole Nash conducts a full pay bench marking exercise. The results of this exercise consistently show Carole Nash to be in the middle range of pay for similar roles within the locality. The results would suggest that this exercise is successful in maintaining satisfaction with pay levels. Though as highlighted earlier the indicative figure in the exit interviews suggested that pay could be a factor. The results regarding satisfaction with the benefits are marginally more positive. Overall, 26.98% of staff responding to the survey were happy with the benefits on offer at Carole Nash, 4.76% were dissatisfied and 68.25% were neutral. The levels of satisfaction were significantly higher among people with 1-3months service, however, there were only 5 respondents in this 49

category. The percentage of dissatisfied respondents within the over 12month category is higher at 9.09%, however, as the overall level of dissatisfaction in this category is relatively low this is not seen as an area of focus for the retention strategy, other than to ensure that the benefits remain in place and that they are regularly reevaluated to ensure that they are still meeting the needs of the workforce. This is good news for Carole Nash as Malhotra et al (2007) found that satisfaction with benefits influenced normative commitment. This correlates with the views expressed by Griffeth and Hom (2001) who discuss the link between fringe benefits and decreased quit rates. 4.2.3.3. Managerial Support

The results of the questionnaire regarding managerial support are concerning with only 11.11% agreeing with the statement, m y line manager provides me with the support I need to perform my role to the best of my abilities. 52.38% of respondents disagreed with the statement with 1.59% strongly disagreeing. In the Carole Nash call centre each Team Leader has up to 12 staff members on their team. Within the small group of new starters the level of satisfaction with managerial support is higher than the overall group at 40%. As we examine the survey results for the groups with longer service we can see that dissatisfaction increases with service up to the 7-12 month group where not a single respondent from the 22 agreed with the statement. In the over 12 month group, only one of the 11 respondents agreed. Discussion with the head of the sales call centre (see Appendix 6 for transcription) would indicate that the discrepancy could be partially due to the presence of the new starters themselves. Due to the complexity of the Carole Nash computer system, new starters tend to demand a large amount of attention and support from the Team Leaders during their first few months on the department. By giving them this attention, they cannot then give the other members of their team the attention that they may require. She also felt that as staffing numbers are so tight during the busy periods the Team Leaders do not have the opportunity to spend the amount of time with the staff that they need to in order to ensure they are fully supported. Therefore, the carryover of additional staff in itself will help alleviate this situation. During the carry over period there will be more staff than are required to answer the calls. This will allow the team leaders the time to spend with their teams to build knowledge and skills in preparation for the upcoming busy period. It will also ensure that during the busy periods the introduction of new staff can be more spaced out thus meaning team leaders time can be more evenly distributed between their staff members. 50

4.2.3.4.

Training

Training did not appear as an area of major concern in the workshops for the advisor level staff however this did not entirely tie in with the workshop results for section heads and team leaders where it was felt that training and development was an issue and a prime cause of individuals leaving the organization. The advisor level results do however carry through to the results of the questionnaires where overall satisfaction is mainly positive (34.92%) or neutral (63.49%). Only 1.59% of respondents disagreed with the statement I am provided with the training that I need to perform my role to the best of my abilities. When looked at across the different length of service groups, we can see that overall level of satisfaction decreases with length of service, 60% for 1-3mths, 40% for 4-6mths and 27.27% for 7-12mths and 12mths plus. Though even still no respondents gave this category a negative score, all were either positive or neutral, even within the groups with longer service levels. At Carole Nash as advisors become more experienced the frequency of their formal training decreases. This is in line with the findings of Callaghan & Thompson (2002) who identified that is a call centre environment it is typical for training to be given initially to new starters and then after that to be offered only to poor performers rather than all staff. According to the Sales Section Head, this is due to two factors, (i) the need for formal training decreases as the advisor reaches a level of competency within their roles and (ii) the training team becomes fully occupied with training new starters and are therefore not available to provide enhancement or developmental training to existing staff. Though due to the results this area is not seen as a major area of concentration for the project it is again felt that by retaining and thus carrying over staff, will actually improve this situation by freeing up some of the training resource to enable them to conduct needs analysis of the call centre and thus offer additional training to the existing staff during the carry over period. One of the key justifications for Carole Nash of initiating this project was the fact that the high level of recruitment caused severe tying up of the training resource. By decreasing the number of new recruits required, the volume of induction training is thus reduced and the training team consequently made more available to the existing teams. 4.2.3.5. Level of Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making

Another area of concern identified by the questionnaire results is level of autonomy. Only 7.94% of respondent agreed with the statement I am h appy with the level of autonomy I have within 51

my role, 42.86% disagreed and 49.21% were neutral. This result is not unexpected given the job design and ties in with the questionnaire findings regarding level of satisfaction with participation in decision making where even less favourable results were found. Here only 6.35% positive, 63.59% negative and 30.16% neutral. The participation in decision making category also had the highest number of strongly disagree options of any area with 17.46% of respondents strongly disagreeing with the statement I feel I have a say in decisions that are made which affect my role. As the literature review outlined this result is very typical of call centres. The Taylorist approach to work design means that there is little room available for autonomy or independent decision making for the advisors (Malhotra et al, 2007). However, it is a major area of concern for Carole Nash and will need to be addressed by the recommendations for the retention strategy. 4.2.3.6. Role Clarity

The literature reviewed previously points to the fact that due to the design of roles within call centres, role clarity is generally high, that given the fact that the advisors actions are for the most part driven by the system or by scripts there is little room for ambiguity. At Carole Nash there is no script, but there is a call structure which must be followed and is monitored via call recording and random call quality monitoring conducted by the team leaders and the compliance department. Advisors are routinely scored against the criteria and have KPIs regarding minimum call scores required. Due to the regulated nature of the insurance industry there are also certain parts of the call which the advisors must recite exactly. This situation is unlikely to change, however, as the script has proven to be successful as a sales and regulation tool and the system driven nature of parts of the call, again cannot be changed. Role Clarity has not come out as an area of concern within the questionnaires with the highest recorded positive response: 73.02% responded positively to the statement I have a clear understating of what is expected from me within my role. However by designing the role in such a way that it is system and call structure driven, the management at Carole Nash may have contributed to the Advisors feelings of lack of autonomy and participation in decision making. As Moss et al (2007) found both of these areas contribute to affective commitment i.e. the employees emotional attachment to, identification with and involvement in the organisation which can also affect employees want to remain. Therefore lack of satisfaction with levels of autonomy and decision making can lead to a detachment from the organization, and decrease employees want to remain. 52

The retention strategy will therefore need to find a way around this. 4.2.3.7. Targets

Though not specifically referenced within the literature review, targets were included as they were a major source of contention within the workshops and can be considered part of the job design/job burnout as covered within the literature section. The questionnaire further highlighted the strength of feeling in this area with only 7.94% agreeing, 44.44% disagreeing and 47.62% neutral regarding the statement I believe that the targets set for me are fair. The level of dissatisfaction did not change significantly following the first three months, though the percentage strongly disagreeing with the statement from the 12months plus group is high at 18.18%. According the Sales Section Head the targets in the call centre are set deliberately high in order to provide challenge for the individuals but also to ensure both high performers and underperformers are easily identified and appropriate action can be taken to support or discipline them as a result. It is felt that should the targets be too easily achieved that complacency will set in. In the sales departments targets are set around the following areas: units sold, conversion rates, call monitoring scores and compliance scores. Targets were implemented by the current sales Section Head and had been in place for approximately 16 months at the time of the project. According to her, there was limited consultation with staff with regards to setting the level of targets, however, targets do increase progressively during the first 3 months of employment to ensure that new starters are being given the opportunity to ease their way into them. It would appear that any recommendations regarding changing the target structure as part of the retention strategy will be met with resistance. As Section Head of Sales states: w hen it comes to retention I only want to keep the right kind of people, and that means not the underperformers". If they are not reaching the targets we have then I would have to seriously think about whether I wanted to fight to keep that person in the business. I think the targets that we have set are fair. We put a lot of work into putting them in place and monitoring against them so I really dont think that I, or [the Head of Operations] would be open to reviewing them at this point. 4.3. Policies and Procedures It was intended to examine Carole Nashs policies and procedures to ascertain whether they were overly strict and thus having a negative impact on the levels of attrition within the organization. The policies (see Appendix 8) were briefly examined, however, this avenue of investigation was not pursued other than an initial read through the policies and procedures as it 53

was found that of the 100 leavers examined only 30 were forced leavers i.e. dismissed using policies and procedures. Of these 7 were based on attendance, 13 on conduct, 4 performance, 2 capability and 2 on absence. Per policy these numbers were too small for any meaningful analysis. Plus it was noted that within the application of the procedures there is room for managerial discretion, therefore, should the procedures look as if they will be forcing an otherwise good employee towards dismissal and this is not in the best interest of the business, the managers can take the individual out of the procedure. Also, discussions with the HR Manager indicated that any recommendations regarding the alteration of policies and procedures would be highly unlikely to be implemented as they had been seen as effective and were used across the organization, not just in the call centre and would thus represent a significant change for the business. 4.4. Summary of Results Overall from the results the following was established: It was proved that it is financially viable to carry over staff in the quiet periods as on average, even when the cost of carry over for four months is taken into account, they will generate an additional 6318.25 income. Than a new starter. The optimal number of staff for carry over was identified as 20 based on the financial data presented The data available in the business with regards to leavers and exit interviews was found to be inconclusive due to the quality of the data itself and also the methods used to record it. The areas identified as most pressing when the results of the workshops and questionnaires were analyzed were lack of promotional opportunities, lack of managerial support, lack of autonomy and involvement in decision making and dissatisfaction with targets. Role clarity and satisfaction with pay and benefits did not come out as areas of immediate concern in the questionnaires and therefore will not feature heavily in the resulting recommendations. Also identified as a major area of concern is the lack of effective data gathering and recording identified via the analysis of the leaver statistics.

54

5. Recommendations This section will focus on the final key research aim: Recommend interventions which will curb the trends in attrition and facilitate retention of the required number of staff as ident ified in point 2

This final aim was conditional on satisfactory achievement on aim one and two regarding justifying staff carry over and identify the number of staff to be carried over. Therefore, within the recommendations outlined below it is assumed that the recommendation put forward by the HR Manager and the Finance Manager to retain 20 additional staff is fully signed off by the board. At the time of writing, this had not yet been completed. Should this not be approved then only the first stage of recommendations with regard to data analysis and recording should be implemented as in reality if the additional staff are not to be carried over then the business will need to commence actively driving attrition towards target FTE levels for September, October , November and December 2010. Prior to focusing on each of the areas of concern identified via the investigation, it is first necessary to evaluate whether the information gathered is sufficient to adequately address the final research aim. Whilst the areas of concern have been identified, they do not provide enough information to fully support the formulation of the strategy. There are a number of reasons for this. Firstly, as explained earlier, the data on which the retention strategy should be focusing is the data on the actual leavers. However because, as previously discussed, this data has not been gathered in all cases and where it has, has not been recorded in a way which allows meaningful analysis, the data gathered has all been based on current staffs theories about why people leave (gathered in workshops) and, (via the questionnaires), the feelings of the current staff with regards to the academically identified problem areas. The output of the workshop agreed for the most part with the academic research, identifying all of the areas with varying frequency but also identified policies and procedures and targets as a further problem area. The questionnaires took these areas and assessed the feelings of the current staff base with regards to the issues and thus narrowed the options down in terms of areas of focus. They were therefore both useful exercises in helping to shape the overall strategy for Carole Nash. However, to form a fully effective retention strategy significant further research and analysis will need to be undertaken 55

by the business and the recommendations will therefore focus on where this should be undertaken. The timescales assigned to this will be reasonably short as in order to retain the required numbers for 2011, i.e. the 20 above the required FTE then retention activities need to start as soon as possible. The remainder of this section will focus on the four areas of major concern: data gathering and recording regarding leavers, promotional opportunities, managerial support, lack of autonomy and involvement in decision making and targets. 5.1. Data gathering and recording The first recommendation resulting from this project for a retention strategy for Carole Nash is a full review of the process of exit interviews and the recording and analysis thereof. McAffee (2007) recommends the following: (i) establishment of a talent retention steering group who can take responsibility for the whole process of retention, (ii) a consistent approach to the interviews (iii) an impartial interviewer [Whilst this is often a HR representative, this often still has perceived risks for the employee, McAffee (2007) recommends considering a third party but if that is not practical, full confidentiality must be guaranteed by internal practitioners] (iv) interviews should be conducted within week 2 or 3 of a one month notice period. (v) If resources are scarce concentration should be given to high performers who are leaving or those that the organization would want to retain (vi) choose a methodology that offers the greatest chance of gathering robust data (vii) Ask parallel questions from a staff engagement survey (viii) Develop actionable strategies to retain the most productive people. McAfee (2007)s recommendation for establishment of a retention comm ittee should be investigated by the HR team. If established, this committees remit should include establishing an effective interview design which will allow for meaningful data gathering. Investigation should also include analysis of the financial implications of using a third party to conduct the interviews. Advice should be sought from a professional statistician with regards to the recording of the information to ensure that it is done in such a way to allow meaningful analysis going forward. The retention team or similar working project group should ensure that all of the elements which may lend themselves to trend analysis i.e. length of service, team leader, trained or new starter, termination reason, forced or voluntary, salary and induction group. Also thought should be given to whether people leave before they are pushed. Anecdotal evidence uncovered during this investigation has indicated that a number of individuals who are currently recorded as voluntary leavers, left when on a final written warning. These are not the people that the 56

organization would want to target with a retention strategy and therefore should not be allowed to skew the statistics. Therefore disciplinary status should be recorded. A certain level of turnover will always be present, what an effective retention strategy should ensure is that the right staff are being retained and that the organization is not losing those they would desire to keep. If they are, the information gathered on these particular individuals is particularly valuable to the on-going refinement of the strategy. Therefore, an indication should also be taken and recorded as to whether the organization would have wanted to retain those who leave. This will give an indication of where the retention strategy is working or otherwise. A commitment must be gained either way to ensure that the full data is gathered and recorded in a way which allows analysis. This must be the first step of the retention strategy as any leavers leaving from this point forward must be interviewed and recording in the correct way. A suggested deadline for investigation into, this recommendation, decisions being taken and a new or revised method being implemented is therefore with month 1 of project commencing. 5.2. Promotional Opportunities Significant time and effort should now be spent evaluating the current grading and pay structure and the current opportunities for progression within the department and the organization as a whole. Malhotra et al (2007) argue that call centre workers are aware of the limitations of a flat structure so to them availability of promotional opportunities is perceived as the organizations concern for its employees future prospects of advancement. Indicating perhaps that it is feeling developed and knowing that as and when opportunities do arise they will be considered and/or prepared for it is equally as important as actual job moves/promotions. This does not appear to be true at Carole Nash as the satisfaction with training and development appears relatively high, though promotional opportunities is still low. Kinnie et al (2002)s study would appear to agree with Malhotra et al (2007). They found that the RAC call centre under examination managed to significantly reduce turnover through a strategy which actually reduced the number of layers within the hierarchy of the call centre but did, however, offer training and development to staff and moved towards multi-functional customer service roles and thus offered long term development. Essentially they offered promotional opportunities/personal development via increasing opportunities for expanding responsibilities rather than traditional moves up the ladder. 57

In terms of a best practice model, both point to a similar approach that is, if we are to consider including offering promotional opportunities in our strategy for retention at Carole Nash, we do not necessarily have to increase the number of hierarchical promotions we make, but we would instead need to demonstrate a commitment to support the advancement and developmental goals of staff and offer promotions where practicable. Moss et al (2008) would disagree. They encourage the addition of hierarchical layers in call centres in order to create internal labour markets with good career growth opportunities for an increased number of employees (Moss et al, 2008; Bozionelos, 2008). They conducted an extensive study of call centres in the financial services and retail sector in the US over a period of seven years and found that whilst most call centres started with relatively flat structures in order to minimize cost, as they developed and strove to recruit and retain a motivated, loyal and skilled workforce their structures evolved to include several hierarchical layers, with some almost doubling the number of layers (Moss et al, 2008). This created more opportunities for growth for valued employees and ultimately reduced turnover. This difference between the findings of two UK based studies and this American one could simply be a matter of the cultural difference between the American versus British employees, perhaps American employees see development and career progression solely in terms of what Moss et al (2008) call upward mobility. Carole Nash should further examine this issue, investigate the opportunities available now, examine whether there is scope for building further opportunities without adversely affecting performance or increasing cost and then encourage internal promotions rather than external hires. The organization should be examined to determine whether additional layers would in fact be beneficial or if alternate ways to support development of employees would be more appropriate. However, given the fact that there are already a number of layers available within the Carole Nash call centre via the Xcellerate programme and as highlighted earlier, people are not taking the opportunity to move up the grades in this way because of the small financial gains and large increase in responsibility and KPIs, investigation should also focus on the Xcellerate structure and whether it has been made too challenging and in fact detrimental to the advisors to move in this way. If so in what way can it be restructured to be a useful tool in the retention strategy? Whether it is via additional layers or via alternative approaches it would seem that every effort should be made to support employees progression goals. Investigation should include analysis 58

of how employees goals for progression are being captured and how, if appropriate, their expectations are being managed where their goals may not be achievable within the organization e.g. those who want to be Team Leaders when there are no Team Leader vacancies. Again the timescales for this are important. As the phones go quiet the staff have more time to think about where they are currently and where they might like to be. This will start from September therefore investigation into this area needs to start as soon as possible. The analysis will take some time to complete. If the first recommendation of establishing a retention committee is taken up the timescales can be tighter, otherwise given the limited resources available within the HR Team completion within a 2 month period is realistic. With a retention committee a timescale of 6 weeks should be achievable. However, it is suggested that given Malhotra et al (2007)s insight regarding the importance of perception, that at all stages the employees be kept aware of the work being done towards reviewing and improving the Xcellerate programme so that have the understanding and knowledge that their progression and development is important to the organization even if they are not seeing immediate changes. 5.3. Managerial support Malhotra et al (2007) found that feedback from managers or team leaders had a direct positive influence on normative commitment of call centre frontline staff. Their results also indicated that where performance-based rewards are limited, constructive feedback received from superiors can be used as a powerful motivating tool for enhancing normative commitment. This implies that call centre representatives feel more obliged to stay with their organization when they receive due recognition and praise. Malhotra et al (2007) state that this is because they then realize that their efforts have not gone unnoticed. At Carole Nash the staff feel unsupported by their Line Managers. Simply by accepting the carryover of staff for the quiet period, Carole Nash will be assisting to alleviate this situation. By having more staff on the department than are required, the team leaders and staff will actually be able to receive permission to have time away from the phones to spend on providing support and on the job development which is not always present during the rest of the year. Further investigation is again required into this area. Carole Nash must establish what type of support the employees want. When they say they feel unsupported, what do they m ean? Do 59

they require more technical support? More moral support? More motivation from the Team Leaders? More one to one development? It is important to fully understand what the employees needs are before deciding on where the Team Leaders should spend the additional time that they will have available to them. Bakker, Demerouti, and Schaufeli (2003) found that job resources (like social support, coaching, performance feedback) are predictors of involvement and also determine turnover intentions but this time for the better. They assert that call centre employees who can draw upon job resources such as social support from colleagues and performance feedback feel more dedicated to their work and more committed to their organization, and, consequently, are less inclined to leave the organization. It would thus appear that to counteract the negative effects of job demands, call centre managers should provide their employees with increased job resources. Carole Nash should investigate whether these are among the areas that staff want addressed. Workshops and questionnaires have already touched on this area so the project group should consider gathering data in another way. Perhaps interviews with a representative sample of staff, this would tie in with Steel et al (2002)s recommend for consultation with highly valued team members as part of a practical approach to retention strategy formulation. In terms of timescales, this should be looked at early in the process as the opportunities for Team Leaders to have more time with staff will increase as the quiet period approaches. Depending on the resources again, this should be completed within 3 months for the HR team or 2 for a larger retention committee. 5.4. Autonomy and Participation in Decision Making As previously discussed, autonomy and participation in decision making are not so easily provided within a call centre environment (Sergeant and Frenkel, 2000). The studies show the importance of these factors as not only to they contribute to affective commitment they also significantly correlate to normative commitment (Malhotra et al, 2007; Holman et al, 2002) and this was evident also in the output from the workshops and questionnaires. Unfortunately autonomy and discretionary decision making is not always possible within the confines of the role structures and high control monitoring and measuring systems which prevail in call centres and are present at Carole Nash (Russell, 2008). As previously discussed, the job structures and the way in which advisors interact with the customers are tightly controlled by the IT system on which they are working, and the call structures that they must follow. Advisor performance is also highly targeted within this. 60

Malhotra et al (2007) suggest involving employees in higher level decision making about their jobs given that their day-to-day tasks are relatively fixed. They suggest, for example, involving the employees in decisions regarding performance management systems, overall working conditions and scheduling. Essentially, the message is to involve people whenever and wherever possible in order to give them a feeling of involvement, to make them feel valued and listened to. This approach is highly supported by Arthur (2002) who suggests involvement strategies such as suggestion schemes and gaining staff feedback and opinions regarding change in the organization as essential to any successful retention strategy. It also links with theories on the retention benefits of employee engagement and voice as discussed in the literature review earlier. Holman et al (2002) recommend that employees job control should be maximised and practices such as insisting that calls are handled within an exact time and excessive call scripting should be resisted. Job demands and role breadth should be such that they provide a challenging environment and one in which the customer service representative has a variety of tasks to do. At Carole Nash they already do this, there is no call length target and no call script as such, just a call structure to be followed and some elements of exact wording but this is limited. Therefore, this should continue whilst further investigations are continuing. Therefore in terms what should be further investigated by Carole Nash, the literature in this area indicates that every attempt should be made to provide the staff with discretion and autonomy within their roles as well as involving them in decision making wherever possible in order to increase their feelings of involvement. In line with the recommendations of Russell (2008) discussed in section 2, the presence or absence of employee voice should be examined and investigations should be included as to whether this can be improved if present, or implemented if entirely absent. Role structure should be examined to determine if constraints are too tight. Is there scope for allowing a degree of discretion to advisors? Perhaps this could be linked to seniority and experience within the department. This is more of a long term goal of the retention project. This investigation will take considerable time to complete and recommendations will need to be implemented carefully. It could be argued that by accepting a role in a call centre environment employees have accepted that they will be working in such a role, i.e. limited scope for individual decision making etc. However as outlined above, investigations should identify areas that the Advisors can have a say and influence over which will, even if their core role does not change, contribute to a feeling of 61

having influence. The process of involving them in the design of the retention strategy in itself is a step in the right direction. In terms of timescales it is believed that a 4 month target for completion of investigations and presentation of recommendations would be realistic for a retention committee, or 6 months for HR. However, involvement and opinion gathering regarding this project and any other upcoming change projects which will directly impact on the advisors should start immediately. 5.5. Targets Targets are a necessity within a call centre environment. It is a consequence in many ways of the job design utilized within the call centre environment. At Carole Nash as has been demonstrated the advisors feel that the targets are unfair. The team managers acknowledge that they are stretching but believe that this is necessary to identify goals to strive for and maintain high standards of quality. Examination must be conducted into the targets set for the advisors, are they actually fair based on the facts available? Is it possible to sell the required number of policies with the volume of calls being received, for example, or are advisors being set up to fail? The current targets have been in place for in excess of 16 months; a full review should be completed and communicated to staff. Should it be found that no change is necessary than this should be communicated to staff and they should be encouraged to present solutions as to how the targets can be achieved. In line with the recommendations for autonomy above, advisors should be given the opportunity to be involved in the process. As discussed earlier a number of authors have discussed the issue of burnout within the call centre environment. Deery et al (2002) found that unachievable or what are perceived as unfair targets contributed to higher levels of stress and burnout. Therefore as targets are coming through from the advisors as an area if concern it is essential the Carole Nash address this before burnout becomes an issue. Targets for the departments are set on an annual basis. Therefore the aim in terms of timescales for this element of the recommendations the analysis of current targets and revision therefore, if required, should be completed by the end of the calendar year ready for implementation in time for the new year in line with overall corporate targets for the same period.

62

5.6. Other Areas Other areas which did not come out as significant should not be forgotten. For example pay and reward, though not a major issue will still need to be considered, particularly in line with the fact that with excess carryover of staff will come lower bonuses for all in this period. Consideration must be made for how this will be handled if it does become an issue. Satisfaction with the benefits should continue to be monitored and the training which has apparently been well received to date should continue. Full investigation should also be made by the training team as to the most appropriate use of the additional time that they will have available to spend with the existing staff due to the decrease in requirements for induction training. This should continue in the background as the main priority areas are being addressed.

63

6. Conclusions Of the four key objectives originally set out by this project only two have been fully achieved: justification has been provided for carry over and the optimal number established. Every attempt was made to achieve the final two objectives regarding data analysis of leaver information and exit interviews and recommendations for a retention strategy and they have been achieve to an extent, however, the limitations of the data available on leavers has been a major and unexpected limitation of the project. This project has been much more challenging than originally anticipated. When first invited to conduct the project and given the brief, the belief and understanding was very much that the information that was needed to conduct the analysis would all be readily available and that the challenge would be mainly around coming up with recommendation based on the trends coming out of the data. However, on closer examination, much of the data that was available was either not detailed enough, or recorded in such a way that it was not amenable to meaningful analysis. Also, a significant amount of time was taken by the business to provide the information required to complete the first phase of the project i.e. establishing whether it was financially viable to carry staff over. Initial figures turned out to be incorrect and had to be recalculated and in all it took a period of approximately 2 months to complete the initial phase. This then left limited time to complete the additional work around questionnaires that was required and the originally planned work with the workshops and analysis thereof. With advanced knowledge of these challenges I would have planned the project over a longer period of time and structured that data gathering in a different way. With the benefit of hindsight it may have been more useful to hand pick the participants on the workshops and conduct a number of one to one interviews with managers and valued stayers in the organization regarding why they stay. I believe that this would have given more specific information to work with rather than what ended up to be quite high level information which has then necessitated further investigation. Also not anticipated during the initially design of the project was the pure scope of areas to be addressed, hence the recommendations resulting rather than being definitive actions to be taken by the business to address areas identified, are instead recommendations for further analysis and research. With the benefit of hindsight, the time would have been better spent and more useful to the business, concentrating on one contributor as identified by the literature and conducting a full and in-depth analysis of this areas which would have practical recommendations and also demonstrate immediate value to the organization. 64

The organization, has however been appreciative of the work conducted, particularly the business case built for the carryover of staff during the quiet period. They feel that as and when this is signed off by the board it will have an immediately beneficial effect for the advisors. Having the surplus staff in the department will free up the Team Leader and the training teams time to spend with the staff and provide support and development which has been previously absent. For them this was in fact the most important part of the project and they are please that the anecdotal gut feel they had regarding the potential benefit of carrying staff over the quiet period has proven to be correct and that they now have the proof to present to the board. Recommendations for establishment of a retention committee/working group and the subsequent recommendations for research activities for this group have also been taken on board by the HR Manager and will be presented to the board for further approval. In terms of the success of the consultancy approach, the fact that the author had previous experience working within the organization was a distinct advantage. Relationships with stakeholders were already established and accessing information was therefore much easier than it might have been otherwise. Full access was given, equivalent to an internal manager operating at the same level.

65

References 1. Aksin, Z., Armony M and Mehrotra, V. (2007) The Modern Call Center: A MultiDisciplinary Perspective on Operations Management Research. Production and Operations Management. Vol. 16 No. 6 pp. 665688. 2. Armistead, C., Kiely, J., Hole, L. and Prescott, J. (2002) A Exploration of Managerial Issues in Call Centres. Managing Service Quality. Vol. 12 No. 4 pp 246 - 256 3. Arthur, D. (2001) The Employee Recruitment and Retention Handbook . Amacom:New York. 4. Barnes, C. (2002) Call Centres Employees IN: Taylor, S. (2002) The Employee retention Handbook. CIPD:London pp 223 - 231 5. Batt, R. (2002). Managing customer services: Human resource practices, quit rates and sales growth. Academy of Management Journal Vol. 45 No. 3 pp. 587599. 6. Belt, V. (2002) A Female Ghetto? Womens Careers in Call Centres. Human Resource Management Journal, 12(4): 5166. 7. Bozionelos, N. (2008) Improving Employee Motivation and Retention in Call Centers: Is Adding Layers the Answer? The Academy of Management Perspectives 2008. Vol.22 No. 3 pp. 114-116 8. Callaghan, G. and Thompson, P. (2002) We Recruit Attitude: The Selection and Shaping of Routine Call Centre Labour. Journal of Management Studies. Vol. 39 No 2 pp 233 254 9. Cappelli, P. (2001) A Market-Driven Approach to Retaining Talent. Harvard Business Review. 10. CIPD (2006) Annual Survey Report 2006. How Engaged are British Employees. [online][Accessed 02 March 2010] Available from: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/empreltns/general/_hwngdbremp.htm 11. CIPD (2009) Recruitment, Retention and Turnover. Annual Survey Report 2009. [online][Accessed 02 March 2010] Available from: http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/recruitmen/general/_recruitment_2009.htm 12. Dawson, K. (2004) The Call Center Handbook . 5th Edition. CMP Books:San Francisco. 13. Deery, S. and Kinnie, N. (2002) Call Centres and Beyond: A Thematic Evaluation. Human Resource Management Journal. Vol. 12 No. 4 pp 3-13

66

14. Deery, S., Iverson, R. and Walsh, J. (2002) Work Relationships In Telephone Call Centres: Understanding Emotional Exhaustion And Employee Withdrawal. Journal of Management Studies Vol. 39 No.:4 15. Eby, L.T., Freeman, D.M., Rush, M.C. and Lance, C.E. (1999) Motivational Bases of Affective Organizational Commitment: A Partial Test of an Integrative Theoretical Model. IN: Malhotra, N., Budhwar, P. and Prowse, P. ( 2007) Linking Rewards to Commitment: An Empirical Investigation of Four UK Call Centres. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. Vol. 18 No. 12 pp 2095 2127 16. Eldridge, R (2008) Conduct a proper analysis of exit data to find out why employees really leave. People Management. Vol. 14 Issue 4, p70-70 17. Griffeth, R.W. and Hom, P.W. (2001) Retaining valued employees. Sage Publications:California 18. Holman, D. (2002) Employee Wellbeing in Call Centres. Human Resource Management Journal. Vol. 12 No. 4 pp 35 50 19. Holman, D. J. (2003). Call centres. In Holman, D.J., Wall, T.D., Glegg,C.W., Sparrow, P., Howard, A. (Eds.), The new workplace: A guide to the human impact of modern working practices.Wiley: Chichester, UK. 20. Holman, D., Chissick, C and Totterdell, P (2002) The Effects of Performance Monitoring on Emotional Labor and Well-Being in Call Centers. Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 57-81 21. Kinnie, N., Hutchinson, S. and Purcell, J. (2000) Fun and Surveillance: The Paradox of High Commitment management in Call Centres. The Journal of Human Resource Management. Vol. 11 No. 5 pp 967 985 22. Kirby, A. (2005a) First Direct focuses on family and fun. Human Resource Management International Digest Vol. 13 No. 5 pp 25-27 23. Kirby, A. (2005b) Sense of Fun Keeps Staff at Thompson Directories. Human Resource Management International Digest Vol. 13 No. 7 pp 31-33 24. Koskina, A. (2006) How Taylorised is call centre work? The sphere of customer practice in Greece. IN: Burgess, J. and Connell, J. (eds) (2006) Developments in the Call Centre Industry. Analysis, changes and challenges. Routledge:Oxon 25. Malhotra, N., Budhwar, P. and Prowse, P. ( 2007) Linking Rewards to Commitment: An Empirical Investigation of Four UK Call Centres. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. Vol. 18 No. 12 pp 2095 2127 67

26. McAffee, M (2007) How to Conduct exit interviews. People Management. Vol. 13 Issue 14, p42-43 27. McKeown, J.L. (2002) Retaining Top Employees . McGraw Hill:New York 28. Morris, J. and Feldman, D. (1996). Managing emotions in the workplace. IN: Deery, S. and Kinnie, N. (2002) Call Centres and Beyond: A Thematic Evaluation. Human Resource Management Journal. Vol. 12 No. 4 pp 3-13 29. Moss, P., Salzman, H. and Tilly, C. (2008) Under Construction: The Continuing Evolution of Job Structures in Call Centers. Industrial Relations, Vol. 47 Issue 2, pp 173-208 30. Pellegrin-Boucher, E. (2006) Symbolic functions of consultants. Journal of General Management. Vol 32 Issue 2 pp 1-16 31. Pollitt, D. (2007) Scottish and Southern Energy Slashes Staff Attrition. Human Resource Management International Digest. Vol. 15 No. 2 pp 14 17 32. Russell, R. (2008) Call Centres: A Decade of Research. International Journal of Management Reviews. Vol. 10 No. 3 pp 195-219. 33. Sergeant, A. and Frenkel, S. (2000) When Do Customer Contact Employees Satisfy Customers? In: Malhotra, N., Budhwar, P. and Prowse, P. ( 2007) Linking Rewards to Commitment: An Empirical Investigation of Four UK Call Centres. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. Vol. 18 No. 12 pp 2095 2127 34. Smith, W. (2000) Customer Service Call Centers: Managing Rapid Personnel Changes. Human Systems Management. Vol 20 pp 123-129 35. Steel, R.P., Griffeth, R.W. and Hom, P.W. (2002) Practical retention policy for the practical manager. Academy of Management Executive. Vol. I6. No. 2 36. Szabo, G. (2010) A Five-Point Plan for Retaining Your Best Call Center Agents [online] [Accessed 04 march 2010] Available at: http://www.icmi.com/knowledgecenter/details.aspx?id=1488 37. Taylor, P. and Bain, P. (1999) An assembly Line in the Head: Work and Employee Relations in the Call Centre. Industrial Relations Journal. Vol. 30 No. 2 pp 101-197. 38. Taylor, P., Hyman, J., Mulvey, G. and Bain, P. (2002) Work Organization, Control and the Experience of Work in Call Centres. Work, Employment, and Society Vol. 16 No. 1 pp13350. 39. Taylor, S. (2002) The Employee retention Handbook. CIPD:London 40. Townsend, K. (2007) Recruitment, Training and Turnover: Another Call Centre Paradox. Personnel Review. Vol. 36 No. 3 pp. 476 490 68

41. Tsai, P.C.F., Shu-Ling, W., Yen, Y.Y., Chin-Ming, H. and Ing-Chung, H. (2005) Study of Remaining Employees Continuance Commitment after Downsizing from the Perspective of Job Satisfaction IN: Malhotra, N., Budhwar, P. and Prowse, P. ( 2007) Linking Rewards to Commitment: An Empirical Investigation of Four UK Call Centres. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. Vol. 18 No. 12 pp 2095 2127 42. Whitt, W. (2006) The Impact of Increased Employee Retention on Performance in a Customer Contact Center. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. Vol. 8 No. 3 pp 235 252

69

Appendix 1
Carole Nash Project Brief

70

Strategic theme document Driving best value from the recruitment model

Background
The recruitment model used in 2009 successfully delivered the recruitment numbers required for the recruitment campaign. It also reduced our overall cost per hire from an average of 1,200 in 2008 to an average of 1,000 in 2009. Following on from the campaign, attrition has been successfully managed in order to hit required head count and payroll targets.

Overall, however it is acknowledged that the annual recruitment model throws up a number of business challenges

The model ties up a lot of HR, training & operational resource in the first 6 months of every year. Ongoing quality meetings consistently identify the need for training and up skilling existing staff and supporting the roll out of strategic initiatives during the pre season. With the existing training resource and with no change to the recruitment model this will not be possible. Management of attrition is resource hungry on line managers in the call centre and HR Gut feel says that call centre colleagues who have been with us for longer have higher conversions, make fewer errors and have higher call monitoring scores than new starters. Consequently the customer journey would be more positive if the call centre advisor population is longer serving and consequently more experienced.

71

Project Objectives
The objectives of this project are:

1. To produce a thorough and robust cost benefit analysis of the recruitment model and to make recommendations on changes to the model to address the challenges raised above and drive best business value 2. To produce analysis of the current attrition statistics and exit interviews and identify trends 3. To recommend interventions which will curb the trends in attrition and facilitate implementation of the new resource model identified in point 1.

72

Appendix 2
Core and New Starter Group Data

73

Staff in the core group and each induction group

2009 NB Core Jan Feb March April/May Other 2009 Rnls Core Jan Feb Other

Jan 24 9

Feb 21 8 7

Mar 19 7 7 15

Apr 19 7 5 13 10

May 17 4 5 10 10

Jun 13 3 4 10 10

Jul 12 3 4 9 8

Aug 11 2 3 7 7

Sep 10 1 3 6 6

Oct 10 1 3 5 5

Nov 9 1 3 4 3

Dec 9 1 3 3 3

Jan 16 7

Feb 16 6 14

Mar 16 5 13

Apr 16 5 11

May 16 5 10

Jun 16 5 9

Jul 15 3 7

Aug 13 3 4

Sep 13 3 4

Oct 13 3 4

Nov 13 1 4

Dec 13 1 4

Person v's income model per annum - new starters Assumptions (averages based on the info from Matt Barrington ie. 2009's actual info) Average cost of 1 call centre advisor for 1 month Average conversion rate of the new starters during peak season - NB Average conversion rate of the new starters during peak season - Ren Average CN income generated per policy Average number of calls per month for NB new starter peak season Average number of calls per month for Ren new starter peak season Split of calls in 2010 of a Motorcycle Sales advisor NB Ren

1,621.81 29.94% 58.86% 85 239 Calls based on the same as existing staff 326 as this element needs to remain constant 52% to be able to recommend the number of existing 48% staff required to smooth the recruitment numbers

New Business - Feb - Sept - income gen Number of advisors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Cost for 9 months 14,596.29 29,192.58 43,788.87 58,385.16 72,981.45 87,577.74 102,174.03 116,770.32 131,366.61 145,962.90 160,559.19 175,155.48 189,751.77 204,348.06 218,944.35 233,540.64 248,136.93 262,733.22 277,329.51 291,925.80 306,522.09 321,118.38 335,714.67 350,310.96 364,907.25 Income based Income generated on spilt of calls 48,626.25 97,252.49 145,878.74 194,504.99 243,131.24 291,757.48 340,383.73 389,009.98 437,636.22 486,262.47 534,888.72 583,514.96 632,141.21 680,767.46 729,393.71 778,019.95 826,646.20 875,272.45 923,898.69 972,524.94 1,021,151.19 1,069,777.44 1,118,403.68 1,167,029.93 1,215,656.18 25,285.65 50,571.30 75,856.95 101,142.59 126,428.24 151,713.89 176,999.54 202,285.19 227,570.84 252,856.48 278,142.13 303,427.78 328,713.43 353,999.08 379,284.73 404,570.38 429,856.02 455,141.67 480,427.32 505,712.97 530,998.62 556,284.27 581,569.91 606,855.56 632,141.21 Number of advisors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Renewals - Feb - Sept - income gen Cost for 9 months 14,596.29 29,192.58 43,788.87 58,385.16 72,981.45 87,577.74 102,174.03 116,770.32 131,366.61 145,962.90 160,559.19 175,155.48 189,751.77 204,348.06 218,944.35 233,540.64 248,136.93 262,733.22 277,329.51 291,925.80 306,522.09 321,118.38 335,714.67 350,310.96 364,907.25 Income generated 130,308.24 260,616.47 390,924.71 521,232.94 651,541.18 781,849.41 912,157.65 1,042,465.88 1,172,774.12 1,303,082.35 1,433,390.59 1,563,698.82 1,694,007.06 1,824,315.30 1,954,623.53 2,084,931.77 2,215,240.00 2,345,548.24 2,475,856.47 2,606,164.71 2,736,472.94 2,866,781.18 2,997,089.41 3,127,397.65 3,257,705.88 Income based on spilt of calls 62,547.95 125,095.91 187,643.86 250,191.81 312,739.76 375,287.72 437,835.67 500,383.62 562,931.58 625,479.53 688,027.48 750,575.44 813,123.39 875,671.34 938,219.29 1,000,767.25 1,063,315.20 1,125,863.15 1,188,411.11 1,250,959.06 1,313,507.01 1,376,054.97 1,438,602.92 1,501,150.87 1,563,698.82

Number of advisors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Motorcycle Sales - Feb - Sept - income gen Cost for 9 Income generated Profit months 14,596.29 87,833.60 73,237.31 29,192.58 175,667.20 146,474.62 43,788.87 263,500.80 219,711.93 58,385.16 351,334.41 292,949.25 72,981.45 439,168.01 366,186.56 87,577.74 527,001.61 439,423.87 102,174.03 614,835.21 512,661.18 116,770.32 702,668.81 585,898.49 131,366.61 790,502.41 659,135.80 145,962.90 878,336.01 732,373.11 160,559.19 966,169.62 805,610.43 175,155.48 1,054,003.22 878,847.74 189,751.77 1,141,836.82 952,085.05 204,348.06 1,229,670.42 1,025,322.36 218,944.35 1,317,504.02 1,098,559.67 233,540.64 1,405,337.62 1,171,796.98 248,136.93 1,493,171.22 1,245,034.29 262,733.22 1,581,004.83 1,318,271.61 277,329.51 1,668,838.43 1,391,508.92 291,925.80 1,756,672.03 1,464,746.23 306,522.09 1,844,505.63 1,537,983.54 321,118.38 1,932,339.23 1,611,220.85 335,714.67 2,020,172.83 1,684,458.16 350,310.96 2,108,006.43 1,757,695.47 364,907.25 2,195,840.04 1,830,932.79

Variance from core -6,318.25 -12,636.50 -18,954.75 -25,273.00 -31,591.25 -37,909.50 -44,227.75 -50,546.00 -56,864.25 -63,182.50 -785,500.80 878,847.74 952,085.05 1,025,322.36 1,098,559.67 1,171,796.98 1,245,034.29 1,318,271.61 1,391,508.92 1,464,746.23 1,537,983.54 1,611,220.85 1,684,458.16 1,757,695.47 1,830,932.79

NB. Cost is for 9 months and income only for 8 months as new starters are in induction for a month, which is a cost but doesn't generate any income

Person v's income model per annum - core group Assumptions (averages based on the info from Matt Barrington ie. 2009's actual info) Average cost of 1 call centre advisor for 1 month Average conversion rate of the core group during peak season - NB Average conversion rate of the core group during peak season - Ren Average CN income generated per policy Average number of calls per month for an advisor in the NB core group peak season Average number of calls per month for an advisor in the Ren core group peak season Split of calls in 2010 of a Motorcycle Sales advisor NB Ren New Business - carry over cost and income - (October - Jan - carry over, Feb - Sept - income gen) Cost per Income based Number of advisors Income generated annum on spilt of calls 1 19,461.72 59,067.60 30,715.15 2 38,923.44 118,135.20 61,430.31 3 58,385.16 177,202.81 92,145.46 4 77,846.88 236,270.41 122,860.61 5 97,308.60 295,338.01 153,575.76 6 116,770.32 354,405.61 184,290.92 7 136,232.04 413,473.21 215,006.07 8 155,693.76 472,540.81 245,721.22 9 175,155.48 531,608.42 276,436.38 10 194,617.20 590,676.02 307,151.53 11 214,078.92 649,743.62 337,866.68 12 233,540.64 708,811.22 368,581.84 13 253,002.36 767,878.82 399,296.99 14 272,464.08 826,946.42 430,012.14 15 291,925.80 886,014.03 460,727.29 16 311,387.52 945,081.63 491,442.45 17 330,849.24 1,004,149.23 522,157.60 18 350,310.96 1,063,216.83 552,872.75 19 369,772.68 1,122,284.43 583,587.91 20 389,234.40 1,181,352.04 614,303.06

1,621.81 36.37% 64.27% 85 239 326 52% 48% Renewals - carry over cost and income - (October - Jan - carry over, Feb - Sept - income gen) Income based on Cost Income generated spilt of calls 19,461.72 142,296.10 68,302.13 38,923.44 284,592.20 136,604.26 58,385.16 426,888.30 204,906.38 77,846.88 569,184.40 273,208.51 97,308.60 711,480.50 341,510.64 116,770.32 853,776.60 409,812.77 136,232.04 996,072.70 478,114.90 155,693.76 1,138,368.80 546,417.03 175,155.48 1,280,664.90 614,719.15 194,617.20 1,422,961.00 683,021.28 214,078.92 1,565,257.10 751,323.41 233,540.64 1,707,553.20 819,625.54 253,002.36 1,849,849.30 887,927.67 272,464.08 1,992,145.40 956,229.79 291,925.80 2,134,441.50 1,024,531.92 311,387.52 2,276,737.60 1,092,834.05 330,849.24 2,419,033.70 1,161,136.18 350,310.96 2,561,329.80 1,229,438.31 369,772.68 2,703,625.91 1,297,740.43 389,234.40 2,845,922.01 1,366,042.56

Number of advisors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Motorcycle Sales - carry over cost and income - (October - Jan - carry over, Feb - Sept - income gen) Number of advisors Cost Income generated Profit 1 19,461.72 99,017.28 79,555.56 2 38,923.44 198,034.56 159,111.12 3 58,385.16 297,051.84 238,666.68 4 77,846.88 396,069.12 318,222.24 5 97,308.60 495,086.41 397,777.81 6 116,770.32 594,103.69 477,333.37 7 136,232.04 693,120.97 556,888.93 8 155,693.76 792,138.25 636,444.49 9 175,155.48 891,155.53 716,000.05 10 194,617.20 990,172.81 795,555.61 11 214,078.92 1,089,190.09 875,111.17 12 233,540.64 1,188,207.37 954,666.73 13 253,002.36 1,287,224.65 1,034,222.29 14 272,464.08 1,386,241.93 1,113,777.85 15 291,925.80 1,485,259.22 1,193,333.42 16 311,387.52 1,584,276.50 1,272,888.98 17 330,849.24 1,683,293.78 1,352,444.54 18 350,310.96 1,782,311.06 1,432,000.10 19 369,772.68 1,881,328.34 1,511,555.66 20 389,234.40 1,980,345.62 1,591,111.22

Income deficit report Income lost due to new starters not converting at the same level as core/existing members of staff 2009 New Business Renewal Total Total Cost Jan - - - Feb 12,142 - 11,248 - 23,390 - Mar 29,784 - 83,293 - 113,077 - Apr 27,314 - 41,979 - 69,293 - May 17,169 - 16,047 - 33,216 - Jun 103,697 - 41,866 - 145,563 - Jul 78,400 - 25,228 - 103,628 - Aug 45,672 - 4,224 - 49,896 - Sep 22,987 - 18,680 - 41,667 - Oct 10,288 - 13,263 - 23,551 - Nov Dec 7,150 - 5,671 7,071 - 1,087 14,222 - 6,758

624,258

New Business data New Business 2009 Jun 41.65% 34.03% 33.13% 31.96% 27.54% Jun 3131 1196 1887 3892 4189 Jun 0 -91 -161 -377 -591 -1220

Conversion Core Jan Feb March May Calls Core Jan Feb March May Unit Variance Core Jan Feb March May Total

Jan 26.06%

Feb 31.92% 25.57%

Mar 38.81% 31.64% 31.23%

Apr 33.75% 29.91% 29.66% 28.16%

May 31.26% 29.05% 26.43% 28.56%

Jul 39.18% 31.08% 27.87% 29.18% 28.54% Jul 2667 711 1705 3629 2903 Jul 0 -58 -193 -363 -309 -922

Aug 38.84% 31.16% 29.69% 32.04% 29.35% Aug 2294 661 1280 2447 2138 Aug 0 -51 -117 -166 -203 -537

Sep 35.57% 30.15% 32.67% 32.02% 27.97% Sep 2128 408 1050 1771 2035 Sep 0 -22 -31 -63 -155 -270

Oct 33.09% 23.14% 29.93% 31.16% 29.32% Oct 2019 229 922 1242 1204 Oct 0 -23 -29 -24 -45 -121

Nov 27.64% 23.43% 25.65% 25.85% 20.95% Nov 1986 303 768 936 587 Nov 0 -13 -15 -17 -39 -84

Dec 33.37% 29.14% 27.21% 28.81% 30.00% Dec 809 151 438 545 250 Dec 0 -6 -27 -25 -8 -67

Jan 6240

Feb 5442 2249

Mar 4823 2168 2571

Apr 4904 2016 1975 2921

May 4335 1215 1529 3754

Jan 0 0 0 0 0 0

Feb 0 -143 0 0 0 -143

Mar 0 -155 -195 0 0 -350

Apr 0 -77 -81 -163 0 -321

May 0 -27 -74 -101 0 -202

Renewals data Renewals 2009 Jun 66.10% 60.47% 58.81% Jun 5634 2914 4503 Jun 0 -164 -328 -493

Conversion Core Jan Feb Calls Core Jan Feb Unit Variance Core Jan Feb Total

Jan 59.06%

Feb 65.40% 58.78%

Mar 67.91% 63.30% 53.33% Mar 4235 2428 5955 Mar 0 -112 -868 -980

Apr 64.62% 59.33% 57.74% Apr 5633 2781 5040 Apr 0 -147 -347 -494

May 60.67% 60.80% 56.64% May 5860 3051 4790 May 0 4 -193 -189

Jul 63.59% 59.49% 57.83% Jul 4991 1891 3801 Jul 0 -78 -219 -297

Aug 61.13% 60.94% 59.24% Aug 4294 1431 2483 Aug 0 -3 -47 -50

Sep 64.74% 58.72% 57.42% Sep 4039 1422 1832 Sep 0 -86 -134 -220

Oct 62.35% 57.19% 54.21% Oct 3602 549 1568 Oct 0 -28 -128 -156

Nov 65.17% 52.78% 59.42% Nov 2831 144 1136 Nov 0 -18 -65 -83

Dec 70.10% 64.44% 68.54% Dec 913 156 255 Dec 0 -9 -4 -13

Jan 4309

Feb 4734 1999

Jan 0 0 0 0

Feb 0 -132 0 -132

Call distribution

2009 NB Core Jan Feb March May Other

Jan 73.7%

Feb 49.8% 20.6%

Mar 28.3% 12.7% 15.1%

Apr 28.0% 11.5% 11.3% 16.7% 32.6%

May 26.3% 7.4% 9.3% 22.8% 34.2%

26.3%

29.7%

43.9%

Jun 18.9% 7.2% 11.4% 23.5% 25.3% 13.5%

Jul 17.5% 4.7% 11.2% 23.8% 19.1% 23.7%

Aug 18.4% 5.3% 10.3% 19.7% 17.2% 29.1%

Sep 18.1% 3.5% 8.9% 15.0% 17.3% 37.2%

Oct 20.9% 2.4% 9.5% 12.8% 12.4% 42.0%

Nov 26.5% 4.0% 10.3% 12.5% 7.8% 38.8%

Dec 15.8% 2.9% 8.5% 10.6% 4.9% 57.2%

2009 Rnls Core Jan Feb Other

Jan 58.0%

Feb 49.4% 20.9% 29.7%

42.0%

Mar 30.3% 17.3% 42.5% 9.9%

Apr 33.8% 16.7% 30.3% 19.2%

May 36.8% 19.2% 30.1% 14.0%

Jun 36.3% 18.8% 29.0% 16.0%

Jul 35.3% 13.4% 26.9% 24.4%

Aug 37.1% 12.4% 21.5% 29.1%

Sep 41.2% 14.5% 18.7% 25.7%

Oct 47.1% 7.2% 20.5% 25.2%

Nov 51.2% 2.6% 20.5% 25.7%

Dec 21.7% 3.7% 6.1% 68.5%

Average number of calls taken by the core group and each induction group

2009 NB Core Jan Feb Mar Apr/May

Jan 260

Feb 259 281

Mar 254 310 367

Apr 258 288 395 225

May 255 304 306 375

Jun 241 399 472 389 419

Jul 222 237 426 403 363

Aug 209 331 427 350 305

Sep 213 408 350 295 339

Oct 202 229 307 248 241

Nov 221 303 256 234 196

Dec 90 151 146 182 83

2009 Rnls Core Jan Feb

Jan 269

Feb 296 333

Mar 265 486 458

Apr 352 556 458

May 366 610 479

Jun 352 583 500

Jul 333 630 543

Aug 330 477 621

Sep 311 474 458

Oct 277 183 392

Nov 218 144 284

Dec 70 156 64

Payroll budget information

Travel and Entertainme Total people nt cost
Average monthly cost per person Average monthly cost of a call centre agent

Gross pay Headcount

Overtime Sales bonus

Year end bonus

Total Pay

Pensions

Employers NIC

Total payroll cost Healthcare Staff Costs

Recruitment Training

Customer Facing
Customer Services New Business Renewals Personal lines Outbound 644,731 584,885 500,351 290,689 245,058 34.96 45.18 23.88 15.49 22.56 54,360 90,323 45,971 33,141 311 63,483 86,086 90,487 45,144 69,340

Apportioned on gross pay

Apportioned Apportioned on on gross pay total pay

Apportioned Apportioned Apportioned on on Apportioned on Apportioned Headcount Headcount on Headcount Headcount on Headcount

Average annual cost per person

25,306 22,957 19,639 11,410 9,619

787,880 784,251 656,448 380,383 324,327

19,792 17,955 15,360 8,924 7,523

71,726 71,396 59,761 34,629 29,526

879,399 873,602 731,569 423,936 361,376

13,829 17,872 9,446 6,127 8,924

17,768 22,963 12,137 7,873 11,466

14,866 19,212 10,154 6,587 9,593

5,165 6,675 3,528 2,289 3,333

15,334 19,817 10,474 6,794 9,895

946,362 960,140 777,309 453,606 404,588

27,069.84 21,251.44 32,550.63 29,283.79 17,933.85

774.3089 470.3728 1363.092 1890.496 794.94

1621.81

Appendix 3
Leaver Data

Full Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Department Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service Customer Service New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business

Original Hire Date 05/01/2009 09/02/2009 02/03/2009 02/03/2009 26/05/2009 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 05/01/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 02/03/2009 26/05/2009 05/01/2009 05/01/2009 26/05/2009 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 10/03/2008 09/02/2009 02/03/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 21/06/1994 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 29/05/2007 29/05/2007 26/05/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 02/03/2009 20/04/2009 09/03/2009 20/04/2009 02/02/2009 09/03/2009 02/02/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 16/05/2005 12/09/2005 20/04/2009 04/02/2008 02/03/2009 04/02/2008 05/01/2009 05/01/2009 06/02/2006

Termination Date 05/01/2009 13/02/2009 09/03/2009 17/03/2009 12/06/2009 01/04/2009 02/04/2009 01/04/2009 01/04/2009 18/06/2009 17/08/2009 19/06/2009 27/03/2009 27/04/2009 23/11/2009 06/03/2009 09/03/2009 13/03/2009 31/03/2009 19/02/2009 19/05/2009 19/06/2009 26/06/2009 06/05/2009 27/03/2009 16/02/2009 28/08/2009 01/09/2009 11/09/2009 25/08/2009 12/01/2009 25/03/2009 27/04/2009 11/06/2009 20/04/2009 03/07/2009 24/03/2009 03/04/2009 13/03/2009 25/02/2009 06/03/2009 08/05/2009 24/04/2009 17/08/2009 02/09/2009 05/10/2009 24/02/2009 02/04/2009 30/04/2009 14/05/2009

Length of Service (WEEKS) 0 1 1 2 3 8 8 13 13 16 24 4 12 16 26 4 4 10 4 50 14 16 25 10 771 1 29 118 120 13 1 4 8 8 6 11 7 4 6 8 1 208 189 17 83 31 55 13 17 171

Month range 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 1-3 1-3 4-6 4-6 4-6 7-12 1-3 4-6 4-6 7-12 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 12+ 4-6 4-6 7-12 1-3 12+ 1-3 7-12 12+ 12+ 4-6 0-1 1-3 4-6 4-6 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 0-1 12+ 12+ 4-6 12+ 7-12 12+ 4-6 4-6 12+

New Starter New Starter (none) New Starter (none) New Starter (none) New Starter (none) New Starter (none)

Termination Reason

Forced or voluntary Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Voluntary Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Unknown Unknown Unknown Forced Voluntary Forced Forced Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Forced Forced Forced Forced

FTE Final Salary 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.45 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12,750.00 12,500.00 12,000.00 12,000.00 13,000.00 12,500.00 13,000.00 12,500.00 12,750.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 12,750.00 12,000.00

New Starter Dismissed - AWOL New Starter Dismissed conduct Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct Dismissed poor attendance Dismissed poor attendance Dismissed poor performance

New Starter Dismissed poor attendance

Team Leader NA NA NA Rae NA Jennings Rae Rae Rae Manning Bentley NA Jennings

12,750.00 Jennings 13,000.00 Jennings 12,750.00 TEAM B 12,500.00 TEAM B 12,500.00 Pau 12,750.00 NA 12,500.00 Pau 13,000.00 Brookes 12,500.00 Manning 12,000.00 Jennings 13,000.00 Manning 0.00 Rae 12,500.00 NA 12,500.00 Bentley 13,000.00 Farthman 13,000.00 Rae 12,750.00 Jennings 13,250.00 NA 13,250.00 NA 13,250.00 Woodcock 12,000.00 Woodcock 12,750.00 Woodcock 12,000.00 Woodcock 13,000.00 Bailes 13,500.00 Baker 13,500.00 Bailes 13,500.00 Woodcock 13,250.00 NA 13,392.00 Farthman 14,200.00 Farthman 12,500.00 Woodcock 12,500.00 Baker 12,750.00 Kemp 12,500.00 Robinson 13,250.00 Robinson 13,000.00 Woodcock 13,725.00 Kemp

New Starter Resignation New Starter Resignation New Starter Resignation New Starter Resignation Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Resignation Resignation Resignation Resignation Resignation/Maternity Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/Potential dismissal

New Starter Resignation/Location New Starter Resignation/New Job

New Starter (none) New Starter (none) New Starter (none) New Starter Dimissed poor attendance New Starter Dismissed - AWOL New Starter Dismissed Capability New Starter Dismissed conduct New Starter Dismissed poor performance New Starter Resignation New Starter Resignation New Starter Resigned/Sickness Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Resignation/New job Resignation/New job Dismissed - AWOL Dismissed - AWOL Dismissed - AWOL Dismissed absence Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct

Induction Group CS1 CS2 CS3 CS3 CS4 CS2 CS2 CS1 CS1 CS3 CS3 CS4 CS1 CS1 CS4 CS2 CS2 CS1 CS3 #N/A CS2 CS3 CS1 CS3 #N/A CS2 CS2 #N/A #N/A CS4 NB1 NB3 NB3 NB5 NB4 NB5 NB2 NB4 NB2 NB1 NB3 #N/A #N/A NB5 #N/A NB3 #N/A NB1 NB1 #N/A

Full Name 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90

Department New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business New Business Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Outbound Sales Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Personal Lines Renewals Renewals

Original Hire Date 20/04/2009 09/03/2009 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 05/01/2009 09/03/2009 09/03/2009 05/01/2009 20/04/2009 02/02/2009 26/03/2007 02/03/2009 29/05/2007 05/01/2009 02/03/2009 09/03/2009 20/04/2009 02/02/2009 20/07/2009 28/04/2008 20/07/2009 07/02/2005 25/02/2008 06/03/2006 19/05/2008 29/05/2007 06/01/2003 12/01/2009 12/01/2009 12/01/2009 12/01/2009 02/03/2009 12/01/2009 12/01/2009 20/07/2009 03/03/2003 18/06/2007 12/01/2009 19/01/2009 09/02/2009

Termination Date 29/10/2009 06/11/2009 09/04/2009 10/11/2009 07/07/2009 23/07/2009 13/08/2009 29/08/2009 23/09/2009 28/07/2009 17/07/2009 18/09/2009 27/03/2009 26/05/2009 26/06/2009 30/07/2009 02/10/2009 12/05/2009 21/07/2009 30/11/2009 05/11/2009 19/06/2009 15/10/2009 09/07/2009 05/08/2009 23/04/2009 17/11/2009 27/02/2009 27/02/2009 09/02/2009 20/03/2009 13/10/2009 15/07/2009 25/04/2009 26/11/2009 06/04/2009 21/08/2009 18/09/2009 13/02/2009 16/02/2009

Length of Service (WEEKS) 28 35 14 36 26 20 23 34 23 25 121 29 96 20 17 21 24 14 0 83 16 228 86 175 64 100 358 7 7 4 10 32 27 15 19 318 114 36 4 1

Month range 4-6 7-12 4-6 7-12 4-6 4-6 4-6 7-12 4-6 4-6 12+ 7-12 12+ 4-6 4-6 4-6 7-12 4-6 0-1 12+ 4-6 12+ 12+ 12+ 12+ 12+ 12+ 1-3 1-3 1-3 1-3 7-12 4-6 4-6 4-6 12+ 12+ 7-12 1-3 0-1

New Starter Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained

Termination Reason Dismissed conduct Dismissed conduct Dismissed poor attendance Dismissed poor attendance Dismissed time keeping Resignation Resignation Resignation Resignation/Absence due to stress Resignation/Job not suited Resignation/long term sick Resignation/Moved away Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/Stress Dismissed - AWOL Dismissed absence Dismissed conduct Resignation/long term sick Resignation/new Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/Relocated Resignation/Stress

Forced or voluntary Forced Forced Forced Forced Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Forced Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Unknown Unknown

FTE Final Salary 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.61 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.36 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12,750.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 12,500.00 12,750.00 13,250.00 13,000.00 12,000.00 13,500.00 10,400.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,500.00 12,000.00 12,500.00 13,500.00 8,893.22 12,750.00 14,500.00 14,500.00 14,362.25 14,500.00

New Starter Resignation/Job not suited

Team Leader Baker Woodcock Woodcock Baker Woodcock Bailes Bailes Woodcock Kemp Bailes Baker Bailes Robinson Baker Robinson Kemp Woodcock Bailes NA Donohue Wood Barker Barker Donohue Barker

14,500.00 Donohue 1,331.22 Jennings 14,000.00 Normansell 14,000.00 Hughes 14,000.00 NA 14,000.00 Hughes 13,000.00 Normansell 14,250.00 Normansell 14,000.00 Hughes 13,000.00 Normansell 15,300.00 Normansell 14,350.00 Hughes 14,000.00 Hughes 14,000.03 Stabler 13,500.00 NA

New Starter Dismissed - AWOL New Starter Dismissed/Awol New Starter Resignation/Absence New Starter Resignation/New Job Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Dismissed - AWOL Dismissed poor performance Resignation Resignation/long term sick Resignation/New Job Resignation/New job

Resignation/based on potential dismisssal for Voluntary absence

New Starter (none) New Starter (none)

Induction Group NB5 NB4 NB1 NB3 NB1 NB4 NB4 NB1 NB5 NB2 #N/A NB3 #N/A NB1 NB3 NB4 NB5 NB2 OB1 #N/A OB1 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A NB3 #N/A #N/A OB1 #N/A #N/A #N/A #N/A RNL2

Full Name 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals Renewals

Department

Original Hire Date 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 19/01/2009 19/01/2009 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 19/01/2009 09/02/2009 03/04/2006 09/02/2009 09/02/2009 19/01/2009 02/01/2008 09/02/2009

Termination Date 11/03/2009 09/04/2009 13/03/2009 27/10/2009 10/06/2009 15/06/2009 01/05/2009 19/06/2009 10/07/2009 24/07/2009 12/06/2009 31/07/2009 05/10/2009 19/06/2009 11/07/2009 Average

Length of Service (WEEKS) 5 9 5 40 21 18 12 22 22 173 18 25 37 77 22 48

Month range 1-3 1-3 1-3 7-12 4-6 4-6 4-6 4-6 4-6 12+ 4-6 7-12 7-12 12+ 4-6

New Starter

Termination Reason

Forced or voluntary Voluntary Forced Voluntary Forced Forced Forced Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary Voluntary

FTE Final Salary 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.44 1 1 1 1 0.31 12,000.00 13,000.00 12,500.00 13,250.00 12,500.00 13,500.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 13,500.00 5,867.53 13,000.00 14,000.00 13,000.00 13,000.00 3,910.00

New Starter Dismissed - AWOL New Starter Dismissed Capability New Starter Resignation/Job not suited Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Trained Dimissed poor attendance Dismissed conduct Dismissed poor performance Resignation Resignation Resignation Resignation/New job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/New Job Resignation/Went to Uni

Team Leader Nield Blake Stabler Farthman Sandbach ??? Stabler Farthman Stabler Blake ??? Farthman Blake Stabler Blake

Induction Group RNL2 RNL2 RNL2 #N/A #N/A RNL2 RNL2 #N/A RNL2 #N/A RNL2 RNL2 #N/A #N/A RNL2

Median Length of service 0-1 months 1-3 months 4-6 months 7-12 months 12+ months

18 No. of Leavers 9 25 35 14 22 % of overall 8.57% 23.81% 33.33% 13.33% 20.95%

Appendix 4
Retention Information Gathering Workshop Structure and Output

Retention Workshops Invite

As part of a wider Staff Development project, Linda Horan is currently supporting the Staff Development Team to identify appropriate recommendations for a retention strategy for 2010 2011 for our call centre departments.

As well as providing us with a framework to work with which will link in with our overall recruitment strategy, Linda will also be writing up the project as a Masters Dissertation for her MA in Human Resource Management.

As we are all aware, each year we recruit a large number of new advisors into our call centres. Our attrition rate (the number of leavers from these new starters) is currently in the region of 35%. There is an obvious cost associated with the recruitment and training of each new advisor, therefore if we can reduce our attrition rate, we can reduce our level of spend in this area. In order to help identify how we can reduce our attrition rate, Linda will be analysing trends regarding leavers, running workshops with cross sections of staff and accessing academic and organisational research regarding call centre retention. This will allow her to make recommendations on areas which can be addressed in order to improve our retention rates.

Over the next couple of weeks Linda will be running workshops for staff with over 12months service. In these workshops she will examine various areas linked to retention including asking what your reasons for staying with the organisation are.

We would like invite to attend one of these sessions. If you are willing to participate, please drop Linda an e-mail at lindahoran@carolenash.com and she will advise you of the dates available.

We appreciate your help

Kind regards

Staff Development

Retention Information Gathering Sessions Facilitators notes Run sessions with a representative sample of Section Heads, Team Leaders and staff. Workshop structure Materials Required: Post it note and brown paper. Place brown paper in 3 separate strips on the walls of the training room. Label strip one as Question 1, strip 2 as Question 2 and strip 3 as Question 3. Introduce the session by explaining the purpose of the workshop. Ensure that participants understand that their participation is entirely voluntary and that anything they say in the sessions will remain anonymous. Answer any questions they may have and then proceed to the content below. Instruct the group as follows: Working in groups of two or three discuss the following question What makes people stay at Carole Nash? As you are discussing the question, write the points which arise on the post it notes. When all groups have completed their discussions ask them to place their post it notes on the relevant strip of brown paper. Repeat as above for the two questions below: 1. What makes people leave Carole Nash? 2. What would you change to improve Carole Nash as a place to work? Facilitator to ensure that adequate detail is being included within notes. Get the groups to examine the output for each question and group common post-its together (split participants into 3 groups, each group looks at one brown paper area). Once they have grouped the post it under common themes ask each group to add a heading on each area. If appropriate/necessary discuss output with the group to gain further insight in any areas required. Timings: Intro: 10 minutes Question 1: 10 minutes per person to discuss 5 minutes to wrap up Question 2: as above Break 15 minutes Question 3: as above Grouping exercise: 30 minutes Additional discussion: 30 minutes (if required) Session wrap up: 10 minutes Total: 2.5 3 hours

Question 1 The people Nowhere else to go Comfortable Good training Good bonuses Nice place to work Like bikes

Question 2 The targets Gets boring Too many KPIs Get sacked Sickness/Lateness Team leaders not supportive enough Section Heads expect too much of us More money Overtime Having to work too many weekends Gets monotonous Want promotion Want to get off the phones Try something different Don't like call centres Broken promises re promotions Better salary Closer to home Constant changes Too controlling System too complicated Open GI too hard to understand Don't want to do overtime Shifts don't work with family life Question 2 More Money Better shifts Find a career Go travelling Most get sacked Targets unachievable Get sick of same thing every day Gets too quiet so lose bonus Want to sell something different Don't get on with Team Leaders Can't meet quality Can't meet targets Don't like being bossed about all the time Want more freedom Want a career Targets "get your line on" Disciplinaries The cull Question 2 Targets too hard Targets impossible Dialler too fast No time to organise self Not enough support for new starters System too complicated for new starters Lots get sacked No one listens to us Sales are bottom of company Want to move on Only so long you can stay in a call centre Not a career Step up ladder Can't cope with pace Don't fit in Section Heads too demanding No fun anymore - not like old days Sickness Lateness Too many targets

Group 1 - Advisers Question 3 Fair bonus system More opportunities for becoming a team leader Easier to move to higher grade Flexi-time Authority to decide discounts without referring to Team Leaders Fair KPIs

Common Themes Identified Pay and Bonus Job structure and Targets Overtime and shifts Opportunities for promotion Support from Team Leaders

Question 1 Local to home Been here too long to leave Scared of unknown Comfortable in role Good support from team leaders Good coaching from training team Better than previous call centres worked in Confident that can do a good job Nice environment Good fun Nice people to work with

Group 2 - Advisers Question 3 Pay more bonuses CS Bonus Change KPIs so can be achieved Give some time off the phones every day Advisers to be allowed make decisions for themselves

Common Themes Identified Money Career Disciplinaries/Sacking Decision making Team Leader Support KPIs

Question 1 The people Good bonus Easy work Tried other call centres and didn't like The people Like the teams The benefits The hours Like the work Like speaking to fellow bikers Good salary

Group 3 - Advisers Question 3 New targets More Team Leaders - Gives more time to spend with team More opportunities to move up the ladder More training once out of induction Bring back team incentives Opportunities to try out other departments - gives variety

Common Themes Identified Targets Time Management Team Leaders Promotions Policies and Procedures Communication

Question 1 Bonus Bikes People Benefits Fits round family Part time hours close to home family work here like the people Team Leaders are nice Easy Can't be bothered looking for anywhere else Nowhere else as close to home Bonus okay

Question 2 Loss of bonus in winter Overtime Hours Weekends Dismissed Too much overtime Better money Less hours Flexi-time Non phone work Don't understand what call centres are like Bonus too small Too stressful Get sacked Want to progress Jump before pushed KPIs not achievable Too much pressure Not enough breaks Try something different Want to travel Go back to uni Systems too hard Want to be a Team Leader

Group 4 - Advisers Question 3 Make targets achievable Higher basic salaries More opportunities to move up More shift rotation More flexible policies - take individual circumstances into consideration New system which is user friendly

Common Themes Identified Promotion Chances Salaries Scheduling Policies and Procedures IT

Question 1 Comfortable No where else to go Benefits Bonus good for high performers Good local employer Not got confidence to go elsewhere Stuck in rut Fits with their family life

Question 1 Comfortable Nowhere else to go Some recognise good place to work Usually only if they are developed/promoted Older and more settled

Group 5 - Team Leaders Question 2 Question 3 We dismiss them More training resource Sickness Lower TL to Adviser ratio Lateness Ability to set more realistic targets/KPIs Can't hack the pace Smooth recruitment curve Not suited to call centre work Alternative activities during quiet period Require too much time to settle in Higher salaries to attract the best Not hitting KPIs More coaches on the floor Targets very challenging/stretching Allow all teams time off for weekly team meetings Want to progress but no opportunities Targets too high Not getting enough support due to time constraints Can't work in call centre structure Can't adapt to manager styles Too much of a gap between training and reality KPIs Feel stifled Too many new starters joining at same time - impossible to support Too quiet in winter Group 6 - Section Heads Question 2 Question 3 Lack of career development particularly for graduates Better rewards for doing a good job Types of people we employ likely to leave anyway Consider who recruiting - approach different markets? Not seen as a career Higher salaries - make it more financially difficult to leave/get sacked Concerns regarding security Look at selection process - lacking consistency No-one moving up competency frameworks No real reward when move grade - only about 200 but targets a lot higher Seen as bottom of ladder Policies maybe too strict but are necessary Difficult to move from training to the floor System too complicated KPIs difficult but need to be strict Too many new people at once

Common Themes Identified Development Opportunities Pay and Reward Training and Support Recruitment

Common Themes Identified Training and Development Salary and bonus Promotion Policies and KPIs Recruitment Practices

Appendix 5
Retention Questionnaires and Data

Retention Questionnaire As part of a wider Staff Development project, Linda Horan is currently supporting the Staff Development Team to identify appropriate recommendations for a retention strategy for 2010 2011 for our call centre departments. As well as providing us with a framework to work with which will link in with our overall recruitment strategy, Linda will also be writing up the project as a Masters Dissertation for her MA in Human Resource Management. As we are all aware, each year we recruit a large number of new advisors into our call centres. Our attrition rate (the number of leavers from these new starters) is currently in the region of 35%. There is an obvious cost associated with the recruitment and training of each new advisor, therefore if we can reduce our attrition rate, we can reduce our level of spend in this area. In order to help identify how we can reduce our attrition rate, Linda will be analysing trends regarding leavers, running workshops with cross sections of staff and accessing academic and organisational research regarding call centre retention. This will allow her to make recommendations on areas which can be addressed in order to improve our retention rates. To support the work being done in this area, we would appreciate if you could complete the attached questionnaire. All answers are treated as confidential and the questionnaire is anonymous. All you need to do is complete it and seal it in the attached envelope and place in the internal post tray before the end of the day on Friday. We appreciate your help Kind regards

Staff Development

Department: Length of service:

Sales 1-3mths

CS 4-6mths

PL 7-12mths

OB 12mths +

Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements using the scales provided: 1. There are good opportunities for promotion within the Carole Nash Call Centre
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

2. The pay at Carole Nash is competitive within the call centre marketplace within this locality
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

3. The benefits at Carole Nash are competitive within the call centre marketplace within this locality
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

4. My line manager provides me with the support I need to perform my role to the best of my abilities
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

5. I am provided with the training that I need to perform my role to the best of my abilities
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

6. I am happy with the level of autonomy I have within my role

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

7. I have a clear understating of what is expected from me within my role

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

8. I feel I have a say in decisions that are made which affect my role
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

9. I believe that the targets set for me are fair

Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly Agree

Appendix 6
Transcription of Interview with Sales Section Head

Transcription of interview with Sales Section Head Interviewer: Why do you think the questionnaire shows that over 52% of respondents disagree with the statement My line manager provides me with the support I need to perform my role to the best of my abilities? SSH: The busy periods in the call centre are really difficult for the team leaders. We have large groups of new starters coming on to the department on a regular basis and they require a lot of the team leaders time and attention, The training they receive is great but they still need a lot of taking care of when they join their teams. Also during the busy periods we are always tightly staffed in terms of numbers of FTE and the call centre itself is so busy that they dont always get a chance to run the one to ones or the team meetings. What little time they do have where they are not answering technical queries or managing the incoming call answer rates they end up spending with the new starters trying to make sure that they adapt from the training department to the reality of life on the sales floor which can often be very different. I can understand people feeling like this, to be honest. Its the same for me and the team leaders. They need time with me to learn and develop but when the phones get busy we just dont get the chance to do it at all because what little free time they have is spent with their staff.

Interviewer: Why do you think the satisfaction levels regarding training decrease so much according to length of service? SSH: We provide a very intensive induction process which means that new starters spend 3 weeks in training including time on our development centre where they are taking calls in a safe environment with trainers and coaches on hand to help then when they need it. Once they go onto the floor they periodically return to the training centre over the first couple of months for further training. After that they dont really have a huge amount of formal training unless we are launching a change to the system or a new product. In some ways their need for the formal training decreases as they become more experienced and can be support by the Team Leaders or the coaches but there is also the fact that there just isnt the resource available in the training team to run training for all new starters and the existing staff. I guess for the people with less experience, the memory of all the training they got as new starters is still fresh in their minds whereas for the more experienced people they arent as close to it. They dont see the on the job coaching that they get as training. They just think about the classroom based stuff which, once we get into the busy periods and recruitment season they get very little of. I would love to put more training on for them to develop them further or to build their skills up but the training team are far too stretched looking after all of the new starters unfortunately. Interviewer: The level of dissatisfaction with targets is high across the board. What targets are currently in place for staff?

SSH: We have targets around units sold, conversion rates, call monitoring scores and compliance scores though these are not all rigid. The new starters targets gradually bui ld over the first three months to the point where we would expect them to perform at the same level as existing staff. Interviewer: How long have these targets been in place and how did you establish them? SSH: For about 16 months now give or take. I worked alongside my manager who is the Head of Operations to come up with what we felt were fair but challenging targets for the staff to achieve in each of the areas which we identified as essential. They had to be challenging so that we can differentiate between the stars and the underperformers, also if you make them too easy what you find is that once people have reached a certain level of units lets say, they just sit back and relax and we cant have that. We need them constantly striving for the next sale , but we have the quality targets in place to make sure that they are doing it in the right ways. Were regulated, as you know, so we cant let them veer away from the call structure or they may end up giving out incorrect information. Interviewer: Would you be willing to reconsider the targets as part of a potential retention strategy? SSH: I would need a lot of convincing. When it comes to retention I only want to keep the right kind of people, and that means not the underperformers. If they are not reaching the targets we have then I would have to seriously think about whether I wanted to fight to keep that person in the business. I think the targets that we have set are fair. We put a lot of work into putting them in place and monitoring against them so I really dont think that I, or Phil (the Head of Operations) would be open to reviewing them at this point. Do you think that will be one of your recommendations? Interviewer: Potentially, though Ive not got to that stage as of yet. The fact that you hav e expressed a concern regarding changing them will obviously have to be taken into consideration though. However, sometime dissatisfaction is about a lack of understanding, do you think the Advisors understand why their targets are set in the way they are and how they link into the business overall. SSH: Probably not. When we put them in initially we did some information sessions but there has been so many leavers since then that Im not sure how many of the people we originally rolled it out to are left. Maybe we need to think about how they are communicated in induction. I guess if people knew that we set the unit and conversion targets as we do to ensure that we are meeting the overall income targets of the organization they may buy into it a bit more. I ts definitely something worth having a think about for me. SSH: Im sorry I have to go, I have another meeting Interviewer: No problem, thanks for taking the time out to talk with me.

Appendix 7
Example Exit Interview Questionnaire & Exit Interview Data

Leaver Questionnaire
Manager:

Employee Name:
Start Date: Interviewer:

Leave Date:

Date:

Department:

Section 1 Current Job

1.1 How closely were your expectations met by the job you are currently doing? Comments:

Score:

Fully met expectations ( ) Met some expectations ( ) Job was totally different ( )

1.2 What is your opinion of the targets given to you in your role? Comments:

Score:

About right ( )

Varied ( )
Not enough targets ( )

1.3 How would you rate the difficulty of work you are expected to perform in your role? Comments: Score: About right ( ) Very easy ( ) Too difficult ( )

1.4 How would you rate the morale in your team? Comments:

Score:

Good ( ) Average ( ) Poor ( )

Section 2 Management, Supervision & Communication

2.1 Do you feel your line manager motivates and inspires you at work? Comments: Score: All of the time ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never ( )

2.2 Do you feel valued and respected by your line manager? Comments:

Score: Yes ( ) Sometimes ( ) Not at all ( )

2.3 Is your line manager approachable? Comments: Score: Yes ( ) Sometimes ( ) Not at all ( )

2.4 Does your line manager provide adequate levels of support to you? Comments: Score:

All of the time ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never ( )

2.5 Do you feel your line manager recognises your contributions to the team? Comments: Score: All of the time ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never ( )

2.6 How would you rate the frequency of communication between you and your line manager? Comments: Score: About right ( ) Too much ( ) Not enough ( )

2.7 How would you rate communication: Between colleagues & managers within your department With employees in other departments Between Carole Nash Management and the employees overall Good Fair Poor

Good

Fair

Poor

Good

Fair

Poor

Comments:

2.8 Do you feel the company makes enough information available to employees? Comments:

Score:

All of the time ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never ( )

2.9 Do you feel the information is clear and easy to understand? Comments:

Score:

All of the time ( ) Occasionally ( ) Never ( )

Section 3 Training and Development

3.1 How helpful did you find your induction? Comments:

Score:

Good ( ) Poor ( ) Did not take place ( )

3.2 What is your opinion of any training you received? Comments:

Score:

Good

( )

Average ( ) Poor ( )

Never had any training ( )

3.3 How would you rate the appraisal system at Carole Nash? Comments:

Score:

Good

( )

Average ( ) Poor ( )

3.4 Do you feel appraisal objectives helped with your development? Comments:

Score: Helped greatly in career development and motivation ( ) Were achieved but did not help with development ( ) Objectives were never achievable ( ) No ( )

3.5 How would you rate promotion opportunities within the organisation? Comments:

Score:

Good

( )

Average ( ) Poor ( )

Section 4 - Compensation and Benefits

4.1 How would you rate your salary at Carole Nash? Comments:

Score:

Above Average ( ) Average ( ) Below Average ( )

4.2 How would you rate the benefits package at Carole Nash? Comments: Score: Above Average ( ) Average ( ) Below Average ( )

Section 5 - Carole Nash

5.1 Would you recommend Carole Nash as an employer? Comments:

Score:

Yes ( ) No ( )

5.2 Are you aware of the 9 Carole Nash Culture Statements? Comments:

Score:

Yes all of them ( ) Yes some of them ( ) No none of them( )

5.3 After reading the 9 culture statements how closely do you think Carole Nash mirrors these? Comments: Score: Fully mirrors ( ) Mirrors slightly ( ) Doesnt mirror at all ( )

5.4 Main Reason for Leaving Better benefits package Career change Career progression Dissatisfied with management Early retirement Family commitments Work Life Balance Higher salary Late retirement Location Personal reasons Personality clash Resumed education Return to previous employers To travel/move/work abroad Too much travel Comments:

Please Tick

5.5 What made you start looking for another position? Comments:

Score:

Planned career move ( ) Personal / domestic reasons ( ) Gradual dissatisfaction ( ) Changes to job / company ( )
Other ( )

5.6 Would you rejoin Carole Nash?

Score: Comments: Yes ( ) No ( ) Unsure ( )

Section 6 - The New Company

6.1 Which industry sector will you be working in when you leave? Comments: (prompt company name?)

Score:

Financial services ( ) Non financial services ( ) Will not be working ( )

6.2 How did you find your new position? Comments:

Score:

Via agency ( ) Speculative CV ( ) Through personal contact ( ) Applied to advertisement ( )

Head hunted ( )

6.3 What is your new employer offering that were not? Comments:

Score:

Higher Salary ( ) Enhanced Benefits ( ) Career Development ( ) All of the above ( ) Other ( )

Further Comments:

To be completed by employees manager Would you re-employ? Yes ( ) No ( )

Data Gathered by HR from Exit Interviews Conducted

Section 1 - Current Job 1.1 How closely were your expectations met by the job you are currently doing? Department Fully met expectations Met some Customer Service 3 Motorcycle Sales 5 Personal Lines 3 Outbound 1 Renewals 5

expectations 5 4 2 5

Job was totally different 2 1 1

1.2 What is your opinion of the targets given to you in your role? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals About right 2 4 1 9 Varied 7 5 6 1 Not enough targets 1

1.3 How would you rate the difficulty of work you are expected to perform in your role? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals About right 6 7 3 1 8 Very easy 2 1 2 2 Too difficult 1

1.4 How would you rate the morale in your team? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Good 2 6 1 1 2 Average 3 1 1 5 Poor 4 2 3 1 4

Section 2 Management, Supervision & Communication 2.1 Do you feel your line manager motivates and inspires you at work? Department All of the time Occasionally Customer Service 3 3 Motorcycle Sales 7 2 Personal Lines 1 1 Outbound 2 Renewals 5 4

Never 3 3 1

2.2 Do you feel valued and respected by your line manager? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Yes 6 8 3 2 7 Sometimes 2 1 1 1 Not at all 1 2 2

2.3 Is your line manager approachable? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Yes 6 8 3 2 8 Sometimes 2 1 2 1 Not at all 1 1 1

2.4 Does your line manager provide adequate levels of support to you? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals All of the time 4 6 4 2 7 Occassionally 3 3 2 1 Never 2

2.5 Do you feel your line manager recognises your contributions to the team? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals All of the time 5 7 2 2 9 Occassionally 3 2 2 1 Never 1 1 2

2.6 How would you rate the frequency of communication between you and your line manager? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals About right 5 6 4 2 7 Too much 1 1 Not enough 3 2 2 3

2.7 How would you rate communication: Between colleagues and managers within your department? Department Good Fair Customer Service 3 4 Motorcycle Sales 5 3 Personal Lines 2 2 Outbound 2 Renewals 7 1

Poor 2 1 2 1

2.7 How would you rate communication: With employees in other departments? Department Good Customer Service 3 Motorcycle Sales 5 Personal Lines 3 Outbound Renewals 4

Fair 3 2 2 1 4

Poor 3 2 1 2

2.7 How would you rate communication: Between Carole Nash Management and the employees overall? Department Good Fair Customer Service 2 2 Motorcycle Sales 2 5 Personal Lines 1 3 Outbound 1 1 Renewals 2 5

Poor 5 2 2 3

2.8 Do you feel the company makes enough information available to employees? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals All of the time 5 4 5 2 7 Occasionally 4 4 1 2 Never 1 1 1

2.9 Do you feel the information is clear and easy to understand? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
Section 3 Training and Development 3.1 How helpful did you find your induction? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
3.2 What is your opinion of any training you received? Never had any training 1

All of the time 5 6 4 2 9

Occasionally 4 1 2 1

Never 2 1

Good 9 10 6 2 8

Poor

Did not take place

Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

Good 3 6 4 1 6

Average 3 2 1 3

Poor 1 1 2

3.3 How would you rate the appraisal system at Carole Nash? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Good 2 3 1 4 Average 5 3 3 1 Poor 1 1 2 1 3

3.4 Do you feel appraisal objectives helped with your development? Helped greatly in career development and motivation 2 3 2 2 2 Were achieved but did not help with development 2 4 1 3 Objectives were never achievable 1 1

Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

No 3 1 3 2

3.5 How would you rate promotion opportunities within the organisation? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Good 7 3 1 1 4 Average 7 4 2 3 Poor 2

Section 4 - Compensation and Benefits 4.1 How would you rate your salary at Carole Nash? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Above Average Average 4 5 4 5 Below Average 4 4 1 4

2 1 1

4.2 How would you rate the benefits package at Carole Nash? Department Customer Service Motorcycle Sales Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
Section 5 - Carole Nash 5.1 Would you recommend Carole Nash as an employer? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Yes 5 5 2 1 4 No 4 4 4 4

Above Average 4 3 3 1 6

Average 5 6 3 3

Below Average

5.2 Are you aware of the 9 Carole Nash Culture Statements? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Yes all of them 2 1 2 4 Yes Some of them 4 3 1 1 3 No none of them 2 4 1

5.3 After reading the 9 Culture Statements how closely do you think Carole Nash mirrors these? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
5.4 Main Reason for Leaving

Fully mirrors 2 1 2

Mirrors slightly 5 4 1 1 3

Doesnt mirror at all 2 1 2 2

Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

Better benefits package

Career change 1 1 2

1 1

Dissatisfied Career with Family Work Life progression management commitments Balance 2 1 1 4 3 3 1 1 1 3 5

Higher salary 3 4 1 4

Location 1 1 1 1

Personal reasons 1 1

Resumed education 1 2 1

Return to To previous Travel/move/ Too much employers work abroad travel 1 1 1 2

5.5 What made you start looking for another position? Changes to job/company 1

Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

Planned Career Move 1 3 3

Personal/domestic reasons 2 1

Gradual dissatisfaction 2 4 4 4

Other 2 1 1 2

2 3

5.6 Would you rejoin Carole Nash? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
Section 6 - The New Company 6.1 Which industry sector will you be working in when you leave? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals
6.2 How did you find your new position? Through a personal contact 1 2 1 4 Applied to advertisment 2 1 1 1

Yes 7 3 2 1 4

No 1 3 3 2

Unsure 1 3 1 1 4

Financial Services 4 3 3 2 5

Non - Financial Services 1 3 3 3

Will not be working 2

Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals

Via agency 1 2 4 2 1

Speculative CV

Head hunted 1 1

6.3 What is your new employer offering that were not? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Higher Salary 2 3 1 1 1 Enhanced Benefits 1 Career Development 2 2 2 1 All of the above 1 1 2 1 1 Other 2 3 4

6.4 Would we re-employ? Department Customer Service New Business Personal Lines Outbound Renewals Yes 5 2 1 2 No 1 2 2 1

Appendix 8
Carole Nash Policies and Procedures

DISCIPLINARY POLICY AND PROCEDURE Why do we need this procedure?

We hope that during your time at Carole Nash, you will conduct yourself in a way that meets the standards expected of Carole Nash staff. If you do not, it may be necessary for your line manager to take disciplinary action. The disciplinary procedure is put in place to provide clear guidelines to deal with difficulties that arise as part of the working relationship, in a fair and reasonable manner.

Please note this procedure does not form part of your contract of employment.

INFORMAL STAGES How is an issue dealt with informally?

Less serious issues around your standards of conduct or work performance, will usually be dealt with by your line manager. In these cases your line manager will make you aware of any concerns with your conduct/performance and you will be advised of improvements or changes that are required to meet the acceptable standards, together with the timescale in which this should be achieved (if appropriate).

Will issues that are dealt with informally be documented?

A record of any discussions surrounding your conduct or performance may be kept on your central personnel file and may be used as evidence if the issue becomes more formal. If this happens you will be informed that this evidence will be used and you will have the right to have your comments or response also recorded. If the unacceptable standards continue or get worse, guidance on how to progress the issue may be sought from the HR Department.

FORMAL STAGES

When is the formal stage used?

The formal procedure is used when no improvement or change has been made or for more serious cases of unacceptable conduct or poor performance.

Why is an investigation conducted?

Before any disciplinary action is taken, when applicable, management, together with the HR Department will conduct a thorough investigation to find out whether or not there is a case for disciplinary action. Please note that where appropriate, other parties such as Compliance/Audit may also investigate the situation.

When will I be informed of a future investigation?

You will be informed that an investigation will take place as soon as is practical. In certain circumstances, e.g. an investigation into alleged fraud, it is essential that an initial investigation is held without the involvement or knowledge of the employee, to find out whether there is any cause for concern with the allegation. These investigations will be carried out with discretion and in confidence.

How much notice will I be given of an investigation?

You will be given reasonable notice by HR, where appropriate, to attend an investigation interview, which will be held at the earliest convenient time. However, the nature of the allegation may require the interview to be held with minimal notice. There may be occasions when several interviews would be necessary in order for a thorough and fair investigation to take place.

Who will be present at an investigation interview?

At any interview there may be a Senior Manager or your Line Manager, a HR Consultant, yourself. Where possible, a HR Consultant should be present. You will be given the opportunity

to respond to the allegation. Please note, you are not entitled to the right to be accompanied at the meeting at this stage.

What happens after the investigation has been completed?

Following an investigation, the outcome will be communicated to you. Depending upon the outcome, the issue may be progressed to a disciplinary hearing.

What does it mean to be suspended?

If it is alleged that you have committed a serious offence, you may be suspended. The suspension will be on full pay while an investigation is carried out. HR will confirm the suspension in writing as soon as possible. A hearing will be held as soon as is practical, but ideally within two weeks. HR will write to invite you to the hearing or if no hearing is to be conducted, we will write to advise you of the date you may return to work.

When will a Disciplinary Hearing be held?

Wherever possible the hearing will be arranged at a convenient time for both parties.

How will I be notified of a Disciplinary Hearing and how much notice will I be given?

You will be given at least 24 hours notice of any disciplinary hearing in writing.

You will be notified in writing of;

The purpose of the meeting The date, time and place of the disciplinary hearing A summary of the complaint The right to be accompanied by a representative The allegations against you, together with any supporting evidence Any possible consequences

You have the option to waiver this notice period in writing to your line manager or the HR Department.

Who will be present at the Disciplinary Hearing?

At the disciplinary hearing there may be a Senior Manager or your Line Manager, a HR Consultant, yourself and your representative. You will be given the opportunity to respond to the allegation.

Can I have a Representative present?

Anyone requested to attend a disciplinary hearing meeting has the right to be accompanied by another member of staff of your choice or a Trade Union Representative. Should you choose to be represented by a Trade Union Representative, adequate certification from the Trade Union will need to be produced to confirm the Trade Union Representatives status. A representativ e can ask questions and sum up the hearing but cannot answer the questions on your behalf. You must notify us in advance if you wish to have a representative present and provide the name of your chosen companion.

Can I call witnesses to the hearing?

Yes, you will be able to call any relevant witnesses to the hearing provided that you give the Company advance notice and that the witnesses are deemed appropriate under the circumstances.

Can the Company call witnesses to the hearing?

Carole Nash may also call any relevant witnesses to the hearing and will give you advance notice of this.

When are adjournments used?

We might need to find out extra information before a decision can be made. If this happens the disciplinary hearing will be adjourned. A break can also be used if the situation becomes heated or people are upset during the hearing. An adjournment must always be used to consider all the information and make a decision on the facts.

How will disciplinary decisions be made?

Normally, the disciplinary decisions will be followed in the order of the stages set out at the end of this policy. However, offences of a serious nature may be brought into the procedure at any stage, if an earlier stage would not be severe enough or appropriate to deal with it. For example, there may be occasions when misconduct is considered not to be so serious as to justify dismissal, but serious enough to warrant only one written warning which will be both the first and the final written warning.

Will there always be a warning following a disciplinary hearing?

It is possible that after any stage no warning will be issued. Alternatively, based on the information collated in the disciplinary hearing, the decision could be to give the employee a warning.

What is a Formal Verbal Warning?

If the decision of the disciplinary hearing is that your conduct or work performance does not meet acceptable standards, you will normally be given a formal verbal warning on the first occasion.

A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of six months, provided that there is not a reoccurrence of the same or similar misconduct during this period.

What is a First Written Warning?

If, during the period of the verbal warning, there has not been an improvement in your conduct or work performance to the agreed standards, or if a further offence of the same nature, or a

related offence, is committed, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage, a written warning may be issued if further disciplinary action is taken.

A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of twelve months, provided that there is not a reoccurrence of the same or similar misconduct during this period.

What is a Final Written Warning?

If, during the period of the first written warning, there has not been an improvement in your conduct or work performance to the agreed standards, or if a further offence of the same nature, or a related offence, is committed, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage, a final written warning may be issued if further disciplinary action is taken.

A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of eighteen months, provided that there is not a reoccurrence of the same or similar misconduct during this period. A final written warning will make it clear that further default may result in dismissal.

What is a Dismissal?
If you commit another offence within the period of the final written warning or your conduct or work performance has not improved to the agreed standards, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage and if this is upheld at the disciplinary hearing you may be dismissed. Your termination date will be stated at the disciplinary hearing. Written reasons for your dismissal will be provided within seven days. An employee will normally be dismissed with pay in lieu of notice except in cases where the employee has been dismissed summarily (dismissed without pay in lieu of notice). Any outstanding accrued holiday pay will be paid.

What are the alternatives to a warning/dismissal?

According to the circumstances of the case, alternative forms of disciplinary action may be considered.

These are demotion (with salary and benefits reduced accordingly) or transfer to another job. Demotion may be used as an alternative to a warning/dismissal; transfer may be used as alternatives to a warning/dismissal or as a penalty for misconduct to accompany a final written warning.

Can I appeal a decision?

Yes, you have the right to appeal against the original disciplinary decision. At the end of the disciplinary hearing, you will be notified of the appeals procedure and who you should appeal to, which will be someone at the next level of management who has not been involved in the hearing.

On what grounds can I make an appeal?

You are able to appeal a disciplinary decision if there is a legitimate reason why you think the disciplinary decision is not the correct penalty for the issue heard or if you feel that a relevant piece of information has not been considered during the previous disciplinary hearing.

How do I make an appeal?

An appeal against disciplinary action must be made, in writing, within 5 working days of receiving notification in writing of the disciplinary action. Your appeal letter must state the grounds for appeal in full and whether you are appealing against the finding that you have committed the alleged act or acts of misconduct, or against the level of disciplinary sanction awarded.

How long will it take for my appeal to be heard?

Every effort will be made to hear the appeal within 10 working days of it being lodged.

Who will be present at the appeal?

At the appeal hearing there may be the manager the appeal has been made to, a HR Consultant, yourself and your representative. You will be given the opportunity to present any relevant information that you consider has not been fully taken into account in reaching the original disciplinary decision.

What are the possible outcomes of an appeal?

An appeal hearing may result in the original decision being upheld, overturned or the disciplinary action being lessened. If new information is presented during the appeal process, this may result in further investigation and possible further disciplinary proceedings.

A successful appeal against dismissal will result in the person being reinstated with full continuity of service.

Can I raise a grievance on the back of an appeal?

No, the appeal decision is final and there are no further procedures to go down.

What is Unsatisfactory Misconduct?

You will be taken to disciplinary action if your conduct is judged to be a conscious breach of Company standards of performance or behaviour or you are significantly negligent with your work. Each case will be considered on its own merits and factors leading to the offence will influence whatever action is appropriate. The following are examples of circumstances that could amount to misconduct, the list is in no way exhaustive: -

Persistent lateness or absenteeism from work without good cause. Failure to abide by the general Health & Safety rules and procedures Consumption of alcohol on the premises Unsatisfactory standards or output of work Rudeness to customers, members of the public or other employees, objectionable or insulting behaviour, harassment, bullying or bad-language. Unauthorised use of e-mail or Internet Failure to carry out all reasonable instructions or follow company rules and procedures Unauthorised use or negligent damage or loss of company property Failure to report immediately any damage to property or premises caused by you Use of Company vehicles without approval or the private use of the Companys commercial vehicles, without authorisation

What is Serious Misconduct / Gross Misconduct?

There are certain offences that are regarded as so serious that the action taken could lead to you being dismissed from the Company summarily without notice (but with accrued holiday entitlement). The following are examples of circumstances that could amount to gross misconduct, the list is in no way exhaustive: -

Persistent lateness or absenteeism from work without good cause.

Insulting, abusive or violent behaviour to customers and fellow employees or members of the public Smoking in designated non-smoking areas Misappropriation or wilful damage to any property and/or information belonging to the Company, its employees or customers Being in possession, or under the influence of drugs or any illegal substance or object Falsification of any documents relating to the Company or your role, whether or not for personal gain Wilful or reckless disobedience of safety or security procedures Fraud Other offences of dishonesty Sexual misconduct at work Exposing the Company to actual or potential substantial financial loss Failure to comply with FSA regulations Conviction in respect of a criminal offence that is relevant to your employment Conduct liable to bring the Company into disrepute Failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for any cash, stock or equipment damage, losses or discrepancies whatsoever, in respect of which you may reasonably be considered to be responsible whether solely or together with others Gross negligence Insubordination Accepting bribes Harassment and Bullying Discrimination or harassment of a fellow colleague on the grounds of sex, sexual orientation, race, disability, age, religion or belief Internet/email abuse/contravention of the IT User Policy or causing a computer virus to enter the Company system Abuse of the call monitoring system Theft from the Company, members of staff or the public Mishandling of information that could cause or lead to breach of the data protection act The Company will deal with any misconduct or breach of discipline, as the case requires.

The Company also reserves the right to search employees should there be reasonable grounds of suspicion relating to a particular incident.

What about offences outside work?

Offences outside work will not be treated as an automatic reason for disciplinary action. Consideration will be given to whether the offence is one which may bring Carole Nash into disrepute. Consideration will also be given as to whether the offence is one that makes you unsuitable for continued employment and if so, whether alternative jobs are available which would be suitable.

What if I hand in my resignation?

You may resign at either investigation stage or during disciplinary proceedings. The company reserves the right to continue the investigation and/or disciplinary process whilst you remain an employee and it is expected you will co-operate with these activities.

An investigation may also continue once you have left the Company and you will be invited to participate in the investigation.

The purpose of any investigation under these circumstances would be to determine actions the Company may wish to take with respect to possible civil or criminal proceedings.

If you do not participate in such investigations the Company will come to conclusions based on the information available.

Guidelines for Disciplinary Action will be based on the following procedures: First Occasion Formal Verbal Warning Written Warning Final Written Warning Dismissal Second Occasion Written Warning Final Written Warning Dismissal Third Occasion Final Written Warning Dismissal Fourth Occasion Dismissal

Offence
Unsatisfactory Conduct Misconduct

Serious Misconduct Gross Misconduct

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR POOR PERFORMANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURE

Why do we need this Procedure? Carole Nash are committed to the development of their staff and expect a high standard of performance from all employees. Should an employees performan ce fall below the acceptable standard for their grade it may be necessary to follow this procedure. This procedure is in place to provide clear guidelines to ensure that incidents of under-performance are dealt with in a fair and consistent manner, it will be used by the following departments; Call Centre, Claims, Commercial Lines, Renewals Administration, Technical Support and the Post room.

Please note this procedure does not form part of your contract of employment. How do I know what standards are expected in my role? A Key Performance Indicator (KPI) is the minimum performance requirement for a particular part of your role. KPI standards are provided to you by your line manager, and are shown on the shared drive. The minimum standard throughout the Call Centre (Motorcycle Sales, Renewals, Personal Lines and Customer Service) will be 75%. Your KPI standards clearly define the required standards for every grade and you will be expected to work consistently at or above this standard.

How are KPI standards set and who does this? KPI standards are set depending on grades within a department, for example, an employee in their probationary period may have reduced minimum standards compared to an employee who has passed their probationary period. Section Heads regularly review section performance and set achievable and realistic KPI standards accordingly.

What happens if a new KPI standard is introduced, or if standards are amended? Employees will be given 1 full month to adjust to any new KPI standard introduced. They will be introduced on the 1st day of a calendar month. All standards will be displayed at least 1 month in advance on the shared drive allowing you a reasonable amount of time to adjust.

What happens if I over achieve against the KPI standard? Your achievement will be recognised and communicated to you by your line manager. Continued over achievement may result in an opportunity for you to work towards a higher grade should you wish to, in consultation with your line manager.

Under what circumstances will this procedure apply? If you fail to achieve the minimum number of KPI standards required for your department in any month, then the first stage of this procedure will commence.

What if I am off sick or on holiday? Your KPI results will be based on the time you have worked during that month. If you are off work for a full calendar month the procedure will continue from the month you return to work.

How will I know if I am under performing? All your KPI results will be addressed in your monthly KPI meeting. If you would like an update of your progress at any point during the month, please see your line manager. What support will I be given? Your line manager will monitor your performance on a regular basis providing you with feedback on your progress. These meetings should provide encouragement when improvements are being made which should motivate you to improve further.

If you fail two consecutive months and you reach a formal file note stage you will be given an action plan to help you concentrate on the areas you need to improve. For the duration of your action plan (2 months) you will be on reduced targets as agreed by your line manager i.e. you may receive a reduced target whereby you need achieve 90% of targets in month 1 of your action plan and achieve 95% of targets in month 2 to give you the best possible chance of achieving your targets. If the target needs to be reduced further than this it will be at the discretion of your line manager with authorisation from your section head.

If you still fail to hit the required standard during your 2 month action you will continue on the KPI poor performance procedure at the verbal warning stage.

Action plans will be drawn up between you and your line manager that will help you improve your own performance and these will be revisited at regular intervals. If you feel that more help and support is needed, please speak to your line manager.

How will poor performance on KPIs be dealt with? Evidence will be gathered to show that your performance has not met the standards required, the diagram below outlines the process:

Stage One
Informal Chat

Achieve the required number of KPI standards the following month to prevent moving to next stage Achieve the required number of KPI standards for 2 consecutive months to prevent moving to next stage Achieve the required number of KPI standards for 5 out of 6 consecutive months to prevent moving to next stage Achieve the required number of KPI standards for 10 out of 12 consecutive months to prevent moving to next stage Achieve the required number of KPI standards for 15 out of 18 consecutive months to prevent moving to next stage

Less than the required Stage Two number of KPI standards

Formal Chat & File Note

achieved Less than the required Stage Three number of KPI standards achieved Less than the required Stage Four number of KPI standards achieved Less than the required Stage Five number of KPI standards

Action Plan please see what support will I be given

Verbal Warning

Written Warning

Final Written Warning

achieved Less than the required Stage Six number of KPI standards achieved Less than the required number of KPI standards
Dismissal

When following the diagram, please note the following points:

On each stage of the procedure, the required number of KPI standards must be achieved for the specified time period (as per the right hand column shown above) before employees are successful, and can revert back to stage 1 of the procedure. If it becomes apparent that you cannot complete the required number of KPI standards at any stage of the procedure (e.g. if you are on stage 2 and fail to achieve target in the first of the 2 consecutive months) you proceed to stage 3 with immediate effect. Note all stages should be documented. At the informal chat stage a note will be placed on your KPI action form to say you have received an informal chat. On all other stages, a file note will be drawn up and sent to HR to store on your personnel file. On the fourth occasion of reaching the Informal Chat stage within a rolling 12-month period you will automatically start from the Formal Chat stage. If an employee consistently under performs in one area, then the principles of the Poor Performance Procedure will apply.

The table below gives examples of how the procedure works. Jan Yes Yes No No Yes No Feb No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Mar Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Apr May June July Stage (as of August) Yes No No Yes Formal Chat No Yes Yes Yes Not on any stage Yes Yes Yes No Informal Chat No No Yes Yes Not on any stage No Yes Yes Yes Not on any stage Yes No Yes No Formal Chat

Adviser 1 Adviser 2 Adviser 3 Adviser 4 Adviser 5 Adviser 6

What happens during each stage of the process? During each stage of the process you will be invited to attend a meeting with your line manager with the aim of:

Establishing the full facts as to why you are unable to meet the standard performance required, giving consideration to any extenuating circumstances and trying to establish possible ways of helping you resolve them by giving you the appropriate help and support. Identifying training needs. Your line manager may liase with their Training Consultant to organise for you to receive extra training. Assisting you in identifying what you need to do in order to improve your performance and meet the standards required.

What happens if performance does not improve? It is normal that performance improves after the informal chat stage with your line manager. Where performance has not improved to the required satisfactory standard a more formal meeting will be held and documented. This meeting will aim to establish why you have been unable to improve your level of performance to the required standard. A file note will be placed on your personnel file stating agreed actions within realistic timescales, making you aware that disciplinary action may be taken if improvements are not made. When will poor performance be dealt with using disciplinary action? Following a file note, if your performance has not improved to the required standard despite being given any relevant training or help to do so, you may be invited to a disciplinary hearing in line with the Carole Nash Disciplinary Policy and Procedure. Will poor performance always be dealt with through the disciplinary procedure? At any stage of the formal procedure a range of options may be considered, including and not limited to: Reverting to an informal approach Taking action under another Carole Nash policy Reviewing the job description, responsibilities, reporting line or other contract terms Seeking alternative employment within Carole Nash This will only occur in extenuating circumstances in consultation with a HR Consultant.

Can stages of the procedure be skipped? This procedure has been devised to ensure a consistent approach amongst line managers towards the management of under-performance of KPIs. However, under extenuating circumstances and in consultation with a HR Consultant, your line manager may choose to award a heavier or lighter penalty.

What can I do if I disagree with the action taken? You have the right to appeal any disciplinary decision, in line with the Carole Nash Disciplinary Policy and Procedure. When will this procedure be implemented from? 1st March 2008

LATENESS POLICY AND PROCEDURE Why do we need this procedure?

We need this procedure to set out guidelines for the management of lateness throughout Carole Nash. Carole Nash accepts that you will, on rare occasions, find yourself late for work. By following the guidelines below, you will be treated fairly and consistently.

Please note this procedure does not form part of your contract of employment.

What are my responsibilities?

Your responsibilities are to: Follow every aspect of the lateness policy and procedure Notify your line manager or HR immediately when you realise there is a possibility that you may be late for work Attend any meetings as requested to discuss your lateness Adhere to the lateness policy and procedure

What should I do if I know I am going to be late for work?

If you are unable to get to work on time you must:

Phone your line manager as soon as you realise you may be late. Notify another line manager within the team if your line manager is not available, if this is not possible you should contact HR on 0161 927 2417 You must always ring in yourself

What information do I need to give?

Your name What time you expect to arrive The reason for your lateness

What do I do if the lateness is not my fault and the result of a major traffic accident?
You should notify your manager to explain your lateness

Your lateness will be taken out of procedure if the same traffic incident affects other staff

What happens when I return to work?

Your manager will conduct an informal meeting or, in cases where you are regularly late, a more formal meeting will be held All circumstances relating to your lateness must be fully explained including the reason. Vague descriptions such as bus was late should be avoided You will be reminded of the consequences of lateness and how this impacts team members and Carole Nash.

Do I need to make the time back?

Yes, this time must be made up by working the amount of time equal to your lateness at other times agreed by your Manager

Is my lateness record reviewed if I apply for an internal transfer or promotion?

Your lateness record will be considered when making a decision on internal transfers and promotions.

What are the responsibilities of my Line Manager?

Line managers are responsible for ensuring that lateness is proactively managed in their area according to the guidelines. They must ensure that:

You are aware of the standard of attendance that Carole Nash requires and the implications of lateness The procedure is used to ensure consistency and fairness as well as highlighting any potential problems at an early stage Where appropriate, advice is requested from HR HR are notified of your lateness Meetings are conducted as soon as possible on your arrival to work, for each occasion of lateness Conversations and meetings with you about your lateness are noted and filed where appropriate You are reminded of the consequences of lateness and how this impacts on team members and Carole Nash

How do Line Managers deal with the paperwork?

Line managers must ensure: They notify HR of your lateness via registers and email They get a lateness report from HR to review your level of lateness absences in the past 6 months

What are the responsibilities of HR?

HR are available for guidance, support and advice on handling lateness and are responsible for:

Ensuring, along with your line managers, that the lateness policy and procedure is followed correctly

Recording all lateness on the HR system

Advising line managers on lateness issues Advising line managers if disciplinary action needs to be taken Monitoring lateness across Carole Nash Being available for you if you feel unable to go to your line manager

Note These procedures are guidelines only and any pattern of lateness that is deemed by Carole Nash as unacceptable or causes concern will be dealt with using relevant action plans or disciplinary action as appropriate.

POOR PERFORMANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURE Why do we need this Procedure?

Carole Nash are committed to the development of their staff and expect a high standard of performance from all employees. Should an employees performance fall below an acceptable standard it may be necessary to start performance management. This poor performance procedure is in place to provide clear guidelines to ensure that incidents of poor performance are dealt with in a fair and consistent manner.

Please note this procedure does not form part of your contract of employment.

What is poor performance?

Poor performance is when work completed is not to an acceptable standard. This includes the performance of the job, duties or any ad hoc tasks, which falls below the standards required by Carole Nash.

How do I know what standards are expected within my role?

You all have access to your job description and competencies, on the shared drive, which clearly define the required standards for each role. The competency frameworks define the level of skill, knowledge and experience required to be signed off as competent within your role. These requirements are realistic and you will be expected to work consistently at this standard

Under what circumstances will this procedure apply?

It is important to establish the reason for poor performance. There is a difference between lack of performance due to wilful refusal to work satisfactorily and incompetence due to incapability. Lack of performance due to wilful refusal may be treated as a matter of conduct. However, if the reason for poor performance is due to factors such as skill, aptitude or health this procedure will be followed.

How will I know if I am under performing?

In cases where the standard of work has started to drop below an acceptable standard it is up to your line manager to informally draw attention to the way in which you are falling short of the required standard.

How will poor performance be dealt with informally?

Evidence should be gathered to show that performance has continually not met the standards outlined by the competency frameworks. At this stage you should be invited to attend an informal meeting with your line manager with the aim of: Establishing the full facts as to why you are unable to meet the standard performance required, giving consideration to any personal problems and trying to establish possible ways of helping you to resolve them by giving you the appropriate help and support.

Identifying training needs your line manager should liaise with their Training Consultant to organise for you to receive the relevant training. Clearly advising of what you need to do in order to improve your performance in order to meet the standard required. You will be given a reasonable amount of time (usually 4-6 weeks, as agreed with a HR Consultant) for you to work at making these improvements

How often will performance be reviewed once performance management has started?
Weekly review meetings should be conducted during this time to provide continual feedback to you about progress being made regarding your performance. These meetings should provide encouragement when improvements are being made which should motivate you to improve further. Any file notes should be sent to the H.R. department outlining agreed actions/ target dates from each meeting.

What happens if performance does not improve?

It is normal that performance improves after initial discussions with your line managers. Where performance has not improved to the required satisfactory standard a more formal meeting will be held and documented. This meeting will aim to establish why you have been unable to improve your level of performance to the required standard. A file note will be placed on your personnel file stating agreed actions within realistic timescales, making you aware that disciplinary action may be taken if improvements are not made.

When will poor performance be dealt with formally?

Following a file note, if your performance has not improved to the required satisfactory standard despite being given any relevant training or help to do so you may be invited to a disciplinary hearing, in line with the Carole Nash Disciplinary Policy and Procedure. Line Managers are

advised to consult with their HR Consultant. You have the right to be accompanied by a colleague.

Will poor performance always be dealt with through the disciplinary procedure?
No, before disciplinary action is taken a discussion should take place at the informal stages as to whether a change in role would be more beneficial rather than struggling to perform in a role that is not suited you. Only roles that better suit the skill set of the individual being performance managed will be considered.

At any stage of the formal procedure a range of options may be considered including: Reverting to an informal approach Taking action under another Carole Nash policy Reviewing the job description, responsibilities, reporting line or other contract terms Seeking alternative employment within Carole Nash
This list is not exhaustive.

What happens if I change role and I am not able to perform in that role?
It is unlikely that you will find yourself in a role that you will not be able to perform in, as the job you will be placed in should be matched to your skill set. However, if this situation does arise the performance management process will start again, starting from the informal stage.

What are the formal stages of performance management? Stage 1 Verbal Warning
If the decision of the disciplinary hearing is that your work performance does not meet acceptable standards and informal procedures have not addressed the problems, you will normally be given a formal verbal warning on the first occasion. You will advised of

The improvement in performance required The timescale for the improvement Support to be received

The consequence of not meeting performance targets A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of six months, provided that your standard of work remains at an acceptable level.

Stage 2 Written Warning

If, during the period of the verbal warning, there has not been an improvement in your work performance to the agreed standards, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage, a written warning may be issued if further disciplinary action is taken. You will be advised of The improvement in performance required The timescale for the improvement Support to be received e.g. training, coaching etc. The consequence of not meeting performance targets A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will be will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of twelve months, provided that your standard of work remains at an acceptable level.

Stage 3 Final Written Warning

If, during the period of the first written warning, there has not been an improvement work performance to the agreed standards, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage, a written warning may be issued if further disciplinary action is taken.
You will advised of

The improvement in performance required The timescale for the improvement Support to be received The consequence of not meeting performance targets
A note of this warning will be placed on your personal file but will not count towards any further disciplinary actions after a period of eighteen months, provided that your standard of work

remains at an acceptable level. A final written warning will make it clear that if no further improvement is made in your performance this may result in dismissal.

Stage 4 - Dismissal
If your work performance has not improved to the agreed standards, or the nature of the offence warrants moving straight to this stage and if this is upheld at the disciplinary hearing you may be dismissed. Your termination date will be stated at the disciplinary hearing. Written reasons for your dismissal will be provided within seven days. An employee will normally be dismissed with pay in lieu of notice except in cases where the employee has been dismissed summarily (dismissed without pay in lieu of notice). Any outstanding accrued holiday pay will be paid.

Can stages be skipped?

Yes, if the consequences of the poor performance or a single negligent error are serious then the manager hearing the case may choose to award a heavier penalty. More senior employees may be expected to have the necessary experience for their position, and so it may be considered that only one warning is appropriate before the dismissal stage. Only in rare cases will an act of incapability justify immediate dismissal without warning.

What can I do if I disagree with the action taken?

You have the right to appeal any disciplinary decision, in line with the Carole Nash Disciplinary Policy and Procedure.

Right to be accompanied
You have the right to be accompanied by a work colleague at any formal hearings in relation to poor performance.