FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fe)
FUJITSU
Fujitsu Services
Customer Satisfaction Interview
Programme — 2008
Report of an interview
conducted independently with:
Mike Davies, Project Light Programme Manager
Royal Mail Group
35-50 Rathbone Place
London WIT 1HQ
interview Date
29" May 2008
Prepared by:
INTERNATIONAL
Angel Corner House
1 Islington High Street
London N1 9AH
if you have any questions concerning this report, please do
not hesitate to contact:
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
Contents
1. Introduction
Research Methodology.
Report Structure ....
Management Summary ...
Scores Overview
Executive Summary/Key themes
Customer Relationship Requirements..
Company Background...
Questions & Scores ....
Detailed Summary.
Improvements in the last 12 months .
Areas of Excellence or Strengths ...
Areas for Improvement or Customer Concern.........
Disappointments in the last 12 months ....
Customer Expectations for the next 12 months
Customer Perceptions of Fujitsu Services
Ip
Iv
I>
a
Strictly Confidential
Page 2 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
1. INTRODUCTION
Research Methodology
The report is based on a face-to-face discussion with Mike Davies conducted on behalf of Fujitsu
Services by Doug Komiliades, an Associate Research Consultant retained by ORC International.
The interview lasted seventy-five minutes and was digitally recorded with the respondents’
consent.
Fujitsu Services would like to thank Mr Davies for affording us his time and for the insights he
has provided.
Report Structure
This report provides a detailed summary of key discussion points from the interview
incorporating the respondents’ evaluation of Fujitsu Services’ performance in a number of
specific service areas and perceptions of the business relationship as a whole.
The document includes a number of satisfaction ratings for key service attributes and a summary
of specific customer requirements, which will form the basis of an action plan to be formulated
by the Fujitsu Services’ Account Manager and the client in the thirty days that follow the
publication of this report.
Strictly Confidential
Page 3 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
2. MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
Scores Overview
Old style - 2 Never Don't
5 5 5 1 6 5 (1-2) know
New style - 7
1. Totally Dissatisfied 6. Slightly Satisfied
2. Extremely Dissatisfied 7. Satisfied
3. Very Dissatisfied 8 Very Satisfied
4. Dissatisfied 9. Extremely Satisfied
5. Slightly Dissatisfied 10. Delighted
Executive Summary/Key themes
This CSIP review is based on the RMG Programme Manager for Project Light, Mike Davies’,
perspective of Fujitsu Services’ performance in delivering a digital media network and the early
stages of providing on-going services for it. The project was hurried in conception and let under
unrealistic timescales, admittedly, but Fujitsu’s initial delivery efforts were a failure and the
project required an extended period of red alert and a large investment by Fujitsu to achieve
completion. The performance rating scores given necessarily reflect the poor customer
experience during this period.
Mr Davies admires the hard work and commitment of the operational teams within Fujitsu
Services but is critical of how internal relationships, including those with other third party
suppliers, are managed.
The main improvement areas cited by Mr Davies are around control and governance, project
planning and problem resolution reporting.
He also felt disappointment with Fujitsu Services, however, in terms of the lack of added value
provided, lack of honesty often demonstrated and petty squabbles and poor internal
communication within Fujitsu.
Following changes to the management of the account, the client is optimistic about performance
improving, once some outstanding service-related and commercial issues are resolved.
Given the opportunity, Mr Davies would raise the issue of improving service with the CEO of
Fujitsu Services. This involves fixing all the non working screens that are not switched off as a
Strictly Confidential
Page 4 of 16
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
RMG
priority. He believes that Fujitsu is not properly analysing the data it collects because the service
delivery team is so small.
Mr Davies would also like Fujitsu Services to ‘drive the need’ in helping RMG gain the most
benefit from the assets it has invested in. Without such efforts and drive from Fujitsu, he fears
that the technology and the on-going business that might be associated with it may be at risk
from gaining future support when renewal is under consideration.
Customer Relationship Requirements
Rank Customer Requirement
1 Improve monitoring and fixing of non-working screens
2 Get more directly involved with helping the business to drive the
usage of the digital media network — build a vision from their
experience digital media and create the need
Strictly Confidential
Page 5 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
3. COMPANY BACKGROUND
Royal Mail Group (RMG) Ltd is the parent company of three large businesses:
e Royal Mail, the UK-wide letters and package delivery business.
e Post Office Ltd is a separate company within and part of the Royal Mail Group that runs
14,300 Post Office® branches across the country. This is the largest retail and financial
services chain in the UK - bigger than all of the UK’s banks and building societies put
together.
e Parcelforce Worldwide, the express parcels business.
The services provided by Fujitsu Services of relevance in this CSIP interview concern digital
media, specifically the provision of hardware, network and support of digital media displays for
2,500 screens in RMG back office locations. The digital media network provides information to
RMG staff and Fujitsu Services provides the processing and delivery of content to the Royal
Mail estate.
This review does not cover Fujitsu Services performance in the provision of other IT services to
RMG businesses.
Mike Davies was RMG’s Programme Manager for Project Light, which entailed the installation
and rollout of the digital media network and commenced in September 2006. Due to go live in
February 2007, rollout was eventually completed in August 2007. He now works as a Project
Manager in RMG’s IT function, reporting to the PMO for projects but without a line manager as
such.
Strictly Confidential
Page 6 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
4. QUESTIONS & SCORES
o Overall how satisfied are you with the performance of Fujitsu Services during the past 12 months?
Slightly Dissatisfied (5)
© How satisfied are you on the extent to which Fujitsu Services Understands your Business?
Slightly Dissatisfied (5)
o How satisfied were you with Fujitsu Services’ performance in terms of Project Management?
Totally Dissatisfied (1)
© How satisfied are you with the overall quality of the day to day Service provided by Fujitsu Services?
Slightly Dissatisfied (5)
© How satisfied are you with Fujitsu Services in terms of how well they manage their Relationship
with you?
Old style of management — Extremely Dissatisfied (2), New style — Satisfied (7)
o Value can mean end to end business value, or perceived financial value ~ we would like you to
answer this question however it best applies to your relationship. Overall, how satisfied are you with
the Value Fujitsu Services provides to your business? Slightly satisfied (6)
co Innovation is the successful introduction of new ideas. How satisfied are you with the extent to
which Fujitsu Services provides innovation that adds value to your _ business’?
Slightly Dissatisfied (5)
o The likelihood that you would provide a Reference for Fujitsu Services today would be?
Never (1-2)
0 The likelihood that you would Renew your business with Fujitsu Services is? Don’t know
Strictly Confidential
Page 7 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
5. DETAILED SUMMARY
Progress in the last 12 months
Mr Davies has been totally dissatisfied with Fujitsu Services’ delivery of Project Light and, as
that has been his total exposure to Fujitsu Services’ work for RMG, this is also reflected in his
scores for each of the rated attributes.
The project was turned around eventually, after very high level escalation and a long period on
Red Alert and considerable further investment by Fujitsu Services.
Whilst he has been disappointed with Fujitsu Services’ performance in this engagement he has
been impressed by the determination and commitment of the people working on the account to
succeed and the very hard work that Fujitsu people have put in. There are also some specific
‘wins’ to report at the end of this section of the report.
However, Mr Davies’ critique is largely based on the poor programme and account management
experienced at the outset of the project and the length of time and effort required to put things
right. His comments supporting each of his rating scores are insightful and now follow.
Understanding requirements A\though delivery of the project didn’t really demand that Fujitsu
Services had a detailed understanding of RMG’s business, Mr Davies expected more in terms of
coaching his business about getting the best out of the technology.
“The project is all about communications screens and using communications as a media. I know
the Royal Mail didn’t have a great picture of what they wanted to do. But I don’t think that
Fujitsu offered a great deal either, in terms of driving our need and creating our need and
helping us deliver that ... they weren't driving the need.”
Mr Davies explained that RMG had expectations that Fujitsu Services could offer the push it
needed:
“Fujitsu were picked on the basis that they had a pedigree with Royal Mail, they were the first
class supplier with Royal Mail the previous year. And they had a professional services delivery
around digital media networks. It wasn’t within the scope of the project but it would certainly
have been in Fujitsu’s interest as a service organisation to push Royal Mail along ... ‘how about
doing this’ as opposed to try and deliver what we asked them to deliver.”
He believes that suppliers should be looking to enhance their sales and he didn’t see any sales
enhancement from Fujitsu.
He describes Fujitsu Services’ project management as “rubbish”.
Strictly Confidential
Page 8 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
Business as usual services Mr Davies admires the service delivery team much more highly than
the project delivery side but is not fully satisfied that RMG is receiving the contracted level of
service.
“T’m not convinced that Fujitsu are offering the contractual service that’s been signed up to.”
He has no proof other than seeing screens that do not work “all over the place”. He
acknowledges that some of these are switched off and that is an RMG problem but some are
“blatantly not switched off’. He says that Fujitsu Services are supposed to have tracking
mechanisms in place to identify and take corrective action for screens that are not working but
not switched off. He has not seen any evidence of that.
Relationship — This was difficult at the outset of the programme but has now improved, hence
his divided ratings between old and new style relationship management.
“Their relationship management was actually quite stressfil. Across the project and across
multiple levels within the project, relationship management was not one of the strong points.
I've never worked in a company where a director had threatened to throw people out before.
That’s a combination of attitude and poor performance in terms of delivery.”
Fujitsu was not behaving as a first class supplier would be expected to. To be fair to the new
account director, lan Terblanche, he fixed the problem. The antagonist was the previous account
manager (who has been replaced by Richard Brunskill) who tended to rub people up the wrong
way. He was moved off the account at the end of the project and the account director came in to
“paper over the cracks’ and did a good job.
Value — In relation to Project Light, he thinks this is “not great”.
“They don’t light my fire, put it that way.
Innoyation — On an ongoing basis he does not think Fujitsu have added any value. Mr Davies
set up a workshop and expected Fujitsu people to contribute and they didn’t.
Would not provide reference. Based on Project Light, Mr Davies would never provide a
reference for Fujitsu Services in relation to digital media networks or project management. He is
aware that Fujitsu Services can perform very well, eg. Project Horizon for RMG. However, he
feels on Project Light that they were given the B team. The rationale may well have been the
rapid project start and the need to use people available at the time. However, it started badly and
continued.
“Building on sand, so it never, ever got fixed. The data that they used to base assumptions and
management decisions on was actually incorrect and they were feeding me incorrect
information. It was just appalling.”
Renew_business — It is not Mr Davies’ decision on Digital Media Networks. If it was his
decision it would depend on the benefits RMG was receiving from the service. If the business
Strictly Confidential
Page 9 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
valued what it was getting, the business would renew it — he wouldn’t make the decision directly
and he would not let the past influence that decision if the business benefit was being gained
from the solution in the end. At the moment, he doesn’t know whether the business perceives it
is getting benefit from the network but his gut feeling is that it is not being used to its full
potential. This is perhaps because RMG needs to be driven; they don’t have any vision how to
make best use of it. POL is one business who are making good use of it but they have a
particularly talented communications manager “who gets great value out of the screens”. He has
his own roadmap. The other RMG divisions do not have the right people in place to drive the
technology and need Fujitsu’s help. They are not asking or paying for that help but someone has
to start something somewhere.
“It’s dying on the vine a bit in Parcelforce and maybe bits of Letters (Post Office).
Some Wins
However, Mr Davies was able to point out some examples of good work by Fujitsu Services
during the engagement:
e Fujitsu delivered well with a small project to provide content on demand. It was the best
delivery of the Project Light programme, according to Mr Davies.
“Our people loved that product. It was the best thing about Project Light.”
e An additional batch of ¢.250 screens was installed for POL, after the main project and
Fujitsu appeared to have learned from previous experiences and the rollout for this went
well.
e Fujitsu designed, and undertook a great deal of effort to get working, a solution to reduce
network bandwidth trunk lines from 250 Meg/ sec to 15 Meg/ sec. Mr Davies saw this as
something that no other supplier would have attempted to do and feels that this is
something that Fujitsu Services can legitimately promote as a win from Project Light.
Areas of Excellence or Strengths
Mr Davies admires Fujitsu’s people.
“The strength is the people and the commitment that the people had ... absolutely outstanding.
“They were great people to work with. I like the drive and enthusiasm that they have. They
were not by any means a lazy bunch of people. They were a great bunch of people to work with
but somewhere along the line they, or the project, weren’t being managed properly. I’d say the
strength was the people.”
Fujitsu’s people work hard and Mr Davies believes that it is probably one of the hardest working
teams he has ever worked with. He cannot fault their willingness to work and commitment to
win.
Strictly Confidential
Page 10 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
He feels that all the management problems he has experienced on Project Light can be relatively
easily fixed and that Fujitsu Services has a very solid base of people doing the work so there is
no reason that it could not perform better on another project.
Areas for Improvement or Customer Concern
Control and Governance
Mr Davies says that the main weakness was a lack of control from the outset. There was, for
example, a willingness to blame the tools that they put in place rather than acknowledge they
were not managing the programme well.
“The weakness was in control ... the governance around what they were doing. The lack of
thought about how they were going to do it and the lack of control from the outset. The
misinformation that they gave me.””
There was no intent to deceive, it was down to too many different people changing at different
points in the delivery — they lost control of who did what and what processes are in place. This
shows lack of governance and not ensuring that new people follow the agreed design processes.
They didn’t manage third party suppliers well. Delivery was outsourced to two other companies,
who in turn further outsourced to other companies.
“They lost control of delivery through their outsourcing environment.”
Project Planning
"T've never ... with any other company in the last twenty years (had) to escalate that I'm not
getting plans. I wasn't getting plans. They would not give me a decent project plan."
Royal Mail’s initial timeframe was unrealistic but on paper Fujitsu could do it because they had
done a similar roll-out before. On paper, the target was to install 60 per day over a two month
period, with the right number of people available. In practice, Fujitsu couldn’t do this because
they didn’t have the organisation set up properly to do it.
“If they had more time to plan it and set it up they probably could have done it.”
Mr Davies sees this as a case of the ‘commercial’ team saying they can do something without
involving ‘technical’, who would not have signed up for it. Immediately, there is a conflict of
interest within Fujitsu. But, they kept this to themselves although RMG knew what was going
on.
Having failed, delivery was extended to a more realistic timetable between January and June
2007. But it went into Red Alert in June and Fujitsu found that the commissioning process ‘4
point check’ could be used as an excuse — commissioning didn’t really mean working.
Strictly Confidential
Page 11 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
“That annoyed me and everybody else in Royal Mail big style. If you’re wrong, you're wrong ...
don't try and weasel around and say ‘that don’t mean that’. We're not dummies in Royal Mail
but that took the biscuit ... that’s just stupidity.”
This put the project into Red Alert and Fujitsu found that the screens weren’t configured
properly and the 4 point check didn’t actually prove that it was configured or working properly
at all. In reality, it was just a real mess. Mr Davies thinks it came as a surprise to the Fujitsu
project team that things were in such a mess and illustrates the amount of lack of control that had
taken place in the delivery ... it took five months for them to fix it.
But, to Fujitsu’s credit, money was provided without asking for extra from RMG to fix the
problem. Nearly every site had to be revisited.
“Massive, massive effort. Real big effort on their part. They could have turned round and said
we've failed here; we're going to give you the money back. But, then, the infrastructure was
very expensive and they could not walk away and would have said goodbye to RMG business for
the next fi
‘een years.”
Problem Resolution Reporting
The long Red Alert was a surprise to everyone. It took several weeks to find why things were
not working as they should before they could attempt to fix the problem. Reporting on Red Alert
was not good. Fujitsu tended to change the reporting. Mr Davies had daily meetings during this
period and always felt the need to challenge the reports from Fujitsu. This led to heated debates,
which led to him digging around and finding more things he didn’t like. Fujitsu tended to get
excited that he was uncovering dirt that they did not want him to see.
“T would have been much more happy if they had just been up front and said ‘we said we were
going to fix 30 screens today, we fixed 5’ instead of trying to massage the figures and make it
complicated. These guys were pretty clever people and they were intelligently trying to use
smoke and mirrors in terms of where they were with the numbering. I spent an awful lot of my
time analysing their data even to the point of asking for raw data ... I didn’t want their reporting
... I didn’t believe what they were telling me. I got to the stage where everything they told me, I
just didn’t believe it.”
Disappointments in the last 12 months
Lack of Added Value
See comments in section on expectations for the next 12 months.
Lack of honesty
RMG considered moving the MDS service in-house, where the content is published. Mr Davies
had worked up cost/ benefits and was mislead that the MDS staff were Fujitsu employees and
Strictly Confidential
Page 12 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
would need to be transferred. In fact, they were agency contract staff which would have put a
different slant on the argument. He felt that he was lied to.
Generally, he feels Fujitsu Services demonstrated a lack of honesty around what they were
doing.
Mr Davies feels that only by talking to multiple people can the truth be found and is suspicious
of being given just one point of contact. At one stage, he was not invited to attend internal
Fujitsu Services’ project meetings and this suggests that there was something to hide.
Petty squabbles within Fujitsu
Mr Davies said that bottlenecks build up around what different teams say they will or will not
do.
“The service people can be really, really good but all of sudden they end up doing something
really dumb and you end up in an argument with them about some trivia.”
He puts it down to internal communications between teams and how they set each others
expectations up. One Fujitsu manager says he will do something, which sets an expectation, but
then a different manager will say they will not do it. Sometimes, the manager would contradict
what the director had said they would do. Sometimes, the manager would be quite aggressive
and say they didn’t care who the issue might be escalated to, they would not do it. He once
wrote to a director and said that it was a great way to lose the business.
In summary, he says that Fujitsu’s internal communications is not joined up.
Customer Expectations for the next 12 months
Drive the need
He would like Fujitsu Services to become more directly involved with the RMG business units to
tell them how to get good value from the digital media network. If this is not done, the
investment will be wasted and the service may not go any further than the existing contract.
Fujitsu should try and drive the need and it has the vision, the experts in media to be able to do
so. RMG on the whole does not. Fujitsu would win by getting more business and RMG would
win by getting better utilisation and more benefits from the assets.
He doesn’t have any other requirements of Fujitsu on Project Light. It’s all about getting value
from the screens.
Better Service
Mr Davies thinks the service elements need to be investigated. Fujitsu needs to assess whether
they are actually delivering what has been agreed and can it be delivered any better.
Specifically, this would include finding better ways to identify and fix genuinely non-working
screens. His reports tell him that 450 screens (about a fifth of the total) are not operational and
Strictly Confidential
Page 13 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
he knows that a proportion are switched on and not working. The tools and monitoring in place
do not pick them up and Fujitsu should be proactively fixing them. Some sites, such as 148 Old
Street — Head Office — are priority sites, so should receive priority attention. Fujitsu needs to fix
this.
Medium to Long Term
Mr Davies feels that if Fujitsu Services was not working elsewhere within RMG, specifically on
Horizon for the Post Office business, then future business prospects would be bleak. Project
Light was the first work for the Royal Mail business for some time and was not done well.
Going forward, Mr Davies said that this experience would not cloud his opinion about future
business because he knows that given the right people and the right amount of time to set up a
project, and given the committed workforce within Fujitsu Services, it is possible to win.
The failure on Project Light is down to a number of things but fundamentally he feels that
Fujitsu did not know the product as well as they thought and at one stage he got the feeling that it
had never been deployed in the same way as for the RMG. If it had, they would have understood.
the problems that they were going to face. It was evident in the mistakes that were being made.
If they were going to do it again, they would do it differently. RMG would also sign up
differently.
“T really don’t see why they shouldn't get new business within the Group. They did a reasonably
good job of clean up. There are still some commercial issues outstanding, however, which we
probably do need to resolve. It’s not good to have commercial issues that are not resolved when
you are coming back for new business.”
Despite his experiences, he knows that Fujitsu Services is a first class supplier and he knows that
it performs well with Horizon. It is a very committed operation and he is sure that the Project
Light implementation was as big a disappointment to Fujitsu as it was to RMG. He understands
that the root cause was the hurried launch and the fact that the right people were not available at
the outset in the right numbers. But, Fujitsu was not strong in saying that they could not do
things within the timeframes expected.
Key Contacts
He mentioned Anthony Lamaru as the Programme Manager and there was also a Programme
Director, lan Terblanche. Mr Davies said that he likes Mr Terblanche very much and has great
respect for the way in which he dealt with the problems experienced during Project Light.
Richard Brunskill, now Account Manager, was previously in service management and got
deployed to help the project team fix screens when it was discovered that so many were not
working. His team did a better job at project delivery than the specialists.
He has always been happy with the people despite many heated debates. He understands that
there were resourcing problems for Fujitsu at the outset of the project.
Strictly Confidential
Page 14 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
Customer Perceptions of Fujitsu Services
Market Position
Mr Davies had not previously worked with Fujitsu Services and was not sure what position the
company held in the IT services market place. He now sees it as a company that wants to win
and will do whatever is needed to do so. He thinks this is commendable. Having started with a
poor perception of Fujitsu Services when he first came to Project Light, the commitment it has
shown in putting things right has improved his estimation of the company.
Fujitsu also has the resources and the capabilities, as well as the commitment, needed to win in
this market, he believes. The problems he perceives within Fujitsu are all management issues
and not down to any lack of commitment of people working on the ground.
Ease of Doing Business
Mr Davies said that it depends on the person you deal with how easy one finds it to do business
with Fujitsu Services.
He found that Fujitsu Services was not easy to do business with under the previous account
manager because he was too commercially orientated and appeared not to wish to discuss
anything that did not involve a profit. This is especially galling during the early stages of
investigating a solution, which appear to show something wrong within Fujitsu, only to be told
things can only be fixed at a price. There was no attempt to negotiate.
“Tt got quite aggressive in some areas. We tended to find that the account manager always went
in with hard negotiation. When you do that ... nobody’s going to win.”
On the other hand, Ian Terblanche — Account Director, is very easy to do business with
according to Mr Davies. He listens to problems and finds constructive ways around them,
without capitulating, ‘batting’ both for Fujitsu and for the client. He negotiates properly, with
give and take and without getting excited.
Risk Management
He does not believe that Fujitsu Services is good at managing risk. It tends to focus on inward
looking, spreadsheet based delivery plans without looking at resources required to deliver what
the client expects. He never got properly detailed and resourced plans for the project, for
example.
Strictly Confidential
Page 15 of 16
FUJ00126071
FUJ00126071
Fujitsu Services - CSIP Programme RMG
Pro. y
Mr Davies sees Fujitsu Services as reactive rather than proactive. He believes that the focus is
on delivering what is specified in the contract rather than adding value.
Green credentials
Mr Davies sees no evidence to suggest that Fujitsu Services is more committed to green issues
than any other IT services provider.
Key attributes — Mr Davies was asked to select three attributes that he would most associate with
Fujitsu Services. The table below illustrates the attributes he could have chosen and the ones he
agreed to select:
Reliable Easy to do business
In-Tune Quality conscious
Flexible x Innovative x
Straight talking Conscientious
Professional Pro active
Trustworthy Creative x
Tenacious
Fujitsu Services can sometimes be flexible to a fault, according to Mr Davies, to the extent that it
can become detrimental. He cites the example of a solution that was found to adapt to a much
lower network bandwidth when RMG found it could not afford the original 250 Meg/sec trunk
lines and needed to reduce to 15 Meg/sec. Fujitsu Services designed a solution to work at the
lower speed but it presented more problems for Fujitsu, in getting it to work, than had ever been
expected.
This solution also demonstrated, however, that Fujitsu can be innovative and creative.
Strictly Confidential
Page 16 of 16