|
|
Quality Monitoring
Best Practices
From Centerserve's leading
best practices research |
|
 |
Providing face-to-face feedback to agents continues
to be best practice. 2007 study participants expected emailed
feedback to increase to 24.4% from 18.1%. Given
the nature of the job as well as the missed opportunity
for impromptu training in a face-to-face setting,
emailed feedback to agents may prove to be detrimental
to overall performance, albeit cost effective and time
efficient.
Centerserve's
2010
Benchmarks in Call Center Operations report states
37.2% of participants provide feedback to agents
immediately after monitoring, implying face-to-face
feedback. |
|
 |
Accuracy of information remains the priority. In
the 2007 Centerserve
benchmarking and best practices survey
72.4% of participants reported accuracy
of information, both provided to the customer and
entered into the system, as the top category used to
evaluate agents when monitoring calls. Centerserve's
2010
Benchmarks in Call Center Operations states the top
two categories used to evaluate agent when monitoring
calls were accuracy of information and knowledge of
products and services. |
|
 |
Increase in monitoring contacts per agent per month?
According to Centerserve's 2007 "Improving Business
Processes" report, nearly 50% of participants reported
monitoring only zero to five contacts per agent each
month. According to Centerserve's
2010
Benchmarks in Call Center Operations, 30% of
participants reported monitoring only zero to five
contacts per agent each month while about 48% of
participants monitor 6 to 29 contacts per month.
|
|
 |
The Quality Monitoring Lifecycle is a critical
model for designing or improving your quality monitoring
program. For more about the Quality Monitoring
Lifecycle Model, download Centerserve's Quality
Monitoring eToolkit chapter dedicated to the Quality
Monitoring Lifecycle.
Click
here to download the Quality Lifecycle chapter. |
|
 |
Ensure your call center is monitoring agents based on specific
levels, not simply referring to their job
description. Different levels of agents may include:
new, struggling, veteran and successful.
Scorecards should be adapted for level and for type
of monitoring, i.e. plug in vs. record and review. For
more on scorecard development, see the Quality Monitoring
eToolkit. Click
here. |
|
 |
Training and Quality Monitoring - According
to Centerserve's 2010 Benchmarks in Call Center
Operations report 37.6% of
participants use quality monitoring results to make
changes to training procedures. What changes to your
training program would increase the quality of your call
center? Explore your options by downloading a 7 page
overview of
Centerserve's Training eToolkit. |
|
 |
Call center supervisors are busy!
An astounding 75% of participants reported agent
supervisors provide feedback directly to agents
regarding their performance. Given that nearly 40% of
participants also reported providing results
immediately, this implies supervisors are devoting much
of their time to quality monitoring.
|
|
 |
3 steps to improve the feedback process: |
- Communicating results in standardized and
real-time reports.
- Coaching by providing agents face time for real
time training.
- A dedicated staff, such as a quality assurance
supervisor who is focused on monitoring and
reporting, should be a key part of every call center.
31.3% of our participants report having a dedicated
staff person for quality assurance that is not the
department's primary supervisor.
|
