POL00448359
POL00448359
Compliance
Policy Monitoring Report
Postmaster Compliant Handling Support Policy
February 2022
1] Page
POL00448359
POL00448359
Contents
1. Rating / Residual Risk Score
2. Overview
3. Objective of the Review
4, Background
5. Methodology
6. Source of Information
7. Findings
8. Recommendations
9, Policy Owner Response
10. Agreed Actions to be Taken
11. Review Date / Sign Off
12. Scoring Table
2IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
1. Rating / Residual Risk Score
The overall rating and residual risk score applied to this review is satisfactory — no findings, no
control weaknesses or process inefficiencies identified.
Ratings Residual Risk Score
2 Satisfactory — with findings, minor
control weaknesses or process
inefficiencies identified.
2. Overview
The purpose of the Policy Monitoring Report is to understand, test and gain assurance based on
some point of control testing that the Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy is working and fit for
purpose.
3. Objective of the review
To test some of the key minimum control standards in the Postmaster Compliant Handling Policy
and whether the effectiveness of the policy is being implemented across the group.
4. Background
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy has been established to set the minimum operating
standards relating to the management of Postmaster Complaints. The Policy is intended to ensure
that Post Office handle all Postmaster Complaints consistently, fairly and within agreed timescales.
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy was drafted, reviewed and approved by the RCC & ARC in
March 2021 and due its annual review in March 2022. Typically on a monthly basis most complaints
logged by Postmasters are against Royal Mail and Parcelforce, with a recent spike in ATM
complaints. The MI (complaints dashboard that was created on Power Bl), demonstrates currently
this month (Feb 22), we have had 305 complaints raised from Postmasters, the three highest areas
of complaints logged were against: ATM’s with 37 Complaints, Parcelforce with 42 Complaints and
Royal Mail with 65 complaints. The remaining 161 complaints logged were against other categories.
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy is sponsored by the Service and Support Optimization
Director with the Retail and Franchise Network Director, having specified responsibilities to facilitate
compliance with the minimum control standards stated within the policy. The Retail and Franchise
Network Director is accountable for the deployment of the policy and their role is also responsible
for regularly reviewing the standards and processes set out in the policy and for drafting any
amendments that may be required.
The policy is part of a developing framework of postmaster support policies that has been established
to set the minimum operating standards relating to the management of our postmaster contract risks.
Post Office’s risk appetite in this area is averse.
3) Page
POL00448359
POL00448359
5. Methodology
The assurance review will consist of the following:
- Asample check of 4 Minimum Control Standards stated within the policy
- Sample testing the processes set out for Postmaster Complaints.
- Sample check of any relevant logs, trackers and MI
- Sample check of any relevant QA
- Complaint guides set out
- Review types of complaints being raised and how these have been effectively managed.
6. Source of Information
The review is based on examining the supporting materials supplied by the Policy Owner to support
the attestations made on policy conformance and not based on an ‘on site’ inspection of files and
supporting materials or as a full internal audit
The source of the information will come from:
- Postmaster Complaint Handling Support Policy
- Policy Owner
- Active Complaints Dashboard
- _ IRT Case Help
- Complaint Classification List
- BSC Complaints Whistleblowing Knowledge
- Voice of the Postmaster
- Complaint KBA Examples
- Complaint Guides
- Quality Monitoring Reports
- Complaints Logged
- Area Manager Processes
- — Royal Mail and Parcel Force Complaints
7. Findings
Minimum Control Standard Tested Rating
Postmaster ease of raising complaints - /f Postmasters are
discouraged to raise and pursue Complaints, their issues will be
unknown to Post Office and remain unresolved.
If Post Office do not provide suitable channels for Complaint raising,
Postmasters will not be encouraged to share their Complaints.
Receipt and Identification of Whistleblowing Reports - /f
Whistleblowing incidents are not recognised and reported to the
Whistleblowing team, there is a risk that the most serious Complaints
may not be investigated and resolved as a priority.
Investigation and Resolution of Complaints - /f Postmaster
Complaints are not fully understood and investigated, the root cause
may not be addressed and the same Complaints could recur, leading to
Postmaster and branch dissatisfaction.
4IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
If Post Office do not take reasonable steps to achieve resolution within
reasonable timescales, there is a risk that Postmasters and branches
may not be able to operate effectively.
Reporting and Insights - /f Post Office are unable or unwilling to
recognise consistent thematic issues Postmasters and branches will
suffer recurring issues and Post Office will forfeit opportunities to
address common Complaint issues.
If Post Office are not transparent with performance against Service
Levels applied to the Complaint handling process, Postmasters and
branches and stakeholders may lose faith in Post Office’s ability to
effectively manage Complaints
Upon review of the Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy and the selected Minimum Control
Standards - it is evident that these areas can currently be demonstrated as fit for purpose and are
improving. There are a few minor gaps that have been identified within the review, however these
are in relation to process inefficiencies and training. The samples/evidence reviewed demonstrated
that the team currently have good processes and procedures in place for some areas of Postmaster
Complaint Handling and some which need strengthening. Training also remains a focus point for
advisors and there has been some turnover in the team.
The samples of MI, Data, trackers and dashboards reviewed by compliance showed and
demonstrated that there are robust measures in place for reporting and gaining insights of
complaints that arise from postmasters and branches. The team have demonstrated that they use
the complaints data effectively and seek feedback on postmaster satisfaction, this has been
evidenced through the Voice of the Postmaster meetings and Voice of the Postmaster surveys.
The team have produced information on the volume of Complaints and Post Office’s performance
against Service Levels, this information has been published both internally and to Postmasters on
a regular basis.
Overall the compliance assurance review on the Postmaster Complaints Handling Policy has
demonstrated that Postmasters are not discouraged to raise and pursue complaints and there are
suitable channels of reporting and raising complaints in place. The team have taken reasonable steps
to achieve resolution within reasonable timescales, however in certain circumstances there still
remains cases that have not met the SLA, due to the nature and complexity of the complaint raised.
5IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
Risk Score 2
Postmaster ease of raising complaints
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy minimum control standards particular to this are:
“Communication with Postmasters at all levels should encourage the reporting of issues and
Complaints.
Post Office will regularly review channels available to Postmasters for the raising of Complaints
Postmaster facing teams will take reasonable steps to identify Postmaster dissatisfaction
which is expressed during their contact with Postmasters and offer the Postmaster the
opportunity to raise a formal Complaint”.
Findings
Communication with Postmasters at all levels is encouraged for reporting issues of complaints.
The team encourage branches to raise any level of dissatisfaction as a complaint. This includes the
IRT advisors as well, If an advisor has a branch on the phone who are not happy about something
the advisor will discuss this with the branch and have the issues logged as a complaint. Typically
the reporting of issues and complaints is targeted through, Postmaster facing teams (at every
interaction), Head of Service and Support Optimisation (Quarterly) and Postmaster facing team
managers (at every interaction).
There are three channels that postmasters can use to raise complaints:
1.Branch Hub - Which can be accessed at anytime from anywhere by the Postmaster, It is
accessed via the ‘We’re Listening’ button on the front page of Branch Hub. Once a complaint has
been received the Issue Resolution Team (IRT) will acknowledge the complaint within 24 hours.
The IRT will then contact the Postmaster directly to fully understand and investigate their
concerns. The aim is to provide a full response to the Postmaster’s complaint within 10 business
days.
2.Branch Support Centre - Which gives the Postmaster the option to make their complaint by
telephone, the branch support advisor will take ownership of the complaint and escalate where
necessary to the Issue Resolution Team (IRT).
3.Area Managers - Area Managers will aim to resolve complaints for the Postmasters, by working
with the Postmaster to fully understand their concerns and provide a response. This may mean
talking to the relevant areas of the business who can resolve the issue or provide an answer to the
Postmaster's concerns. If the Area Manager is unable to resolve the Postmaster’s concerns, they
will refer the complaint to the Issue Resolution Team (IRT) to investigate and provide a response
directly to the Postmaster.
The business have created 166 complaint classifications due to the various nature of complaints
that could possibly arise which compliance sampled. Each classification has a knowledge base
article (KBA) attached to it. These KBA’s provide information to the advisors of what needs to be
logged on a case when logging a complaint, as well as what to feedback to the branch. These
KBA’s were created with escalation points for help in resolving an issue. This was carried out by
contacting the relevant areas of the business. The Issue Resolution Team (IRT), have a dashboard
on dynamics for complaints to filter through to, which compliance reviewed and sampled. Once a
6IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
case is assigned to IRT, the aim is for the case to be at least acknowledged within 1 hour.
Complaints raised via Branch Hub, IRT receive an email alert direct to the specially created inbox,
postmastercomplaints __ Complaints that come in from Area managers do vary
and aren’t consistent. This is currently being reviewed and a meeting is due to be scheduled in the
coming weeks with the Issue Resolution Team Manager and the Network and Postmaster
Contractor.
Compliance worked with the Issue Resolution Team Manager whom identified that further
improvements need to be made across BSC for advisors to identify a potential complaint better.
Training requests have been identified but no set date has yet to be agreed. The main work that
needs to be done is for the advisors to be fully aware of what constitutes as a complaint and what
doesn’t. For example BSC advisors are fully aware of the correct processes to follow for a
complaint about Royal Mail or Parcelforce, but knowledge is sparse for most other complaint
categories. This work is on the Issue Resolution Team Manager's service improvement plan and
initial steps in regards to planning has already started with the Service Centre Manager.
For business wide awareness in February 2022, a Postmaster Complaint Handling was created on
successfactors which was mandatory for all employees to undertake, the training reinforced and
raised awareness of what you should do when a postmaster makes a compliant. The course was
designed to help understand the key principles of the Postmaster Compliant Handling policy.
Review
Upon review of this minimum control standard it is evident that there are effective channels and
processes in place for postmasters to raise complaints and concerns with ease, these channels do
get reviewed regularly by the Issue Resolution Team Manager to ensure they continue to remain
effective.
There are also robust measures in place to capture and filter through data on the complaints that
come through to the team, this is evidenced through the dashboard on dynamics for complaints
that compliance sampled.
There has been improvement within this area over the last 6 months where the business have
created 166 complaint classifications with a knowledge base article (KBA) attached to it, which
provides information to advisors on what to feedback to the branch and postmasters when a
complaint is raised. As an observation and from the KBA’s sampled by compliance, it is unclear
what happens if a complaint comes through that does not fall within the 166 complaint
classifications created. Compliance would recommend that a clear process is devised outlining the
steps that advisers would need to follow should a complaint arises that falls outside of the 166
complaint classifications.
Further improvements also need to be made across BSC for advisors to identify a potential
complaint better as training requests have been identified but currently there is no set date
agreed for this to be carried out. Compliance recommend that reasonable steps are taken to
ensure training/processes are put in place for advisors as a priority so they are fully aware of what
constitutes as a complaint and what does not.
The Issue Resolution Team Manager raised concerns regarding the Complaints that come in from
Area managers as they vary and aren’t consistent, work is currently being undertaken to ensure
there remains consistency with area managers and the types of complaints being raised.
The control standard is assessed as Satisfactory — with findings, minor control weaknesses or
process inefficiencies identified.
TIPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
Risk Score 1
Receipt and Identification of Whistleblowing Reports
The Postmaster Complaint Handing Policy minimum control standards particular to this are:
“All Complaint Handlers will undertake a training and awareness programme, so that they
are aware of the Whistleblowing Policy and procedure.
Regular case reviews of Complaints that have/have not been identified as Whistleblowing
reports to ensure consistency and continued understanding of the triage guidelines”.
Findings
The policy outlines and addresses the difference between complaints and whistleblowing for
Complaint Handlers to understand in relation to the types of Complaints being raised by
Postmasters, so that they can assist in identifying whether a report is a Complaint or
Whistleblowing.
Currently every employee in the business has to complete a compulsory whistleblowing
compliance test, following the annual Whistleblowing Training on SuccessFactors. In addition to
this the Whistleblowing team have recently (31% January 22) carried out group sessions with BSC
and IRT advisors to go through what whistleblowing is in more detail, including what constitutes
as whistleblowing. This additional training will give a better overview of how to identify a
potential Whistleblowing call/email better and to answer any questions/queries that the teams
may have.
In order to help advisors the business has in place a knowledge base article (KBA), which has been
put together with input directly from the Whistleblowing team and the Issue Resolution Team
Manager, this is to ensure that the cases are logged correctly and the correct process is being
followed. The Postmaster Complaint Handling Support Policy has been incorporated to the
knowledge base article (KBA) and has been shared with all of BSC/IRT and is saved on the teams
pages.
Cases that are logged are reviewed monthly by the Issue Resolution Team Manager via the
dynamic’s dashboard which compliance reviewed and sampled. Compliance also reviewed the
Whistleblowing process document which in place and applies to all Post Office branches, including
multiple partners. This includes postmasters, managers, assistants, and clerks. The document
reviewed clearly outlines the processes that IRT advisors need to follow when they identify that a
complaint is a potential Whistleblowing Case.
Review
Upon review of this minimum control standard it is evident that the business has a robust and an
effective Whistleblowing Policy, procedures and processes in place. Advisors have completed
Whistleblowing compliance tests along with the annual Whistleblowing training which is a
mandatory requirement for all employees. This has demonstrated that advisors are aware of what
Whistleblowing incidents are and how to spot them when they are raised.
Additional Whistleblowing training is currently being delivered to all BSC and IRT teams by the
Whistleblowing Officer to ensure advisors continue to recognise what constitutes as a
Whistleblowing incident and how to escalate it and follow the correct process/procedure.
8) Page
POL00448359
POL00448359
It is also evident that there are measures in place to capture Whistleblowing cases, which can be
evidenced through the dynamic’s dashboard.
The control standard is assessed as Satisfactory — no findings, no control weaknesses or process
inefficiencies identified.
Risk Score 2
Investigation and Resolution of Complaints
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy minimum control standards particular to this are:
“Knowledge based articles and processes will be rolled out through training and reviewed
regularly.
Quality checks and training will take place with Complaint Handlers to ensure that all information
is gathered, and the correct process is followed.
Complaint Service Levels will be regularly reviewed by the Complaint Handler and spot checked
by the Issue Resolution Team Manager. Any risk to Service Level will be notified to the Postmaster
in advance and flagged to the Issue Resolution Team Manager.
Any Complaints that are unable to be resolved will be escalated for review”.
Findings
Within the last quarter of 2021 a project was carried out primarily with product owners and their
associated teams to enhance knowledge based articles (KBAs). There have been KBA’s for all
complaint classifications created. They have also raised awareness of the role of the Issue
Resolution Team.
The KBAs are reviewed monthly and will be done by checking a months’ worth of data to see
which classifications/KBA’s have been used the most. The process will be to contact the product
owner or contact shown on the KBA to make sure all the information is up to date or if any
changes need to be made. An audit system for the KBA’s will be launched in the near future. This
will include a monthly review of which KBA’s that have been used as well as implementing an
update process. Recently the ATM KBA’s have been updated due to changes within the business
from BOI to Cennox. Similar changes are currently taking place due to AEI machines being
changed to tablets.
A quality checking process is in place which compliance sampled checked, the form focuses on the
key elements of a case. This includes making sure the case has been logged correctly,
acknowledging the complaint and making sure the complainant is aware of the 10 working day
SLA to resolve, processes carried out for escalating to the relevant area if required, and also that
the case was resolved correctly.
4 cases are picked at random each month by the Issue Resolution Team Manager. 4 cases to
review was decided to fall in line with the BSC advisors. The Issue Resolution Team Manager also
checks cases on an ad-hoc basis, this includes reviewing active cases with his advisors in one hour
sessions per advisor every two weeks. The Issue Resolution Team Manager stated that going
forward there needs to be a feedback sheet developed and completed every session.
A process guide has been put together and trained out to each complaint handler. The main focus
with this is to make sure the correct expectation is set. It is not always possible for a complaint to
9] Page
POL00448359
POL00448359
be resolved within the 10 working day SLA, these usually occur when a longer investigation is
required, relying on responses from other teams or external partners. The guide makes sure that
the correct process is followed consistently.
For complaints that advisors are struggling to resolve, a case help spreadsheet has been created.
The advisors add the information to this spreadsheet for the IRT manager to review and provide
feedback, or step in and actively chase the issue if required. The case help spreadsheet is checked
3 days a week by the IRT manager on Monday's, Wednesday’s, and Friday’s.
Review
Upon review of this minimum control standard it is evident that improvements have been made in
this area and many of the processes have been scoped out from scratch to ensure that
investigations and resolution of complaints remain robust and processes are being followed
correctly.
Although training sessions have taken place, It is still evident that training for advisors remains a
focus point on complaints and work is currently being planned to further upskill advisors on what
constitutes as a complaint and what does not.
When the business had a structure change last year (2021) it did have an impact on the team and
due to the change the team lost 3 advisors and gained 2 new advisors. Both advisors had to be
trained from scratch which was difficult, mainly due to the fact that everyone was working from
home. The Issue Resolution Team Manager is currently devising a training plan for each advisor,
this will include compliance tests chosen from Success Factors as well as an overall review of what
each person feels they struggle with. Some for example find it difficult to write resolution emails
so this has been included in the training pack.
From the evidence sampled by compliance the Issue Resolution Team Manager regularly reviews
SLA’s and if there has been a risk identified to the postmaster they have been notified in advance.
Quality Assurance is conducted on advisors, the form sampled by compliance is comprehensive and
now incorporates the New Competency Performance Indicators for advisors. The form also includes
a section on a coaching plan should advisors need further development and upskilling.
As an observation compliance query whether quality checking 4 cases against the level of
complaints raised is sufficient and recommends the Issue Resolution Team Manager increases the
number of cases being quality checked to ensure there remains consistency in the quality of service
the team provide to Postmasters/Branches when handling complaints/issues raised.
The control standard is assessed as Satisfactory — with findings, minor control weaknesses or
process inefficiencies identified.
Risk Score 1
Reporting and Insights
The Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy minimum control standards particular to this are:
“Complaint handling reporting dashboards will be maintained and updated to show volumes,
channels, Service Levels, subjects and resolution of Complaints
Interrogation of Complaints data will be undertaken to identify themes that could surface
common Complaint issues.
10IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
Common and recurring issues will be escalated to the Voice of the Postmaster meeting for
awareness and discussion with the aim of establishing overarching solutions.
Postmasters will be provided with regular updates on the number of Complaints raised by
Postmasters, key issues raised and what Post Office are doing if they haven’t been resolved”.
Findings
Compliance reviewed a number of reporting dashboards and raw data, which are maintained and
updated regularly, the Postmaster Complaints Dashboard updated on the 21 Feb 22 currently
showed that 91% of complaints have been resolved within the agreed SLA, against a target of goal
of 80%. 250 complaints still remain open, of which 183 are over the SLA. There are 0
Whistleblowing reports. In the last 7 days the business have seen 130 complaints created of which
124 have been resolved within the 7 day period, the recent data shows that 48% of these were
resolved the same day.
The three main areas that postmasters have raised complaints about are product/service, IT and
supply chain.
The following is how the data is used
e Data is used to form a live Postmaster issues and complaints dashboard
Each area from around the business is given access to the dashboard and can drill into
their area of responsibility
e Service levels are closely monitored along with volumes of complaints
* Each area of the business is being held to account to ensure they are giving the best
possible service to Postmasters
e Trends are discussed at the monthly voice of the Postmaster meeting and
opportunities identified to fix the root causes of issues
This has allowed the team to understand what is impacting Postmasters and causing them the
most concern, understand how well the team are dealing with postmaster complaints and the
service they provide to them and Identify issues and whether improvements need to be made.
Every Monday a spreadsheet is compiled from dynamics to show all the complaints that have
been logged from the previous week. This is used to spot trends to feedback with. The main areas
that stand out are Mails, IT issues, and recently ATM. Additionally the reporting team send a daily
spreadsheet of the previous days mails complaints to key stakeholders. These cases are checked
ona daily basis to make sure they were logged correctly.
The Voice of the Postmaster (VOTP) meeting, chaired by the Retail and Franchise Network
Director reviews all postmaster complaint themes monthly and actions taken to address the root
causes are also reported at the meeting.
A sample pack from a voice of the postmaster meeting has been reviewed and sampled by
compliance. Notes on actions are taken and tracked by the Head of Postmaster Engagement. In
addition to this compliance also reviewed the copy of the Voice of the Postmaster action log,
filtered for actions on complaints.
Review
Upon review of this minimum control standard it is evident that the business have robust and
effective reporting and insights in place. Complaint handling reporting dashboards are maintained
11IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
and updated to show volumes, channels, Service Levels, subjects and resolution of Complaints on
a regular basis with both raw and live data. Interrogation of Complaints data has also been
undertaken to identify themes that could surface common Complaint issues.
As an observation whilst the SLA is met for more than 80% of the time, it does mean that there
are some breaches on outstanding complaints passed the SLA period, these have usually occurred
when a longer investigation is required, relying on responses from other teams or external
partners, before the complaint can be resolved and closed off.
It is also evident that Postmasters are provided with regular updates on the number of Complaints
raised by Postmasters, key issues raised and what Post Office are doing if they haven’t been
resolved. This can be evidenced through the Voice of the Postmaster (VOTP) meetings, where
common and recurring issues are escalated for awareness and discussion with the aim of
establishing overarching solutions to the actions raised. The team do include Postmaster
Feedback surveys after a compliant has been resolved however very rarely receive any completed
‘ones back.
The control standard is assessed as Satisfactory — no findings, no control weaknesses or process
inefficiencies identified.
8. Recommendations
Following the assurance review of the Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy compliance have
advised the following recommendations:
- Compliance would recommend that a clear process is devised outlining the steps that
advisers would need to follow should a complaint arises that falls outside of the 166
complaint classifications.
- Further improvements also need to be made across BSC for advisors to identify a potential
complaint - Compliance recommend that reasonable steps are taken to ensure
training/processes are put in place for advisors as a priority so they are fully aware of what
constitutes as a complaint and what does not.
- Compliance recommend the Issue Resolution Team Manager increases the number of cases
being quality checked to ensure there remains consistency in the quality of service the team
provide to Postmasters/Branches when handling complaints/issues raised
- Continue to work with Area Managers to ensure there remains consistency with the types of
complaints being raised by them.
12IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
9. Policy Owner Response
10. Agreed actions to be taken
Action Owner Date to be completed by
All actions documents in Issue Resolution Team Manager I Next Policy Annual Review (March
section 7 of this report. 23).
11. Review Date/Sign Off
Policy Review Date I Next Policy Review I Review Conducted Review Signed Off
Date By By
March 2022 March 2023 Reena Chohan (Policy Reena Chohan
Compliance Manager)
13IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
12. Scoring Table
Below table sets out the Residual Risk Score and Rating that will apply upon review of the
Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy, to determine how effective the policy is, any control
weaknesses or gaps and whether the policy needs enhancements/improvements.
Ratings Residual Risk Score
1 Satisfactory — no findings, no control
weaknesses or process inefficiencies
identified.
2 Satisfactory — with findings, minor
control weaknesses or process
inefficiencies identified.
3 Satisfactory — room for
improvement, Some weaknesses
around internal controls such as
records, systems identified.
4 Unsatisfactory — improvement
control weakness. Inadequate
internal control environment which
requires management attention and
improvement as priority. A high
number of non-compliances with
internal and external guidelines,
weaknesses in records, systems and
controls and/or non-compliance with
regulator/contractual requirements
and policy.
5 Unsatisfactory — major control
weakness, major breakdown in
internal control environment which
requires urgent Senior Management
intervention. A significant number of
non-compliances with internal and
external guidelines and weaknesses
in records, systems and controls
identified. Non-compliance with
regulatory/contractual requirements,
risk of significant reputational
damage.
1. Recommendations
Following the assurance review of the Postmaster Complaint Handling Policy compliance have
advised the following recommendations:
¢ Compliance would recommend that a clear process is devised outlining the steps that advisers would
need to follow should a complaint arises that falls outside of the 166 complaint classifications.
Classifications are set to allow regular updates and changes as required.
Ifthe advisor can’t find a suitable classification, they can refer to the IRT for Review (who can
advise how to log or look to add a category).
14IPage
POL00448359
POL00448359
Classifications are also updated when new products are introduced (e.g. PUDO)
e Further improvements also need to be made across BSC for advisors to identify a potential complaint
- Compliance recommend that reasonable steps are taken to ensure training/processes are put in
place for advisors as a priority so they are fully aware of what constitutes as a complaint and what
does not. —
.
Work has started to develop the process and training for BSC advisors.
Initial meeting held with Service Centre Senior Manager to understand training requirements
for BSC advisors (focus on ‘what is a complaint/what is feedback’ based on the policy
definition).
A meeting has been held with a Team Manager and two advisors from BSC, to talk about the
process and how we can make sure we are capturing the feedback / what advisors need to
know.
Meeting set with the Service & Support Quality Training Manager to talk about complaint
handling training for advisors and the best way to deliver this.
* Compliance recommend the Issue Resolution Team Manager increases the number of cases being
quality checked to ensure there remains consistency in the quality of service the team provide to
Postmasters/Branches when handling complaints/issues raised
.
4 Case audited by the IRT Manager each month
The IRT manager also has I hour side by side quality assessment sessions with each advisor
every 4 weeks, to go through their active cases.
Next steps is to formalise the process and record the output of the 1 hour sessions, to
identify any advisor training needs.
Continue to work with Area Managers to ensure there remains consistency with the types of
complaints being raised by them.
15IPage
V’ve spoken to Rhi Thomas and agreed a 10 minute slot on their Monday business
update. We just need to contact sharon.madden{ “to arrange the slot.
The IRT Manager (Mat) will attend to remind AMs of the process when they receive a
complaint (alongside points they've raised for us to cover below).
Why log complaints (what is the benefit to the AM and the Postmaster)
How we log the complaint
Who owns the complaint to resolution
Who is contacted and when
What is the SLA regarding time to resolution.
How and to who do the AMS escalate if they are not receiving updates/resolution
not achieved within SLA
eeeee