Project Charter

Building Enhanced Experience for Wire-line Segment (NPS)

Sector – Telecom Project Methodology – DMAIC

Project Leader : Srividhya B Sponsors : Joy Mohanty/ Client GM Champion : Manick/Client Business Manager Process Owners : Allwin/Hashim MBB : Dhananjay Hegde Lead BB : Prasannarani S BB : Ram Gopalan Project Team : Vasanth, Santhosh, Abinathan, Habeeb •Copyright © 2013 Tata Consultancy Services Limited 1 1

TCS CBO BPS: A Bird’s Eye View

330+ $2.2 B 80,000+ 134 4.5B+ $2.7B 1st Business Value Organization Revenues for FY18 Employees Nationalities Transactions Delivered (FY17- Certified at Level FY18) 5 - ISO 30105 Industry Analyst Recognitions Across Domains:

> LEADER

Capital Drug Life & Banking Insurance Mortgage Markets Safety Pensions Gartner

Life Supply Retail IDC Sciences Retail Telecom Procurement Chain Banking R&D Everest Group Digital Analytics Mortgage- Finance & Order-to- Analytics Marketing BPO as-a- Accounting Cash & Insights Operations Services service Nelson Hall Telecom Capital Wealth & Insurance- Technolog Operations F&A-as-a- Markets- Asset as-a- y in BPS -as-a- Service as-a- Management Service Service service HfS

2 TCS ConfidentialTCS Confidential TCS Confidential

1 Lean Six Sigma Culture in TCS

$ 86.29 Mn savings & 2.85Bn BVA delivered in 2017-18 through Improvement Initiatives

25+ National/ International awards won at External forums in the last 4 years

Savings Projects Events Trained  2038 associates  50.32% savings delivered  2318 CI projects 63 Events participated in CI events in 2017-2018 through closed in 2017-2018 in 2017-2018 Customer facing projects  Six Sigma, positively impacting the  225 Lean  99 Lean Business metrics  Lean/Herculean  1876 GB

 58 Six Sigma  63 BB 49.68% savings delivered  SPS in 2017-2018 through TCS   4120 associates certified specific projects - Seat 374 SPS  Data Science Session in different process Utilization, Gross margin, improvement Productivity etc  1661 Idea max/ Kaizen projects conducted across various methodologies in locations in 2017-2018 2017-2018 Robust deployment of Process Improvement / Lean Six Sigma Culture focused on

Competency Development and Business Benefits 3 TCS Confidential

Enablers for Lean Six Sigma Culture

10 MBBs

Best Practices Sharing End to End Mechanism for sharing the 66+ BBs workflow tool for learnings from PI Projects Project Management 4000+ GBs

Improved Business Results with Better Project 18000+ Lean/ SPS Governance through Robust Workflow

Emphasis on training the workforce for data-based problem analysis Internally developed Body of Knowledge specific to BPS Industry – SPS, Lean, Six Sigma

4 Green Belt, Six SigmaTCS Confidential Black Belt TCS Confidential

2 Our client a leading Australian Telecommunications Service provider with 40% Market share……

About Our Client

17.4 MN 6.7 MN Mobile services 4G consumers

• Founded in 1975, they are the largest Telecom and Information Services 24 MN Customers provider in Australia TCS –Client Partnership 3.5 MN • Builds and operates Broadband telecommunications networks and Presence Services Partnering with TCS 20+ countries 4500+ associates markets voice, mobile, internet since 2011 access, pay television and other entertainment products and services. Digital Tech Managing all the Best Adoption Telecom offering of Digital lever • 5.8 BN profit with the total revenue of 27.1 BN in 2016. Number of Employees 36K+, More than 70+ Years in Telecom Honored Account Honored best productivity of the year in Disha award- Account in CBS 2015-2016 symphony 2018 Licensed Operator in china

India’s First Mobile Call 130+ GB Certified Associates 207 Improvement Initiatives –FY18 …is a proud partner with 6 years of engagement employing 4500+ TCS people

5 TCS Confidential

Project Background and Purpose Section 1

3 1.0.1 Organization approach to project planning

How the projects are selected with in the organization Organization Approach

Our Success Story

Organization Approach of Planning for Selection project from Pre Planning( Voice & Source of The Planning is extended to a multi year process Opportunity) and execution (Outcome) standardized across organization delivering the financial benefits YOY

TCS Confidential 7

1.0.2 Project Identification Process (General)

How the projects are selected with in the organization

Thought Leadership Framework

TCS Confidential 8

4 1.0.2 Project Identification Process (General)

How the Projects was Identified Menu Card –Thought Provocation

1 2 BVA Grid : Process VS Business Metric

Benchmark  Identify and list down, Prioritize and engage Business Metric Projects Beyond SOW TCS Offering Capability  Project Prioritization Matrix Using Menu card BVA Grid andGridLevers BVA Client Business Objectives Improvement Projects Thought Leadership Outcome

• 32 Opportunities identified as part transformation Roadmap for Agile and Machine Learning Robos with Cognitive ability FY’18-19 Industry Analysis • All projects aligned to Internal or Customer key goals & priorities • Financial Benefits projected : BVA $50MN & FORE & $3.32MN • Governance :Systematically track and ensure sustained focus and Objective – • Monthly Governance and reporting will be executed for successful rigor on projects till value realization / Closure completion • Understand client's business environment, their business • Project closures in Impact (PI System) • objectives/Business Metrics (Financial / Operational) • Identify, List down, Prioritize and engage Projects

Alignment to Change in Business 4.0 Strategy Prioritization with Defined Criteria Our Approach and Outcome TCS Confidential 9

1.0.3, 1.0.4 Project Selection and Prioritization Process

How the Project Prioritized and Selected with in Organization

Voice of Business Voice of Customer Voice of Stakeholder To enhance client experience TCS being the leading NPS as key metric as to and add value to business, the partner and had end to end improve customer focus will be on improving NPS visibility on the processes was experience, simplify the score required to transform the existing structure and existing process and improve increase revenue % the NPS scores to help Client increase the revenue

Client TCS Leadership Project Team

TCS Confidential 10

5 1.0.5. Project Goals and Benefits

What Specific goals and/or measures was the team trying to achieve with the project

Business Growth Customer Advocacy Profitability Aligned to Benefits the Business and Client outcome of Customer satisfaction &customer  Revenue Market  Net promoter  Cost to Serve experience Share Keep the Brand Promise score in Negative reduction  Time to Market First Time Right

Reduction of Customer Churn

Operational Definition of Metric : Cost Reduction NPS Improvement %Advocates - % Detractors Baseline Performance -43.7 Better Replication greater > 40% Any score between 0-6 Detractor - 62% Target Detractor less than opportunities (Detractor) is considered a 50% Defect

Goal : To improve NPS (Net Promoter Score) by 40% from -43.7 to -26

TCS Confidential 11

1.0.6. Success Measures/Criteria Identified

Approach for Identifying Additional Benefit:

Fallout/Remediation/Push the Activation Delay Order Build Installation order Back or Issue time WIP Days Profitability

%Order rework & Fallouts Lead time to activate

Lead Tiime Accuracy

Secondary Metric Secondary Metric

Metrics Benefit Category

Lead Time Reduction in time to connect the customer will Additional Success add early revenue to Client Accuracy Reduction in rework & Fallout orders will Additional Success reduce operational cost

Cost to Serve Focus on Enhance service might have a Counter Metric impact of increase in cost to serve

TCS Confidential 12

6 Project Framework Section 2

2.0 Project Framework

2.0.1 Concise Project Statement

About our Client and Project Business Case Problem Statement

NPS is the measure of willingness of customers Our client is an leading Australian to recommend a services to others. NPS is key telecommunications provider, provides voice, strategic metric to improve customer NPS score is trending at -43.7 for the period mobile, internet access and pay television experience & increase revenue. Apr- June ‘17.Lower the NPS has impact on products and services to customers across The Team currently handles a volume of 3 Lac increase in churn, drop in revenue and Australia spread across 4 products. The net promoter market share. The Industry standards quote TCS Back of House team handles the order score is negative across all operators & it is a that one detractor is equal to a potential .fulfilment process for the various important. metric for improvement across the churn of 2 customer and 1 advocate is equal telecommunication products sold industry. Our client with highest market share 2 new customer. This is an opportunity for was looking to scale up on this metric first. TCS TCS to further enhance it’s partnership with being the leading partner and had end 2 end Client by adding value and create benchmark visibility on the processes was required to improvement in satisfaction score across transform the existing process and improve the other operators NPS scores to help our client and increase the revenue .

2.0.2 Type of Project 2.0.3 Scope Statement Out Of Scope Direct Waste Inscope Kaizen Lean Improvement Elimination  Fiber Product Copper- Wirelines Product All Types  Mobility and Broadband of order  Technological Changes in design  PSTN  Bundles  process from client SPS Simple Analysis- DMAIC Variation/Chronic  Foxtel Big pond 7 QC Tools Issue

TCS Confidential 14

7 2.0. Project Framework

2.0.5 Project Schedule /High Level Plan 2.0.4 Assumptions/ Expectation Phase July'17 July'17 Aug'17 Sep'17 June'18 Define • Requires investment in training hours Measure • Additional FTE effort required to manage Analyze change

• Separate teams for specialized tasks Improve

• Feasibility analysis and Development of Control any automations for improvement • Approval for UAT deployment 2.0.6 Budget( Financial or Resource) • Rewarding initiative • Timeline Of Implementation of Solutions • Hiring of Lead for managing the Automation development • Operating Budget will be discussed during the course of the project

• TCS Gems points for the R&R Assumptions/ Expectation learning

from Completed Projects

2.0.7 Risk Management  Fiber roll out Consumer • Structured Project management Risk Framework deployed to proactively segment Net promoter identify risk score improvement from -8 • will be reviewed by on a monthly basis and go for approval on a quarterly to +10.5 basis. Custodian Process Owner/Black Belt  Wireless Net promoter score improvement for copper customers from 6 to 12

TCS Confidential 15

Project Stakeholders and the Project Team Section 3

8 3.0 1 Project Stakeholders and the Project Team

3.0.1 How were the Stakeholders Group Identified

High Interest

 Quality lead  BB,MBB & Lead  Team Leads BB  DDL  Automation lead  CL  Process Onshore  Client GM SME

 Process Specialist

High InfluenceHigh • IT Team (Third InfluenceLow Party)

Low Interest

TCS Confidential 17

3.0.2 Project Champion and Project Team Selection

3.02 Project Champion and Team Selection

Project Management Group Project Team Project Steering Committee Process Owners

Master Black Belt Project Lead (TCS)

General Manager (Client) Process Managers(TCS)

Black Belt Project Lead (Client) Domain Delivery Lead ( TCS) Process Manager (Client)

Process Tower Leaders

Stakeholders BRM (TCS) IT Manager (Third Party) SME (Client)

• Ensure the team is trained on project • Ensure project goal is management and methodologies achieved Green Belts (TCS) Customer Leaders (TCS) • Observe team performance & take • Review the progress of timely corrective actions project internally • Review projects with stakeholders • Approval committee Process Experts(TCS) • Enablement

• Execute the project as expected • Identifying key drivers and . The roles & expectation were designing feasible solutions Project Champion clearly documented during the • Making control plan selection • Getting the project reviewed by . KPI Aligns to drive business • stakeholders in a timely manner Improvement and success

TCS Confidential 18

9 3.03 Team Selection

What knowledge or skill sets were determined to be necessary for successful completion of the project? I-EVOLVE

“I-Evolve” is the defined organization practice standard to enable all the skill set requirement

TCS Confidential 19

3.0.4 Team Selection & Preparation

Before the project started, what specific training was done? Before the project started, what was done to prepare the team to work together as a team?

Specific Skillset 5 Solving problems in a Team Building Activities complex process Impact: High Launch Problem Solving (7QC Tools) Training Duration:- 1.5 Days, 3 Black Belt 1 Quick Wins Identification Impact: Low CORE Committee members on (7 types of Wastes) Refresher Session: 1 Day Training 1 Day the critical tools Workshop on Quality Tools Impact: Low AGILE & Behavioral Workshop : 01 Hr. on floor activity Target Audience- All Project execution .Target Audience- All process Stakeholders 6 skills associates (100% associates covered) Waste Elimination@ process Training Duration: 3 Hours levels (VSM) Target Audience- All . 2 Understanding Root 4 Impact: High Causes (5 Why & Fish .Training Duration: 1 Days Training & 1 Days Workshop on Lean Six Sigma Bone techniques) .Target Audience- Team leader and Impact: Low above Training Duration: 04 Hr. training on Stage 3 Causal Analysis Target Audience- Project Stakeholders

Stage 2

Stage 1 Total 4 days of team preparation Journey enabled for the successful execution of the project as per the organization defined standards

TCS Confidential 20

10 3.05 Team Routines

What roles and expectations were determined ahead of the project?

Stakeholder Role & Expectations

1)Set objective & purpose Project 2)Ensure availability of adequate resources Name Define Measure Analyze Improve Control Steering 3)Monitor progress Committee 4)Resolves escalated matter/bottleneck Project Sponsor A, I I I I A 5)Organize team Project 1)Chair team meeting and maintain focus on the goal A, I A, I A, I A, I A, I 2)Ensure progress towards the goal Champion Project Leader 3)Act as a communication hub and as a liaison with management 4)Ensure execution of action items assigned for individual team Process Owners I, R A,I, R A,I, R A,I, R A,I, R members 1)Complete all action items assigned on time Project Leader M M M M M Execution 2)Participate in team meetings Group Project 3)Communicates ideas and expertise R R R R R Members 1)Support team members with resources and information Process 2)Participate in project review Owners 3)Share required information with team * When Populating the Stakeholder, consider the ARMI: • A = Approver of team decisions Project 1)Ensure project is moving in the right direction • R = Resource to the team, one whose expertise, skills, are needed Management 2)Ensure right set of tools & techniques are used • M = Member of team Group 3)Facilitate in removing bottlenecks • I = Interested Party who will need to be kept informed on direction and findings

TCS Confidential 21

22 3.0.5 Team Routines

How communication, were established?

Review Agenda Attendees Frequency Host

Plan Ensure that the team is

Report Frequency Custodian Recipients Project Meetings working towards objective/ Project Team Weekly Project Lead goal All Stakeholders Live working sessions to NPS Report Daily MIS Project Working Weekly complete project related Project Team Black Belt Sessions Twice documents and files Status Report Weekly Project Team All Stakeholders Moving in right direction Process Project Project Review Meeting Monthly Timely issue resolution Owners Leader

To get formal go ahead on Project As per Master Black Reporting Plan Governance Governance Tollgate Review completion of every tollgate Champion Milestone Belt

 Recurring meeting invites to be

accepted

 Be on time for meetings  Provide advance notice of being absent for a meeting  Action points should be closed before the next scheduled meeting

Requirement  Agenda of the meeting to be shared 2 days before the meeting date

TCS Confidential 22

11 Project Overview Section 4

4.0.1 Project Approach

Project Methodology and Standard Organization approach

Summary of Organization standard and repeatable approach to executing DMAIC project 24-

12 4.0.2 Tools Used Throughout Project

Quick Glance on Tools used & Output Phases Tools Output

 Project Charter –Sponsor Approval Obtained  VOC to CTQ  Baseline Performance, Scope, Goal – Baseline -43.7  Project Charter –Storyboard Define  Process Map, SIPOC & Stakeholder - Core Team formed  SIPOC & Stakeholder Analysis  Benefits from Project - $28MN BVA

 VSM  Value Analysis & Quick Wins- 7 Quick Wins  MSA  MSA –Gage Accepted  CA-DPMO  Cause Effect Diagram -65 Cause Identified Measure  Brainstorming, Fishbone Analysis, Affinity Diagram  Affinity- Categorize and grouping X’s

 Validated Causes .Hypothesis test -Tool Chi-square,  Statistical approach for validating the facts  Validated 14x, 11 Significant Analyze Regression and Pareto Analysis

 65 Improvements are identified based analysis and 40  Prioritize Using Gantt Chart of them implemented  Control Impact Grid  NPS Improved from -43.7 to -18.66 Improve  Improvement validation using 2Proportion  Reduction in detractors by 14.5% from 63.7%(Jun’17)  FMEA to 49% (Jun’18)

 Control Plan  Control Impact Grid- Prioritize solutions for deployment   Performance Sustenance validated Control Control Chart  Replication  BVA Savings of $41 MN

15+ Tools were Used throughput the Project

4.0.3 Tools Output at Different Stages of Project aligned to the organization approach

What tools were used

1 2 Define Phase Measure

SIPOC was charted & team charter enabled us in ensuring support NVA’s and Manual activities Identified thru VSM Capability Analysis and partnership from all the stakeholder

Process was deep through Process Map Cause Identified Using Fishbone Affinity Diagram -Causes to X’s

13 4.0.3 Tools Output at Different Stages of Project

What tools were used 3 4 5

Analyze Improve Control

Hypothesis Testing Solution/Improvement Development Plan Control Chart

Control Plan Made

4.0.4 How Team was Prepared to use the Tools

Preparing Team using Methods

LSSGB Training Tools How Prepared Who were trained Who Trained?

Six Sigma Quality Green Belt Session Project LSSGB COE & Web based training – Tools /LSS Capsules Management Team Black Belt • Mandatory completion of online LSSGB self learning module Automation Agile Online Project Self Serve Class room training Themes Course Management Team o 3 Day training program for new candidates Online and Class Project Telecom COE Telecom Skills o Objective evaluation at the end of the training session room Training Management Team Online Assessment • After the training mandatory completion of online assessment

Monthly Governance & Toll Gate Review

14 4.0.5 Dealing with Project Risk

Project Risk Monitoring and Mitigation

Risk Risk Risk Mitigation Risks Risk Effect Encountered Close Out probability Method Status Cross Skilled Team on 2 Products from Other location based on Environmental Ensure the capacity is planned High Low Y Utilization study for closure of order Changes to handle season impacts on the customer committed date without impact in Service Unplanned Outages leading to To list all possible technical sudden fallouts addressed through Technical problem High Low problem may arise and make Y Keep me informed process to ensure prevention plan for the same low impact of detractors To organize weekly meetings Human/Organization Low Low with the employees to discuss N al resistance about the problems Work on Revisiting the entire Inadequate Planning High Low N project plan

Snap shot of the encountered risk and closeout action

4.0.6 Encountering and Handling Resistance – to be updated with live examples

Resistance was identified and/or addressed in this phase of the Project

What Type of Resistance How Identified Stakeholder Resolution

Caller FTEs were not  Revised utilization / Effort • Discussed with Tower leads behind the ready to be cross • Process Tower Lead required report necessity for cross Skill trained

• Rules were set in discussion with Client SPOCs pushing Project Steering Committee about the  During Weekly connect • Project Steering Committee ideas without sufficient necessity of performing validation data for validation before the final solutions were identified IT team was not • Upskilled TCS on specific IT skillset to agreeing for a • Project Champion avoid handoff from TCS to IT milestone SLA to  Dependency Report • Process Tower Lead • Priority matrix defined for all critical capture their TAT queues and defined priority SLA performance Inter departments in • Process Manager (Client) • Mailbox created for instant escalation onshore were not  Pended Orders Report • Process Tower Lead • Automated IVR deployed to seek providing real time approval for all credit override orders support

15 4.0.7 Stakeholder Involvement in the Project

Stakeholders Involvement Communication  Attending weekly reviews  Approved man-hour required Project Steering Committee  Resolution on Escalation  Toll gate signoff

 Attend Brainstorming session  Data collection Project Execution Group  Statistical Analysis  Sharing progress update  Escalate & engage team towards project objective Weekly review- 37 Reviews Monthly review-9 Reviews  Ensuring timeliness Toll gate review – 7 Reviews  Providing necessary knowledge & expertise to execution group Spark Best practice Sharing-1 Review Project Management Group  Validating hypothesis with data  Helped in escalating items  Review projects with stakeholders

 Provided process perspective during the data collection & analysis Process Owners  Training & meeting participation

Head of Center of Excellence  Knowledge sharing from other domains

Project Walkthrough Section 5

16 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C Project Charter

Project Leader Srividhya B Project Champion Joy Mohanty Project Mentor Prasannarani/Ram

Team Members Vasanth, Santhosh Process Owner Hashim/Allwin Project Sponsor Rhonda Rumler/Madhu C

BUSINESS CASE PROJECT SCOPE INCLUDES Our client is an leading Australian telecommunications provider, provides voice, mobile, internet access and pay television products and services to customers across Australia. TCS Back of House team handles Copper- Wirelines Product All Types of order PSTN, the order fulfilment process for the various telecommunication products sold. Foxtel, Bundles, Big pond NPS is the measure of willingness of customers to recommend a services to others. NPS is key strategic metric to improve customer experience & increase revenue. PROJECT SCOPE EXCLUDES The Team currently handles a volume of 3 Lac spread across 4 products. The net promoter score is negative across all operators & it is a important metric for improvement across the industry. Our client  Fiber Product, Mobility and Broadband with highest market share was looking to scale up on this metric first. TCS being the leading partner and  Technological Changes in design process from client had end 2 end visibility on the processes was required to transform the existing process and improve the NPS scores to help our client and increase the revenue . CRITICAL ITY OF THE PROCESS High PROBLEM STATEMENT IMPACT ON NPS score is trending at -43.7 for the period Apr- June ‘17.Lower the NPS has impact on increase in churn, drop in revenue and market share. The Industry standards quote that one detractor is equal to Internal ,Client and End Customer a potential churn of 2 customer and 1 advocate is equal 2 new customer. This is an opportunity for TCS PROJECT MILESTONES to further enhance it’s partnership with Client by adding value and create benchmark improvement in satisfaction score across other operators Phase July'17 July'17 Aug'17 Sep'17 June'18 GOAL STATEMENT Define To improve NPS by 40% from -43.7 to -26 by 30th June 2018 Measure EXPECTED Benefits Analyze Improve Reduction in Turn Around Time, CSS,Complaints Per customer, Improved customer satisfaction and

increased customer confidence in our network Control

TCS Confidential 33

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C What Data was generated to select the project Metrics & Operation Definition

Name of the metric (with unit of measure): Net Promoter Score (NPS) Measure Data type What How Frequency Source Period Size

Operational Definition: Net Promoter Score is an index ranging from 0 to 10 that measures the willingness of customers to recommend a company’s products or services to others. It is used to gauge the customer’s overall satisfaction with a company’s product or service and the customer’s loyalty to the brand. Report 151 Advocates is a customer who recommends the service to his NPS (Net NPS via NPS Reporting June’ Discrete Weekly data friends, relatives .Detractor is a customer who spreads negative Promoter Score) report reporting Tool 17 points word about the product/company. Passive is in different about tool product/company.

Formula: %Advocates - % NPS Trend –Apr’17 to June ‘17 Detractors -38.00 Any score between 0-6 Apr'17 May'17 Jun'17 (Detractor) is considered a -40.00 Defect -42.00 NPS Period of Data: Apr ‘17 to -44.00 June’17 -46.00 Current Performance: - Apr'17 May'17 Jun'17 43.17 (Apr’17-June’17 NPS NPS -44.46 -41.26 -45.38 score)

Target: -26

TCS Confidential 34

17 35 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C SIPOC and Stakeholder Analysis

. End Customer . Web forms Order Build . Outbound Call . End Customer . Sales Channel . Siebel Orders . SMS/Email/Letter . Client Internal Teams Fallout Remediation . Order Build Team . Inbound Calls . Service Activation . Activation team . Client Internal Teams . Logistics . SIK Kit delivery . End Customer Field Appointment (Systems/Applications) . NPS Feedback (Interaction and Episode) Modem Installation Supplier Input Service Activation Process Output Customer

Strongly Strongly Name ARMI Opposed Neutral Supportive Opposed Supportive Client General Manager A, I X

Madhusudhan Calastry A, I X

Joy Mohanty A, I X

Manickavachakam R X

Client –Business Manager R X * When Populating the Stakeholder, consider the ARMI: • A= Approver of team decisions Vasanth M X • R= Resource or subject matter expert (ad hoc) • M= Member of team Santhosh M X • I= Interested Party who will need to be kept informed TCS SME Team M X

SIPOC was charted & team charter enabled us in ensuring support and partnership from all the stakeholder TCS Confidential 3 35 5

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C Process Mapping

Process was deep dive through Process Map. Detailed Process Map has been drafted

TCS Confidential 36

18 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow Quick Win

Lean Tools Activity Quick win opportunity Area Quick win solutions Applied Tech visiting the customer only to activate One Step appointment proposed to Client A technician visits to the the PSTN service, Internet activation which activates the PSTN & internet at the same Tech Visit customer premise and install the happens post the PSTN connection which time. This saves the time & truck roll cost and Waiting services delays the service activation by 4 business quicker service to the customer. 7Quick Win days. solutions identified and implemented Activity Quick win opportunity Quick win solutions Type before moving into full fledged problem Address issues are occurring due to mismatch  Root cause identified and fixed solving Order failing to EP due to Address between Australian Council and Client database. the bug in the system which help Address issue issue This causes delay in service activation and orders not failing in EP because of Defect unnecessary rework this error message

Activity Quick win opportunity Quick win solutions Type

Customer The reachability of the customer is very low as Proposed solution Client to amend a Contacting customer to acquire the customer not available which resulted in preferred contact time in all the web Standardize Reachability missing/incorrect information delay in processing the request/ withdrawn the forms, so that call will be made during request that time.

TCS Confidential 37

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C Quick Win

Activity Quick win opportunity Area Quick win solutions Type Orders were getting delayed due manual In-house Macro tool developed to fetch the Service request to be reviewed validation and processing. Multiple details and enable us in a single view. This helped TIMWOOD -LEAN Web form for processing the order built navigation between applications us in avoiding transport, Defect and waiting waste

Activity Quick win opportunity Quick win solutions Type 7Quick Win solutions identified  Dedicated experts deployed and implemented Knowledge Consultant reach out to onshore stakeholders for across all LOB with systematized Parked /Clarification orders different scenarios / process confirmation .waiting approach of tracking aged orders. Intellectual before moving into Management for resolution to proceed further Repository created and OLAs full fledged problem defined solving

Activity Quick win opportunity Quick win solutions Type

Associates are preparing the reports manually. In-house Expert developed VB Scripts Preparing Reports to identify Huge time consuming activity which will which help us to eliminate the manual Jidoka Reporting Duplicate/Closed records eliminate rework effort. efforts and generate automatic reports

Activity Quick win opportunity Quick win solutions Type

Proposed Idea to Client to enhance the Designation Number is mandate Associates manually referring the contact Number current operation model. Developed Standardize) to process the number redirection details in the application . Time consuming interface which dials automatically to Designation request activity the customer

TCS Confidential 38

19 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Capability Analysis

Process Sigma Calculator - Discrete Data

Total Number of orders Survey N 2366

Total Number of Detractors D 1508

Number of Defect Opportunities per Unit O 1

Defects per million opportunities dpmo 637362.6

Defects as percentage 63.74%

Process Sigma Level Sigma 1.15

Interpretation: • The process is at 1.15 Sigma level

TCS Confidential 39

D M A I C 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow

Data Collection Plan for Y

Process Information NPS Improvement Function Client O2A Project Y FTE Size 650+ BAU Period Since August 2011

Opn. How Measured Multiple Shift Metrics Definition Window Service Service Fulfilment Offering Net Promoter Score Improvement NPS is a difference between % detractors from NPS = % Advocates - % Detractors % Advocates. Any score between 0-6 Products Internet, Voice (Detractor) is considered a Defect Billing Type Transaction Based Pricing

Data Collection Plan

Measure What Data Type Frequency Source Period Responsible

NPS Discrete Monthly Apr’17 –Jun’17 Y1 Vasanth

SM Lead Time Continuous Monthly Apr’17 –Jun’17 Allwin

SM Accuracy Discrete Monthly Apr’17 –Jun’17 Rajesh CM Apr’17 –Jun’17 Cost to Serve Attribute Monthly Vijay

TCS Confidential 40

20 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Brainstorming Potential Causes (Xs) Effect (Y) System Methods / Procedures Methods / Procedures Multiple sources of information NPS score differ between states Price comparison with Other service provider Disconnect between TCD Compliance various Tools/Applications Held Orders Reward/Offers not updated as process Siebel Latency Training Gaps ITAM dependency-No Lead time Multiple tech visit but issue is not fixed Process Knowledge Gap VDI Latency High Repeated Fallout Ports\Wire not available System Issues leading to fallouts Incomplete/Incorrect Action Provisioning Escalations (PET delay) Third Part Order Customers very particular about appointments Intermittent connectivity issue PODS Delay Customer Request Untouched Modem not received Delay or unavailability of appointment Planned/unplanned outages High Touch Points No proper work allocation SIK offered by Sales to customers with out proper expectation setting High Dependency on Multiple Products Less NPS Score Poor service in T-store High Shrinkage & Attrition Non availability of automated system Not following user procedure Customer not in attendance/Rescheduled Frequent discounts/promotion campaign Communication skill issue Lack of adherence to WI Incorrect address\Product by FOH Service activation process misinterpretation / Process gap No Escalation matrix POD not submitted not communicated Call back not done as promised Incomplete Cutover as work not completed Frequent Bundle Change Order not tracked properly Delay due lag btw sale and Order creation Webform not used by sales team Stock unavailable Delay in picking request Long Hold/Delay Not cross trained Less Technicians SME’S & Agent not aligned incorrect/Invalid service activated by FOH Call Handling issues Site not ready Technician work is incomplete Wrong commitment given to customer Unhappy with Installation No network coverage Unreachable Customer Tenurity Lack of floor support Materials People People

…and 65 probable causes was identified with fish bone

TCS Confidential 41 - 4 1 -

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C Probable X’s Cause-Effect Matrix Cause-Effect Matrix Lead Cycle Accuracy Lead Accurac Cycle <<- Output time Time <<- Output Indicators time y Time Indicators << - Importance (1- << - Importance 10 9 3 10 scale) 10 9 3 (1-10 scale) - Correlation of Input to - Correlation of Input to - Input/Process Indicators - Output - Total Rank - Input/Process Indicators - Output - Total Rank

High Repeated Fallout 9 9 9 198 1 High EP Lead Time 9 9 9 198 1 Stock unavailable 9 1 3 108 11 High Customer Disatisfication due to Retail Customers very particular about appointments 9 1 1 102 12 and contact Center 9 9 9 198 1 Customer not in attendance/Rescheduled 9 1 1 102 12 Incomplete/Incorrect Action 9 9 9 198 1 Process Knowledge Gap 3 6 1 87 13 Incorrect address\Product by FOH 9 9 9 198 1 Not following user procedure 3 6 1 87 13 Webform not used by sales team 9 9 9 198 1 incorrect/Invalid service activated by FOH 9 9 9 198 1 Lack of adherence to WI 3 6 1 87 13 FOH user error 9 9 9 198 1 Unreachable Customer 6 1 3 78 14 Technician work is incomplete 9 9 3 180 2 BQ Performers 1 6 3 73 15 Call back not done as promised 9 9 3 180 2 SME’S & Agent not aligned 1 6 3 73 15 Wrong commitment given to customer 9 9 3 180 2 Modem not received 6 1 1 72 16 Unhappy with Installation 9 9 3 180 2 TCD Compliance 6 1 1 72 16 Multiple tech visit but issue is not fixed 9 6 1 147 3 Order not tracked properly 6 1 1 72 16 Siebel Latency leading to fallouts 9 3 9 144 4 Delay in picking request 6 1 1 72 16 System Issues leading to fallouts 9 3 9 144 4 Unwarranted Volume due to planned/unplanned outages 9 3 9 144 4 Not cross trained 6 1 1 72 16 ITAM dependency-No Lead time 9 3 9 144 4 VDI Latency 6 1 1 72 16 High TAT for Provisioning Escalations 9 3 9 144 4 No proper work allocation 6 1 1 72 16 High Dependency on Multiple Products 9 3 9 144 4 No network coverage 6 1 1 72 16 High Touch Point 9 3 9 144 4 Ports\Wire not available 6 1 1 72 16 orders Held in various stages 9 3 9 144 4 Less Technicians 6 1 1 72 16 Long Hold/Delay 3 9 9 138 5 Training Gaps 1 6 1 67 17 Tenurity 3 9 6 129 6 High Shrinkage & Attrition 3 3 3 66 18 High TAT for PODS 9 3 3 126 7 POD not submitted 9 3 3 126 7 misinterpretation / Process gap 3 3 3 66 18 Delay or unavailability of appointment 9 1 9 126 7 Non availability of automated system 3 1 6 57 19 Customer Request Untouched 9 3 3 126 7 Lack of floor support 1 3 3 46 20 NPS score differ between states 9 3 3 126 7 Frequent discounts/promotion campaign 3 1 1 42 21 Expectation not Set during Sales 3 9 3 120 8 Frequent Bundle Change 3 1 1 42 21 Incomplete Cutover as work not completed 9 3 1 120 8 Third Party Order 3 1 1 42 21 Call Handling issues 3 9 3 120 8 Disconnect between various Tools/Applications 3 1 1 42 21 Communication skill issue 3 9 3 120 8 Intermittent connectivity issue 3 1 1 42 21 SIK offered by Sales to customers with out proper expectation setting 6 6 1 117 9 Site not ready 3 1 1 42 21 Poor service in T-store 3 9 1 114 10 Price comparison with Other service provider 3 1 1 42 21 Delay due to Unavailable of Escalation matrix 9 1 3 108 11 Reward/Offers not provided to customer 1 1 1 22 22 TCS Confidential 42

21 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Affinity Diagram –Causes to X’s X's Shortlisted Causes Corresponding X Data Type High TAT for PODS 1 Lead Time PODS Continuos POD not submitted High EP Lead Time Delay due to Unavailable of Escalation matrix ITAM dependency-No Lead time 2 Siebel Latency leading to fallouts Count of Fallout orders Discrete System Issues leading to fallouts Unwarranted Volume due to planned/unplanned outages High Repeated Fallout Incomplete/Incorrect Action Poor service in T-store Communication skill issue Expectation not Set during Sales Incorrect address\Product by FOH X’s 3 Web form not used by sales team Count of FOH errors Discrete incorrect/Invalid service activated by FOH  13 Countable Unique Wrong commitment given to customer X’s has been identified FOH user error Customers very particular about appointments for data collection and Delay or unavailability of appointment 4 Count of Held orders Discrete validation Technician work is incomplete High Held orders Multiple tech visit but issue is not fixed SIK offered by Sales to customers with out proper expectation setting 5 Count of Installation orders Discrete Incomplete Cutover as work not completed Unhappy with Installation 6 High Dependency on Multiple Products Product wise Activation Survey Discrete 7 Segment Segment wise Activation Survey Discrete Customer not in attendance/Rescheduled Discrete Call back not done as promised Discrete 8 Lead Time Customer Contact Long Hold/Delay Discrete Call Handling issues Discrete 9 High Touch Point Count of Touchpoints Discrete 10 Tenurity Tenurity wise NPS Survey Discrete 11 High Customer Disatisification due to Retail and contact center Channel wise Activation Survey Discrete 12 High TAT for Provisioning Escalation Lead Time PET Continuous 13 NPS score less in TAS State wise Activation Survey Discrete TCS Confidential 43

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Data Collection Plan for X’s

X Corresponding X Data Type Frequency Source Period Responsible WFM Dashboard/NPS Report X1 Lead Time PODS Continuous Monthly 3 Months Santhosh

X2 Count of Fallout orders Discrete Monthly Fallout Report 3 Months Vasanth

Count of FOH errors Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth X3 Discrete Count of Held orders Discrete Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth X4 Count of Installation orders Discrete Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth X5

Product wise Activation Survey Discrete Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth X6 X7 Segment wise Activation Survey Discrete Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth

Lead Time Customer Contact Continuous Monthly WFM Dashboard/NPS Report 3 Months Vasanth X8 Master Database Tenurity wise NPS survey Monthly 3 Months Santhosh

X9 Discrete NPS Report Vasanth Count of Touchpoints Discrete Monthly 3 Months

X10 Channel wise Activation Survey Discrete Monthly NPS Report 3 Months Santhosh X11 Lead Time PET Monthly WFM Dashboard/NPS Report X12 Continuous 3 Months Santhosh State wise Activation Survey Monthly WFM Dashboard/NPS Report X13 Discrete 3 Months Santhosh

TCS Confidential 44

22 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Test Output X1 – Lead Time PODS VS NPS Rating

Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Lead time PODS VS NPS rating

Ho : PODS Lead time do not affect NPS rating Ha : PODS Lead time do affect NPS rating

Tool : Regression

Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the<0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between Lead time PODS VS NPS Rating

 High Lead time affect NPS rating

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X3 – Count of Fallout orders VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Fallout order and NPS

Ho : Fallout orders do not affect NPS Score Ha : Fallout orders affect NPS score

Tool : Chi square

Sno Healthy 1 Non Fallout 2 Fallout Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the <0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between between the Fallout orders and NPS

Fallout order is affecting the NPS score

23 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X4 – Count of FOH Errors VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Pareto Chart of FOH 600 Objective of the test is to validate the identified 100 500 X’s are the major contributors for completion 80

400 t

r e

o 60 c

r 300

r r E Tool : Pareto Chart 40 e 200 P

100 20 0 0 F O H r t r r o es n e re d H e te e o e rr l e su o se m e su i h e a is st is O ti pl is v t r S itm l - F d l ha O e g il T m y l m il e s in m k n ro b o co k b u r m s i p d h n s u o n e s e g i n e H d c io ic a t n is io ud O t g t v a Lo t R F e n ca r e iv rk ca S o i se on ct o i t r n d a n o W u or t w u n m o o ce n m n m P n i ia m tio o k rv ic o a C c e n C t a s ch - Interpretation c b d e ce pe ll li T i x a a rv E C nv e /I S ct er e rr om  Pareto has been done and validated that the identified co st in u C X’s are the major contributors for Low NPS score. Error 184 99 72 56 25 22 18 18 18 16 15 22 Percent 32.6 17.5 12.7 9.9 4.4 3.9 3.2 3.2 3.2 2.8 2.7 3.9 Hence decided to put control to reduce the number of C um % 32.6 50.1 62.8 72.7 77.2 81.1 84.2 87.4 90.6 93.5 96.1 100.0 detractors for the above contribution

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X6 – Installation Type VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Installation Type VS NPS

Ho : Installation do not affect NPS Score Ha : Installation do affect NPS score

Tool : Chi square

Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the alpha value, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between between the installation Type and NPS

The Chi-square value indicates that the products which does required the installation has low NPS score.

24 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X5 – Count of Held Orders VS NPS Score Test Output Hypothesis Chi-Square Test: Advocates, Detractor

Objective of the test is to validate the Expected counts are printed below observed counts relationship between Held Order and NPS Chi-Square contributions are printed below expected counts Ho : Held order do not affect NPS Score Ha : Held Order affect NPS score Advocates Detractor Total Tool : Chi square Held 10 71 81

17.09 63.91 2.939 0.786

Non Held 17 30 47 Interpretation 9.91 37.09 5.065 1.354 As the P-Value is less than the <0.05 it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between between the Held orders and NPS Total 27 101 128

Chi-Sq = 10.143, DF = 1, P-Value = 0.001

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X7 – Product VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Product and NPS

Ho : Product do not affect NPS Score Sno Product Ha : Product do affect NPS score 1 Big pond Tool : Chi square 2 Bundle 3 Foxtel 4 PSTN

Interpretation As the P-Value is less than the >0.05, it has been considered that there is no significant relationship between Products and NPS

p >0.05, hence Ho is accepted. Product do not effect Episode NPS

25 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X8 – Segment VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Segment order VS NPS

Ho : Segment category do not affect NPS Score Ha : Segment Category affect NPS score

Tool : Chi square

Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the <0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between the segment and NPS

The Chi-square value at the segment level indicates that the Family & Fun(4) and Friend ,fun & Fashion (7) Safe and respected (9), segment contributes to detractor high compared to other segments

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X10 – Tenurity of agent VS NPS Score Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Tenurity of agent and NPS

Ho : Tenurity do not affect NPS Score Sno Tenurity Ha : Tenurity affect NPS score 1 <1 Year 2 2-3 Year Tool : Chi square 3 >3 Years

Interpretation As the P-Value is less than the >0.05, it has been considered that there is no significant relationship between NPS and Tenurity

26 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X11 – Touch Point VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between touch point and NPS

Ho : Touch Point do not affect NPS Score Ha : Touch Point affect NPS score

Tool : Chi square

Interpretation As the P-Value is less than the <0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between between the touch Point and NPS

It’s been observed that the orders which have more than 2 touch points shows dip in NPS scores on all months

Touch point is influencing towards NPS

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X12 – Channel Type VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Channel Type order VS NPS

Ho : Channel Type do not affect NPS Score Ha : Channel do affect NPS score

Tool : Chi square

Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the <0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between the channel Type and NPS The Chi-square value indicates that Contact Center channel contributes to detractor high compared to other channels

27 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Test Output X2 – Lead Time Customer Contact VS NPS Rating

Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between Fallout Lead time VS NPS

Ho : EP Lead time do not affect NPS Score Ha : EP Lead time do affect NPS score

Tool : Regression

Interpretation

As the P-Value is less than the<0.05, it has been considered that there is a significant relationship between Lead time EP VS NPS Rating

 High EP Lead time affect NPS score

5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

X14 – State VS NPS Test Output Hypothesis

Objective of the test is to validate the relationship between State wise and NPS Sno Customer State 1 NSW Ho : State wise do not affect NPS Score 2 VIC

Ha : State wise do affect NPS score 3 QLD 4 WA 5 SA Tool : Chi square 6 ACT 7 TAS

Interpretation As the P-Value is less than the >0.05, it has been considered that there is no significant relationship between between the State wise and NPS

Failed to reject Null hypothesis.

28 5.0.1 Data Driven Project Flow D M A I C

Summary- Statistical Test Plan and Results

S. No Validated X’s X Data Type Y Data Type Test Used Accepted

Lead Time PODS Continuous Continuous Regression Significance X1

Count of Fallout orders Discrete Discrete Chi Square Significance X2

Count of FOH errors Discrete Pareto Significance X3 Discrete

Count of Held orders Discrete Discrete Chi Square Significance X4

Count of Installation orders Discrete Discrete Chi Square Significance X5 Product wise Activation Discrete Discrete Chi Square Non Significant X6 Survey Segment wise Activation Discrete Chi Square Significance X7 Survey Discrete

Lead Time Customer Contact Discrete Chi Square Significance X8 Discrete

Tenurity wise NPS survey Discrete Chi Square Non Significant X9 Discrete

Count of Touchpoints Discrete Discrete Chi Square Significance X10 Channel wise Activation Discrete Discrete Chi Square Significance X11 Survey

Lead Time PET Continuous Regression Significance X12 Continuous

State NPS Survey Continuous Chi Square Non Significance X13 Continuous

5.0.1 Data Driven Flow D M A I C

Validated X’s Root Cause List of Solutions Responsible 1)20% of Order form had incorrect POD of Document 1. Two Way SMS : Two Way SMS to implemented for to improve customer Submitted or critical document not submitted for service reachability, reduce calling dependency. activation due to non availability of mistake proof frond

end systems 2. Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) :Trigger about right document

submission for the FOH while orders submission.  Lead Time 2)The attempt to reach the customer to collect the Srividhya/Allwin

PODS document is significantly high as 7 to 10 days impacting 3. Process Reengineering : New mail box has to be developed for handling the Team the overall lead time POD validation for not reachable scenario

3)Document submitted but misalignment between 4. IT Intervention :All orders should flow to PODS submission queue without any system for processing interruptions

1) No Specific prioritization for fall out order leading to 5.Dedicated Team :Ring fence to be created in EP to prioritize Activation & Move delay of service activation request to fast track action turn around time 2) IT issue Orders Piled up during weekend and no 6. Heijunka (Scheduling): IT weekend support required to handle and mitigate the defined escalation matrix system fallout orders 3) Fallout due to multiple product configuration due to 7.One Stop Solution (MUDA) : Analyzed all the products and business matrix undefined business rule in the legacy system developed to provide all service at one instance 4) Mobile Add new order should not contains initials , 8. Poke Yoke. Automatic Tool to be developed to overcome the system spaces in Siebel since MICA will not accept the same challenges in order to avoid the human errors leading to fallouts 9. System Enhancement ( First Time Right) Business rules developed to 5) Customer requested VAS is incompatible for the indicate the right component with the user friendly approach on selecting the  Fallout orders products already active for the customer Product Srividhya/Abi 6) Order failed as the address in customer portal/ billing 13. Make the Complex Simple : Address database to be reinforced with Siebel account address provided in Siebel is not mapped and the Australian Govt. Database with E-East 14. Continuous Flow: Refine the existing system to have the seamless flow to 7) Foxtel move orders landed in VIVA successfully, but avoid the order fallout in B2B system failed in Siebel . Orders getting failed as B2B handler 15. Continuous Flow: Refine the existing system to have the seamless flow to unable to handle the orders on time/sending avoid the order fallout in response back to Siebel 15. Standardize: Siebel to be aligned with the network model for all customer 8) Customer migrated to Mx9 platform in network Mailboxes however Siebel is still active with MX8 platform asset

- 58 -

29 5.0.1 Data Driven Flow D M A I C

Validated X’s Root Cause List of Solutions Responsible  Error occurs due to Data alignment between Siebel, USM 17. PDCA: Analyze the list of misaligned service data and establish protocol to and Network. verify the alignment in the service inventory

 Count of  Order getting failed due to Planned / Unplanned System 18. Proactive Engagement :System should pro-actively get inputs from the Fallout Srividhya/Abi outages. This is due to system maintainenace requestor and provision the requests once the system running up - Simultaneous orders customer should be informed about the delay. OM should be holding the order until IT system up and Running

 Segment  Offers not applied as promised 19. IT team need to verify the offers applied for all the product release wise  Incorrect information received which lead to high TAT Srividhya/Abi Activation  No Prioritization done on the segment request 20. Dedicated Team to create for emergency and High value customer Survey  Work Instruction not effectively maintained 21. Collaborative Session: Joint session between FOH/TCS to exchange effective Knowledge Session on the detractor feedback and user errors and  Not procuring the right information during sales/order submission. 22.Work Instruction : Standardized Work – Documented procedures for  Count of Inbound/Store /Back office on the alignment of work Srividhya/Jucel FOH errors  Communication/skill issue 23. Feedback Management Tool: Feedback provided to the users on the  Wrong commitment provided to the customer committed error, discovering the true underlying problem. Strengthening the weakest area .  No Prioritization on the orders held up in the “ Held order 24. Priority Support : Team choose the Held orders for managing the New management Queue “ provision order to enhance the customer advocacy  Non Availability of Technicians 25. Dedicated Slots for Fallout :Reserved slot for fall out queues to meet the  Count of  Port Unavailability original date Srividhya/Rhond Held orders  Less Infrastructure 26. Elevate Network Footprint : Feasibility to be explored to fix splitter in a  Customer been not informed about the delay precedence to port pillar to augment port availability. 27.Case Managers : Deployed Case Manager to be deployed for effectively managing the held request without any delay. Ride on

- 59 -

5.0.1 Data Driven Flow D M A I C

Validated X’s Root Cause List of Solutions Responsible

 Lead Time  Missed to call the customers on all available contact 28. Jidoka (Autonomation ) :Automated Caller out to be connected for all the Client/Srivid Customer and less reachability outbound calls which will increase customer reachability Increase the number of Contact  No prioritization on calling attempt based on order attempts in automated system from 2 to 3 for better reachability. hya type 29.Priority : Customer Preferred contact time slot to be made available in  SMS not sent for all unsuccessful attempts(KMI not Siebel to increase customer reachability % done) 30. Automated SMS Report to be sent for every unsuccessful attempt  Multiple hands off on internal contacts to remediate 31. Cross Skill BOH to contact Internal team areas which will avoid volume for the order customer contact

 Customers requests untouched in SOTB due to user 33. Live Dashboard : Reports to be developed to check the touch status of each action negligence with the order journey details  Count of  Incorrectly moved and actioned the request 34. Process Standardization: Matrix to be developed to meet all the critical Srividhya/Le Touchpoints  Lack of Cross Training and multiple process requirements of transferring the orders to the right department on the first instance ads/Client dependency 35. Cross Skill to be done in the back of house team to contact internal teams for order remediation and handle the orders end to end by the consultant

 Channel wise 36. Work Instruction to be reviewed between GCC and Retail Live and Workshop to be Srividhya/Cli Activation  WI not aligned between Retail and GCC arranged between GCC , Retail team and Back of House Survey ent  Orders stuck in provisioning system due to system 37.Fast tracking: Provisioning escalation turn around time from IT will influence challenges 11.8% of detractors from Push to cancel/Push to complete dependencies.  Lead Time PET  Systems not enhanced Habeeb 38Governance : Fortnightly call to be organized to discuss the dependency and way  High TAT on IT resolution forward action for early closure  Multiple teams involved in resolving issues

39. Service Verification Call : Once technician work get completed , verification call  Tech work Incomplete to be initiated to confirm the service assurance  Installation  Customer not been informed on the appointment 40 Automated KMI to be sent to customer if there is any appointment or commitment Srividhya orders  No proper information on the KIT done in the customer request with the Prevalidation requirement 41. Self Installation user guide to be simplified for ease of connection

- 60 -

30 5.0.1 Data Driven Flow

What tools were used to identify the final solution Ease of Implementation

Easy Difficult

35 36 39 40 7 15 19 20 24

18 21 22 27 28 32 25 26 29 30 High

11 12 13 14 16 17

1 3 4 5 9 10 NPS

2 4 6 8 23

Impact to to Impact 31 33 34 37 38 4 20

41 Low

5.0.2 Solution Validation

EP Fallout Improvement Validation PODS Improvement Validation

Customer Contact -Improvement Validation

We had significant improvement ….

31 5.0.2 Solution Justification

Cost Benefit Analysis

Fallout FOH Held Touch Installation Validated Root Cause PODS Segment Customer Contact Channel PET Orders Errors Orders Points Orders Training Cost $0.04 $0.01 $0.000 $0.03 - - $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 Automation Cost - $0.01 - $0.001 0.000 - - $0.00 Man hours Spent $0.01 $0.07 $0.000 0.012 0.005 $0.014 0.01 $0.02 $0.01 $0.01 Total Cost $0.31 FTE Cost Save(Proj) $0.96 Customer Business $31.48 Value add save(Proj) Total Benefit Annualized $32.44 Total Net Benefit $32.13

64 5.0.4 Results Primary Metric Secondary Metric Secondary Metric

NPS Pre VS Post Lead Time -Pre VS Project Accuracy-Pre VS Project

0 6 99.00% -20 5

98.50% -18.66

In Days In 4

-40 -

Defective 98.00% NPS -43.7 3 - -60 97.50% 2

-80 1 97.00% Lead Time Lead -100 0 Accuracy 96.50% Pre Project Post Project Pre Project Post Project Before After NPS -43.7 -18.66 Lead Time 5.29 4.28 Lead Time 97.50% 98.79%

Counter Metric IMPACT CLOSURE Cost to Serve -Pre VS Project

$6.00 AUD

- $5.00 $4.00

$3.00

Per Order Per - $2.00 $1.00

Unit Rate Unit $0.00 Pre Project Post Project Cost to Serve $5.79 $3.31

HUMAN CLOUD • Employee Social Network Analysis • Employee Collaboration Index ANALYTICS • Sentiment Analysis TCS Confidential 64

32 5.0.4 Results Validation of Y – Improvement, Stability & Capability Improvement

Process Sigma Calculator - Discrete Data Test and CI for Two Proportions

Total Number of orders Survey N 1324 Claim: There is significant difference in NPS before and after improvement (HA)

Total Number of Detractors D 652 Sample X N Sample p Detract-Pre 1508 2366 0.637363 Number of Defect Opportunities per Unit O 1 Detract-Post 652 1324 0.492447

Defects per million opportunities dpmo 492447.1 Difference = p (1) - p (2) Estimate for difference: 0.144916 Defects as percentage 49.24% 95% CI for difference: (0.111742, 0.178089) Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = 8.56 P-Value = 0.000

Process Sigma Level Sigma 1.52 Fisher’s exact test: P-Value = 0.000

Interpretation

 Sigma Score for NPS has been improved from 1.15 to 1.52

TCS Confidential 65

5.0.4 Results

Benefits from Project Improvement Project Financial Benefit Calculation Sheet

PI Project Title: Building Enhanced Experience for Wire-line Segment (NPS)

PI Project Lead (GB/ BB/ LEAN/ SPS/ Other): Srividhya Project Mentor: Prasannarani Project Champion: Manick Total Business Project Sponsor: Joy Mohanty Project Start Month (MM/DD/YYYY): 1-Jul-17 Value Add Project End Month (MM/DD/YYYY): 30-Jun-18 Saving of $41.7 Project Type: Customer Facing MN. Endorsed

NPS Wireline -Saving Calculations from client end Business Value Benefit Pre Project Post Project Potential Detractor % 62% 49% Volume 346163 Potential Business Value delivery threat per customer 64 ARPU Potential Projected Loss Monthly $ 13,661,167.02 Volume x Detractor% Before Potential Loss actually Monthly $ 10,823,340.06 Volume x Detractor% After Monthly Business value Add -AUD $ 2,837,826.97 Annual Business Value Delivered in AUD $ 34,053,923.59 AUD to INR Conversion – ₹ 52.5100 Annual Business Value Delivered in INR ₹ 1,788,171,527.72 Annual Business Value Delivered in USD $ 41,701,761.37 - 66 - Annualised Savings IN mn $ 41.70 66

33 5.0.5 Maintaining the Gains

What were the results

Interpretation

 NPS Score has improved from -43.7 to 18.66

TCS Confidential 67

5.0.5 Maintaining the Gains

I-MR Chart of Netpromoter by Stages P Chart of NPS Detractor by Stagewise Pre Implementation Post -10

e UC L=-12.62 Pre Implementation Post

u l

a -20 _ 0.70 V

X=-23.29 l

a -30 u

d LC L=-33.95

i v

i -40 0.65

d n

I -50

17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 ------l- - - e ly st er er er er y y h ri y e n u u b b b b ar ar rc p a n n UCL=0.6022 Ju J g o u u a A M Ju 0.60 u m t m m r o

e c e e n M i A t v c a eb

O J t ep o e F S N D r

Month o p

o 0.55 r _

Pre Implementation Post P 15 P=0.5311

e UC L=13.10

g n

a 10 0.50

n __

i 5

v MR=4.01

o LCL=0.4600 M 0 LC L=0 0.45

17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 18 - - t - r- r- r- r- - - - il- - - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 e ly s e e e e ry ry ch r y e un u u b b b b a a r p a un J J ug m to m m u ru a A M J e c e e n b M Sample A t O v c Ja e ep o e F S N D Month Tests performed with unequal sample sizes

Interpretation:15% reduction in detractor improved Interpretation: 26 point improvement in NPS (-43.7 to - from (62% to 55%) 18.51) with reduction in variation of the scores .

34 5.0.5 Maintaining the Gains

Control Plan

Control Plan What's Process Step Measurement Method Control Method Frequency Responsibility Controlled?

Responsibility assigned to EP Remediation EP Fallout Reports Team Leads Daily Team Leads

Quality check –Random PODS –Two Way SMS Lead time Siebel Report Audit Daily Quality Team

NPS affected by Aged ITAM Escalation ITAM’s Report SPOC assigned Daily SME SPOC

SPOC assigned Customer Contact Customer Reachability Two Hours Report Hourly Team Leads

Responsibility assigned to Team Leads Cycle time AHT WFM Report Weekly WFM

Orders landing to CO Own CODE NPSO Report SOM SME’s Monthly TL tool without any miss

5.0.6 Project Communication

How did the team communicate the results to the various stakeholder groups? Process Improvement Portal : Formal Communication CAR-Best Practice Sharing

Newsletter : Standard Communication

35 71 5.0.6 Project Communication

Standard Communication Across multiple Stakeholders

TCS Confidential 71

72 5.0.6 Project Communication

How did the team communicate the results and get acknowledgment?

Communicate the results to the various stakeholder groups

Client

Client Endorsement

Acknowledgement

TCS Confidential 72

36 5.0.6 Project Communication

Testimonials

Client General Manager– “Congratulations on this great achievement, it is a fabulous success story, This is a true reflection of a great partnership and collaboration across the teams to help drive these fantastic results. My sincere appreciation and thanks to the entire teams”.

Business Team Manager– Great work and collaboration on this initiative across the teams.

TCS Customer Leader– “Well done in enabling this improvement through the year and for the successful closure of this project. Pls pass my compliments to your teams

Delivery Excellence Head – “Excellent! Congratulations Team !

TCS Confidential - 73 -

Thank You!

TCS Confidential 74