studies on quality monitoring
Hi, my name is Susan. I’ve worked in the Customer Service Department for my company for just short of 20 years now and I absolutely love most everything about it. I’m one of the top ranked agents in the department and, according to the masses, I work for one of the best managers in the whole company. But lately I think I’ve experienced agent burnout because I have begun to think about doing something different.
Normally I keep to myself and just go with the flow when it comes to what management wants me to do from day to day. However, as I get older I feel I need to address the elephant in the room – aka our QA program. I’m sure the process was created with good intentions; however, it seems to have outlived its usefulness, and my tolerance. Please let me share with you my perception and let me know what you think. Continue reading
In late May, the QATC (Quality Assurance, Training and Connection organization) published the results of their quarterly survey on critical quality assurance and training topics in call centers, focusing on quality monitoring call calibration practices. I found the survey results to be quite interesting (sometimes scary), but for very different reasons than highlighted in the QATC report.
1) Quality Monitoring Calibration requirements – According to the survey, 24% of respondents indicated that calibration participants were not required to review calls prior to the call calibration meeting. In these cases, it is a feel-good, group-think exercise and not a true call calibration session. Yikes! Assuming the Quality Assurance team in the call center does not grade every call by committee, such an exercise is ineffective at gauging the degree of disparity that exists within the current call monitoring process. And since disparity is not being measured, the effectiveness of call calibrations cannot be quantified. Result: Waste of time.