Streamlining Telecom Order Fulfillment Through Real-Time Process Intelligence
Challenges in Telecom Order Fulfillment
Cross-Functional Data Fragmentation
Data is spread across platforms like ServiceNow, GIS tools, CRM systems, field apps, and legacy order managers—making end-to-end visibility difficult.
Manual Interventions and Delays
Site surveys, address validations, and provisioning steps often rely on human coordination, which introduces delays, rework, and missed SLAs.
Inconsistent Task Ownership
When multiple Line of Business (LOB) teams contribute to one order, overlapping responsibilities and unclear handoffs result in dropped steps or duplication.
SLA Violations and Missed Revenue Windows
Due to delays or missed steps, committed fulfillment windows are frequently missed—impacting customer satisfaction and delaying revenue recognition.
How Re-ViVE Helps
Unified Process Digital Twin
SLA and Compliance Tracking
Rework and Exception Visibility
AI-Powered Workflow Suggestions
Control Chart Monitoring
Use Case
Other Telecom Use Cases Re-ViVE Supports
Fiber Build Project Tracking
Identify permitting and construction delays across geographies and contractors.
Field Technician Optimization
Analyze repeat visits, route inefficiencies, and skill mismatches for dispatches.
Trouble Ticket Resolution (B2B)
Spot repeat tickets, SLA violations, and time-to-resolution trends by region or team.
Sales to Service Handoff
Analyze where deal closures stall during the transition to provisioning teams.
Workforce Planning and Productivity
Compare technician performance and workload balancing across service areas.
Contract Activation and Billing Sync
Identify lags between service completion and billing system updates.
O1
Fulfillment delays often exceeded 30+ days beyond committed SLAs due to disconnected tasks between field ops and network planning.
O2
Address validation had a 19% rework rate due to mismatches between sales orders and field inputs.
O3
Manual follow-ups between systems caused lost visibility and “black hole” wait periods—impacting customer satisfaction.
O1
Mapped over 120 variants of the fulfillment process across order types and LOBs.
O2
Identified bottlenecks in the “Design → Field Survey → Provisioning” path—where wait times accounted for 68% of total delay.
O3
Showed that 42% of provisioning time was due to repeat validations or failed scheduling.
O1
Created new SLA dashboard for 6 critical order types, reducing breach frequency by 35%.
O2
Proposed routing logic for surveys that improved task handoff efficiency by 23%.
O3
Predicted savings of $11M annually through faster fulfillment, reduced penalties, and earlier revenue recognition.