Ken and Kurt I agree completely and this is a hot button for me, or at least
the poor wifi part. I’ve been coaching my guys on “confidence” and “owing” the
conversation with the idea that most customers will be more likely to accept an
installers install plan if they own the conversation and have confidence in
what they are explaining to the customer. The “Umm” and “like’ words have no
place in situations where you're trying to convince someone that a hole your
house here will make the service work much better. This is proving to be
working better as of late for us, and were seeing and hearing less about poor
wifi and more about your guys know their shit….
Ryan Hill
Operations Manager
Amplex Internet
(419)837-5015 Ext 1047
www.amplex.net <http://www.amplex.net/>
> On Sep 18, 2018, at 10:31 AM, Kurt Fankhauser <lists.wavel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Ken,
>
> I have definitely has to convince customers to change router location due to
> poor wifi coverage! Some of them are hard to convince.
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 9:52 AM Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com
> <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote:
> There’s also the age old question of whether to send 1 tech or 2.
>
>
>
> I will say I’m starting to get tired of customers telling the installer to
> put the WiFi router in a bad location, and then wanting us to come back and
> fix poor WiFi coverage. A rushed installer will just put it where the
> customer says rather than spend the time to convince him it needs to be on
> the first floor in the center of the house, not in the attic or basement,
> even at the expense of having a 1/4 inch hole next to the baseboard or a
> visible (gasp!) cable in the living room. Or that no, the kitchen counter or
> dining room table is not a good place for electronics, let’s put it in the
> office or the entertainment center.
>
>
>
> I often send 2 techs if we are installing on an outbuilding with a PTP
> wireless link to the house, or if the wiring run is complicated, or sometimes
> the second person can deflect a chatty customer so the first person can
> actually work. We don’t get that many commercial installs, but those are
> usually 2 person jobs.
>
>
>
> A WISP that mostly installs in subdivisions may have more uniform,
> straightforward cookie cutter installs and less need for 2 person crews.
> Even so, a second person can be loading supplies/tools/ladders back on the
> truck, taking photos, etc. while the other sets up the router, deals with
> problem devices like wireless printers and smart TVs, gets customer to sign
> paperwork, etc. It’s nice to walk out the front door and drive off to the
> next install, rather than spend another 15 minutes loading stuff back in the
> truck. And you are less likely to have the truck looks like a disaster at
> the end of the day (some WISPs actually have a second shift to organize and
> restock the trucks).
>
>
>
> If you ever watch American Pickers on TV, it’s like that. You need Mike and
> Frank in the van, and Danielle on the phone back in the office.
>
>
>
>
>
> From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com>> On Behalf
> Of Colin Stanners
> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 8:11 AM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <af@af.afmug.com
> <mailto:af@af.afmug.com>>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Paying employees per install/service call
>
>
>
> When taking less time results in higher profits, the people doing the work
> have 3 options:
>
>
>
> 1) don't waste time unnecessarily, e.g. chatting with the customer, doing
> personal things on cellphone
>
>
>
> 2) optimize the work for time, e.g. pre-planning, choosing a wire route that
> is more visible/more prone to get damaged but is quicker to do
>
>
>
> 3) do low-quality work, e.g. mount the antenna at a location that is quick to
> reach but has low signal/trees in the way/connects to a more loaded AP, or
> just throw the wire on the roof without attaching it, or run the wire in a
> location where it is very likely to get damaged.
>
>
>
> If employees have a good personality and the company has a good culture and
> enforcement, you get #1 and a bit of #2. If employees are lazy/don't care and
> the company culture is the same, you get #3 and lots of problems.
>
>
>
> I did some work in the early days that was paid per-install; I tried to do
> always good work while another installer did #3. I can tell you that I was
> REALLY NOT HAPPY that he was being paid more than me for lower-quality work.
>
>
>
> On Sep 18, 2018 7:32 AM, "Kurt Fankhauser" <lists.wavel...@gmail.com
> <mailto:lists.wavel...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I was thinking of hiring my first installer/service tech and I am trying to
> come up with a unique way to pay them that basically rewards effort. Has
> anyone ever heard of having a flat base pay of like $10/hour and then on top
> of that pay them for number of installs / service calls / tickets they get
> completed in that pay period? Basically it will motivate them to do more
> because their hourly rate average will increase with the more they get done.
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
>
>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com <mailto:AF@af.afmug.com>
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> <http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
