• Replies 11 replies
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 17 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Tips for rolling out FieldPulse to a team that's resistant to new software?

Paula Hendrix

We're getting ready to roll FieldPulse out to our 12-person field team, and honestly, I'm bracing for some pushback. A few of our senior technicians have been vocal about not wanting to learn another system — they know their current workflow (paper dispatch sheets and Google Calendar) and see no reason to change.

I've read the migration guide and the general rollout tips, but I'm hoping to hear from folks who've actually navigated this. What actually worked to get resistant team members on board? Did you find certain training approaches more effective than others? Any mistakes you'd avoid if you did it again?

Our team is split between tech-savvy younger techs and a few veterans who are excellent at their jobs but skeptical of anything that feels like extra overhead. I want to set them up for success without creating resentment.

Parents

  • In my experience, the mistake is showing people every feature at once. FieldPulse's got a lot going on — you dump that on someone who's already resistant, they shut down.

    We started with just two things: viewing their schedule and marking jobs complete. Nothing else for the first two weeks. Once that was muscle memory, we added photos. Then checklists. Took about six weeks total but adoption was way better than our previous attempt where we tried to do everything day one.

    Also — and this might be controversial — we let the old paper system run parallel for the first month. Gave people an escape hatch so they weren't panicking if the app felt broken. The paper trail naturally fell off once they trusted the digital one.

  • in reply to Art Kowalczyk

    I have to respectfully push back on the parallel system approach — we tried that and it nearly killed our adoption. Technicians just defaulted to paper because it was familiar, and we spent three months cleaning up data integrity issues when the two systems drifted apart.

    What worked for us was mandatory cutoff with robust support. Day one of rollout, paper dispatch was gone. But we had two people dedicated to nothing but answering FieldPulse questions for the first three weeks — phone, text, whatever. Response time under 10 minutes. When people trust help is available, the resistance drops fast.

    My take: parallel systems feel safe but create ambiguity. Commit and support heavily.

Reply
  • in reply to Art Kowalczyk

    I have to respectfully push back on the parallel system approach — we tried that and it nearly killed our adoption. Technicians just defaulted to paper because it was familiar, and we spent three months cleaning up data integrity issues when the two systems drifted apart.

    What worked for us was mandatory cutoff with robust support. Day one of rollout, paper dispatch was gone. But we had two people dedicated to nothing but answering FieldPulse questions for the first three weeks — phone, text, whatever. Response time under 10 minutes. When people trust help is available, the resistance drops fast.

    My take: parallel systems feel safe but create ambiguity. Commit and support heavily.

Children