|
Monitoring Quality on Fast Forward
By
Kathryn E. Jackson Ph.D. and Deborah Royer
June, 2003
When the call center industry
began 30 years ago, we didn't measure much of anything – we just tried to
stay afloat. With the implementation
of new technology solutions and more refined call center practices, the pendulum
swung – we began to measure everything. During
this phase, many devised (and continue to use) a form of monitoring that
includes every possible quality an agent might exhibit during a customer
interaction.
This form was accompanied by an
ultimate definition (or nuance) list that rivaled the thesaurus.
Companies invested hours, even days, in calibrating every quality monitor
to the same definition of excellence.
As we discovered, this approach
is expensive. Not only does it
require you to invest heavily in development, but also to spend hours monitoring
individual agents – day after day, contact after contact.
However, companies did this work gladly because they were convinced it
was having a positive effect on customer loyalty and on organizational goals.
Client Perspective: At about the same time, companies
started outsourcing their customer contacts.
While they outsourced for many reasons, they all were essentially looking
for the same benefits. They wanted a
partner that would provide a quality service at a reasonable fee.
It was evident from the start that outsourcers would have to invest in
quality monitoring.
But how does an outsourcer
justify this expensive process? With
growing business and client demands, outsourcers are required to do more with
less. Clients are demanding that
outsourcers pursue productivity while improving quality and that they do
everything at warp speed – while not raising fees.
As an outsourcer,
have
you been able to improve your quality monitoring process without adding extra
costs? In most cases, the
answer is no. This article will help
you slay the quality-monitoring dragon and replace it with a nice puppy dog you
can train to serve you.
Outsourcer Perspective: From our experience in working
with outsourcing companies, four distinct approaches to call monitoring have
evolved based on four distinct client types.
They are:
1.
The down-and-dirty client.
This client's call flow and call processing requirements are narrow in
scope. The client assures you that
there are only a few boxes to check when it comes to quality assessment and they
hand you their call monitoring form with these items already spelled out for
you.
2.
The "you're the expert" client.
This client wants to use your standard form (the one used by most of your
clients). This client believed you
when you said you were an expert. They
listened intently when you said your standard quality monitoring process is the
benchmark for other companies, and your demonstration of your expertise was
compelling. This client trusts that
you will keep your process updated based on your understanding of world-class
performance.
3.
The "I'm unique" client.
This client is convinced that there are no other companies like theirs.
They think there are no callers quite as demanding and precise as theirs.
This client requires a customized form that incorporates its pre-defined,
complex definition of call quality.
4.
The "not now" client.
There may be several reasons for clients to take this approach.
This client may be implementing a trial program and going for the bare
essentials contract. Or perhaps this
client has not defined a quality requirement and doesn't want to pay for
quality measurement until they are sure how it is defined.
Over the years, you've probably
encountered most, if not all, of these client types.
However, if the majority of your clients are "you're the expert" or
"I'm unique" clients, then you are probably examining your quality
processes and considering how to streamline your approach, as well as reduce
costs.
Fast-Forward Quality: Fast-Forward Quality is the
perfect solution for these types of clients.
It conserves quality-monitoring resources without jeopardizing the
future. Costs are cut, revenues are
protected, callers are satisfied, and employees have much more fun (since
management doesn't need to nitpick about minor aspects of their performance).
What does it mean to implement
Fast-Forward Quality techniques? When you implement Fast-Forward Quality, you
look to your client's customers, your client's goals, and your overall
contractual and partnership goals to define what to monitor.
You don't produce a laundry list of all possible qualities that might
affect the success of your partnership—you focus on a limited list of
qualities that will help you move fast while moving forward.
Caller Perspective: Callers can tell you what is
important. Just ask them.
The problem these days is that few organizations actually do
call-center-focused customer surveys. Most
clients do corporate customer surveys that contain a few call-center-related
questions but not a survey dedicated solely to the customers' experience with
the call center.
Fast-Forward Quality requires you
to design a survey that asks callers to rate your performance on specific
qualities. You can gather your list
of qualities from your client or through focus groups.
For your first attempt, you could simply take your best guess.
Once you ask callers to rate your
performance on each quality, ask them some loyalty questions ("Will you use us
again?" "Would you recommend us
to friends?") Compare how each
caller rates you on specific qualities with how he or she answers the loyalty
questions. As your callers'
perceptions of your performance on certain qualities improve, do their ratings
on the loyalty questions also improve? With
this analysis in hand, you'll no longer have to guess which qualities
contribute most to callers' loyalty.
As a first step to quickly doing the right things right,
determine the top two to three
qualities that callers rank as the most important. Use these qualities to
construct a new caller survey. This
survey will be used after a customer contact to ask callers how they rate the
agent on these qualities. Once you
have gathered a certain number of surveys, you will produce a score for each
agent's "quality performance indicator."
This score will be part of the balanced scorecard you use to reward
agents for good performance.
This score will help you diagnose
what is contributing to each agent's weaknesses.
You will listen to several calls in order to
pinpoint the exact skills contributing to those weaknesses.
Ideally, you could listen to the same calls that produced the individual
score – but this is not required.
For example, let's say that callers consistently
rate a given agent as weak in listening and courtesy (after you've already
determined that these qualities are prime indicators of customer loyalty).
In your survey, listening has a higher correlation to loyalty than does
courtesy. You would monitor several
of that agent's interactions to determine what specific listening skills to
focus on in coaching (does the agent interrupt callers, does he talk over
callers, does he paraphrase what the caller has said, etc.)
Once you know what to focus coaching on, you can stop this portion of the
monitoring and get straight to the coaching.
This is another fast-forward principle – don't keep monitoring after
you are clear about what you need to do.
The result is that your team can
develop a limited monitoring sheet based on caller input.
Since the quality scores reported for each
individual are based on callers' perceptions, the team doesn't have the
arguments that are typical when supervisors monitor contacts and report scores. You
are also monitoring a limited number of behaviors for each individual based on
caller comments. All these benefits
put together comprise the first step to Fast-Forward Quality.
In subsequent surveys, you'll
see the effect of your efforts on caller loyalty – but don't rest on your
laurels. Expect internal and
external conditions to change constantly. Caller expectations will evolve and
your client's competitors may raise the bar or change the rules.
Once you have a list of the most important qualities, you can't simply
keep monitoring the same items forever. Revisit
the list often, and stay alert for qualities that your team may have failed to
identify at all.
For the
actual implementation of the survey you will need to work with your client.
Often the client will not have a survey process in place to yield
the needed information. So, you will
need to develop and administer the survey. Obviously
you will need to determine how this effort will be funded, but even if your
organization must pay all the expenses, in the long run if this helps streamline
the quality monitoring process, relieve stress on the agents, provide a high
level of caller satisfaction, the return on investment will be there.
Client and Organizational
Goals: Other qualities are important for
agents to master – qualities that you would not expect a caller to identify.
These qualities may be related to your client's goals or to the goals
of your organization.
For example, most callers
wouldn't think upselling skills contribute to their satisfaction.
They would not know what to say if you asked them, "Did we comply with
all legal requirements?" or "Did we accurately document your account?"
However, these qualities are vital to the success the organization and to
meeting the client's goals. From
an organization perspective, some of these qualities are a high priority,
especially if they are contractual considerations for non-performance, such as a
penalty for not complying with federal regulations.
You must measure each agent's skill in these areas.
Productivity Indicators:
Your first priority is to look at
your client's goals. Most call
centers contribute to these goals by reducing costs, increasing revenue, or
enhancing caller satisfaction. These
are the first measures that any call center management team should examine
before starting on its quality-monitoring quest.
How does your team measure agent
performance in these areas? By calls
per hour? By sales per hour?
Whatever it is, look at this measure periodically.
If an agent is not meeting a productivity target then you may need to
start a second type of monitoring. In
this monitoring, you will be trying to diagnose why an agent cannot seem to
reach a productivity standard.
Let's say that you measure
calls per hour. Your team would
brainstorm the actions that contribute to an optimum number of calls per hour.
Your list might include things such as talk time, after-call work time,
hold time (when the agent puts the caller on hold during a call) etc.
Next, your team would equate behaviors to actions.
What behaviors contribute to talk time, after-call work time, etc.?
Some of the behaviors you list can be monitored, but others can't.
Your team may determine that product knowledge is a quality that
contributes to talk time, after-call work time and hold time.
You can either monitor or test for product knowledge – and your team
would decide which form of assessment would be more efficient.
Your team may discuss the skills
relating to defusing anger and how a skilled agent may have a lower talk time
(and increased productivity). It may
decide that monitoring (rather than testing) is the most effective way to assess
anger management skills.
Using Fast-Forward Quality, your
team can determine how to move forward quickly when an agent's performance is
sub-par. If an agent's
calls-per-hour rate is low and his talk time is high, the supervisor tests for
product knowledge and monitors for defusing anger skills.
The supervisor narrows the testing and the monitoring to the most
probable skills. Making a laundry
list at this stage is inappropriate. Because
the team monitors selectively, it can diagnose quickly and coaching is commenced
quickly.
No agent quality score is
documented from this productivity analysis and intervention.
The goal of the productivity monitoring is to enhance the agent's
performance on productivity measures only. The
agent is held to the productivity standards, not the results of the productivity
monitoring.
The result is
that your team develops a limited monitoring sheet based on productivity
indicators. Since these quality
monitor results are not reported and do not affect an individual's performance
appraisal, possible agent perceptions of inconsistent monitoring are not an
issue. The
team is also monitoring a very limited number of behaviors for each individual
with regard to the sub-par performance in the productivity indicators.
This is the next step to Fast-Forward Quality.
Organizational
Non-Productivity Measures: Other contractual requirements
may not be related to either customer satisfaction or productivity.
Examples of these include compliance with legal requirements and accuracy
of documentation. Your team will
need to decide if monitoring is the most efficient way of determining skill
level. If monitoring is required, a
quality score must be documented for each agent since, unlike with the
productivity requirement, there is no umbrella measure being reported.
The result is that your team
develops a limited monitoring sheet for this "other" category.
Since this is the only category of monitoring that directly contributes
to the overall performance indicator of the agent, it is the only quality
monitoring that requires more in-depth definition and calibration (to ensure
consistency in the definition of excellence).
This is the last step to Fast-Forward Quality.
Conclusion:
In
today's fast-paced, low-cost, high-quality environment, you can no longer
afford the old approach to quality monitoring.
Take a leap into the 21st century by doing the right quality
monitoring, quickly and at lower cost. When
you invest in Fast-Forward Quality not only might you have happier clients but
you might also have happier executives.
Dr. Kathryn Jackson
and Deborah Royer are associates at Response Design Corporation.
The Response Design team works with organizations to assess
relationships, including employees, customers, stakeholders, and the community.
You can reach Dr Jackson at 609-398-3230 or 800-366-4732 or KJackson@ResponseDesign.com.
Return
to List of Articles || Read more articles at MyArticleArchive.com
|