FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER / 013,
Version: 32
Date: mous
Document Title: SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS.
Document Type: SERVICE REVIEW - APRIL 2000
Abstract: This document contains a summary of the Monthly Service Performance Statistics for the Period
¥* to 31 March 2000
Status: Definitive
Distribution: Service Management Review Forum
ICL Pathway Management Team
ICL Pathway Customer Service Management Team
Richard Brunskill
Dave Fletcher
Peter Robinson
ICL Pathway Library
Author: Jez Murray, Information Analyst, Customer Service
Approval Authority: Stephen Muchow, Director Customer Service
Signature: Date: 07.04.00
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 1 of 31
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
CONTENTS
o DOCUMENT CONTROL...
on DOCUMENT HISTORY
0.2 ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS
0.3 ABBREVIATIONS...
0.4 GLOSSARY...
0.5 CHANGES IN THIS VERSION
1, INTRODUCTION..
Pay APPROACH ..
1.2 INTERPRETATION
13 REVIEW BOOK CONSTRUCTION...
2 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY...
3 HORIZON VOLUMETRICS...
3a OPERATIONAL OUTLET & COUNTER VOLUMES...
3.2 HORIZON SYSTEM HELPDESK ~ LOGGED CALL VOLUMES
3:3 HORIZON SYSTEM HELPDESK - LOGGED CALL PROFILES.
4 SERVICE PERFORMANCE STATUS...
41 HELPDESK SERVICES ...
4.2 SYSTEM SERVICE...
43 DATA SERVICES...
4.4 TRANSACTION SERVICES.
4.5 TRAINING SERVICES...
4.6 IMPLEMENTATION & ROLL OUT....
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 2 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
4.7 LFS SERVICES (WITH EFFECT FROM CSR+)..
4.8 I BUSINESS INCIDENT MANAGEMENT.....
4.9 SUPPORTING COMMENTS...
5 CUSTOMER SERVICE OPERATIONS REPORT....
5.1. CROSS DOMAIN PROBLEMS - OPEN CALLS / WORK IN PROGRESS...
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 3 of 31
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/PER/ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
o DOCUMENT CONTROL
0.1 DOCUMENT HISTORY
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
{Commented [MSOffice1]: Service Level Agreement
Version Date Reason
om 16.07.97 Tnitial Draft with limited circulation & issue for review
2 27.08.97 Draft for first Service Review and evaluation within the Service Management Review Forum
03 16.09.9 Amended by Service Review Forum (August) input.
ong 10.10.97 Amended by Service Review Forum (September) input.
05, 1AL.9; ‘Amended to reflect SLA[ profiles arising from Rel 1C implementation
06 17.12.97 Minor changes with introduction of Release 1C reports.
o7 19.01.98 BPS MIS Reports included
o8 13.02.98 BPS MIS Reports deleted — issued via Electronic Route.
09 3.03.08 ‘Amended by Service Review Forum (January) input. Includes new Management Report (Section 2)
10 14.04.98 ‘Amended by Service Review Forum (February) input. Includes Actual v's Predicted Volumes.
20 15.12.98, Draft restructure of NRa Service Review - Performance Statistics Book
2a 1.03.99 Restructure of NR2 Service Review - Performance Statistics Book — as accepted by Service Review Forum.
22 17.06.99 ‘Amended to reflect Horizon contract changes made on 24" May 1999.
23 12.08.99 Brought into line with Performance Measures as set out in the revised contract
24 08.09.99 Service Review Book for August performance
25 16.09.99 Revised Service Review Book for August performance
2.6 (07.10.99 Service Review Book for September performance
2. 05.11.99 Service Review Book for October performance
2.8 07.12.99) Service Review Book for November performance
29 10.01.00 Service Review Book for December performance
3.0 (07.02.00 Service Review Book for January performance
3a (07.03.00 Service Review Book for February performance
32 14.03.00 Revised Service Review Book for February performance
33 20.03.00 Revised Service Review Book for February performance
34. (07.04.00 Service Review Book for March performance
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 4 of 31
J
‘Commented [MSOffice2]: Management Information
System
‘Commented [MSOffice3]: Management Information
System
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER / 013,
23.2
Date: 07.04.00
0.2, ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS
VersionI Date Title
on 02.07.97 I Business Performance BLA Listings 4 —(Commented [MSOfficed]: Service Level Agreement )
O9 13.03.98 _I RiC Operations Report
10 01.03.99 I ICI. Pathway Customer Service Monthly Incident Review
0.3 ABBREVIATIONS
Asti Executive Information System POCL Post Office Counters Limited ‘Commented [MSOffice5]: Executive Information
HS Horizon System Helpdesk SLA Service Level Agreement __I System
Information Technology SLAM. Service Level Agreement Monitor \\_] Commented [MsOffice6]: Post Office Counters,
MIS Management Information System TBN To be Notified \ Ge
MAT Minimum Acceptable Threshold TRT Termination Review Threshold \\\ {commented {MSOffice7: Horizon System Helpdesk _}
\\ \ [Commented IMSOffices}: Service Level Agreement}
0.4 GLOSSARY
formation Technology _}
Commented [MSOffice10]: Service Level Agreement
Monitor
For ease of use the glossary of terms used in this review book are classified by the main reporting groups against which they
appear:
@ HELPDESK SERVICES
‘Commented [MSOffice11]: Management Information
System
Commented [MSOffice12]: To be Notified )
‘Commented [MSOffice13]: Minimum Acceptable
‘Threshold
POCL (Non-Serv): __All calls placed with Horizon System Helpdesk that embrace non- System Service calls (currently
equates to Advice & Guidance, Operations, Implementation, Reconciliation, Security and Other).
Advice & Guidance Calls requiring general advice.
Operations Calls diagnosed as relating to the operating environment. ‘Commented [MSOffice14]: Termination Review
Implementation Calls for site preparation and installation. Bsc
Reconciliation Calls requiring reconciliation of a particular part of the system. Commented [MSOffice15}: Post Office Counters
Security Calls relating to security breaches or for the requirement of one shot passwords. ested
Other Calls relating to PO closures, reference data changes, miscellaneous environmental issues and failed
verification calls.
[POCL (Serv): All calls placed with Horizon System Helpdesk that embrace System Service calls (currently equates _—{ Commented [MSOffice16}: Post Office Counters
to Hardware, Network and Software). Limited
H/W: Calls diagnosed as relating to a system hardware fault.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 5 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Refi CS/PER/ 013,
Version: 3.2
NW: Calls diagnosed as relating to a system network fault,
s/w: Calls diagnosed as relating to a system or application software fault.
@ CALL TO RESOLUTION
‘A’ Priority: Logged calls that reflect a fault which has ‘resulted in substantial impact on all automated counter
positions in the outlet’,
‘B’ Priority: Logged calls that reflect a fault which has ‘resulted in substantial impact on an automated counter
position, but not all automated counter positions in the outlet’.
0.5 CHANGES IN THIS VERSION
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 6 of 31
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
1 INTRODUCTION
11 APPROACH
This document contains those reports and information necessary for the Service Management Forum to review delivery of the
contract by ICL Pathway.
The issue of this document is now definitive and is to be used commencing March 1999.
1.2 INTERPRETATION
Data interpretation, beyond report label classification, can be further qualified by use of the Service Review Guide.
1.3 REVIEW BOOK CONSTRUCTION
This book is sectioned by key areas against which Service Management Reviews are to be conducted. Where necessary
supplementary information will be provided to support the service performance status reports.
@ Management Summary
@ = Horizon Volumetrics
@ = Service Performance Status Report
© Customer Service Operations Report
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 7 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
2 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
Programme Status Live Outlets Operational Counters
Comments
In order to comply with the requirement to issue the first version of the SRB by 5"" working day of the
month, the ‘up to date’ figures for TPS, APS and OBCS file delivery cannot be obtained for the previous
month. This is due to Data Warehouse processing cycles and the effects of late polling. This subsequent
version contains updated TPS, OBCS and APS file delivery performance measures, which now reflect the
true position at the end of March.
2. Engaged call statistics have now been received from BT and included.
3._A detailed explanation and action plan for all SLA failures is included within section 4.9.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 8 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
3 HORIZON VOLUMETRICS
34 Operational Outlet & Counter Volumes 10
3.2. Horizon System Helpdesk - Call Volumes n
3.3. Horizon System Helpdesk - Service Call Profiles 2
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 9 of 31
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
Refi CS/PER/ or
Versios
Date:
32
07.04.00.
3.1 OPERATIONAL OUTLET & COUNTER VOLUMES
EEE Actual Live Outlets
mE Actual Live Counters
-- Forecast Live Counters
Juk99 Aug-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 Nov-99 Deo-99 Jk
00 Feb-00 Mar-00 Apr-00 May-00 Jun-00 Ju-00
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 10 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
Ref:
€S/PER/ or,
Version: 3.2
Date:
3.2, HORIZON SYSTEM HELPDESK - LOGGED CALL VOLUMES
30000
TOTAL CUSTOMER]
CALLS (February)
00) 13897
Apr-99 May-99 Jun-99
Jul99 Aug-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 Nov-99 Dec-99 Jan-00 Feb-00 Mar-00
fem Service
lem Non-Service
I—a— Total Cusomer Calis
20000 I» Live Outlets
I—x— Calis per Outlet
15000
‘10000
Apr-99 I May-99 I Jun-99 I Jur-99 [ Aug-99 [ Sep-99 [ Oct-99 I Nov-99 I Dec-99 I Jan-00 I Feb-00 I Mar-00
Service 547 1347 1592 1609 1219 1422 I 2352 I 2064 I 2046 I 2425 I 3131 5901
Non-Service 697, 1743 1446 928 1158 I 3680 I 10477 I 9567 5510 I 4592 I 10766 I 17954
Total CusomerCallsI_ 1444 I 3090 3038_I 2537_I 2377_I 5102 I 12829 I 12231 I 7556 I 7017 I 13897 I 23855
Live Outlets 202 299 299 323 321 749 1596 1859 1858 I 2000 I 3136 I 4566
Calis per Outlet 71 10.3 10.2 79 74 68 80 66 44 35 44 52
© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 11 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
Ref:
€S/PER/ 013,
Version: 3.2
Date:
04.00
3.3. HORIZON SYSTEM HELPDESK - LOGGED CALL PROFILES
+2000
11000
‘0000 Softw are
8000 B Hardware
8000 1B Netw ork
BAaG
2 7000
2 1 Operations
$6000 1B inplerentation
5000 1D Reconciliation
.
_ Security
Other
3000
2000
1000 +
°
May-99 Jun-99 Juk@9_Aug-99 Sep-99 Oct-99 Nov-99 Dee-99 Jan-00Feb-00 —Mar-00
Month
Way99 [ Jun-09 I Ju-99 [ Aug99 [ Sep99 [ Oct-99 I Novo9 [ Deo89 I Jan-00 [ Feb-00 [ Mar00
Sowers] —833_I 1164 I 1477 I 106s I 1198 I 1849 I 1851 I 1509 I 2022 I 2438 I 4495
Hardware I 430 375 110 124 195 I aa7_I 60a I 463 I 358 I 629 I 1280
Network 84 53 2 40 29 72 89 74 45 64 126
A&G 3e_I_97a_I sor aei_I 1996 I 7193 I 7095 I 4009 I soa I 6196 I 10968
Operations [494 202 via_I_330_I 699 I ‘16 I avo I 425 I 545 I 2302 I 3577
Implementation] 73 5 7 52 8 2 30 12 17 128 128
Reconciliation I 57 37 28 2 47 65 19 6 7 34 24
Security 0 0 12 30 1 44 45 26 65 85 135
Other 301 223 ver_I 29 I 919 I srr I 1908 I 1012 I 94 I 2025 I 9126
Total calls I 3090 I 3038 I 2537 I 2399 I 5102 I 12020 I 12251 I rss6 I vow I 10807 I 23055
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 12 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
4 SERVICE PERFORMANCE STATUS
4a Helpdesk Services 14
4.2 System Service 15
4.3 Data Services 16
4.4 Transaction Services 7
4.5 Training Services 18
4.6 Implementation & Roll Out 19
4.7 _ LFS Services (with effect from CSR+) 20
4.8 Business Incident Management 21
4.9 Supporting Comments 22
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 13 of 31
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS I Ref: CS/ PER / 013,
Dates ep
4.1 HELPDESK SERVICES
HELPDESK SERVICES MAT I TRT Comment
Aproo I May [Tan 8] Jugs [ Avg. 98 [Sep 99] 0698 I Nov99 [Dec89 I Jan 00 [Fab 00] Mar00
Horizon Helpdesk
COTTE RETIRE alls answored within 20s 80% I WA
a eS I calls answered within 40s eo.o% I wa [see Seaton a9
aie sleshenitonatiring wee I He [esoGeaen as
RRR es Ro ome I 1m froosecionse
ee Ree ee ee vn I 1m foo sesionse
[NRT cals ested itn 10min wor I wa
[2 T1221 coved wn ms osx I nin
ap eo I 8) 8 rr cas ° oa: I Level 2 Calls resolved within 45 mins 100% N/A [See Section 4.9
I LL Lt I I I FONIEDII Cash Account: second line availabilty for call answering 95% I NA
I LoL a I T I FORTE Cash Account: second line callback <= 20 minutes 100% I NA
I LL Lot I I I LI I_cash Account: cal scripts correctly followed by HSH 95% I WA IPoct to supply
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 14 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER / 013,
Version: 3.2
Date: _ 07.04.00
.2 SYSTEM SERVICE
‘SYSTEM SERVICE maT I RT ‘Comment
Aproa] May 95 [Jun-GB] Jars I Aug-98 [Sep-99] Oct 9 I Nov-o9 I Dec-G9 I Jan-00 [Feb-O0] Mar-00
Gall fo Resolution (Local)
HardwarelNetwork Priory A - 4 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA [See Section 4.9
HardwareINetwork Prionty B - 8 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA ISee Section 4.9
Hardware/Network Priority A - 6 hours Remedial 100% I NA ISee Section 4.9
Hardware/Network Priorty 8 - 10 hours Remedial 100% I WA ISee Section 4.9
Call to Resolution (Intermediate)
I [AINA AR NAR NAD ENADNAD [ENA [ENA RNAI) Hardware/Network Priority A - 6 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA
[ [RA INAD NAD NAD NATIONAL NAD [ENA [ENAD[ONAT] HardwareiNetwork Priority B - 10 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA
I [NAD INATNAD NAT ENAT NAD ENADIONATIENAR[ONAT) Hardware/Network Priority A - 9 hours Remedial 100% I WA
I [LNAUINATINATINATENAD [NAT ENATIENATIENAT[ENAT) Hardware/Network Priorty B - 15 hours Remedial 100% I WA
Call to Resolution (Remote)
i [NANA NA [NA I NA NA I NA] NA HardwarelNetwork Priority A - 8 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA
I [NANA NA [NA] NA NA] NA] NA HardwarelNetwork Priory B - 12 hours Non-Remedial 95% I NA ISee Section 4.9
I [NANA LNA] NA] NA] NA] NA] NA HardwarelNetwork Remote Prionty A - 12 hours Remedial 100% I WA
I LNA_LNA I NA [NA I NA] NA I NA I NA Hardware/Network Remote Priority B - 24 hours Remedial 100% I NIA
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 15 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS I Ref: CS/ PER / 013,
Version: 3.2
Date: _ 07.04.00
4.3. DATA SERVICES
DATA SERVICES maT I RT ‘Comment
AprOG] May-G9 [sun-9] Jaro I Aug 99 [Sep-99] Oct-99 I Nov99 [ Dee99 I Jan-00 [Feb00] Maro
ROMC Reference Data
— 98.72 99.14) 99.13 99.30 99.46 99.26 MeN) 97% I NA
a
— 99.4 699.5 99.7 99.79 99.62 Mee Net nes 99% I NA
— 99.6 99.8) Data Delivery - Day D 100% I NIA ISee Section 4.9
APS Reference Data
— 98.0 99.3, 100.0 99.6 99.41 99.38 MeO} 97% I NA
— 99.8 99.3) 100.0 99.9 99.51 99.71 Meee 99% I WA
— 100.0 100.0 99.9 Data Delivery - Day D 100% I WA ISee Section 4.9
APS Data
Ld 99.1 97.0 985 98.94 98.86 MEE) 97% I WA
— 986 99.1) 996 99.3 99.64 99.52 MORO 9% I WA
— 99.5 File Delivery - Day D 100% I 98% ISee Section 4.9
‘TPS data
— TTI «File Delivery - Day 8 97% I NA
— TITY File Delivery -Day 99% I NA
i 99.9 99.9) 100.0 99.9 99.98 File Delivery - Day D 100% I 98% ISee Section 4.9
BCS Data
— 99.8 100.0) 99.9 99.8 99.87 99.83 MMee nae aeer ny 97% I NA
— 99.9 100.0) 99.9 99.9 99.95 99.90 Meee ne RCet ee 99% I NWA
— 99.9 100.0) 100.0 99.9 99.96 ‘OBCS Stop List - Day D 100% I 98% [See Section 4.9
— 96.7 98.6) 98.8 97.60) File Delivery - Day B 97% I NA ISee Section 4.9
— 989 99.6) 99.7 99.49 99.70 99.64 MN 99% I NA
— 99.8) File Delivery - Day D 100% I 98% ISee Section 4.9
© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 16 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Led ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Refi €5/PER/ox
Version: 3.2
Date: _ 07.04.00
4.4 TRANSACTION SERVICES
TRANSACTION SERVICES MAT I TRT Comment
Apr9a] May 95 [Jun-S8] Jur [Aug-99 [Sep-98] Oct 5 I Nov-58 I Dec-99 I Jan00 [Feb-O0] Mar-00
‘OBCS
I LLL LI I I I Lot Issues (local) 39.00 I 39.50
I LLL LI I I I Lot Issues (foreign) 4250 I 43.00
I LL L_I I I I LI Encashment (local) 2604 I 27.44
i L_L_I Ll I I I L_l Encashment (foreign) 28.10 I 28.60
APS
i L_L_I L_l I I I L_l Cash Payments - No tokens handed back to customer 19.96 I 20.46
I L_L_I L_l I I I L_l Cash Payments - Tokens handed back to customer 21s2 I 22.02
I LLL Lo I I I Ll Gash Payments - Using Smart Card or Key 26.56 I 27.06
EPOSS
I LL LT I i I L_I EPOSS 30.00 I 30.50
© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 17 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/PER/ 03
Dates ep
4.5 TRAINING SERVICES
TRAINING SERVICES mat I TRT ‘Comment
‘Apr99 I May-99 [Jun-99] JurS9 I Aug-99 [Sep-99] Oct-99 I Nov-98 I Dec-59 I Jan-00 [Feb-00] Mar-00
100.0) 100.0 Training Course Availabilty 100% I NA
Training Venue Quality 35% I NA
Training Course Quality 95% I NA
Training Course Cancellation 98% I NA
Training Course Competence Levels 95% I NA
Training Course Timeliness Live Delivery 100% I NA ISee Section 4.9
© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE, Page 18 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS: Ref: CS/ PER / 013
Version: 32
.6 IMPLEMENTATION & ROLL OUT
IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES war I TRT I Comment
Aproa] May 95 [Jun-GB] Jars I Aug-98 [Sep-99] Oct 9 I Nov-o9 I Dec-G9 I Jan-00 [Feb-O0] Mar-00
me Ste Survey - Quality Compliance a5% I NIA }se0 Section 49
I__I __) a ‘ts Modioaton- Guelty Compliance mm I NA
a Site Modiiation - Repairs Completeness sem I WA
a a Site instalation - Quaity Compliance asm I WA
a I Ste instalation - Repairs Timeliness se% I WA
© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 19 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER / 013
4.7. LFS SERVICES (WITH EFFECT FROM CSR+)
ILF Service (CSR¥) MAT I TRT ‘Comment
AprOG] May-G9 [sun-9] Jaro I Aug 99 [Sep-99] Oct-99 I Nov99 [ Dee99 I Jan-00 [Feb00] Maro
Outlet to SAPADS Data Transfer
[ [ I I I [ I I I [ I Confirmation of Pouch Received at Outlet - Day A 98% I NIA
i [ I I I [ I [ I [ I Confirmation of Pouch Received at Outlet - Day B 100% I 98%
I LTT LI I I I L_I Details of SAPADS Pouch Collected from Outlet - Day A 90% I WA
I LTT LI I I I L_l Details of SAPADS Pouch Collected from Outlet - Day B 100% I 98%
[ [ i I [ [ I [ I [ [ Daily Cash on Hand Details - Day A 98% I 95%
[ I I il [ I [ I [ I Weekly Stamps / Stock on Hand Details - 22:00 on Day C 98% I NIA
I es I I Lo Weekly Stamps / Stock on Hand Details -23:59 on Day I 100% I 98%
I I I I I I I l I [ [ Weekly Inventory Items Details - 22:00 on Day C 98% I NA
[ I I I [ I I I [ I Weekly Inventory Items Details - 23:59 on Day C 100% I 98%
SAPADS to Outlets Data Transfer
I I ] I I I I l I [ [ Delivery of SAPADS Planned Orders to Outlets - Day A 96% I NA
I ee a I ee a Delivery of SAPADS Planned Orders to Outlets - Day 8 100% I 96%
I I I I I I I I [ [ Delivery of SAPADS Advice Notes to Outlets - 08:00 on DayC I 98.5% I NIA
I [ I I I I I l I [ [ Delivery of SAPADS Advice Notes to Outlets - 12:00 0nDayC I N/A I 96%
© ICL Pathway Lid ‘COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 20 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Refi €5/PER/ox
Dates e040
4.8 BUSINESS INCIDENT MANAGEMENT
[Business Incident Management maT I RT ‘Comment
AprOO] May-99 [sun-99] Juro [Aug 99 [Sep-99] Oct99 [ Nov99 [ Dee99 I Jan-00 [FabO0] Waro0
I I I I I I I I I [SEATS ncidents resoved <= 5 days of receipt 100% I NA ISee Section 4.9
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 21 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/PER/ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
4.9 SUPPORTING COMMENTS
Performance Measure
41 I HSHD - Calls answered within 4o seconds
HSHD - Calls abandoned through ring off
HSHD - Calls engaged
Comments
Performance Summary
88.4% of calls were answered within 4o seconds.
92.2% of calls were abandoned through ring-off.
95.5% of calls were engaged.
Cause and Action
Whilst there has been improvement in performance with
regard to ‘Calls abandoned through ring-off and ‘Calls
engaged’, ‘Calls answered within 40 seconds’ has seen a dip.
This aligned with a gradual reduction in performance against
‘Calls answered within 20 seconds’ has prompted ICL
Pathway to review the detail of the manpower model for the
HSH. This review is currently ongoing. In the meantime extra
resource is being drafted in to ensure continued conformance
for ‘Calls answered with 20 seconds’ and improved
performance for the other service levels.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 22 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
Performance Summary
41 HSHD - Level 1 calls resolved within 5 minutes
HSHD - Level 2 calls resolved within 45 minutes
87.7% of Level 1 calls were resolved within 5 minutes.
98.1% of Level 2 calls were resolved within 45 minutes.
Cause and Action
New outlets are being added to the live estate at 300+ per
week and our initial analysis of the call text would suggest in
many cases that a number of calls are taking longer to resolve
due to Clerk / PM unfamiliarity with the system.
It is worth noting however that during March the average
duration of Li & L2 calls was:
Li=3 mins. 54 seconds
L2 = mins. 30 seconds
We are currently embarking on a detailed analysis of all Li &
L2 calls taking each weeks newly rolled out offices over a
defined period, (thought initially to be 12 weeks), to identify
the average call duration falling over the 12 week period. This
will give comfort in the knowledge that once the roll out
programme has been completed, call duration will fall to an
acceptable level against all outlets.
In the meantime, we are ensuring all HSH TSA’s are aware of
the need to resolve A&G calls quickly and effectively without
compromising customer service.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 23 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
232
04.00
42
Local
Hardware / Network Priority A - 4hrs Non-
Remedial
Hardware / Network Priority A - 6hrs Remedial
Hardware / Network Priority B - 8hrs Non-
Remedial
Hardware / Network Priority B - 1ohrs Remedial
Remote
Hardware/Network Priority B - 12 hours Non-
Remedial
Performance Summary
Local
64.3% of priority A Hardware / Network calls were resolved
within 4 hours, and 92.9% were resolved within 6 hours,
81.3% of priority B calls were resolved within 8 hours and
88.4% of calls were resolved within 10 hours.
Remote
70% of Priority B calls were resolved in 12 hours
Cause and Action
A number of actions have been taken in the last three weeks
to attempt to define the root cause of our being unable to
meet these SLA’s and to improve the processes surrounding
call resolution.
Unfortunately over the last few months there have been a
number of software issues, which have manifested
themselves as hardware failure, especially true with regard to
screens and printers. This has caused the HSH 1 and 2"! line
to become over cautious and therefore to review all hardware
call symptoms against the ‘Known Error Log’ (KEL) before
passing the call to Field Engineering, thus creating an
unacceptable delay.
In order to resolve this issue a number of actions have been
taken:
1. The HSH 2™ line has been tasked to allocate dedicated
resource to handle all hardware calls and thus speed up
the process of diagnosis.
2. Field Service themselves have been reviewing calls in the
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 24 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/PER/ox
232
04.00
43 I Data Services - RDMC Reference Data Delivery by
Day D
2 Jine ‘call stack’ and taking calls directly from the stack
if, in their opinion, a site visit is thought appropriate.
3. With the experience currently obtained within the field
we are attempting to produce an easy guide for each
hardware product. This should allow the 1* line to readily
identify hardware calls and therefore allocate them direct
to Field Service without the need for all calls to be
reviewed by 2" line.
4. We have now convened a weekly ‘Field Service / HSH
Forum’ to discuss and review process failures where
actions are placed to resolve the issues.
We have now taken on dedicated resource to further
diagnose the route cause of each failure, by analysing each
call in detail. This will define the process changes that are
required or further enforcement of the process flow.
Performance Summary
99.71% of RDMC Reference Data was delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Calculation of this SLA is based upon the delivery of ‘Core’
reference data to all outlets on a daily basis, The ‘Non Polled’
outlet report is used to identify when an outlet has failed to
return an ‘End of Day’ (EOD) marker to the Data Centre. If
this is the case, the outlet is assumed to have not received a
delivery of reference data. This method of calculation weighs
heavily in the direction of POCL as we cannot determine
whether or not the outlet has received this data prior to any
communication problem preventing an EOD, the assumption
therefore is that it has not.
CSR+ sees this SLA being calculated automatically to counter
level.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 25 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
43
Data Services - APS Reference Data Delivery by
Day D
Performance Summary
99.78% of APS Reference Data was delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Calculation of this SLA is based upon the delivery of APS
reference data to all outlets ONE day per month. The ‘Non.
Polled’ outlet report is used to identify when an outlet has
failed to return an ‘End of Day’ (EOD) marker to the Data
Centre. If this is the case, the outlet is assumed to have not
received a delivery of APS reference data. This method of
calculation weighs heavily in the direction of POCL as we
cannot determine whether or not the outlet has received this
data prior to any communication problem preventing an
EOD, the assumption therefore is that it has not.
CSR+ sees this SLA being calculated automatically to counter
level.
43
Data Services - APS File Delivery by Day D
Performance Summary
99.68% of APS transaction files were delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Failure of this SLA is entirely attributable to ‘Non Polling’.
We are now working closely with POCL with the aim of:
1. Driving down the instances of non polling due to comms
failures.
2. Driving down the instances of non polling due to counter
switch off at the outlet
3. Mitigating the risk to POCL clients / customers in the
event of APS transactions failing to poll by reviewing the
escalation process and documentation retrieval from the
outlet.
N.B. APS transactions that have been delivered to HAPS after
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 26 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Refi €5/PER/ox
Version: 3.2
Dates o7.04.00
day D, are identified on the ‘Polling Exception’ report.
Performance Summary
43 _I Data Services - TPS File Delivery by Day D 99.96% of TPS transaction files were delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Failure of this SLA is entirely attributable to ‘Non Polling’.
We are now working closely with POCL with the aim of:
1. Driving down the instances of non-polling due to comms
failures.
2. Driving down the instances of non polling due to counter
switch off at the outlet.
Performance Summary
43 Data Services - OBCS Stops List by Day D 99.92% of OBCS Stops List files were delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Calculation of this SLA is based upon the delivery of OBCS
stop list data to specific outlets on a daily basis. The ‘Non
Polled’ outlet report is used to identify when an outlet has
failed to return an ‘End of Day’ (EOD) marker to the Data
Centre. If this is the case, the outlet is assumed to have not
received a delivery of OBCS stop list data. This method of
calculation weighs heavily in the direction of POCL as we
cannot determine whether or not the outlet has received this
data prior to any communication problem preventing an
EOD, the assumption therefore is that it has not.
CSR+ sees this SLA being calculated automatically to counter
level.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 27 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
43
Data Services - OBCS File Delivery by Day B
Data Services - OBCS File Delivery by Day D
Performance Summary
94.28% of OBCS transaction files were delivered by Day B.
99.79% of OBCS transaction files were delivered by Day D.
Cause and Action
Failure of the Day B SLA can be attributed to the non delivery
of data to BA for transactions completed on 9"" March.
This failure was due to the BA data centre at Washington
being closed for 36 hours over the period, therefore no data
files were accepted.
Failure of the Day D SLA is entirely attributable to ‘Non
Polling’
We are now working closely with POCL with the aim of:
1. Driving down the instances of non polling due to comms
failures.
2. Driving down the instances of non polling due to counter
switch off at the outlet.
44
Transaction Services (OBCS, APS and EPOSS)
Performance Summary
The method of calculating performance against these SLAs is
currently being reviewed between ICL Pathway and POCL
Commercial.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 28 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/ PER /ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
45
4.6
Training Services - Training Course Timeliness
Live Delivery
Implementation Services
Performa: Summary
99.6% of training courses were delivered in the required time
(ie. within five days of the Horizon system being in Live
operation in the Outlet).
Cause and Action
This failure was caused by ‘Knowledge Pool’ cancelling 1
course in this month. This was due the power at the hotel
being cut off following a road accident. The delegates were
re-scheduled on different courses.
Approximately 20 staff were given training prior to the
contractual training window. All these cases were agreed
with the delegate (and many were at the delegate’s request).
Authorisation for 5 of these was sought from ICL Pathway
and POCL. Control of this has been tightened up, and we
expect this figure to drop.
This situation will be resolved by next month.
Performance Summary
The data required for the calculation of these SLA’s is
currently unavailable from both POCL, for the ‘Quality’
derived measures and from ICL Pathway for the ‘Repair’
measures. The provision of this data has now been escalated
as a high priority task within ICL Pathway and we expect to
have some initial figures for discussion at the May 2000 SRF
in respect of April 2000 performance.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 29 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd ‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS Ref: CS/PER/ox
Version: 3.2
Date: 07.04.00
4.8 I Business Incident Management
Performance Summary
97.9% of business incidents were cleared within 5 working
days of receipt. (The definitions of ‘cleared’ being that
sufficient detail was supplied to POCL to allow reconciliation
or client settlement to take place).
Three Business Incidents did not achieve this SLA:
1. Ref: 0003201015: Receipts and Payments (post migration).
This was a new problem that took some time to resolve as
each individual line of the Cash Account required
checking to the message store. A revised Cash Account
was produced and sent to POCL TIP.
2. Ref: 0003130820: A transaction contained an invalid
transaction mode. Reference data checks against all
transaction modes took some time to complete with the
resulting resolution occurring 1 day outside the SLA.
3. Ref: 00033130910: This was a Customer / Client enquiry.
This case took a while to resolve as there was some
dispute with the PM as to whether a reversal had taken
place. The PM initially denied this to be the case,
necessitating a full check of the message store, however
our investigations subsequently proved otherwise. The
incident was finally cleared one day outside the SLA.
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE Page 30 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223
ICL Pathway Ltd
‘SERVICE REVIEW - PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
Ref:
€S/PER/ 013,
Version: 3.2
Date:
04.00
5 CUSTOMER SERVICE OPERATIONS REPORT
5.1 CROSS DOMAIN PROBLEMS - OPEN CALLS / WORK IN PROGRESS
PinICL Date Problem Management Last Next Status Problem
Number I Raised _I Calls - Description Update I Update Manager
PCooi9130 I 03/12/98 I PM - PO unable to read 10/02 I 31/03 I Monitor I Audrey
shiny Barcodes Adams
PC0026385 I 03/06/99 I PM-NBSC-HSH Interface I 14/01 I 31/01 I Monitor I Dave
and Responsibilities Fletcher
PCo027145 I 24/06/99 I PM - Outlets not polling (03/03 I 17/03 I Monitor I Richard
information Brunskill
PCo030464 I 30/09 BCM - Major Business 03/03 I 20/03 I WIP Tony
Continuity Incident Wicks
PCo0032761 I o4/n PM - Operational Integrity In/o2 I18/o2 I WIP Deidre
Violation Connis
PC0033128 ‘I 10/11 PM - Dugannon PO £43k 18/02 I 23/02 I WIP Paul
discrepancy Curley
PCoogo4is I 13/03 Belfast PO experiencing high I 24/03 I 07/04 I WIP Alison
volumes of calls Peacock
‘© ICL Pathway Ltd
COMMERCIAL-IN-CONFIDENCE
Page 31 of 31
FUJ00058223
FUJ00058223