I’m sure, like many others, there are times when you put off addressing medical ailments because a. You’re busy and b. There are people with far more urgent issues that need to be seen first. Perhaps there’s also a c. – you avoid asking because you know getting a (non-private) doctor or nurse appointment is tricky right now (I appreciate this is a UK and not necessarily a global issue). But what follows still applies to IT support, no matter your location. Is technology being used as a blocker?
Now, the use of technology in the provision of medical services is designed to help. For example, our local doctors’ practice directs people to an online triage service rather than to request an appointment via telephone. Sound familiar? You guessed it – there are parallels with what we do in IT service management (ITSM) and IT support here.
This article examines my recent experience with this healthcare technology and compares it with IT support.
A Healthcare Experience That Mirrors IT Support
As stated in the introduction, our local medical practice now encourages callers to use the online triaging service. As a “rule follower” (at least until it’s illogical or unworkable), I obliged.
I entered my details and quickly received a text saying I had an appointment in six weeks. I could wait, as I’d put up with the issue for longer than this.
However, 90 minutes later, I received another text with a link to book an appointment. So, I didn’t actually have an appointment – I guess I could book an appointment (rather than having one). I was confused, but it doesn’t take much. Was the technology being used as a blocker?
When Technology Gets in the Way
Well, I could book an appointment if one were available in the next two months. One wasn’t according to the online booking system. There were zero appointments available.
It seems you have to regularly check for new appointments or cancellations to get an appointment. If I’d called, I’d have had to wait weeks for an appointment, but I’d have received one. Plus, there would have been no time wasted checking for a free appointment twice a day. This new system smelled like a “technology as a blocker” use case to me.
The kicker with this wonderful new system? The appointment link is valid for only 7 days. After checking it a few times a day over four days (by which point I started writing this article), I’m not convinced this process will work in terms of my desired outcome, i.e. getting a doctor’s (or nurse’s) appointment.
This has been an IT-like “deflection” move, but without the ability to self-help.
Seven Days Later: Technology 0, Humans 1
With no available appointments when checking twice a day, and a “self-help” link that no longer works – it smelled like a blocker. It was time to try “route one” – going into the local practice to speak with a human. I could have simply given up, but my eternal fascination with broken processes made me want to continue (along with wanting to resolve my medical issue).
So, I walked into the practice while passing by for something else, endured a short queue, and then spoke with a helpful receptionist. An appointment was made, and you don’t need to hear any more about my medical history. What I’d failed to achieve in a week using technology was done in less than five minutes in person.
It’s worth repeating this statement: What I’d failed to achieve in a week using technology was done in less than five minutes in person.
Technology Should Enable, Not Block
I know the queue at the practice was shorter because of the new online system. But what good is that online system if it doesn’t work?
Does it make you think of IT support and one of my least favorite ITSM terms – “deflection”? If you’ve heard me talk about self-service, you’ve probably noticed my dislike of the term “deflection.”
I can’t help thinking that this new online triage system is more for medical practitioners and support staff than for “patients.” After all, if you can’t get help as a patient, how can it be beneficial?
Of course, it might be a (medical) capacity issue – far more people need help than there are opportunities to provide help. It happens, especially given the insufficient investment in the National Health Service (NHS). But why waste people’s time by having them try to get an appointment via an online service that won’t provide one? Perhaps it’s a new hurdle introduced to see if people really need medical help?
The Simple “Technology as a Blocker” Lesson for IT Support
It was a technology capability added to make lives easier (and perhaps driven by some digital transformation initiative in central government).
But whose life was made easier? Certainly not that of patients (at least, in my experience). I’d also argue that it doesn’t help the practice either. Not only is it more likely to fail to meet local demand for medical support (and to fulfill its purpose), but it’s also another blow to its reputation.
The same is true for badly designed “deflection” mechanisms in IT support. Even the term smacks of “We want to reduce the requests for help.” It’s an inside-out term, focused on making life easier for the service provider rather than the service receiver. It completely overlooks the service provider’s purpose, which includes addressing other IT mistakes and inadequacies.
In the case of IT support, at best it moves IT work (and effort) into lines of business, and at worst it might encourage end-users to continue dealing with whatever technical issue they are experiencing. The proverbial “suffering in silence.”
Are You Using Technology as a Blocker?
Using technology as a blocker – it’s easy to do but also easy to avoid. Someone like Stuart Rance would ask “Where’s the value in this operational change?” But even if you don’t want to get lost in understanding value streams, surely taking the time to understand the business impact of your change is sufficient.
Are end-users spending longer fixing issues than if they’d called the IT service desk for help? And how many IT issues go unresolved as a result of this “better” way of tackling IT support requests? In both instances, is the IT organization “benefiting” at the expense of the parent business?
Of course, your self-service or self-help capabilities might be just what your organization and its people need. The important question is: Have you stopped to check whether your increased use of technology (including AI) is helping or hindering business operations and outcomes? If you haven’t, you might be in for a surprise.
Technology as a Blocker FAQs
It’s when a system introduced to make getting help easier ends up putting more work on the person asking for it. The writer waited a week checking an online booking link that produced zero available appointments, then got the same issue solved in under five minutes by walking into the practice and talking to a receptionist.
Because it’s built around the service provider’s convenience rather than the person asking for help. Even the word points to reducing incoming requests rather than resolving them, and badly designed deflection can shift IT work onto other parts of the business or leave people dealing with an issue on their own.
The writer used a local practice’s online triage tool instead of calling, and within 90 minutes went from a text confirming an appointment in six weeks to a link to book one instead, with zero appointments showing as available. After checking the booking link twice a day for a week, it expired. Walking into the practice and speaking with a receptionist got an appointment booked in under five minutes.
No. The writer notes the queue was shorter because of the new system, but a shorter queue doesn’t mean the system delivered what people showed up for. If patients can’t get an appointment through it, its purpose isn’t being met, whatever the queue looks like.
The article points to two checks: whether end-users are spending longer resolving issues than they would by calling the IT service desk, and how many issues go unresolved because someone gave up on a self-service process that wasn’t working. It also raises the question Stuart Rance would ask: where’s the value in this change?
Technology should make it easier for people to get help, not harder. Before adding or expanding self-service, including AI-driven tools, check whether it’s improving outcomes for the person asking for help or just moving effort off the service desk and onto them.
Stephen Mann
Principal Analyst and Content Director at the ITSM-focused industry analyst firm ITSM.tools. Also an independent IT and IT service management marketing content creator, and a frequent blogger, writer, and presenter on the challenges and opportunities for IT service management professionals.
Previously held positions in IT research and analysis (at IT industry analyst firms Ovum and Forrester and the UK Post Office), IT service management consultancy, enterprise IT service desk and IT service management, IT asset management, innovation and creativity facilitation, project management, finance consultancy, internal audit, and product marketing for a SaaS IT service management technology vendor.
