Category: Innovation and Technology

Incorporation of digital twin technology in material handling. It’s aspect, appl

Incorporation of digital twin technology in material handling. It’s aspect, application and implementation or any case study.
Three pages including appropriate reference citations. Must use the reference if any figure is taken from other resources. Table must be drawn and can’t be pasted as screenshot. From using AI or other unauthorized resources as software can detect plagiarism with AI help. 
Template format is attached below

Directions Provided
Write a comparative critique of 5 scholarly articles dealing

Directions Provided
Write a comparative critique of 5 scholarly articles dealing with the subject of educational technology tools.  Articles should be under 5 years old (2019–2024). In the primary or classic approach, each article is given equal weight.  The lens hole approach weighs heavily on one or two similar articles to critique the others.  Good practices of writing comparative critiques should be in use.  In essence, you are comparing and contrasting these articles.  You should thoroughly acquaint yourself with the articles, build a frame of reference from which to write, and form a thesis statement for your paper that captures the main focus of your argument.  The thesis should reflect that the focus of this paper is the articles, not the topic.  Therefore, each article should be identified when it is introduced.
A copy of the required paper template is provided below. Please use this template to complete the paper.
A copy of the rubric is provided below.
Requirements
It must not be AI-generated. AI detection Report is required.
Must pass the Turnitin Detection Report Required

Based on the agent scores (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NyE6WYeDO8Rfu

Based on the agent scores (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NyE6WYeDO8Rfu6xGu_U0ccigKlpMdhZO?usp=drive_link) please create a organzied google sheets chart highlighting the data of the agents.
Each agent v=name vs ticket
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AQ_VMGerhd32ELxsEuzXvrmSB1MBEX0WXfM0LVwydbQ/edit?gid=0#gid=0
EACH agent should have their own tab within the sheet showing their scoring rubric with the questions by it
The chart should closely show Low Performers Identification:
1. Daisy (Ticket 5407666)
2. Sam (Ticket 4791506)
Reasons for Identifying as Low Performers:
Daisy (Ticket 5407666):
– Issue Resolution: Struggled to resolve the document approval issue efficiently.
– Communication: Long delays without updates, causing customer frustration.
Sam (Ticket 4791506):
– Issue Resolution: Did not address the customer’s repeated statement about not having a COVID booster,
leading to confusion and frustration.
– Communication: Long, inefficient conversation without clear progress.
Details about instructions: 
The Ideal Team Lead:
● Holds agents accountable for meeting high standards and objective success measures,
based on QA feedback and other metrics.
● Dives deep and touches reality to an extreme degree, and will stop at nothing to
find the root cause of defects.
● Communicates clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing.
● Initiates consequence management with a sense of urgency, ensuring any low
productivity/cases of poor performance last for a while. We look at how to solve
problems in days rather than weeks.
● Provide excellent, valuable, targeted feedback to agents.
● Exhibits technical proficiency by navigating all tools and platforms the Customer
Operations organization utilizes.
● Supports and resolves direct report escalations/conflicts.
● We are a culture that embraces writing, and we firmly believe that writing is thinking. To
help us get to know you and your thinking, we have compiled a sampling of support
tickets and would like you to dive into them to understand the performance of the
agents included. After you’ve had a chance to review it
● Create a Google sheet and link it to your document
.
● Grade tickets individually and add an overall grade for each agent. 
● Explain your grading rubric. 
● Use a numeric grading scale.
I have attatched a sample of what I ideally want it to look like per agent. It should show the agent scores and how they are ranked compared to the avergae of other agents closely showing the lowest agents.
What questions that agents are being scored on ( revamp some of the scores to make sre each question within the rubric is beign answered)
Rubric for scoridng tickets and chats
Did the agent follow the proper account security procedures for Email change requests ?
Verify: Did the agent ask appropriate, relevant questions to ensure that they fully understood the customer’s issue? Did the agent restate the issue, or otherwise confirm understanding of the issue, before proceeding to investigation? 
Investigate: Were all agent replies sent within 2 minutes? If not, did the agent set proper expectations regarding possible delays? If switching channels, were proper expectations set? Were any relevant next steps sent before switching channels? 
Solve Issue: Did the agent provide the correct solution?
Did we provide personalized solutions specific to the CX’s use-case (if applicable)? When appropriate, did we offer to help connect a calendar and/or set up their first ET? If the CX was in their First 30 Days, were appropriate resources sent?
DId we provide personalized solutions specific to the CX’s use-case (if applicable)? When appropriate, did we offer to help connect a calendar and/or set up their first ET? If the CX was in their First 30 Days, were appropriate resources sent? 
If converted to email, or sent to a different team member/department: Did we have a valid reason for doing so? For escalations: were the correct procedures observed? Were proper escalation notes added? If sent call link: was the link single-use?
ofessional 
Were all appropriate tools and resources utilized to ensure maximum efficiency? 
Was good ticket hygiene observed? -Was the correct ticket form implemented? Were the correct reason, feature, and resolution indicated? If applicable, were the appropriate tags applied?
Effective Communication
Did the agent refer to the customer by their name within the initial greeting? 
Did the agent introduce themselves appropriately in the conversation? 
Did the agent explicitly thank the customer for contacting or reaching out? 
Did the agent explicitly display enthusiasm and  willingness to help at the opening of the conversation?
Did the agent apologize for the issue/concern conveyed by the customer?
Instead of week put ticket

Based on the agent scores (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NyE6WYeDO8Rfu

Based on the agent scores (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1NyE6WYeDO8Rfu6xGu_U0ccigKlpMdhZO?usp=drive_link) please create a organzied google sheets chart highlighting the data of the agents.
Each agent v=name vs ticket
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AQ_VMGerhd32ELxsEuzXvrmSB1MBEX0WXfM0LVwydbQ/edit?gid=0#gid=0
EACH agent should have their own tab within the sheet showing their scoring rubric with the questions by it
The chart should closely show Low Performers Identification:
1. Daisy (Ticket 5407666)
2. Sam (Ticket 4791506)
Reasons for Identifying as Low Performers:
Daisy (Ticket 5407666):
– Issue Resolution: Struggled to resolve the document approval issue efficiently.
– Communication: Long delays without updates, causing customer frustration.
Sam (Ticket 4791506):
– Issue Resolution: Did not address the customer’s repeated statement about not having a COVID booster,
leading to confusion and frustration.
– Communication: Long, inefficient conversation without clear progress.
Details about instructions: 
The Ideal Team Lead:
● Holds agents accountable for meeting high standards and objective success measures,
based on QA feedback and other metrics.
● Dives deep and touches reality to an extreme degree, and will stop at nothing to
find the root cause of defects.
● Communicates clearly and effectively, both verbally and in writing.
● Initiates consequence management with a sense of urgency, ensuring any low
productivity/cases of poor performance last for a while. We look at how to solve
problems in days rather than weeks.
● Provide excellent, valuable, targeted feedback to agents.
● Exhibits technical proficiency by navigating all tools and platforms the Customer
Operations organization utilizes.
● Supports and resolves direct report escalations/conflicts.
● We are a culture that embraces writing, and we firmly believe that writing is thinking. To
help us get to know you and your thinking, we have compiled a sampling of support
tickets and would like you to dive into them to understand the performance of the
agents included. After you’ve had a chance to review it
● Create a Google sheet and link it to your document
.
● Grade tickets individually and add an overall grade for each agent. 
● Explain your grading rubric. 
● Use a numeric grading scale.
I have attatched a sample of what I ideally want it to look like per agent. It should show the agent scores and how they are ranked compared to the avergae of other agents closely showing the lowest agents.
What questions that agents are being scored on ( revamp some of the scores to make sre each question within the rubric is beign answered)
Rubric for scoridng tickets and chats
Did the agent follow the proper account security procedures for Email change requests ?
Verify: Did the agent ask appropriate, relevant questions to ensure that they fully understood the customer’s issue? Did the agent restate the issue, or otherwise confirm understanding of the issue, before proceeding to investigation? 
Investigate: Were all agent replies sent within 2 minutes? If not, did the agent set proper expectations regarding possible delays? If switching channels, were proper expectations set? Were any relevant next steps sent before switching channels? 
Solve Issue: Did the agent provide the correct solution?
Did we provide personalized solutions specific to the CX’s use-case (if applicable)? When appropriate, did we offer to help connect a calendar and/or set up their first ET? If the CX was in their First 30 Days, were appropriate resources sent?
DId we provide personalized solutions specific to the CX’s use-case (if applicable)? When appropriate, did we offer to help connect a calendar and/or set up their first ET? If the CX was in their First 30 Days, were appropriate resources sent? 
If converted to email, or sent to a different team member/department: Did we have a valid reason for doing so? For escalations: were the correct procedures observed? Were proper escalation notes added? If sent call link: was the link single-use?
ofessional 
Were all appropriate tools and resources utilized to ensure maximum efficiency? 
Was good ticket hygiene observed? -Was the correct ticket form implemented? Were the correct reason, feature, and resolution indicated? If applicable, were the appropriate tags applied?
Effective Communication
Did the agent refer to the customer by their name within the initial greeting? 
Did the agent introduce themselves appropriately in the conversation? 
Did the agent explicitly thank the customer for contacting or reaching out? 
Did the agent explicitly display enthusiasm and  willingness to help at the opening of the conversation?
Did the agent apologize for the issue/concern conveyed by the customer?
Instead of week put ticket

RES Tech has decided to transition from its aging legacy system to a modern plat

RES Tech has decided to transition from its aging legacy system to a modern platform to enhance operational efficiency, scalability, and the specialist experience. The legacy system, in place for over a decade, lacks documentation on a significant portion of its functionality due to years of ad-hoc updates and modifications. This poses a challenge as the transition to the new platform needs to ensure continuity of both critical business processes and lesser known processes that may be specific to certain LOBs (Lines of Business) without disrupting ongoing operations.
**Challenges:**
**Unknown Functionality:** A substantial portion of the legacy system’s functionality is undocumented, making it challenging to assess its impact on the transition process.
**Long Transition Horizon:** The transition process is expected to span 18-24 months due to the dependency of backend functionality still being developed, integrating with existing systems, and ensuring minimal disruption to daily operations.
**User Adoption:** Ensuring that end-users, accustomed to the legacy system, can seamlessly transition to the new platform without significant retraining or disruption to their workflows.
**Risk Management:** Mitigating risks associated with potential data / functionality loss, downtime during transition phases, and ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements throughout the migration process.
Please prepare slides (no more than 3) to demonstrate how you would conduct a thorough review of the legacy system to identify critical business requirements & functional dependencies, address the challenges identified, engage w/ key stakeholders, and a recommendation on how to move forward in the project