Saturday, April 12, 2014

How much time to spend with each patron

Today we are going to talk about TPP and the algorithmic efficiencies of placement staff time allocations (PSTA's) to best accelerate customer contact diagnostics.

Oh! But where are my manners! I am aware that more than half of my readers are not library professionals. Let me assure you that while this post may occasionally of necessity dip into Libraristic Nomenclatures, the subject matter will be illuminating and of use to anyone, and the technical terms will be fully explained. Ultimately, I am saying, you will find this to be an easy read. While my clerk, page, and librarian colleagues across the globe will readily understand such terms as TPP (Time Per Patron), Accumulated Service Step Ratios, Consultation Quantification Reductions in Coactive Problem Solving Analytics, and Paradigmatic Social Softening Equations, these terms may not yet be entirely familiar to the non library worker. But, trust me, dear non library professional, when you are through reading this blog post you pretty much won't be able to stop talking about things like "Hubristic pre-research intuit scans". They look complicated and boring at first glance, but you will soon find them to be an awesome force for clarity, understanding, and goodness.

So is everyone all set?


Today we are discussing TPP, that is, the appropriate amount of time each front line staff person spends with each patron.

Is everyone following me so far?


You see, time per patron reflects an average time an individual staff member spends with patrons. You understand average time, right? 

Yes, yes, sorry, I'm just being very careful here. 

Er, so anyway, the time spent on a single interaction with a single patron, or customer, is too variable to easily judge, much like a single At Bat of a baseball player. By gathering a larger grouping of interactions we can establish a baseline measurement. 

Does this make sense?

You"re sure?


Ready to move on?


Once the baseline metaphor is correlated with influx parables, we survey the vocal plexigrams of our spurial subjectives. Say you have a DAP pointer of eleven. From there we tandemize our foot traffic service falcrums to release a back counter, or, in layman terms, a numerological imperative. The individual service representative's syllabic analytical will then show what is called a hyper-data range. If this range indicates from a Baz-five-11 to anywhere near the "L" alphabetical on the Zackson-Polley exchange we can at least know, that, yes, perhaps our subject has an has a heightened DAP inveigh.

Did that all make sense?

Good, good.

Sure, yes, I can put it a little more simply to make sure we're on the same page.

How simply would you like it?

Oh? One sentence? It's pretty complex.

No, I can do it. I can try.



The amount of time one should spend with any given patron varies.

No comments:

Post a Comment

If you were wondering, yes, you should comment. Not only does it remind me that I must write in intelligible English because someone is actually reading what I write, but it is also a pleasure for me since I am interested in anything you have to say.

I respond to pretty much every comment. It's like a free personalized blog post!

One last detail: If you are commenting on a post more than two weeks old I have to go in and approve it. It's sort of a spam protection device. Also, rarely, a comment will go to spam on its own. Give either of those a day or two and your comment will show up on the blog.