Help Desk/Technical Support Telecommunications and Information Services Department

City of Tulsa Internal Auditing August 2003

Help Desk/Technical Support Telecommunications and Information Services Department

City of Tulsa Internal Auditing

Ron Maxwell, CIA, CFE Chief Internal Auditor

Phil Wood, CIA, CFA City Auditor

AUDIT TEAM: Cathy Criswell, CPA, CIA Robin Watson, Auditor In Charge Jenifer Hendrix

Background Information The city currently mans five help desks using staff from the Airport, Fire, Police, Public Works, and Telecommunications & Information Services Departments (TISD). Staff at each of these help desks perform similar functions, but normally do not provide service to each other’s customers. This audit focused on TISD’s help desk. When a customer in a department supported by TISD has a problem, they call extension 1600 for help. The call is answered by either the Computer Support LAN Technician or the Office Administrator I. The help desk employee enters call information into help desk management software and makes a judgement as to how to prioritize the call. Prioritization is classified as: • Mission critical – Critical application failure; multiple users affected; immediate response; resolution within 4 hours • Urgent – User unable to work; response within 4 hours; resolution within 12 hours • Usual – User inconvenienced but able to work, response by next business day; resolution within 3 business days • Marginal – No business related impact; response as time available, resolution within 25 business days The help desk employee who answers the call may be able to resolve some problems, but the majority are referred to one of five support technicians. With assistance from the help desk software, the employee determines how to assign the call. Most calls are assigned to the next available technician. Help desk employees answering calls notify technicians of assignments by paging them. Most trouble calls are resolved at the customer’s work location. The technician may call the customer first or go directly to the site. When the trouble is resolved, the technician closes out the call in the help desk software. TISD management uses statistics generated from the help desk software to monitor technician performance.

1

Summary of Audit Project SCOPE: Review and evaluate technical support provided by the Telecommunications and Information Services Department through help desk calls OBJECTIVES: 1. Review how calls are prioritized to minimize service interruption 2. Determine whether all calls to the help desk are assigned to a technician and resolved on a timely basis 3. Evaluate how technician competence levels are set and maintained 4. Evaluate management’s process for identifying and planning support for changes in technology 5. Determine whether service level is adequately meeting user needs 6. Review how management identifies and obtains current technology for technical support to provide effective and efficient service OVERALL RISK EXPOSURE:

CONCLUSION:

(Low, Moderate or High) Moderate

(Satisfactory, Satisfactory-needs improvement or Unsatisfactory) Satisfactory – needs improvement

2

Audit Findings

Observation 1: Customer service is not always provided on time Recommendation – Formal performance goals should be developed for timely service delivery Formal performance goals should be established and communicated to staff. Monitoring of staff performance should include evaluating results against goals. A formal method should be established for identifying causes for not being able to resolve customer calls within established time criteria. TISD staff should be trained to ask appropriate questions to assign the correct priority code. TISD staff should inform customers of when they can expect service delivery. Response: Management agrees While some goals already exist, we will formalize the establishment, monitoring and communication of these to staff.

Observation 2: Response time criteria are not clearly established Recommendation – Draft service agreements should be finalized All draft service agreements should be discussed and finalized with customers. TISD should measure response times. Response: Management agrees Response time goals will be reestablished with discussion with customers. Response time will be measured and communicated as stated above.

Observation 3: Policies do not address staff continuing education Recommendation – Policies on continuing education should be improved Specific skill requirements for each job should be stated, with specifications for appropriate training. These requirements should be periodically updated. A method for tracking continuing education for each employee should be implemented. Performance goals should be set based on completion of specific training and a set number of continuing education hours each year. Alternate, low-cost, methods for providing training should be explored. A knowledge database should be developed where staff can store information on how tasks are completed so that inexperienced staff can access it. Management should encourage staff members to obtain professional certification and provide funding, as available. Response: Management agrees While budget cuts have completely eliminated training amounts, there is some on-thejob training that takes place on a continuous basis. Most of the employees are in progression and have been encouraged to take advantage of it.

3

Observation 4: Management does not use advance information about pending changes to prepare staff Recommendation - Information about pending changes should be communicated to staff Information about pending changes in information technology from ITSC meetings and budgets should be summarized and communicated by management to help desk staff as early in the process as possible. This will allow the staff time to analyze what training will be needed and to obtain the training in advance of customer calls for support. Response: Management agrees Planning is an area that is lacking due to the decentralized budgeting and staffing. While the ITSC and subcommittee may receive some communication, project tracking is not consistent; therefore, help desk staff may not be aware of pending changes.

Observation 5: Help desk software is not used to its fullest capabilities Recommendation – Additional uses of help desk software should be explored TISD staff should discuss and decide which additional features of the help desk software will be useful to improve customer service. TISD staff should research what training is needed to implement use of the selected functions. Staff should be appropriately trained on its use. Response: Management agrees Some additional features are already planned (notification of status changes). These have not been implemented at this time due to time and budget constraints.

Observation 6: Customer satisfaction is not adequately monitored Recommendation - Customer satisfaction should be more completely monitored Management should explore whether the help desk software could be set up to automatically generate an e-mail message to each customer on completion of a work order to solicit satisfaction information. Alternatively, the technicians could leave a customer satisfaction card with customers to complete and mail back through interoffice mail. Customer satisfaction surveys should address all key areas of customer service. Negative customer feedback should be followed-up and resolved. Response: Management agrees While complaints have been very few, automatic generation or leaving a card on a certain percent of calls would provide for more timely information gathering.

4

Other Observation: The city currently operates five separate help desks. Internal Auditing plans to meet with the Information Technology Steering Committee for input on a potential internal audit project to analyze the benefits of consolidating four of the help desks.

Report Distribution List Mayor Bill LaFortune Councilor Joe Williams Councilor Chris Medlock Councilor David Patrick Councilor Tom Baker Councilor Sam Roop Councilor Arthur Justis Councilor Randall Sullivan Councilor Bill Christiansen Councilor Susan Neal Stephen Sewell Mike Kier Don Cannon Wendy Shott Dale Hunter

Larry Hurst Allen Lacroix Dave Been Charles Hardt Lex Rutter Bill Toliver Sherry Reinhardt Scott Robb George Smith Phil Carnahan Renee Plocek Information Technology Steering Committee Mayor’s Audit Advisory Committee PricewaterhouseCoopers

5