How design helped in improving ‘Audits’ at OYO.

Context

OYO has deployed a highly capable on-ground team across 200+ cities to primarily ensure ‘best in class guest experience’. Along with this they manage inventory, engage with guests, provide support to owners and oversee operations as and when required. We call them ‘captains’, they are the ‘Superman’ for our team and this story.

  1. Filtering out the bad rooms from the system
  2. Update the owners and concerned stakeholders at OYO about the malfunction and get them fixed

What were the gaps in the ‘Audits’, how we helped!

As per data analysis, we made an observation that the correlation between ‘ audit’ and guest experience was missing. This translates to, despite regularly having audits in some properties guest experience was the same as compared to properties where audit completion rate was poor. Which clearly indicated that audits weren’t as effective as we expected. We conducted thorough field research to identify the gaps and tried to fix them

1. Credibility & quality concern

Observation :- By analyzing the data we made an unsettling observation that captains were taking less than a minute to complete the audits comprising of around 200 questions in some 2500 cases. Further, during our ground research, we observed that in most of the scenarios captains were answering questions without inspection. Hence, making the process less credible

The yellow banner intimates user that something has gone wrong, red banner highlights the conflict between the captain and house keeper’s response

2. Recommended rooms

Observation :- To complete an audit captain has to audit at least three rooms. On the ground, we observed that to complete the task captains have to procure keys from reception where property managers were deciding which rooms should be picked for the audit. In most of the cases, we observed that the best rooms were getting picked for the audits hence a compromise was made with the quality of the audits.

3. Redundant and tedious questionnaire

Observation :- Captains were responding to a fixed set of 200 plus questions all the time they conducted an audit. Guest feedback wasn’t being accounted for framing the audit.
For eg. If one room has reports of significant no. of washroom related issues where as other room has colossal amount of AC related issues but the questionnaire for the both of these room was same. This made the process monotonous, hence captains lost the trust from the process.

4. Lack of visibility of vital information

Observation :- For system to work efficaciously stakeholders should be able to keep a track of vital metrics and analyse them to identify the problems. In our case, the product they were using lacked this visibility. When we interviewed some of the high performing self motivated captains we observed that some of them were maintaining their own dashboards on Microsoft Excel to keep the track of basic metrics like % unhappy guests. They were using these data points to plan their next moves. Most of the captains on other hands lacked this capability.

5. Fighting muscle memory

Observation :-Our captains developed muscle memory around questions. They knew question sequence and what to respond in order to complete an audit quickly without reporting any issue hence creating tasks for themselves. Hence, captains were not going through the audit thoroughly.

Preventing user from developing a muscle memory

6. Prioritisation of work and efficiency

Observation :- When we shadowed some of the captains we observed that captains spent most of their time in travelling from one property to another property. So, aggregate time spent in performing the tasks was very less as compared to the total travel time.

Captain’s task feed

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store