TGCSA ANNUAL ASSESSOR CONFERENCE 2011 Joint Presentation by Nivashnee Govender: Operations Manager & Fanie Shawe: Finance Manager 29 November 2011
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION 1. The year that was…. 2. Application Process 2.1. Online application 2.2. Daily Approval 2.3. Challenges 2.4. Changes to the application form 2.5. Renewal applications December 2011 to March 2012 3. Invoicing and Receipting 4. Synchronization and download to assessor laptop 5. Assessments conducted 5.1. Assessor visits 5.2. Final Grading Criteria 5.3. Dispensation and Grace Period 5.4. Downgrades 5.5. Post assessment/way forward discussion
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION Pre-screening 6. 6.1. Submissions 6.2. PMA feedback 6.3. Pre-screening guide 7. Awards Committee 7.1. General comments 7.2. Feedback on rejections 8. Post Awards Processes 8.1. Approval Letters 8.2. Certificates and Plaques 9. Assessor Payments 10. Implementation Forum 11. Change Requests CR25 (Finance) and CR26 (Operations) 12. Operations Team
THE YEAR THAT WAS …. • Q - QUIETLY • I – INTERNALIZING • T- TRAUMA • It was actually: – Getting used to QIT – Using criteria that establishments were not willing to accept easily – Facing irate and difficult clients – Working with a system that was not operating at its optimum BUT WE SURVIVED AND ARE ALMOST AT THE TOP
APPLICATION PROCESS 2.1. Online application • Operational since October 2010 • Initially faced time-out errors, now fixed • Occasional interruptions due to server errors • Resolved as soon as HELPDESK is informed 2.2. Daily Approval • 5900 Applications approved to date • Approved daily • Had a delay twice in daily approval as Nivashnee and Karin were unavailable • Intern will be assisting with approvals as well • Daily list sent to all assessors who can track consistency of daily approvals
APPLICATION PROCESS 2.3. Challenges • Applications being submitted by assessors without establishments knowledge • Applications being submitted multiple times • Incorrect and/or missing information on applications • Establishments not willing to complete new forms • Renewal vs. New applications (joining fee) • Assessor details
APPLICATION PROCESS 2.4. Changes to the application form • Tool tips on what is mandatory fields • Highlighting important information e.g. certificates will be sent to physical address • Submission of form only if ALL mandatory information has been completed • Pre-populated renewal forms
APPLICATION PROCESS
APPLICATION PROCESS 2.5. Renewal applications December 2011 to March 2012 • QiT process for renewals not completed • Manual process implemented • Assessor representatives on Implementation Forum requested information to be verified by assessors • Challenge in some assessors not responding hence resulting in a delay of approval and invoice generation THANK YOU TO ALL THOSE ASSESSORS WHO ASSISTED PROMPTLY
INVOICING AND RECEIPTING FANIE SHAWE WILL NOW GIVE YOU FEEDBACK ON THIS SECTION
INVOICING AND RECEIPTING INVOICING 1 All invoicing is generated once QIT approval is done 1.1 Reasons for invoice delays 1.1.1 QIT /Oracle integration error 1.1.2 QIT approval not on the same day as application 1.1.3 E-mail notifications not working RECEIPTING 1 Receipting is performed on a daily basis 2 Where deposits are not reflecting the invoice number, the receipting process will be delayed until Sean receives a bank proof of payment. 3 Sean can only import the previous days bank statement. 4 Receipting challenges 4.1 Assessors performing assessment before payment.
SYNCHRONIZATION & DOWNLOAD TO ASSESSOR LAPTOP SYNCHRONIZATION: • Daily assessor synchronization list indicates frequency of synchronization by assessors • Very few problems with synchronization recorded – all resolved by helpdesk DOWNLOAD TO ASSESSOR LAPTOP • Biggest assessor complaint is the delays due to receipting of payments • No major problems with downloading
ASSESSMENTS CONDUCTED 5.1. Assessor visits • Some complaints from establishments on performance of assessors e.g. not enough time spent on assessment • Assessors also complimented on providing extra guidance with new criteria 5.2. Final Grading Criteria • Grading criteria published in November 2010 • In practice assessors found that some criteria didn’t work • Workshops held with assessors in March 2011 • There were still problems with grammar, etc • ProServ appointed to edit documents • Final copy was signed off on 4 November 2011 • Delay in publishing on website due to change requested by assessors during Implementation forum regarding TVs in Guest Accommodation • UA Technical Guide
ASSESSMENTS CONDUCTED
ASSESSMENTS CONDUCTED 5.2. Dispensation and Grace Period • Huge problem! Some assessors not discussing this with the establishments and giving them the option • Other assessors submitting motivation on behalf of client without client knowing about it • A lot of confusion on what can be considered and what cannot • A large number of requests received over the past year. Majority have been approved!
ASSESSMENTS CONDUCTED 5.3. Downgrades • More than 150 Downgrades approved in the past year • Good sign – getting rid of “soft stars” • Challenge – many cancellations due to downgrades • Some assessors have been GREAT in explaining to an establishment the reason for a downgrade and having them accept it • Other assessors cannot face the conflict and don’t inform the establishment they are being downgraded. This leads to very angry clients and sometimes costs the TGCSA money as an audit needs to be done with no cost to the establishment attached! 5.4. Post assessment/way forward discussion • Needs to be thorough and informative • Many assessors don’t carry out this step which results in irate clients who are ill informed on way forward.
PRE-SCREENING 6.1. Submissions • Thank you to all assessors who submit assessments as they complete them • Still too many assessors submitting on the final day of deadline – makes it very difficult to pre-screen in limited period prior to meeting • Number of submissions improved a lot over past 2 months • Manual submissions by exception
PRE-SCREENING 6.2. PMA feedback • TGCSA have taken cognisance of assessor comments on type of feedback they receive from PMAS for properties not approved at pre- screening • This is being addressed internally and more appropriate wording/explanations/examples will be used moving forward • Assessments submitted to the Awards meeting is a mutual decision between PMA and assessor 6.3. Pre-screening guide • An updated guide will be sent post this conference.
AWARDS COMMITTEE 7.1. General comments • The submissions to the Awards Committee have improved tremendously • The rate of rejections from at the meeting has reduced • There is still some assessors who consistently submit properties that are not of the standard required. 7.2. Feedback on rejections • The TGCSA have been made aware that the feedback received from the Awards Committee is not always adequate enough to convey to the client when a property is rejected • The Awards Committee have committee to providing more concise feedback moving forward.
POST AWARDS PROCESSES 8.1. Approval Letters • Once approval is done on QiT, automated letters are sent to all establishments • The templates have been amended as per discussions at the Implementation Forum meetings e.g. “no longer CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR DOWNGRADE”!!! • Establishments also sent emails with a link to their visitor report 8.2. Certificates and Plaques • Covered in Marketing Presentation
ASSESSOR PAYMENTS FANIE SHAWE WILL NOW GIVE YOU FEEDBACK ON THIS SECTION
ASSESSOR PAYMENTS 1 This process works as follows: 1.1 Awards committee meeting gets approved on QIT. 1.2 QIT e-mails approved property PO notifications to all Assessors. 1.3 Operations distributes the final approved awards list on an excel spreadsheet to all Assessors and Finance. 1.4 Assessors need to submit their invoices based on 1.2 and 1.3 above. 1.5 Finance can start processing Assessor payments only once all the above steps are completed. CHALLENGES 1 E-mail errors on the VOX server. 2 The time it takes to approved the properties on QIT. 3 The time it takes to send out the awards lists on an excel spreadsheet.
IMPLEMENTATION FORUM • Set-up by TGCSA in November 2010 • Chaired by Mr. Jegie Padmanathan • Forum Members: Mark Goveia – SAGAA Representative Colin Knowles - SAGAA Representative Ruby Gangiah – Non-SAGAA members representative Thembi Kunene – TGCSA Nivashnee Govender – TGCSA Operations Karin Suter – TGCSA Operations Thekiso Rakolojane – TGCSA Marketing Fanie Shawe – TGCSA Finance Rachel Mathosa - Secretariat
Recommend
More recommend
