Enclosure 2, Letter sent BBC, 6/2.

From: eribsskog@gmail.com Erik Ribsskog
To: England.moderators@bbc.co.uk
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:06:13 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Your BBC Posting has been removed

Hi,

I can't see that I have recieved an answer to this e-mail yet, thats why I'm
trying to send it again.

Hope that this is alright!

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 13, 2007 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: Your BBC Posting has been removed
To: England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>


Hi,

I was wondering if you think it would be possible for me to get a more
spesific reason on why the post
was removed?

Yours sincerely,

Erik Ribsskog


On 12 Oct 2007 15:57:47 +0000, England <England.moderators@bbc.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> Dear BBC Community member,
>
> Thank you for contributing to a BBC community site. Unfortunately we've
> had to remove your content below because it contravened one of the House
> Rules.
>
> Postings to BBC messageboards will be removed if they:
>
> *Break the law, or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes
> defamation and contempt of court.
>
> You can find out more about Defamation at
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/hub/HouseRules-Defamation
> You can read the BBC messageboards House Rules in full here:
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_house_rules.html
>
> Please be careful when you copy the text of someone else's message into
> your post. If their posting is subsequently removed, your posting may also
> have been removed, as it contained a copy of their failed text.
>
> If you can rewrite your contribution to remove the problem, we'd be happy
> for you to post it again.
>
> Please note that anyone who seriously or repeatedly breaks the House Rules
> may have action taken against their account.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/popup_breaking_rules.html
>
> Regards,
>
> The BBC Communities Team
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/messageboards/newguide/
>
> URL of content (now removed):
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/england/F2770282?Thread=4653901&post=54093182
>
> Subject:
> The use of Negative Reinforcement as a Management-method at the Arvato
> Microsoft Scandinavian Product Activation in Liverpool.
>
> Posting:
> When I was working at the Arvato Microsoft Scandinavian Product Activation
> in Liverpool, I had a meeting with one of the team-leaders on the campaign.
>
> I was wondering why we, (I was working as a regular Contact Centre
> Representative there), and I was wondering why we got lines like 'NN, you're
> on wrap-up', shouted at us across the tables, from the team-leaders.
>
> Then I got to hear that this was something that the team-leaders had been
> thought during team-leader training.
>
> The team-leader I was in the meeting with, told me, that they had been
> trained using '[negative] reinforcement', during the team-leader training.
>
> She explained to me, that she wouldn't stop with the
> shouting/complaining/'giving stick', the way she did, because this was the
> way they had been trained to lead the campaign.
>
> Here is a quote from the summary from this meeting:
>
> 'I also brought up the situation with the wrap-up meeting we had some
> weeks earlier, where
> we agreed on that I would work on gradually bettering the wrap-up time,
> but that she then
> forgot this agreement, and the next day acted like this meeting hadnt been
> taking place
> at all, and continued to shout 'You're on wrap-up' if the wrap-up time
> exceeded 5 seconds.
>
> Vivian explained that this was call reinforcement, and that the
> team-leaders were trained
> to use reinforcement as a way of solving problems, like the problem with
> agents being
> to long time on wrap-up between the calls. So she wouldnt stop doing this,
> because she
> had been trained to do her job this way.
>
>
> NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT
>
> I hadnt heard about reinforcement on the management/organisation modules I
> had studied on
> upper secondary and university-level, and neighter had I heard about it on
> the management-
> courses I had participated on while I was working as a manager in Norway.
>
> So when I got home on the day we had the meeting, I searched for
> 'reinforcement' on the
> internet. I found from how Vivian described it in the meeting, that this
> way of sorting
> problems was called 'negative reinforcement'.
>
> I couldnt find very much on how this was being used in management, but
> from what I found
> it seemed like it was more used as a way of training dogs, and that it was
> known to make
> the dogs nervous.
>
> Line says that they were told to do it this way, because if they did it
> this way, then the agents
> would do the job the way the team-leaders wanted.'.
>
> Link: http://johncons-mirror.blogspot.com/2007/10/enclosure-7.html
>
>
> My issue, regarding this, was that when I was searching on the term
> 'negative reinforcement', on the internet, then it mostly appeared links
> that had to do with the training of animals, like dogs and horses. (And not
> so much with management-theory):
>
> Link: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=negative+reinforcement&meta=cr%3DcountryUK%7CcountryGB
>
>
>
> And, the fact that the team-leaders are screaming things like 'You're on
> wrap-up', to the CCR representatives.
>
> I think this is a bit impolite, because the places were people are seated,
> are up to the region of 5-10 meters from were the team-leader is sitting
> shouting.
>
> So I remember I myself thought this practice was a bit inpolite towards
> the representatives.
>
> And also, I thought it was interfering in the work.
>
> That is, if one are sitting, and writing some notes, or if one are loging
> the latest call.
>
> The latest call from when someone has called in to activate Windows or
> Office etc.
>
> Then one had five seconds to log the call and to prepare for the next
> call.
>
> So sometimes one ran out of time, and sometimes, one also wanted to have a
> zip of water inbetween the calls, so sometimes five seconds could be maybe a
> bit to little time.
>
> But the point is, that when the call wasn't a regular call. That is, if
> the call lasted for longer than about five minutes, then one had to log the
> call on a form as well as on the screen.
>
> And if it was a company-call, a Microsoft customer, then it could be that
> one had to write some notes down, since these calls sometimes were a bit
> more complex than the regular calls.
>
> And also since there was a lot of types of agreements, like
> Select-agreement, Open-agreement, etc.
>
> There were meny combinations of different agreements and products, so
> sometimes, one happened to write down some notes, and also send e-mails to
> the line-managers about the activation.
>
> So if one were busy doing things like this, then I think the shouting was
> sometimes interfering a bit with the other work.
>
> Because, often, it wouldn't be possible to do work-tasks like this, while
> one were answering the next call simultaniously.
>
> Because one needed to consentrate on the loging and the writing og notes
> and e-mails.
>
> So then it interfered a bit when someone shouted at me: 'Erik, you're on
> wrap-up'. At least I remember that I thought this personally.
>
> Because then I lost my concentration, and my awarenes of what I was doing.
> And I sometimes got a bit stressed, and I maybe started thinking about
> things regarding the organisation of the campaign instead.
>
> And I also think that this practice is a bit condescend.
>
> That is, from the team-leader to the representative. It seems to me, that
> one are shouting like this, then it means that one thinks that the
> representative isn't using his time in a meaningful way. That is, it means
> that the representative is doing something wrong.
>
> I tried telling them, that we knew from before, that the wrap-up time was
> five seconds, and that they didn't really need to shout that out, because we
> already knew this from before.
>
> And when one used more time than five seconds, it was because it was
> needed to finish the work-tasks.
>
> But when they were shouting, then I think it means that they didn't belive
> the representative would be able to manage the time for the work-tasks
> themselves, in a reasonble way.
>
> So then I guess it means that the representatives was looked at as to be
> thoughtless and without the ability to act reasonable.
>
> I thought this meant that the representatives, were looked down upon, in
> regards to the issue of being able to manage their own work-time in a
> meaningful way.
>
> So I myself, remember, that I was thinking that this practice was a bit
> condescend.
>
> I used to work as a store-manager in Norway, and in conection with that, I
> had a few courses in practical management etc.
>
> And I also had some modules in management and organisation, from upper
> secondary school level, and also from university level.
>
> But I can't remember, that we were taught were much about 'negative
> reinforcement' in those modules and couses.
>
> So I was wondering if someone maybe had some knowledge, regarding where
> negative reinforcement fits in, in relation to the management-theory field.
>
> I think that management is an interesting field, so I think it would be
> very fine if someone have the time to contribute a bit to the thread on
> this.
>
> I myself, think that this management-method, can maybe sometimes seem a
> bit harassing, but I think it would be very interesting to also hear what
> other people think about this.
>
>
>
>
>
> This e-mail, and any attachment, is confidential. If you have received
> it in error, please delete it from your system, do not use or disclose
> the information in any way, and notify us immediately. The contents of
> this message may contain personal views which are not the views of the
> BBC, unless specifically stated.
>
>