Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 Challenge​ : Describe your challenge , including all relevant information .     I worked in the Financial Services industry in the US from the early 1992 ’s to 2009 . As the Head   of Wema Bank Plc in the Office of the COO , I managed the North America support   functions for Customer Service and Collections operations for various financial products like   Credit Cards , Retail Bank , Mortgage , Student and Auto loans . In 2008 , this industry was hit by   the now well - known and notorious financial crisis . This was a pivotal chapter that caused a   paradigm shift in how banks and financial institutions ran their business . From a focus on   offering competitive products and achieving high customer satisfaction , it pivoted to   aggressively driving ​expense optimization initiatives​. This was both essential from a business   sustenance standpoint but also from the PR/ optics side due to the TARP money that had been   afforded to many banks during this time by the US Government . This led to a single track focus   on cost cuts and driving expenses down over the next few years .     Desperate to meet this goal of reducing expenses as much and as quickly as possible , various   business units in my organization unanimously chose the two most obvious ( ​‘low hanging fruit’​ )   solutions : ​Automation​ and ​Outsourcing​. Automating all feasible customer communication   channels ( Interactive Voice Response ) and outsourcing operations to cost effective locations   ( typically offshore ) . Both of these approaches were tremendous successes as was evident from   the financials at the end of the year . However , we saw a significant decrease in new business   and the sales of the financial products and services we offered declined by over 30 % in the   same period . This was a serious red flag as it shook the very foundation of business   sustenance . The Office of the COO issued a directive to pause and analyze data to understand   what was driving this and whether it was related to the expense optimization measures we had   put in place recently . As the Head of PMO , I was tasked with driving this effort to understand the   relationship and dependencies to come up with creative solutions to tackle both expense   optimization and new business .     Selection​ : In your own words , briefly describe the tool you selected ( e.g. , what it is and why you   selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references ) .     For this exercise , I chose the ​Mind Map​ * tool . The organization had employed two strategies as   a ‘ ​knee jerk/ gut​ ’ reaction to the industry crisis . While that was solving the immediate problem at   hand of expenses , it was causing repercussions in other areas . To be able to solve this , it was   vital to understand the data and analyze the patterns to understand cause and effect . This   analysis of ‘ ​what - is​ ’ was critical to understand the organization ’s current reality and hone in on   insights from the data we had . These would form the basis for the ‘ ​what - if​ ’ brainstorming phase   that would seek to identify meaningful and creative solutions for the road ahead .      * Design Thinking - Week 3 : Idea Generation ( Sophie Tolu ) and Mind Mapping Tool ( Carolyn Martinez )     Application​ : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , what you   did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 ----- ​Please continue to next page 

 Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 I organized this exercise in the following way :     Step 1 : Identify key stakeholders - Business Unit Leaders , Finance , Engineering etc .    Step 2 : Obtain alignment problem statement ( ‘ ​what - is​ ’ ) and key data points available   Step 3 : Organize focus groups to have an engaging and interactive conversation on the above   Step 4 : Summarize key findings , patterns and insights    Step 5 : Document design criteria based on the above learnings      The 5 focus groups ( one for each line of business ) was the most time consuming yet insightful   of the five steps . Participants included representation from all lines of business so as to benefit   from a learning experience while also keeping an eye out for cross functional dependencies and   impacts . The first task was to whiteboard the ​business journey​ from ‘ ​what - was​ ’ to ‘ ​what - is​ ’ .   The group utilized post - it notes to identify the steps taken and how they contributed to the   current reality of the organization . The second task was to whiteboard the ​customer journey ​to   understand how the business journey had impacted and changed the customer experience .   This was important as we needed to understand the cause and effect to be able to derive   meaningful insights . Finally , for the third task , we had a deep dive into the data and analytics   available to quantify the themes and trends we had observed .      Insight​ : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your challenge   ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design thinking more   broadly ) .     The quantitative analysis showed that expense optimization initiatives and customer satisfaction   ( CSAT ) were positively correlated , meaning there was a definitive cause and effect between the   two . There were no perceptible differences between the impact of either Automation or   Outsourcing - they were both complemented by proportional decline in CSAT scores . However ,   declining CSAT scores were also observed in smaller lines of business that had not   aggressively employed the expense optimization initiatives . This showed the interconnectivity   and dependence between the different lines of business . This is where the qualitative data from   the focus groups really helped . Customers preferred to talk to an agent rather than an   automated IVR system ( evident from the requests to transfer to a live agent data ) . However , the   CSAT scores were still low despite and after a conversation with the live agent . A focus group   with select customers identified the following contributors : customers with multiple products and   services ( eg . a customer with both credit card and mortgage accounts ) were kept bouncing   around by the IVR system ; customers that talked to a live agent found them wanting of   knowledge and information about highly specialized products ( eg . agent in India did not   understand student loans in the US ) .      The key insights we gained from this exercise was mind blowing . The fundamental problem that   was unearthed was that the organization had approached the problem in a two - pronged way -   business journey and customer journey . This was evident from the visual whiteboard exercise   where multiple misalignments were detected between the two journeys . While expense   optimization is good for the business and the balance sheet , customer satisfaction is what is 

 Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 needed for long term sustenance and success of the company . The design criteria that were   formulated included two key elements : higher complexity products and services should be   serviced by Subject Matter Experts , high value ( monetary measure ) and high breadth customers   ( multiple products ) should be serviced by a live agent , circumventing the IVR system . These   groundbreaking insights focused our subsequent steps and helped bring together creative and   intuitive solutions that solved both the business and customer problems .      Approach​ : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you   selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why .     While this was a very enlightening exercise , this unfortunately came a bit late in the timeline .   The initial solutions of Automation and Outsourcing were employed with only the business   problem in mind . Had there been a deep dive into the various contributing factors and   dependencies ahead of time , we could have saved a very costly and time consuming effort . This   was a good lesson for the future for me personally about focusing on all aspects of ‘ ​what - is​ ’   before delving into the ‘ ​what - if​ ’ . 

 x - x - x - x - x 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 Challenge​ : Describe your challenge , including all relevant information .     I worked in the Financial Services industry in the US from the early 1992 ’s to 2009 . As the Head   of Wema Bank Plc in the Office of the COO , I managed the North America support   functions for Customer Service and Collections operations for various financial products like   Credit Cards , Retail Bank , Mortgage , Student and Auto loans . In 2008 , this industry was hit by   the now well - known and notorious financial crisis . This was a pivotal chapter that caused a   paradigm shift in how banks and financial institutions ran their business . From a focus on   offering competitive products and achieving high customer satisfaction , it pivoted to   aggressively driving ​expense optimization initiatives​. This was both essential from a business   sustenance standpoint but also from the PR/ optics side due to the TARP money that had been   afforded to many banks during this time by the US Government . This led to a single track focus   on cost cuts and driving expenses down over the next few years .     Desperate to meet this goal of reducing expenses as much and as quickly as possible , various   business units in my organization unanimously chose the two most obvious ( ​‘low hanging fruit’​ )   solutions : ​Automation​ and ​Outsourcing​. Automating all feasible customer communication   channels ( Interactive Voice Response ) and outsourcing operations to cost effective locations   ( typically offshore ) . Both of these approaches were tremendous successes as was evident from   the financials at the end of the year . However , we saw a significant decrease in new business   and the sales of the financial products and services we offered declined by over 30 % in the   same period . This was a serious red flag as it shook the very foundation of business   sustenance . The Office of the COO issued a directive to pause and analyze data to understand   what was driving this and whether it was related to the expense optimization measures we had   put in place recently . As the Head of PMO , I was tasked with driving this effort to understand the   relationship and dependencies to come up with creative solutions to tackle both expense   optimization and new business .     Selection​ : In your own words , briefly describe the tool you selected ( e.g. , what it is and why you   selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references ) .     For this exercise , I chose the ​Mind Map​ * tool . The organization had employed two strategies as   a ‘ ​knee jerk/ gut​ ’ reaction to the industry crisis . While that was solving the immediate problem at   hand of expenses , it was causing repercussions in other areas . To be able to solve this , it was   vital to understand the data and analyze the patterns to understand cause and effect . This   analysis of ‘ ​what - is​ ’ was critical to understand the organization ’s current reality and hone in on   insights from the data we had . These would form the basis for the ‘ ​what - if​ ’ brainstorming phase   that would seek to identify meaningful and creative solutions for the road ahead .      * Design Thinking - Week 3 : Idea Generation ( Sophie Tolu ) and Mind Mapping Tool ( Carolyn Martinez )     Application​ : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , what you   did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . 

 ----- ​Please continue to next page 

 Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 I organized this exercise in the following way :     Step 1 : Identify key stakeholders - Business Unit Leaders , Finance , Engineering etc .    Step 2 : Obtain alignment problem statement ( ‘ ​what - is​ ’ ) and key data points available   Step 3 : Organize focus groups to have an engaging and interactive conversation on the above   Step 4 : Summarize key findings , patterns and insights    Step 5 : Document design criteria based on the above learnings      The 5 focus groups ( one for each line of business ) was the most time consuming yet insightful   of the five steps . Participants included representation from all lines of business so as to benefit   from a learning experience while also keeping an eye out for cross functional dependencies and   impacts . The first task was to whiteboard the ​business journey​ from ‘ ​what - was​ ’ to ‘ ​what - is​ ’ .   The group utilized post - it notes to identify the steps taken and how they contributed to the   current reality of the organization . The second task was to whiteboard the ​customer journey ​to   understand how the business journey had impacted and changed the customer experience .   This was important as we needed to understand the cause and effect to be able to derive   meaningful insights . Finally , for the third task , we had a deep dive into the data and analytics   available to quantify the themes and trends we had observed .      Insight​ : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your challenge   ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design thinking more   broadly ) .     The quantitative analysis showed that expense optimization initiatives and customer satisfaction   ( CSAT ) were positively correlated , meaning there was a definitive cause and effect between the   two . There were no perceptible differences between the impact of either Automation or   Outsourcing - they were both complemented by proportional decline in CSAT scores . However ,   declining CSAT scores were also observed in smaller lines of business that had not   aggressively employed the expense optimization initiatives . This showed the interconnectivity   and dependence between the different lines of business . This is where the qualitative data from   the focus groups really helped . Customers preferred to talk to an agent rather than an   automated IVR system ( evident from the requests to transfer to a live agent data ) . However , the   CSAT scores were still low despite and after a conversation with the live agent . A focus group   with select customers identified the following contributors : customers with multiple products and   services ( eg . a customer with both credit card and mortgage accounts ) were kept bouncing   around by the IVR system ; customers that talked to a live agent found them wanting of   knowledge and information about highly specialized products ( eg . agent in India did not   understand student loans in the US ) .      The key insights we gained from this exercise was mind blowing . The fundamental problem that   was unearthed was that the organization had approached the problem in a two - pronged way -   business journey and customer journey . This was evident from the visual whiteboard exercise   where multiple misalignments were detected between the two journeys . While expense   optimization is good for the business and the balance sheet , customer satisfaction is what is 

 Design Thinking for Innovation - Final Assignment                           November 2020 

 needed for long term sustenance and success of the company . The design criteria that were   formulated included two key elements : higher complexity products and services should be   serviced by Subject Matter Experts , high value ( monetary measure ) and high breadth customers   ( multiple products ) should be serviced by a live agent , circumventing the IVR system . These   groundbreaking insights focused our subsequent steps and helped bring together creative and   intuitive solutions that solved both the business and customer problems .      Approach​ : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you   selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why .     While this was a very enlightening exercise , this unfortunately came a bit late in the timeline .   The initial solutions of Automation and Outsourcing were employed with only the business   problem in mind . Had there been a deep dive into the various contributing factors and   dependencies ahead of time , we could have saved a very costly and time consuming effort . This   was a good lesson for the future for me personally about focusing on all aspects of ‘ ​what - is​ ’   before delving into the ‘ ​what - if​ ’ . 

 x - x - x - x - x
### Output: 