I was pleased to hear this, and I wanted to keep it that way. A change of staff should not mean asking the customer to explain everything again. That is not the kind of handover I want.
In an operations consolidation project handled by Advange, I was also concerned about how to transfer information held by several vendors. The customer's business continues while the help desk and operations management transition to a new arrangement. Even with documentation in place, could there still be tasks or contacts known only to individual staff members? This required as much attention as the equipment settings.
Who Do You Ask During a Procedure?
Take the example of granting additional permissions to a shared folder.Even if the procedure explains how to change the settings, work stops if no one knows whose approval is needed. The MSP asks the internal IT contact, who checks with the department using the folder and relays the response to the MSP. If this happens every time, the IT contact remains a permanent intermediary.
Adding more screenshots to the procedure will not solve this problem. What I want to see is the approval email. I read it to understand who was asked what, looking for information missing from the handover documents.
If the approver is missing, add that information to the documentation. But recording a name is not the end of the task. We need to agree with the customer on whether the MSP may contact that person directly. Can requests be routed without going through the IT contact while leaving the decision to grant permissions with the customer? Discussing that point can change how the next request is handled.
In urgent situations, it may be necessary to ask someone with the relevant knowledge and proceed. The problem is when the answer remains only in an email. Another request arrives the next day, and unless time is set aside to update the documentation, it tends to stay that way.
Once a request is resolved, we also feel that the job is done. But if the next staff member cannot use what the customer has explained, we will have to ask the customer to explain it again. I want to reduce the repeated questions that our own handover process can prevent.
Have Another Staff Member Use the SOP
I would like to incorporate these details into the SOP, the standard operating procedure used in daily work.For additional permissions, include the information required for the request and the approver alongside the operational steps. Agree with the customer on whom to contact when the approver is unavailable. Requests for permissions outside the usual scope should be routed to the appropriate decision-maker rather than carried out immediately.
After writing the procedure, I plan to have another staff member use it. Even when I think I have written it clearly, some parts are likely to be unclear to the reader. I will revise it based on the questions that arise. The starting point is to choose one task that repeatedly generates the same questions.
My concern is keeping the procedure up to date after it has been created. If the approver's name becomes outdated, staff will have to search for the right person again. I would also like the operating process to specify who communicates organizational changes and who updates the procedure.
Advange works across networks, cloud services, Microsoft 365, security, user support, and other areas. Understanding work across multiple domains helps us plan handoffs between teams, which is also a strength when taking over operations.
I want the next staff member to hear the customer's words: 'It has become easier.' When handing over a procedure, we should also record which interactions had placed a burden on the customer. Understanding that context should make it easier to make decisions when reviewing the procedure.
Written by: Choi Myung-hee
