executive report on performance, operations and technology · executive report on performance,...

EXECUTIVE REPORT ONPERFORMANCE, OPERATIONSAND TECHNOLOGYBy Brian Cantor

callcenter-iq.com 2

Call Center Performance in an Age of Customer Satisfaction

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Customer-centricity has become the drivingforce behind today’s call centers.

Call centers define customer satisfaction—not cost efficiency or revenue generation—as theirparamount objective. Instead of situatingperformance evaluation with C-level executives,investors or even lines on their incomestatements, the majority of today’s businessesbelieve the most important voice of judgment isthat of the customer. Customer-orientedmetrics like CSAT score and first call resolutionnow possess the influence once held byoperational ones like average handle time andaverage speed of answer.

Always designed to serve customers, the callcenter is now committed to satisfying them.In order to honor that commitment,organizations must calibrate their call centeroperations with the notion of customersatisfaction.

From the metrics used to evaluate operationalperformance and contact quality, to thestrategies employed when recruiting anddeveloping agents, to the technologies used toexecute back-office operations and front-lineinteractions, every facet of the customer servicefunction plays a role in either driving orpreventing customer satisfaction.

Even the most wholehearted, sincere belief incustomer-centricity can be nullified in practice ifan element of the call center adversely impactsthe service experience.

It is within this customer-centric landscape thatCall Center IQ issues its annual Executive Reporton Call Center Performance, Operations andTechnology. Constructed with data from CCIQ’sannual Call Center Performance and Operationssurvey and colored with insights from a diversepanel of thought leaders, the report unpacksand assesses the state of call center operations.

After first revealing the profile of today’s callcenters, the report then investigates howorganizations are measuring—and managing—call center performance. From there, ituncovers trends in agent engagement anddevelopment, quality assurance and technologypurchasing, implementation and testing beforerevealing how today’s call centers musttransform to deliver the results for which theirbusinesses and their customers are looking.

According to the survey, today’s call centersprimarily exist to satisfy customers. This reportreveals whether today’s call centers arefunctioning as customer satisfaction drivers.

Executive Report on Performance,Operations andTechnologyBy Brian Cantor

Introduction......................................................2

Contributors ....................................................3

Methodology and Demographics ..............................................4

State of the Call Center:Meet Today’s Customer Service Function..........................................5

Positioning the Call Center ................5

Omni-Reluctance to go Multi-Channel........................................6

Call Center: What’s the Point?........................................8

OperationalPerformance ..................................................9

Performance: Evaluating the Metrics............................9

Performance: Is Right Now the Right Way? ............................10

Performance: Does the Circumstance Breed Action?............................................11

Agent Development..............................12

Investing in People ................................12

Behavior that Drives Good Behavior ..........................................13

Putting the Data to Work..................13

The Voices Behind the Front Line ............................................14

Working on the Workplace..............15

Quality ..............................................................17

Quality Measurements of Quality, Part One: Customer Interactions ........................17

Quality Measurements of Quality,Part Two: System Performance ..18

Quality Improvement Strategies ......................................................19

Solutions and Technology................20

Not of Necessity......................................20

Solutions that Satisfy ..........................21

The Impending Solution Landscape..............................22

Turning Action intoTransformation ..........................................23

3 callcenter-iq.com 3

Stefan CaptijnDirector, Product

MarketingGenesys

Nigel WarrenHead of Marketing

MatsSoft

Steve ChirokasVice President,MarketingVoltDelta

Contributors

Mike BurkeVP, Sales & Business

DevelopmentIQ Services

Patrick BotzGlobal Director of

MarketingVPI

Matt McConnellCEO

Intradiem

Erik StrandVice President of

ProductCallMiner

In April and May of 2014, Call Center IQconducted this research with collaboration froman audience of customer service, customerexperience and contact center professionals.Representing buy-side organizations, vendororganizations and independent consultancies,respondents contributed insights via a websurvey and/or targeted, one-on-one interviews.

Requests to participate were issued irrespectiveof company size, call center size or region,assuring that the sample represented a globalcustomer management audience.

Participation nonetheless skewed in favor oflarger organizations. 37% of respondentsrepresent organizations with more than 5000employees. Only 42% work for organizationswith less than 500 employees, and 18% workalongside less than 100 people.

The skew in favor of large organizations didnot, however, produce a marked skew in favorof large call centers. 50% of respondents seatmore than 100 agents in their call centers.While 14% employ more than 1000 customerservice agents, 19% seat less than 25.

The overwhelming majority of respondentsoperate at the managerial level or higher. 89%

are at least managers, while 36% are at thedirector or vice presidential level and 6% are C-level executives. 9% classify themselves asanalysts, while 3% are agents or “teammembers” and 2% perform in administrativepositions.

Example respondent job titles included“Director, Global Support,” “VP, GlobalCustomer Care,” “VP, Marketing,” “ManagingDirector,” “Director, Customer Care,” “SeniorDirector, Customer Interaction Center,”“Operations Manager,” “Vice President,Customer Care,” “President,” “Call CenterDirector,” “Chief Operating Officer,” “Director,Technical Product Support,” “Customer ServiceManager,” “VP, Client Services,” “Call CenterManager,” “Customer Support Manager” and“Contact Center Operations Manager.”

50% confirm they make purchasing decisionsfor their call centers. An additional 38% playan influential role in decision making.

Although industry representation was notconcentrated—28 distinct industries wereidentified by respondents—it did skew slightlyin favor of telecommunication services (15%),outsourcing (12%), healthcare (8%) andfinance/banking (8%).

Methodology andDemographics

4 callcenter-iq.com 4

callcenter-iq.com 5

How large is your organization? (#employees/staff members)Q1

5000+

2500-499

1000-2499

500-999

250-499

100-249

50-99

10-49

Less than 10

0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Which define your contact centerarchitecture/function/strategy?Q2

0 5% 10% 15% 20%

23% Single site On-Premise

4% Single site Cloud

7% Single site Hosted

9% Single site Hybrid On-Premise/Cloud

4% Single site Hybrid On-Premise/Hosted

3% Single site Hybrid cloud

21% Multi-site On-Premise

7% Multi-site Cloud

7% Multi-site Hosted

9% Multi-site Hybrid On-Premise/Cloud

9% Multi-site Hybrid On-Premise/Hosted

3% Multi-site Hybrid cloud

callcenter-iq.com 6

Q3 In which channels do you presentlyengage with customers?

44% Twitter

54% Facebook

20% LinkedIn

11% Google Plus

14% Other Social Networks

87% E-Mail

92% Telephone (live agent)

59% Telephone (IVR)

39% Web Live Chat

51% Web Self-Service

21% Mobile (live chat, text, etc)

24% Mobile (app self-service)

43% In-Person

5% Other (please specify)

100

80

60

40

20

0

callcenter-iq.com 7

Q4 How will your level of service withinthese channels change over the next6-18 months?

Twitter

Facebook

LinkedIn

Google Plus

Other SocialNetworks

E-Mail

Telephone (live agent)

Telephone (IVR)

Web Live Chat

Web Self-Service

Mobile (livechat, text, etc)

Mobile (appself-service)

In-Person

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Not using - will not start

Not using - will start

Using - will cease

Using - will decrease use

Using - will maintain current use

Using - will increase use

42% of today’s call centers exist entirely onorganizational premises. An additional 30%adhere to a hybrid infrastructure that includesan on-premise element. 13% exclusively usephysical infrastructure hosted by a third party,while just 10% operate on an exclusively cloud-based infrastructure.

Planning to retain at least a remnant of pastarchitecture, few businesses will completelyeliminate their reliance on-premise technology.They will, however, more notably integratehosted and cloud call center solutions.

While 69% will at least retain an on-premiseelement throughout the next 6-18 months, areduced 34% will exclusively situate their callcenters on premise. The others will pursuehybrid solutions involving a blend of on-premiseand hosted or cloud technology.

Up from 58% in the status quo, a total of 66%of call center operations will feature a hosted orcloud element by the end of the next eighteenmonth period. 31% of organizations willexclusively rely on hosted or cloud solutions.

Reflective of a trend towards cloud and hostedsolutions, the data nonetheless reveals areluctance to completely abandon their on-premise installations. Aware of the objectionsthat contribute to that hesitation, VoltDelta’sSteve Chirokas argues that contemporaryiterations of cloud and hosted technology cannullify the concerns.

“Cloud and hosted solutions are gaining

momentum, but in many cases the path frompremise to hosted encounters some bends inthe road,” acknowledges Chirokas. “Internalconstituents occasionally feel that they mustmaintain their call centers on premise becausethat’s what they depended upon in the past forreliability and security.

“What has changed is that there are nowhosted contact center solutions thatdemonstrate a level of reliability and securitythat will meet if not exceed what might becurrently deployed on premise. Customer careprofessionals are finding out that achieving theefficiency of the cloud does not require puttingtheir customers Personally IdentifiableInformation (PII) at risk or being concerned withscalability when partnering with a capable cloudcontact center vendor.”

Citing the constraints created by internal ITdepartments, MatsSoft’s Nigel Warren contendsthat shifting to an externally hosted or cloud-based call center provides businesses withgreater flexibility, agility and rapidity in theirefforts to satisfy customers.

“Internal IT is often focused on long-termstrategic projects; meaning even small tacticalimprovements to customer service processeshave to take their place in a queue,” arguesWarren. “If customer experience improvementis the new battleground for competitiveadvantage, being made to wait for suchimprovements is not acceptable. CustomerService organizations that want to jump this

Despite existing in a world of multiple contact channels and virtualinfrastructures, many of today’s call centers remain at least partiallycommitted to the traditional conception of a customer service department.

State of the Call Center:

Meet Today’sCustomer ServiceFunction

callcenter-iq.com 8

Positioning the Call Center

"Customer careprofessionals arefinding out that

achieving the efficiencyof the cloud does notrequire putting theircustomers PersonallyIdentifiable Information(PII) at risk or beingconcerned withscalability whenpartnering with a

capable cloud contactcenter vendor."

- Steve Chirokas

callcenter-iq.com 9

Q5 What is the primary objective of yourcall center?

12% Create revenue through customer acquisition

4% Create revenue through upselling/cross-selling

9% Create revenue through customer retention

27% Minimize costs/maximizeefficiency of customer engagements

1% Minimize marketing/sales spend

1% Gain customer insights

44% Improve customer satisfaction

3% Other (please specify)

callcenter-iq.com 10

queue and take charge of their ownimprovement agenda are increasingly looking toexternal technology partners and Cloudplatforms to sidestep internal IT constraints.”

Aware of the opportunity created by hosted orcloud platforms, VPI’s Patrick Botz still questionswhether a complete transition into a cloud orhosted solution is feasible

“The majority of contact centers aren't built totransition to cloud technology,” notes Botz.“They still have legacy systems, they still have tohave everything on site and they still intend tomaintain direct control over security, especiallyfor processing sensitive transactions that mayinvolve regulated information, like PCI -DSS orHIPAA. [To account for these concerns], anybusinesses are creating their own private cloudsor opting for a hybrid premise/cloud model versustransitioning 100 percent to the cloud.”

Perpetually concerned about data security anduncertain about how new technology willimpact reliability, decision-makers aresuccumbing to the inertia illustrated by the data.

Positioning the Call Center continued

Amplifying that inertia, as IQ Services’ MikeBurke explains, is the fact that call centerprofessionals—constrained by limited time andresources—tend to focus on urgent, disastersituations at the expense of optimizing whatthey believe is already working sufficiently.

“There are always going to be things that are at the moment more important than tweakingthings that are working within tolerance,”elaborates Burke. “What we see in terms oftuning call center performance is that whenthere is a disaster at hand, they focus on thedisaster. They’ll deal with urgent issues ratherthan technology improvements.”

That phenomenon, which not only affectsdecisions about call center infrastructure but all technology matters, is not without direconsequence.

“Unfortunately, if they don't deal with what willbe important in the long-term, issues that areminor today will eventually become urgent,”warns Burke.

The term “contact center” might be in vogue,but the “call center” moniker remains veryappropriate.

Telephony continues to reign as organizations’primary customer service channel. Offered as aplatform for live agent support in 92% oforganizations and IVR support in 59%, itrepresents one of only four channels in which themajority of businesses provide care.

E-mail, Facebook and web self-service, the otherchannels, maintain penetration rates of 87%,54% and 51%, respectively.

Despite offering evidence that businesses are,technically, serving customers in multiplechannels, the data casts significant doubt on thematurity of the alleged omni-channel revolution.

Instead of providing service wherever customerscan conceivably demand care, today’s businessesconcentrate their support efforts within only ahandful of channels. In the status quo, thatconcentrated effort largely excludes mobile, livechat and many social channels.

“I think it's been hyped but mostly by vendors,”says Genesys’ Stefan Captijn. “There's this waveof people that think it is cool and interesting, butit is hard for us to justify the real ROI.”

Only 11% of businesses support customers onGoogle Plus. Only 20% of businesses offermobile customer service. Merely 39% ofbusinesses grant customers the ability toconnect via live chat.

While this reluctance surprises Intradiem’s Matt McConnell, who argues, “To have a greatcustomer experience, [businesses] need to servecustomers in whatever channel they choose,” itdoes not surprise CallMiner’s Erik Strand.

“Part of the reason for the delay is adoption ofthe channels by customers,” retorts Strand.“There are still a ton of things that customers willonly do on the phone.”

And because offering service in a given channel isnot the same as committing to optimizingsupport in that channel, the reality of multi-channel customer service is even more sobering.

The majority of organizations only allocatededicated support resources to the phone (85%)and e-mail (72%) channels. Facebook, whichplays host to customer service interactions formany organizations, only commands dedicatedattention from 30% of organizations.

Dedicated support is even rarer for channels likeLinkedIn (7%), mobile (14%) and Twitter (22%).

Omni-Reluctance to go Multi-Channel

"Unfortunately, if [call centers] don'tdeal with what will be important in the

long-term, issues thatare minor today willeventually become

urgent."

- Mike Burke


Q6 When evaluating call centerperformance, how valuable are thefollowing metrics?

Average Handle Time

After Call Work

Hold Time

First Call Resolution

Average Speed of Answer

Blockage

Self-Service Utilization Rate

Abandon rate

Transfer rate

Adherence to Procedure

Accuracy of Agent Information

Agent Occupancy

Scheduling Efficiency

Contact Volume by Channel

Cost Per Call

Sales Conversion Rate

Employee Satisfaction Score

Customer Satisfaction Score

Customer Retention/Loyalty Rate

Time to Resolution

Frequency of Customer Callback

Net Promoter Score

Social Media Feedback Score

Customer Effort

Quality Assurance Score

Other Internal/Organization-Facing

Other External/Customer-Facing

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0

Rank 1-4 (1 b

eing the lo

west an

d 4 th

e highest


“Right now, the perspective seems to be moreexploratory in general, “ says VoltDelta’s SteveChirokas regarding dedicated support for somesocial and mobile channels. “Even if businessesdon’t choose to support these channels now, theyare increasingly becoming aware that they willlikely have to add this dedicated support downthe road.”

Affirming Chirokas’ message about adaptation,MatsSoft’s Nigel Warren adds, “Call Centers needto adapt quickly to keep pace with these changes,or else customer experience could suffer ifmultiple channels lead to disjointed service andfractured customer data.”

While its penetration is among the lowest for allchannels, Google Plus receives dedicated attentionfrom the same 11% of organizations thatconsider it a viable customer service channel.

Uncompelled to provide dedicated resources forthe majority of contact channels, businessespossess even less drive to measure performancewithin most media.

Live agent phone conversations (87%) and email(61%) are the only service realms within which themajority of businesses manage performance.Even though they represent service destinations inmore than 50% of businesses, IVR and web self-service go unmeasured by an abundance ofbusinesses.

Believing respondents likely understated theextent of their self-service offerings, IQ Services’Mike Burke finds this gap particularly alarming.

“There is an awful lot of self-service technologyfor minor interactions,” says Burke. “Whenpeople want to talk to an agent, they're going tohave to buzz through that technology. There ishardly anyone that gives you a number that landsat an agent desktop. Performance measurementis too low for self-service and IVR.”

Despite its existence as a service channel in 54%of businesses and its ability to commanddedicated staff in 30% of businesses, Facebookgoes unmeasured by a staggering 87% oforganizations. The same quantity oforganizations opts not to measure support viaTwitter. Mobile service is managed by only 14%of businesses.

Insofar as today’s call centers are designed todrive customer satisfaction, the absence ofmeasurement in most communication channelscreates an obvious challenge. Without anyinsight into the service customers areexperiencing in the majority of channels,including popular ones like telephone IVR, webself-service and Facebook, many of today’sorganizations are inherently unable to evaluatethe success of their contact center functions.

Omni-Reluctance to go Multi-Channel continued

Excuses like lack of customer demand andfinancial constraints might explain why businessescannot commit dedicated resources to the fullsuite of contact channels, but they do not explainwhy organizations are rendering themselvesunable to even assess their existing customerservice efforts.

While phone and e-mail will retain their significantpenetration, businesses will spend the next 6-18months initiating or improving experiences withinseveral alternative channels.

Organizations are particularly adamant aboutimplementing or amplifying web, voice andmobile self-service options. Over the next 6-18months, 56% of organizations will increase theirreliance on web self-service. Mobile self-servicewill command increases from 48% of businesses,while 38% will devote more focus to IVR.

If implemented correctly, the additional self-serviceoptions could prove instrumental in improving thecustomer experience.

“I think what organizations should focus on ishow they can achieve a resolution for thecustomer via self-service,” says Genesys’ StefanCaptijn. “Right now, it still takes customers a lotof interactions to get a resolution or get theirquestion answered. Self-service would solve thatproblem.”

“Used properly, [self-service and virtual agenttechnology] can drive just as much—if not more--satisfaction as long, drawn out but friendly calls,”adds CallMiner’s Erik Strand.

“Improving customer communications and webself-service capabilities can dramatically cut thenumber of chaser (follow-up) calls,” articulatesMatsSoft’s Nigel Warren. “For example,Cambridge Building Society halved the number ofchaser calls within a few weeks of implementingautomated status-update-messaging for theirmortgage applicants.”

Other channels due for increases included livechat and live mobile care. They are earmarkedfor increases in 50% and 49% of businesses,respectively.

Conspicuously absent from the shortlist are anysocial channels. Occasionally treated assynonymous with the word multi-channel, socialremains slow to garner support from today’senterprises.

Social channels Google Plus and LinkedIn, in fact,will become less relevant in some organizationsover the next 6-18 months. 6% and 5% oforganizations, respectively, will decrease theirGoogle Plus and LinkedIn offerings.

Other channels marked for notable decreasesinclude phone (down 12%), email (down 6%)and in-person (down 6%).


Q7 How would your organization rate itsperformance against the followingmetrics?

Average Handle Time

After Call Work

Hold Time



Blockage


Abandon rate

Transfer rate



Agent Occupancy



Cost Per Call





Time to Resolution


Net Promoter Score


Customer Effort




4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0

Rank 1-4 (1 b

eing the lo

west an

d 4 th

e highest

Knowledge of how businesses are constructingtheir call center infrastructure provides adegree of context for understandingoperational limitations. Knowledge of wherebusinesses offer service provides a degree ofcontext for understanding customer experiencelimitations.

But in order to appreciate the magnitude ofthose limitations, one needs to understand thefundamental objectives of today’s call centers.That also requires knowledge of the extent towhich businesses are committed to fulfillingthose objectives.

According to respondents, customersatisfaction trumps cost minimization andrevenue generation as the most important callcenter objective. 44% of businesses definedriving customer satisfaction as their callcenter’s primary focus; only 27% most notablyfocus on reducing the cost of customerengagements.

12% believe revenue generation throughcustomer acquisition is the call center’s primaryfocus. 9% believe revenue should mostnotably come from customer retention, while4% are most concerned with up-selling andcross-selling existing customers.

A top priority for 27% of call centers and alingering concern for virtually all businessunits, cost remains a prominent factor in thecontemporary customer managementenvironment. The idea that businesses arenow throwing cost concerns to the wind whendeveloping customer service strategies issimply not one rooted in accuracy or reality.

That 73% of businesses are more concernedwith the value generated by their call centersdoes, however, underscore the dissolution ofthe cost center stigma. Contemporarybusinesses see their call centers as gateways to improved customer relationships and greaterrevenue. They do not view them as sources ofunwanted cost within which less is alwaysmore.

And by rating customer satisfaction as the mostparamount call center objective, businesses aredeclaring that while cost is always relevant andsignificant, it cannot be the source of finaljudgment on a customer service strategy.

A call center investment is not inherently bad ifit is costly. It is, however, fundamentally inferiorif it does not favorably contribute to customersatisfaction levels.

“It's all driven by this intent to focus on thecustomer experience,” says Intradiem’s MattMcConnell of the trend towards customer-centric call centers. “Driven by the Apples andthe Zapposes of the world, there is anexpectation on the part of consumers that ahigh quality of service can now be delivered.Because of that, it is responsible for determiningmarket share.”

“Increasingly organizations regard customerexperience improvement as their primaryprocess improvement goal,” adds MatsSoft’sNigel Warren. “Partly that’s because ofincreasingly powerful customers, and partly it’sbecause of diminishing returns from longestablished efficiency initiatives like sharedservices and outsourcing. The agenda hasswitched to winning, delighting and retainingmore customers.

“That will ultimately help drive profitability.”

As businesses consider strategies for achievingtheir paramount, customer-centric and value-centric call center objectives, they are morelikely to increase than decrease budget.

37% of businesses will increase their customerservice spending over the next 6-18 months.38% will make no changes, while only 25% willenforce budgetary reductions.

Knowledge of how call centers are structured,how deeply they extend into different media,how they define success and how serious theyare about achieving that success provides therequisite backdrop for understanding how theyare managing performance, developing agents,assessing quality and optimizing technology.


Call Center: What’s the Point?

“Driven by the Apples and the

Zapposes of the world,there is an expectation

on the part ofconsumers that a highquality of service cannow be delivered.

Because of that, it isresponsible for

determining marketshare.”


Q8 How would you rate your organization'scommitment to improving performanceagainst the following metrics?

Average Handle Time

After Call Work

Hold Time



Blockage


Abandon rate

Transfer rate



Agent Occupancy



Cost Per Call





Time to Resolution


Net Promoter Score


Customer Effort




4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0

Rank 1-4 (1 b

eing the lo

west an

d 4 th

e highest

Confident that customer satisfaction represents themost notable call center objective, businessesunsurprisingly declare CSAT Score the mostimportant performance indicator.

According to the annual survey, businesses assessthe importance of CSAT score at 4.08/5. The onlymetric to receive a value rating of 4 or higher, it isviewed as important by 88% of businesses and veryimportant by 61% of them.

Net Promoter Score, another metric deemedcustomer-oriented, ranked as one of the mostvaluable with a score of 3.94/5.

Emotional indicators like CSAT Score and NetPromoter Score are not, however, the only metricsbusinesses believe play a valuable role in call centerperformance management.

Accuracy of agent information, which offers a moreobjective assessment of the customer experience,earned a strong 3.95/5 importance mark fromrespondents. Quality assurance score, which,depending on the organization, will blend objectiveand subjective elements, garnered a strong 3.83/5.

Widely subject to debate about what constitutes a“first” interaction, what constitutes a “call” andwhat constitutes a “resolution,” first call resolutionis not, however, subject to debate about itsimportance. Given a valuation of 3.66/5, itrepresents a key metric in the age of customer-centric call centers.

“We believe FCR is important,” declares CallMiner’sErik Strand in defense of the metric. “The surveysays that the key thing that needs to be measured iscustomer satisfaction, but we believe the mostimportant component to customer satisfaction issuccessful outcomes.”

While businesses are paying reverence to bothobjective and subjective metrics, they are notembracing all standard indicators of call centerperformance.

Blockage/blocking rate, a long-standing call centermetric, was deemed relatively unimportant byrespondents. With a score of 2.15/5, it wasconsidered the least valuable of the 25 metrics ratedby respondents. Only 26% of businesses felt it waseither important or very important.

Other metrics of limited value for today’s call centersinclude transfer rate (2.26/5), after call work(2.46/5), self-service utilization rate (2.53/5) andaverage handle time (2.76/5).

“We’ve got one client where the agents are on thephone for twenty minutes or more by design," saysVoltDelta’s Steve Chirokas of the shift from metricslike average handle time. “They’re engaging withdifferent dealerships that are supporting cars acrossmultiple countries, and that’s what they want. Thisorganization is focused on delivering exceptioncustomer care. AHT just goes right out the door.”

“More CSAT, more NPS,” says Matt McConnell of

A business unit for which there are inevitable costand inevitable revenue opportunities, the callcenter invites—and requires—strict investigationinto the efficacy of its operation.

Even the most cost-conscious organizations requiretheir call centers to generate value. Even the mostcustomer-centric businesses require their callcenters to operate with a mind for cost-efficiency.

And insofar as businesses ascribe clearly articulatedobjectives to their customer service functions, mere

knowledge about performance is insufficient.Successful businesses assure that the metrics theyuse serve to illuminate and incentivize theconnection between call center performance andthe objectives held most dear.

When selected and managed correctly, performancemetrics bridge the gap between call center activityand the desired outcomes. When selected andmanaged incorrectly, performance metricscontribute to the disconnect between customerservice efforts and core business objectives.

OperationalPerformance


Some businesses focus primarily on the cost of operating their call centers.Considerably more businesses focus on the value being generated by their centers.All, however, require insight into how their call centers are performing.

Performance: Evaluating the Metrics


Q9 Which do you use when evaluatingagent performance?

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

71% Call Quality Metrics

68% Call Efficiency Metrics

60% C-Sat Metrics

48% Supervisor Reports

43% Call Resolution Metrics

30% Revenue Generation

29% Downtime Efficiency/After Call work

29% Self-Assessment

22% Performance in Training Sessions

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

36% Determining agent shifts

36% Determining call routing/specialtyassignments

56% Determining agent promotions

23% Determining supervisor promotions

43% Determining front line agentfirings/terminations

17% Determining management/supervisor firings/terminations

51% Determining incentives - for individual agents

27% Determining incentives - for supervisors

55% Determining training/coachingcurriculum - group

61% Determining coaching curriculum -individuals

23% Determining product quality (ex - is a product too problematic,difficult to service)

30% Determining process quality/efficacy

Q10 How does your organization use agentperformance data?


Performance: Evaluating the Metrics continued

the optimal approach to call center metrics. “Callcenters should also more on intent to purchase ordo business and less focus on handle time and othermetrics focused on efficiency.

VPI’s Patrick Botz, however, believes after callwork—or wrap time—is exactly the type ofefficiency metric businesses should be measuring.

“The best customer champions remove averagehandle time, but measure wrap time where agentstend to hide out,” says Botz. “By minimizing wraptime, you keep productivity exactly where it waswhen measuring talk time but allow agents to bemore comprehensive on the phone.”

The lack of merit ascribed to self-service utilizationrate is surprising given the extent to whichbusinesses plan to increase their self-service offeringsover the next 6-18 months. If self-service utilizationis truly meaningless to businesses and theircustomers, why are web, phone/IVR and mobile self-service initiatives earmarked for significant focus intoday’s era of customer centricity?

And while their scores suggest they too are beingdeemed irrelevant by businesses, blockage rates andtransfer counts absolutely could impact satisfactionlevels. A customer who consistently endures hurdlesto connecting with an agent or sits through one ortwo transfers before reaching the person qualified tohelp is absolutely less likely to declare satisfactionthan one who gets what he wants on the first call.

The metrics deemed more important do, however,possess a quality absent from the low-rated metrics:the presence of a holistic assessment. While metricslike average handle time address an aspect of thecustomer experience that may or may not influence

satisfaction levels, CSAT score speaks directly to acustomer’s overall opinion of the customerexperience. NPS speaks directly to a customer’swillingness to, with consciousness of its best andworst qualities, advocate on behalf of a brand. Firstcall resolution speaks to whether the necessaryelements came together in support of the optimaloutcome.

Even accuracy rate and quality assurance score arethe sums of many moving parts.

Today’s customer management mindset, therefore,is not one that rejects the importance of individualcustomer experience elements but one that asksbusinesses to think about the totality of thecustomer journey. A business strictly striving tominimize blockage or reduce average handle time isnot necessarily addressing other bottlenecks in thecustomer experience. One concerned with elevatingCSAT and NPS is looking at everything.

While IQ Services’ Mike Burke supports thisholistic mindset, he advises businesses to remainfocused on how each individual component ofthe experience is contributing to the overallcustomer satisfaction score.

“I think metrics should be at all the individualcomponents and channels,” says Burke.“Accuracy and efficiency within each one of thecomponents is what is going to make customereffort lower and should drive customersatisfaction to a higher level.

“If any of the technology doesn't work the way itis supposed to or slows down, then you end upwith frustration both on the part of the agent andthe customer.”

In declaring customer satisfaction their greatestcall center objective and CSAT score the mostrelevant call center metric, businesses aretalking the customer-centric talk. They areemphasizing their commitment to approachingthe call center as a gateway to value rather thana landfall to unwanted cost.

According to survey data, they are also walkingthe walk.

In addition to rating CSAT the most valuableindicator of call center performance, businessesconfirm that is the measure against which theyare enjoying the greatest level of success.

Respondents assess their existing CSATperformance at 4.06/5. 39% deemed currentperformance very satisfying, while a total of 69%are at least somewhat satisfied with CSAT levels.Only 8% are dissatisfied with performance.

Believers in the connection between accuracyand a strong customer experience, businessesare also successfully delivering in that regard.

Respondents rate their performance against the“accuracy of agent information” metric at astrong 3.91/5.

Also performing competently against the qualityassurance score (3.73/5) and first call resolutionmetrics (3.67/5), organizations have thus farbeen struggling to deliver against one of theirmost cherished measures.

Businesses rate their performance against NetPromoter Score, that measure, at anunderwhelming 3.38. Whereas performanceagainst the aforementioned four metrics isroughly in line with the extent to whichbusinesses value those metrics, NPSperformance lags considerably behind the3.94/5 importance rating.

Trailing both its importance rating andperformance against other key metrics, thecurrent NPS success level is likely hurt by theheightened standard. While CSAT hinges on afairly broad definition of satisfaction, NPSrequires a level of satisfaction strong enough to

Performance: Is Right Now the Right Way?

“The best customerchampions removeaverage handle time,but measure wrap timewhere agents tend tohide out. By minimizingwrap time, you keepproductivity exactlywhere it was when

measuring talk time butallow agents to bemore comprehensive

on the phone.”

- Patrick Botz


Q11 How do you collect and/or manageagent feedback?

25% Focus only on "voice of thecustomer" insights

56% Treat performanceissues/inquiries/internal call centeras feedback gathering tool

17% Ask agents to submit in writing;respond if deemed important

17% Ask agents to submit in writing;respond in all cases

39% Ask agents to submit inconversation with supervisor/management; follow-up after thefact

39% Ask agents to submit inconversation with supervisor/management; resolve duringconversation

47% Ask agents for feedback during grouptraining sessions; follow-up after thefact (ex - at next meeting)

48% Ask agents for feedback during grouptraining sessions; resolve duringsession

46% Ask agents for feedback during privatetraining sessions; follow-up after thefact

43% Ask agents for feedback during privatetraining sessions; resolve duringsession

51% Employee satisfaction surveys

34% Suggestion "boxes"

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%


Performance: Is Right Now the Right Way? continued

inspire advocacy. Efforts to drive increasedsatisfaction are evidently not driving acorresponding increase in customer advocacy.

Moving forward, organizations could benefit bytreating NPS—not CSAT—as the paramountobjective. Businesses that focus on cultivatingthat advocacy will naturally be improvingsatisfaction. Businesses content to prioritizeimprovement against CSAT, however, are notnecessarily doing enough to drive an equivalentincrease in NPS.

While businesses are not yet succeeding on theNPS test, they are, however, succeeding againstless important tests. Indicative of the extent towhich previous customer service mindsetsinfluence performance in the present,businesses are delivering strong marks againsttraditional metrics like average handle time(4.03/5) and average speed of answer (3.91/5).

Performance against the blockage (3.13/5) andtransfer rate (3.21/5) metrics is not strong—those scores are among the weakest for the 25assessed metrics—but it is stronger than isdeemed necessary by the relevance scores.

While confirming that call centers are not yetoptimizing performance, the contrastingdisparities—overperformance against irrelevantmetrics, underperformance against importantones—collectively create an ideal scenario forbusinesses moving forward.

Since businesses are already deliveringsatisfactory marks for the unimportant metrics,they can remove or reduce focus from thoseareas in the coming 6-18 months. That willenable them to focus more directly on theimportant metrics for which performanceimprovements are more meaningful.

The circumstances within today’s marketplace areperfect for fostering call center improvement.

Because businesses are over-delivering on irrelevantaspects of the customer service process andmoderately delivering—or even under-delivering--on some of the most relevant ones, they canrecalibrate their efforts without negativeconsequence.

And insofar as the overwhelming majority of today’sbusinesses appreciate the call center as a valuedriver—either by virtue of generating customersatisfaction or driving revenue—they have anincentive to continue improving. The call centermight be performing at a decent level, but insofar asbetter performance directly creates more value, nobusiness has a reason to curb its effort.

Well, no business should have a reason to curb itseffort.

No matter how evolved today’s businesses are onthe topic of customer service, they are ultimately stillbusinesses. They still do fear rising costs.

Additional investment into the customer servicefunction might position the call center to createmore value, but if the business fears future returnson investment will be diminishing or delayed, itbecomes a more tightly constrained prisoner of costconsciousness.

If the business is not certain the value of becominggreat warrants the cost of becoming great, which isa particularly conceivable reality given the stigmalong associated with the call center, it might opt tosettle for being good.

Current performance, after all, is fairly satisfactory.Businesses are proud of their CSAT scores. They areproud of their ability to provide accurate informationduring customer interactions. They are reasonablycontent with their ability to resolve matters on thefirst contact. Certainly not broken, do these areas

warrant fixing simply because they can technicallyget better?

Moving forward, businesses will definitely grapplewith the conflicting thought processes.

On the one hand, businesses are committed toimproving against the metrics they deem mostvaluable.

With respective commitment scores of 3.20/5 and3.15/5, they will devote their greatest effort toimproving NPS and CSAT Score over the next 6-18months. With a commitment score of 3, First CallResolution is also a realm targeted for improvement.

Other areas most notably earmarked forimprovement are Customer Effort Score (2.95/5) andEmployee Satisfaction Score (2.78/5). While neithermetric is considered as valuable as accuracy orquality assurance, for which improvementcommitments are rated 2.54/5 and 2.56/5,respectively, both fit in with the emotional, holisticmotif that plays an influential role in today’sperformance culture.

Unimportant areas like transfer rate, after call workand blockage will receive limited attention frombusinesses moving forward. Respondents rate theircommitments to improve at just 1.84/5, 1.91/5 and1.92/5, respectively.

Noteworthy, however, is the fact that no score isparticularly significant. CSAT score might be thegreatest target for improvement, but only 49% ofbusinesses are making such improvement asignificant or paramount priority. 21%, meanwhile,do not consider improvement a priority at all.

That no area of improvement is a significant priorityfor more than 50% of respondents confirms adegree of complacency within the marketplace.Businesses absolutely care about their call centers,but they place a ceiling on the effort andinvestments they are willing to commit.

Performance: Does the Circumstance Breed Action?


Q12 Which aspects of your agentperformance management strategy areyou planning to change?

5% Nothing - it is perfect

27% Metrics - need to focus more on callstat/efficiency metrics

29% Metrics - need to focus more on callquality metrics

27% Metrics - need to focus more onresolution metrics

33% Metrics - need to focus more oncustomer satisfaction/loyalty metrics

13% Metrics - need to focus more on postcall/recurring customer feedback

18% Transparency - need to more publiclyshare floor-wide performance

5% Transparency - need to makeperformance statistics more private

16% Transparency - need to be clearerabout how performance stats areutilized

25% Transparency - need to be clearerabout why certain performanceelements are measured

31% Feedback - need to encourage opencommunication (floor-wide)

29% Feedback - need to create moreopportunities for agents to shareprivate feedback with management

33% Feedback - need to demonstratehow agent feedback is beingutilized

27% Feedback - need to demonstratehow customer feedback is beingutilized

21% Incentives - need to improve thequality of incentives

18% Incentives - need to improve thefrequency of incentive programs

31% Incentives - need to be more publicabout celebrating individual agentsuccess

4% Incentives - need to be more privateabout celebrating individual agentsuccess

22% Training - need to focus more ongroup exercises

44% Training - need to focus more onpersonalized, one-on-one coaching

18% Training - need to focus more on e-learning

25% Training - need to focus more onscript/process knowledge education

36% Training - need to focus more onsoft/interaction skills

50

40

30

20

10

0


Q13 What is your primary source of datawhen measuring quality?

0% Agent feedback

7% Side-by-side live agent evaluation

22% Listen to recordings - evaluate using spreadsheets or paper forms

29% Listen to recordings - evaluate using commercial software

17% Listen to recordings - evaluate using in-house software

3% Automated scoring using speech analytics

16% Customer feedback

0% Built-in QOS/MOS from VoIP network

0% Audio intelligibility automaticallymonitored from the outside-in

7% No formal quality measurement program

0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%


When evaluating the myriad of available callcenter solutions and technologies, respondentsadhered to a pattern: if it impacts the agent’shappiness or ability to satisfy customers, it islikely a valuable solution.

Destined to be utilized by 82% of businesseswithin the next 6-18 months, call centercoaching represents the second most popularsolution category. Only call center recordingand monitoring solutions, which can technicallyplay an instrumental role in agent performancemanagement and coaching, will command agreater utilization rate.

67% of businesses will use performancemanagement solutions, while 66% will rely onworkforce management tools.

Beyond garnering strong overall utilizationrates, agent development solutions will attractmore new investment than the majority of othercall center services.

To be implemented by 19% of businesses overthe next 6-18 months, unified agent desktopsolutions will attract the greatest level of newinvestment.

“Agents always complain about multiplescreens,” begins VoltDelta’s Steve Chirokas inhis advocacy for unified desktops. “Anytimeyou can reduce the number of those screens,that’s helpful.”

15% of businesses will empower agile agentperformance by launching knowledgemanagement solutions, while 14% ofbusinesses will invest in e-learning solutions toaid in agent training. 12% will introduceworkforce management tools.

The only other technology to commandcomparable levels of new investment will be livechat solutions (18%), mobile customer servicesolutions (17% will initiate), virtual agentsolutions (14%) and CRM applications (11%).

By declaring that they value the opinion offront-line agents more than they do that of C-level executives, potential customers, incomestatements and competitors (albeit less thanthey do call center supervisors and currentcustomers), businesses are underscoring theimportance of the agent’s perspective.

By declaring accuracy of information one ofthe greatest indicators of call centerperformance, businesses are underscoring theimportance of the agent’s knowledge andaccess to training.

Before even considering the direct roles agentsplay in driving customer satisfaction, unlockingrevenue opportunities and controlling callcenter costs, businesses are adamant in theirbelief that the call center agent experiencecommands considerable attention.

As they work to improve call center operationsand achieve their fundamental customerservice objectives—all while managing changesin infrastructure and methods ofcommunication—organizations will thereforedevote significant attention to their strategiesfor driving agent development andperformance.

By declaring employee satisfaction score one of their top improvement areasfor the next 6-18 months, businesses are underscoring the importance of theagent experience.

AgentDevelopment

Investing in People


Q14 A: How do you measure system quality?

39% DIY – test equipment purchased & staff trained totest & evaluate technology performance

24% 3rd party managed testing & monitoring service

34% Staff periodically check availability &performance of self-service IVR andWeb applications

29% Collection & analysis of networkcomponent metrics such as uptime,CPU consumption, etc.

31% No formal testing/evaluation process in place

C: How many interactions do you qualitymonitor per agent per month?

7% 0

14% 1 to 2

29% 3 to 5

22% 6 to 10

8% 11 to 15

21% More than 15

B: Which strategies will you employ toimprove call quality?

26% Automate QA workflow to be able toevaluate more calls and/or spend moretime coaching agents

37% Use analytics to find and QA higher valuecalls and focus on outcomes

19% Ramp-up calibration sessions

48% Tie quality scores directly to training toquickly bridge knowledge gaps

324%Speed up the feedback on QA scores to agents

11% Use auto-scoring via speech analyticsto evaluate more calls

3% Voice & Data on separate VLANs

0% Voice & Data on separate physicalLAN segments or networks

8% Implement QOS within blendednetwork

0% Move to G.711 exclusively instead ofG.729

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%


Notably focused on tools that facilitate training,knowledge development and performanceversatility, businesses are clear in theirdeclaration that agent development is a priorityfor the next 6-18 months.

In order to succeed in that effort, businesses willneed to do more than simply invest in tools. Ifthey do not develop a call center environmentthat sustains the positive impact of peopleinvestment and incentivizes further agentdevelopment, they will not only squanderopportunity for return on their investments buthinder efforts to drive customer satisfaction.

Effective performance management plays anintegral role in creating a sustainable, ever-improving atmosphere of agent productivity.

More than mere routines in measurement, thebest performance management strategiesassure that the data collected is used to informoperational practices, aid in agent training anddevelopment and incentivize performance. It iswhat an organization does with the data—notthe data itself—that drives the most valuableand effective agent behavior.

Behavior that Drives Good Behavior

While organizations consider a myriad of factorswhen evaluating agent performance, they turnmost notably to call quality metrics. 71% ofbusinesses rely on call quality assessments todetermine the efficacy of agent performance.

Efficiency metrics are no longer top of mindwhen it comes to holistically evaluating callcenter performance, but they remain strongindicators of agent productivity. 68% ofbusinesses continue to look at factors likeaverage handle time when evaluating theirtalent.

60% look at the agent’s impact on customersatisfaction metrics, while 49% acquireinformation about front-line performance fromsupervisor reports. 42% rely on resolutionmetrics, including first call resolution andcustomer call back rate to make educatedassessments of agent performance.

Less widespread—but still often employed—sources of agent performance insights aremetrics related to revenue generation (used by30% of businesses), downtime efficiencyintelligence (used by 29% of businesses), agentself-evaluation data (used by 29% ofbusinesses) and performance in training sessions(used by 22% of businesses).

Aggregating the relevant performance data isonly the beginning of the journey. Oncebusinesses understand how their agents areperforming, then they must decide how toleverage that knowledge to improveproductivity and inch closer to achievingprominent call center objectives.

Such data is most commonly used to informagent training strategies. Wanting to assuretheir personnel development efforts are lean,targeted and mindful of the actual strengthsand weaknesses within the talent pool, 61% ofbusinesses utilize performance insights when

crafting individual training curricula. 55%,meanwhile, use the aggregate data to drivegroup training syllabi.

A positive trend, CallMiner’s Erik Strandnonetheless urges businesses to assure the linkbetween performance data and training is afast, seamless one.

“You don't want to look at a monthly reportand then schedule a training session that theytake two weeks later,” says Strand. “Make thatfeedback loop as tight as possible. As soon asthere is highly targeted and certain knowledgethat this agent needs training, provide thattraining right away.”

“Today’s agents expect these kinds of moment-of-need learning and collaboration capabilities,”notes MatsSoft’s Nigel Warren. “They typicallyprefer them to long formal classes, where halfthe content is forgotten before it’s applied.”

While most commonly used to drive training,process assessment (60% of businesses do so inthis circumstance), agent promotions (56%) andagent incentives (51%), agent performanceinsights empower a wide array of applications.None of the survey’s 13 listed options applied toless than 17% of respondents.

Even some relatively new or creativeapplications are gaining considerable tractionwithin the customer management marketplace.36% of businesses, for instance, use agentperformance—potentially as an alternative toseniority—to determine shift assignments. Anequivalent percentage draws from agentperformance data when determining routingand specialty assignments.

That organizations are beginning to use agentperformance to inform shifting decisions makesVPI’s Patrick Botz particularly optimistic aboutthe state of call center management.

Putting the Data to Work

Notably focused ontools that facilitatetraining, knowledgedevelopment and

performance versatility,businesses are clear intheir declaration thatagent development is apriority for the next

6-18 months.


Q15 Which represent your plans foraddressing reliability issues?

18% Not issues

11% Will not address

3% Will eliminate technology

44% Will improve staff training/knowledge of technology

52% Will upgrade/optimize technology

24% Will replace technology

60

50

40

30

20

10

0


“Performance-based versus tenure-based shiftbidding is a huge opportunity,” explains Botz,“because the choice of shift is often moreimportant than the pay. The current Americandream for the up-and-coming generation is notowning a fancy house and a nice car – it is havingthe flexibility to incorporate your personal lifewhile working for a company about whose causeyou're passionate.”

While agent performance data is frequently usedto determine agent promotions (56%), agentincentives (51%) and agent terminations (43%),it carries less weight as an advisory tool at thesupervisor level. A considerably smaller 23% usethe intelligence to drive agent promotions, whileonly 17% use the information to determineagent firings (it was the aforementioned lowest-ranking application of agent data). 27% useagent performance information to determineincentives for supervisors.

Because the data directly measures agentperformance, the disparity is an expected andintuitive one. But insofar as it sends the messagethat agent performance is not a surefire indicatorof a manager’s performance, the disparity alsoruns the risk of de-incentivizing accountability. Ifmanagers are not led to believe that great agentperformance can earn them more money andmore job stability and that poor agentperformance can spell the end of their tenure,they have less motivation to cultivate strongperforming habits. They can place the blame on“bad agents,” which minimizes their sense ofinvestment in the front-line and thus continuesthe vicious circle of workplace detachment.

Essential to business leaders when assessingproductivity, managing workflow, determining futurecall center investments and developing trainingcurricula, performance data can also proveimmensely fruitful to the agents themselves. Bygiving agents a transparent window into their ownperformance—and sometimes that of their peers—businesses provide them with a more vivid, palatableunderstanding of their strengths and weaknesses. Ifcommunicated correctly, the information can alsoserve as a tangible source of motivation.

Skewing more to the former mentality than thelatter, businesses’ favorite medium forcommunicating performance information is withinprivate training and coaching sessions. 68% ofbusinesses deliver performance statistics in thatenvironment.

55% of businesses, meanwhile, issue private,periodic reports to inform agents of theirperformance statistics.

Utilizing performance insights to inspire friendlycompetition, motivation and collective accountabilityis not, however, a foreign concept. 42% issueperiodic agent reports to all team members. 38%track performance statistics on real-time wallboardsto add a de facto Gamification element to their callcenters.

Genesys’ Stefan Captijn is confident the practice willonly gain traction moving forward.

“The angle I find interesting is gamification,” heexplains. “That drives a performance culture andalso inspires competition. It is an area where if it'sdone well, [businesses] will see that people come upto speed faster.”

Putting the Data to Work continued

Over the next 6-18 months, businesses intendto devote attention to employee satisfaction.It ranks as one of the customer managementworld’s top five performance improvementareas.

“There is a direct one-to-one correlationbetween E-Sat and CSAT,” says VPI’s PatrickBotz. “It's so important to empower frontline employees to self-manage and makedecisions, and engage them throughcollaboration and proactive updates.”

Given the importance of employeesatisfaction, singular, standalone efforts willprove insufficient. If businesses truly want toimprove the customer experience, they mustaddress the issue from a multitude ofpositions.

They need to incorporate concepts ofempowerment and customer-centricity intothe cultural dynamic.

“People aren't motivated by making moremoney for their employer,” explainsIntradiem’s Matt McConnell. “But they aremotivated by how to do right by thesecustomers.”

They need to assure the assistive technologyis fast, accurate and accessible.

“The concepts of technology not beingavailable, not performing correctly or beinginaccurate and the quality of the interactionare directly connected,” says IQ Services’Mike Burke.

The Voices Behind the Front Line

“People aren'tmotivated by makingmore money for theiremployer,” explainsIntradiem’s Matt

McConnell. “But theyare motivated by how to do right by these

customers.”

- Matt McConnell


A dichotomy commonly explored within theabstract concept of customer centricity, thedistinction between thinking and doing alsoapplies to the realm of agent development.

Per the aforementioned findings, businessesrecognize opportunities for acquiringperformance statistics and agent sentimentand then utilizing those insights to driveaction. When shaping their customer serviceinvestment strategies, they are prioritizing thetools, technologies and other solutions thatdirectly improve the agent experience.

While those commitments speak to admirableintentions for processes and mindsets, theydo not necessarily generate valuable action.Developing a proper utilization chain forperformance metrics is important, but ifbusinesses do not measure and deliver theright metrics at the right times, the utilizationchain will be limited in its efficacy.

Investing in training and coaching solutionsmight be a valuable approach to talentdevelopment, but if training curricula andcoaching strategies are off base, the impactof the investment will not resonate withagents, executive leadership or customers.

Pivotal value, therefore, exists inunderstanding the actions businesses willtake to improve the customer experience.And insofar as only 5% consider theirperformance management effort perfect, theoverwhelming majority will be taking preciseactions.

No specific action, however, commandssupport from the majority of businesses.

The most popular actions include focusingmore on personalized, one-on-one coaching(44%), focusing on softer, interaction skillsduring training sessions (36%), increasingtransparency into how agent feedback isbeing utilized (32%), shifting more focus tocustomer satisfaction and loyalty metrics(32%), incentivizing performance by moreopenly celebrating top performers (31%) andencouraging open communication on the callcenter floor (31%).

VPI’s Patrick Botz appreciates the emphasison customer satisfaction metrics butrecognizes an existing barrier toimplementation.

“A lot of call centers aren't measuring CSATwell or frequently enough to do so at theagent level,” says Botz. “If you can’tmeasure customer metrics down to the agentlevel, it is difficult to start incentivizing agentson those metrics.

“Right now, I see that organizations aremeasuring CSAT on a macro level – as anorganization – but many are unable to drive itdown to incentivize individual agents. Amacro level approach is very limited inproviding insights into drivers of CSAT –including, but not limited to, the impact ofservice provided by individual agents.Organizations also often lack the mechanismfor the delivery of personalized metrics toagents in a manner that would provide fastfeedback and inspire improvement throughself-management. ”

Working on the Workplace

“Putting the information at their fingertips atreal-time could enable them to be ascompetent as possible,” adds CallMiner’s ErikStrand.

Businesses also need to assure they areproperly dialed into agent sentiment.

To acquire agent feedback, the majority ofbusinesses focus directly on agentperformance. 56% “treat performanceissues/inquiries/internal call center asfeedback gathering tools.” Used by 51% oforganizations, employee satisfaction surveysare also common sources of agent sentiment.

Group and individual training sessions alsoserve as valuable sources of agent feedback.

48% of businesses say that they not only acceptfeedback during such sessions but resolve anyissues on the spot. 47% collect the feedbackbut then follow up after the session concludes.

45% collect feedback—and follow-up withneeded resolutions—during private trainingsessions. 43% resolve the issues within suchprivate sessions.

Less popular options for collecting agentfeedback include asking agents to submit theirissues in writing (17%) and looking solely atagent-related issues in voice of the customerdata (24%).

The Voices Behind the Front Line continued

“A lot of call centersaren't measuring CSAT

well or frequentlyenough to do so at theagent level. If you can’tmeasure customermetrics down to the

agent level, it is difficultto start incentivizingagents on those

metrics."


Q16 What are your plans for call centertechnology?

Agent recruiting &training solutions

Automatic call distribution

Call centercoaching/consulting

Call monitoring andrecording solutions

Cloud or hosted call center

Performancemanagement solutions

CRM applications

Customer analytics

Customer engagement/interaction management

Customer feedbackmanagement solutions

Customer satisfactionmeasurement solutions

Dialing solutions

eLearning/Trainingapplications

e-Mail Support Solutions

Help desks

Interaction managementsolutions

IVR solutions

Knowledge managementsolutions

Live chat applications

Mobile customer supportsolutions

Multi-channel customerservice solutions

Outsourcing

Remote/at-home agentsolutions

Social media supportapplications

Speech and text analytics

Training solutions

Unified desktop solutions

Virtual agent/assistantsolutions

Web/self-service solutions

Workforce management& optimization solutions

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Not using - do not need to use - will not start

Not using - do not need to use - will start

Not using - should use - no plans to start

Not using - should use - will start

Using - do not need to use - will cease use

Using - do not need to use - willcontinue use

Using - should use - will cease use

Using - should use - will continue use

Using - do not need to use - willcontinue use

Using - should use - will cease use

Using - should use - will continue use


Once organizations overcome that challenge,however, Intradiem’s Matt McConnell believesthey will create improved agent engagement.

“If you're measuring me on things that Iknow are only good for the company, thenI'm not as engaged,” explains McConnell.“But when companies really do make it allabout the customer and focus on thecustomer's pain points and empower theagents to serve the customers, unlocksomething that is part of our nature ofwanting to help other people.

“The organizations that do that really havemore effective cultures. It's human nature.”

And culture is the ticket to a better call centeroperation.

“Culture is obviously about identity, but it'salso about people. It's about values. It'sabout giving people a safe place--giving themthe right circumstances to perform and toexcel. Organizations still underestimate thebusiness case for driving employeeengagement,” adds Genesys’ Stefan Captijn.

Initiatives not commanding much attentioninclude becoming more private aboutcelebrating agent success (4%), becomingmore private about agent performance stats(5%), granting recurring customer feedback agreater role in the performance managementprocess (13%), increasing transparency intohow performance statistics are being utilized(16%), being more transparent about sharingfloor-wide performance statistics (18%),increasing the number of incentive programs(18%) and focusing more on e-learning(18%).

If there is a trend to the data, it suggests amovement towards a more employee-centric,holistic approach to agent engagement.Businesses are emphasizing one-on-onecoaching more than group or e-learningactivities (the soft response to e-learning isinteresting, however, given that it is a popularnew investment target for technology buyers).They will emphasize agent feedback andcommunication rather than hard performancedata. When agents do perform well, however,they want the entire office to join in thecelebration.

While the limited emphasis on recurringcustomer feedback suggests businesses will nothold agents directly accountable for long-termrelationships with customers, the rise inemphasis on customer satisfaction metricsguarantees a cultural shift in favor of customercentricity.

Despite the persistence of claims that the callcenter’s existence in a silo impacts customersatisfaction efforts, businesses interestingly arenot committed to bridging the gap betweenagents and the rest of the business.

VoltDelta’s Steve Chirokas believes doing sowould be a boon to customer satisfaction.

“You have to make sure the agents are up todate on things that you might not consider partof their realm, such as marketing messages,”says Chirokas. “All of a sudden, calls might beshowing up in their system because of apromotion, and the agents are not aware of it.The agent screen does not show up with theright information because the marketing teamdidn’t stay in touch with the operations team orthe contact center team.”

Working on the Workplace continued

“Culture is obviouslyabout identity, but it'salso about people. It'sabout values. It's aboutgiving people a safeplace--giving them theright circumstances toperform and to excel.Organizations stillunderestimate thebusiness case fordriving employeeengagement."

- Stefan Captijn


It offers more opportunity for creativity in thecustomer experience process. It incentivizesmaking meaningful connections withcustomers. It aligns more neatly with thecultural element that thought leaders deem socrucial to fostering strong agent engagement.It makes performance management moresubjective—and thus more friendly tosupervisors and agents who fear theunflattering reality of hard statistics.

As customer centricity continues to gain tractionas the driving force behind call centers, there isabsolutely merit to escaping from the rigidity ofa transactional mindset.

But if not tempered by a simultaneous emphasison the more tangible, measurable elements ofthe customer experience, the new mindsetcould prove harmful to the business. It, afunction of business’ desire to become morecustomer-centric, could actually reducesatisfaction levels.

“Customers want speed and accuracy,” declaresIntradiem’s Matt McConnell. “They don't wantrelationships, they don't want to know you -- theywant to get in, get what they need and get out.”

“[When it comes to call center operations],availability, performance and accuracy are reallyimportant and lead directly to more customersatisfaction,” adds IQ Services’ Mike Burke.

Collectively, the McConnell and Burkecomments offer the reminder that customershave a clear, transactional objective when theycall a contact center. And they ascribe a clearcost to any inefficiencies they encounter inpursuit of that objective.

They do not necessarily want to be treated likea number, but they will not welcome a friendlyinteraction as a substitute for a pointed one.They will not overlook the burden of excessivewait times, the hassle of multiple transfers, thefrustration of dropped calls or the harm ofinaccurate information simply because oneagent attempted to make a personalconnection.

Knowing that it plays a meaningful role indriving customer satisfaction, a customer-centricorganization does not downplay the importanceof call quality. It instead makes quality aparamount concern for call center operations.

Focusing on the softer, more emotional elements of the customer experiencehas its advantages.

It offers more opportunity for creativity in the customer experience process. It incentivizes making meaningful connections with customers. It aligns moreneatly with the cultural element that thought leaders deem so crucial to fosteringstrong agent engagement. It makes performance management moresubjective—and thus more friendly to supervisors and agents who fear theunflattering reality of hard statistics.

Quality

Businesses share in the belief that qualitymanagement is an essential part of customerservice strategy.

According to the annual survey, only 7% oforganizations operate without a formalprogram for measuring interaction quality.

The overwhelming majority of businesses thatdo measure quality, meanwhile, look directlyto call recordings as their most relevant

indicator. 68% of all businesses treat callrecordings as their primary gateway to anassessment of quality.

Confident in the value of call recordingsolutions, VoltDelta’s Steve Chirokas isunsurprised by the trend.

“Call recording is great for businessesbecause it captures intelligence with theemotional element that is so important with

Quality Measurements of Quality,Part One: Customer Interactions

Call recording is great for businessesbecause it capturesintelligence with the

emotional element thatis so important with

telephony interactions.The ability to easilyshare segments ofdialogs between

callers and agents alsobecomes a portal intocustomer care realityfor senior execs and

marketingdepartments as well as for agent training.”

- Steve Chirokas


telephony interactions,” says Chirokas. “Theability to easily share segments of dialogsbetween callers and agents also becomes aportal into customer care reality for seniorexecs and marketing departments as well asfor agent training.”

43% of those who primarily focus on callrecordings most commonly leverage third-party, commercial applications to analyze therecordings; 25% rely primarily on in-houseprograms.

The remaining 32%, meanwhile, still largelyrely on paper forms and spreadsheets totransform call recordings into usable qualityinsights.

Beyond call recordings, other top sources ofquality data are customer feedback (15%),live agent-to-agent comparisons (7%) andautomated scoring reports developed withspeech analytics (3%).

Call recordings will remain a significantsource of quality insights moving forward. Ineighteen months, 87% of organizations willbe utilizing some form of call monitoring orrecording solution. That figure represents afive percent increase from the solutioncategory’s already dominant market presence.

Businesses, however, seem considerably moreconcerned with the insights they unlock fromcustomer feedback. Asked to rate theirintention to improve within the various lensesof quality measurement, respondents scored

customer feedback at a 2.54/5.

Agent feedback, which was not identified byany business as its primary source of qualityinsights, was nonetheless given the category’sthird best score. With a 2.13/5, agentfeedback trails automated scoring fromspeech analytics (2.20/5) but outranks liveagent comparisons (1.94/5), built-in QOStools (1.92/5), call recordings (1.84/5) andexternal audio intelligibility monitoring(1.63/5).

Despite demonstrating universal support formeasuring interaction quality, businesses arenot necessarily exhaustive in their actualevaluations. Only 21% of businessesmeasure more than 15 monthly interactionsper agent. 49% measure no more than fiveof an agent’s monthly interactions.

The limited scope of call centers’ qualitymonitoring practices does not catch VPI’sPatrick Botz off guard.

“Quality monitoring is, unfortunately, viewedby executives as just a necessary cost,” saysBotz. “They don't view it the way they dothe voice of the customer, and they're notwilling to invest that much into it unless it’sfocused on business outcomes and there’s aclear contribution to the bottom line.Aligning QA with CSAT and adjusting thename and focus of your call qualitymonitoring program to ‘voice of thecustomer’ program can have a big impact.”

Quality Measurements of Quality,Part One: Customer Interactions continued

Assuring agents—or non-humantouchpoints—convey the right informationand offer the right resolution in a timely,seamless, hassle-free manner is an essentialelement of the call center quality process.

It is not the only pivotal element.

In addition to driving quality within the actualinteractions, businesses must also assure thesystems on which the interactions take placeare reliable. A business might provide itsagents with everything they need to succeedonce the interaction begins, but if thecustomer has trouble initiating that

interaction, the experience is not a highquality one. It is not a satisfactory one. It isnot an acceptable one.

“Unacceptable technology experiences canbe reliably identified both before and aftercontact center implementation so they can beaddressed & eliminated,” adds IQ Services’Mike Burke.

Businesses, however, do not value systemreliability to the same extent that they valueinteraction quality. While virtually allorganizations formally measure quality, anon-trivial 31% abstains from measuringsystem quality.

Quality Measurements of Quality,Part Two: System Performance

“Quality monitoring is,unfortunately, viewed byexecutives as just anecessary cost. Theydon't view it the way

they do the voice of thecustomer, and they'renot willing to invest thatmuch into it unless it’sfocused on business

outcomes and there’s aclear contribution to thebottom line. AligningQA with CSAT and

adjusting the name andfocus of your callquality monitoring

program to ‘voice of thecustomer’ program canhave a big impact.”


One of the hazards when looking at quality—or any other call center performanceindicator—is the disparity between asuccessful score and a successful operation.As Intradiem’s Matt McConnell explains,excelling at 85% of interactions might soundlike an intrinsically good number, but whenleadership considers that a whopping 15 outof every 100 calls is a failure, it comes torecognize the extent to which its call center isunderperforming.

Businesses are committed to measuringquality, and based on their statement of plansfor the next 6-18 months, they are alsocommitted to improving the scope of thedata they collect.

Success, however, comes not from knowingthe quality score but putting agents andsystems in position to avoid or promptlyresolve nearly every conceivable point offailure.

When it comes to interaction quality, businessesbelieve tying quality scores to training curriculais the most pivotal step. 48% of businesses willfocus on that initiative over the next 6-18months.

37% will use analytics to locate and evaluatethe higher-value calls (for which quality lapsesare most damaging), while 26% will automatethe quality process to evaluate a larger sampleof calls and create more time for coachingbased on performance insights. 24% will workto more rapidly communicate quality assurancescores and insights to agents.

To improve system reliability, 52% will optimizeor upgrade their technology. 44% ofbusinesses will work to better acquaint agentswith the technological systems, while 24% willreplace technology. 18% declare that theyhave no issues, while an additional 11% willrefrain from addressing the reliability issues theydo have.

Quality Improvement Strategies

Those that do test reliability embark onseveral avenues of evaluation.

39% of businesses rely on do-it-yourselftesting, which requires the purchasing of in-house technology and proper training of staffmembers. 34% rely on staff members to

periodically test systems by simulating thecustomer contact process. 29% focus onsystem data related to uptime and CPUusage. 24% enlist a third-party testing ormonitoring service.

Quality Measurements of Quality,Part Two: System Performance continued


Logical in black-and-white terms, continuedcall center investment is a decidedly grayertopic in the nuanced realm of business reality.

In reality, businesses will recognize the oftenvast costs associated with purchasing, testing,implementing, maintaining and improving ofnew technology. In reality, businesses willrecognize the likelihood that the benefits ofnew technology are being inflated bymarketing hype. In reality, businesses willrecognize the steep learning curve associatedwith educating both agents and customers onthe new systems. In reality, businesses willrecognize the gap between the incurrence ofinvestment costs and realization of returnrevenue. In reality, businesses will recognizethe potential difficulty of integrating newtechnology with legacy systems. In reality,businesses will recognize the security risksassociated with unproven call center systems.

Just as inertia is preventing businesses fromaggressively foraying into new channels andpreventing businesses from committing toimproving performance to the same extent

that they value it, that same inertia, a productof the aforementioned concerns, will preventbusinesses from rapidly investing in newtechnology.

“People are in this mode of we need to domore with less,” explains Genesys’ StefanCaptijn. “Every dollar we spend needs areturn, so we have to be really sure [of thatreturn] before moving forward. So we look atthings that we know work.”

CallMiner’s Erik Strand adds, “For so long,processes have been in place and polished uplike shiny dimes…[that is] especially [true] inbigger enterprises that aren't really forwardthinking. This stuff is so baked in, that it'sreally hard to effect change within thoseorganizations.”

Businesses will direct a significant portion ofthe rising or steady call center budgets to theoverall realm of technology, but their effortswill be primarily centered on improvingexisting systems.

Capable of facilitating entry into new channels, improving oversight overperformance, quality and reliability issues, addressing those performance,quality and reliability of interactions, reducing the cost of satisfying customersand capturing valuable insights from inside and outside the call center,technology is an irrefutable gateway to a stronger call center operation. Nomatter the business’ fundamental call center objective, if it aligns solution andtechnology investments with the most relevant experience elements, it canbring itself dramatically closer to success.

Solutions andTechnology

While common practice urges observers toblame that mentality on resistance to change oraversion to cost, businesses maintain that theiropposition is driven by an honest valueassessment.

If a business does not plan to invest in a newtechnology or solution over the next 6-18months, odds are strong that they do notbelieve it is a necessity.

On the topic of technology or solutions they willnot begin using within eighteen months, theamount of respondents who declared that theyshould be using the technology never exceededthe percentage who felt it was unnecessary.

In the cases of cloud call centers (43% ofbusiness will not begin using the technologyand do not believe they need to; 12% will notbut believe they should), dialing solutions (48%

Not of Necessity

“For so long, processeshave been in place andpolished up like shiny

dimes…[that is]especially [true] in

bigger enterprises thataren't really forward

thinking. This stuff is sobaked in, that it's reallyhard to effect change

within thoseorganizations.”

- Erik Strand


do not believe they need to, 10% believe theydo), interaction management solutions (46% donot believe they need to, 11% believe they do),outsourcing (58% do not believe they need to,2% believe they do), at-home agents (42% donot believe they need to, 7% believe they do),speech analytics (49% do not believe they needto, 10% believe they do), virtual agents (45%do not believe they need to, 10% believe theydo), and third-party testing and monitoringsolutions (66% do not believe they need to, 7%believe they do), the disparities are significantenough to send a vivid message regardingnecessity. If a solution is neither currently in usenor tapped for upcoming use, it has notsuccessfully convinced call center decisionmakers of its value.

Even solutions that will command newpurchases from substantial numbers ofbusinesses, including unified desktop solutions(19% will initiate), live chat applications (18%will initiate), mobile customer service solutions(17% will initiate), knowledge managementsolutions (15% will implement) e-learningsolutions (14% will initiate) and virtual agentsolutions (14% will initiate) will go justifiablyignored by a considerably larger number ofbusinesses.

To overcome this barrier, providers—or desiredusers—of new solutions and technologies mustmore compellingly align their value propositionswith call center objectives. Insofar as areas likeCSAT score, NPS and call accuracy are toppriorities for businesses, any solution hoping togain widespread adoption must successfullyarticulate its ability to positively affectperformance against those measures. It mustalso demonstrate an ability to do so withoutexposing the business to intimidating costs,troublesome disintegration with existingtechnology, daunting learning curves for usersand security concerns for customers.

VPI’s Patrick Botz, however, believes resourceconstraints remain a barrier even as solutionsbegin to demonstrate significant returns oninvestment.

“Everything can have a good ROI, but a lot oforganizations don't have the adequqatefinancial and human resources to implementand manage more stuff,” contends Botz.“Technologies that have a strong ROI and areeasy to implement with minimal IT resourcesneeded on their end – for ramp-up andeveryday use - are far more attractive.”

Not of Necessity continued

A further inhibitor to the adoption of newtechnology comes from the fact that businesses,which all operate under resource and budgetaryconstraints, are largely content with theirexisting solution purchases.

The percentage of businesses using a solutionwho continue to see the merit in that solutionexceeds the percentage of businesses using itthat do not see the merit for every singlecategory identified by the survey. Fewbusinesses, in fact, even fit into the lattercategory for most technologies.

The ones that did elicit value questions from asizable number of businesses, including trainingsolutions (14% who use see the category asunnecessary), dialing solutions (12%),performance management solutions (10%), e-mail support solutions (10%), web self-service

solutions (10%) and workforce managementsolutions (10%), go unquestioned by asignificantly larger portion of businesses (51%for training, 23% for dialing, 60% forperformance management, 46% for e-mailsupport, 53% for web self-service and 46% forworkforce management).

Several solution categories, meanwhile,maintain significant approval ratings and limiteddisapproval ratings. Call monitoring is used andvalued by 77% of businesses and used anddevalued by just 8%. Automatic calldistribution is used and valued by 72% andused and devalued by just 8%. Call centercoaching is used and valued by 71% and usedand devalued by less than 10%.

Solutions that Satisfy

“Everything can have agood ROI, but a lot oforganizations don'thave the adequqatefinancial and human

resources to implementand manage more

stuff,” contends Botz.

“Technologies that havea strong ROI and areeasy to implement withminimal IT resourcesneeded on their end –

for ramp-up andeveryday use - are far

more attractive."organizations.”

- Patrick Botz


Largely content with the solutions they areusing and largely uninterested in the solutionsthey are not using, businesses willdemonstrate stagnation on both sides of theequation.

The solution landscape eighteen months fromnow will thus share a staunch similarity withthe one in the status quo.

At present, the most commonly used solutioncategories are call monitoring (85%),coaching (80%), automatic call distribution(80%), performance management (71%),customer satisfaction measurement (64%)and training solutions (64%). The leastpopular categories are third party testing andmonitoring (21%), speech and text analytics(29%), virtual agent (31%), dialing (35%),social media support (35%) and cloud orhosted call center solutions (35%).

In eighteen months, the most popularcategories will be call monitoring (87%), callcenter coaching (82%), automatic calldistribution (78%), CRM (74%) andknowledge management (67%). The leastpopular categories will be third party testing(26%), speech and text analytics (36%),outsourcing (37%), social media support(38%) and dialing (40%).

Only CRM and knowledge management,which already possess solid utilization rates of63% and 57%, will ascend into the top five.

Only outsourcing, which currently possess alow 38% utilization rate, will descend intothe bottom five.

Within that fairly stagnant landscape,however, will be some movement in favor ofcertain solutions and in opposition to others.

Categories that will receive the greatestincreases in utilization rate include unifieddesktop (+14%), live chat (+13%), CRM(+11%), virtual agent (+10%) and workforcemanagement (+10%).

Categories that will endure the greatestdecreases include performance management(-3%), agent recruiting and training (-2%), e-mail support (-2%), outsourcing (-2%) andautomatic call distribution (-2%).

While he is surprised by the current lack ofmarket penetration for virtual agent andspeech analytics solutions, CallMiner’s ErikStrand is not at all surprised by theanticipated growth (10% for virtual agenttechnology, 7% for speech analyticstechnology).

“I'm a little bit surprised about thepenetration of speech analytics…and virtualagent technology, which is an example ofsomething that is fairly obviously going to bea high-impact technology [as evidenced bythe clear, but gradual growth],” explainsStrand.

The Impending Solution Landscape


While businesses continue to subject all facets of thecustomer service operation to inertia and resistance,they are also granting the call center anunprecedented level of leeway to align with thecustomer.

They, now recognizing customer satisfaction as theprimary call center objective, are reducing emphasison operational metrics like average handle time andaverage speed of answer demonstrating support forcustomer-oriented metrics like CSAT Score and NPS.

Recognizing the front-line as an instrumentalpathway to customer satisfaction, they arecommitting themselves to simultaneously improvingagent training and development, improving theagent desktop experience, improving the manner inwhich agent performance is managed andimproving the culture in which customer serviceactivity takes place. Businesses are not simply hiringbut investing.

Recognizing the role quality continues to play indriving customer satisfaction, businesses arescrutinizing call content and system functionality.They are also beginning to recognize customerfeedback as a rich source of insights about callquality.

While the scope of investments remain limited,businesses are also committing themselves tosolutions and technology that impact agentperformance, customer relationships and self-serviceoptions. Their distribution of investment, whichextends into areas like call center coaching, CRMand knowledge management, reflects a desire topurchase and optimize technology that drives valuerather than that which exists as a supposed, yetantiquated call center necessity.

A shift in action is clearly preferable to a mere shiftin rhetoric and mindset. It does not, however,represent the end of the line for call centers thattruly wish to transform into beacons of customercentricity.

Shifting focus to CSAT over AHT clearly representsan admirable step, but it can also degenerate into asorely limited one.

A customer-centric business will not simply evaluatethe score but the context of the metric itself. Whatdoes satisfaction mean to customers? Whatelements of the customer experience—includingchannel offerings, resolution elements, accuracy,consistency and, yes, even average handle time—most notably contribute to customer satisfaction?Which forms of subjective behavior influencecustomer satisfaction, and how, in turn will asatisfied customer behave?

Focusing on the metric reveals that businesses careabout the information. Deconstructing the metric—and identifying opportunities for markedimprovement—reveal that businesses care about acustomer-centric transformation.

The difference between satisfying and supremelysatisfying might be obscured by a blanket score, butit could ultimately play a gamechanging role inreducing costs and securing customer loyalty.

“If things are performing exactly as they should, thatshould lead to a lower customer effort score and animproved customer experience,” offers IQ Services’Mike Burke. “It might not be particularly noticeable,but there is the potential for real cost savings inperfecting processes.”

That businesses now recognize the call center as asource of value offers a great deal of empowermentfor call center managers, but it also risks creating anaura of complacency. That stakeholders “get” theconnection between customer satisfaction andfavorable business outcomes must not discouragecall centers from continuing to optimize the valueand minimize the cost they generate.

What additional opportunities to create customersatisfaction exist? What additional opportunities toboost agent productivity exist? What technologiesand practices can optimize performance? And howelse can the contact center help the business?

“When making such changes call centers need tobe mindful, not just to improve what they do, but tochallenge current practice and innovate,” declaresMatsSoft’s Nigel Warren.

Virtually no respondents identified gaining customer

Not simply one of mindset, the shift in favor of a more customer-centric callcenter approach is also one of action.

Turning Action intoTransformation

“If things areperforming exactly asthey should, that should

lead to a lowercustomer effort scoreand an improved

customer experience. It might not be

particularly noticeable,but there is the

potential for real costsavings in perfecting

processes.”

- Mike Burke


insights as a top objective of the call center. Whenone considers how valuable that information can beto the business—and how effectively the call centercan capture that information—he sees that theprevailing mindset could drive businesses tosquander opportunity.

“Managers in the call center space must find better,alternative ways to add more value,” says Genesys’Stefan Captijn. “It's not just about picking up thephone and answering the question or selling – it isalso about consider how the customer serviceoperation be used to gain greater insight into overallbusiness performance.

“What is really happening on the floor? What is thevoice of the external customer? What about theinternal customer? The call center should be muchbigger than just service and sales.”

They might be thinking more intently about the wayagents are measured, trained and conditioned intothe call center environment, but businesses continueto accept undesirable restrictions and limitations onboosting agent productivity.

Few businesses, after all, guarantee an instantresponse to customers. Failure to do so canunfortunately neutralize all the progress in favor of amore customer-centric call center.

“No matter how much work companies put intoproviding the agent with the right information whenthey finally talk to the customer, if the customer hasbeen put on hold, I don't care what you've doneabout multi-channel [and other trendy customerservice endeavors] -- it's not a great customerexperience,” argues Intradiem’s Matt McConnell.

And insofar as businesses have access tounprecedented data, they have no excuse forallowing their customer service supply to fall out ofline with customer demand.

Aware that interaction and system quality canimpact the customer experience, businessescontinue to measure and assure quality.

But they also do so from a position of obligationrather than one of enthusiasm and urgency. Theyare not creatively thinking about areas in whichquality issues can arise. Content to measure only afew calls per month, they are not consideringopportunities to expand their quality assuranceprogram. They are not considering how automatingthe more objective aspects of quality monitoring canfree up resources to focus on the subjective ones.

“Automate, automate, automate,” says CallMiner’sErik Strand. “You should not have call centerpersonnel doing anything that is not directlysupporting the customer or is not part of the endgame.”

Despite rejecting some new technology categoriesdue integration concerns, businesses ironicallyoverlook opportunities to better integrate thetechnology they are using.

Customer-centric businesses are striving to introduceand optimize technology that improves agentknowledge, improves customer experiencemonitoring, creates better interactions and buildscustomer relationships. But if the data is notcorrectly integrated and positioned before the agentin real-time, it significantly loses its efficacy.

“Many companies can’t track the customer journeyas a single entity,” explains VoltDelta’s SteveChirokas. “They can’t really, easily identify what thecustomer’s perspective was.”

Chirokas argues that properly integrating channels,CRM, knowledge management and quality insightscan produce a more efficient, more measurableexperience. And when that happens, thetechnology is truly doing its job of producing morevalue.

Call centers also must develop comfort lookinginternally for results. While measuring performancebased on popular metrics are mirroring popular“best practices” or benchmarks can help inspire,provide a direction for change and quickly eliminateweaknesses in existing processes, it can also causethem to overlook the existing strengths.

According to VPI’s Patrick Botz, inter-organizationbenchmarking has limits in that it reveals thestandards attained by other organizations but doesnot always consider the circumstances under whichthose standards were attained and how they weremeasured. Businesses should first look at their bestperforming internal agents, processes andtechnologies and determine how to replicate thatsuccess across the entire organization.

“My recommendation is to first look internally to seewhat your best performing agents can do,” advisesBotz. “There are usually a handful of tactics thatyour top performing agents are using in the salesand service processes. Find out what those are andtrain everyone else on how to use those tactics.Once they’re trained, you can quality monitor or usespeech analytics to ensure they're consistently doingthose things.”

Technology and process improvement decisions canthen be evaluated based on their ability toconsistently employ those three tactics.

Businesses have developed a customer-centricmindset. They have begun using that mindset todrive call center performance and decision-making.The next step is deconstructing the actions to assurethey are not simply addressing past call centerwrongs but transforming the business so that it canroutinely operate in the right.

Turning Action into Transformation

“Managers in the call center space mustfind better, alternativeways to add more

value. It's not just aboutpicking up the phoneand answering the

question or selling – itis also about considerhow the customerservice operation beused to gain greaterinsight into overall

business performance.”

- Stefan Captijn

“Automate, automate,automate. You shouldnot have call centerpersonnel doing

anything that is notdirectly supporting thecustomer or is not partof the end game.”

- Erik Strand

executive report on performance, operations and technology · executive report on performance,...

Documents