You lead a call center staffed with well-trained, professional agents. You’ve created a supportive culture with a quality assurance (QA) program that is robust and nuanced. Your performance results are tracked in a searchable database, and the reports you get allow you to see trends by agent, by unit, and by the overall center.
Your QA monitors assess and score a targeted number of calls each and every month, even though the goal is aggressive. They have been trained to provide constructive coaching in line with your culture, and through personal observation and feedback from the agents, you are confident that they are doing so. You have seen steady improvements in agent scores, and your customer satisfaction survey results are on target. You are pleased, and you should be.
So is there anything more you can do to improve your operations? Well, maybe. Now might be the time to begin a process of monitoring the monitor.
What we’re talking about is having a process for a 2nd review of completed assessments, to add depth to your quality assurance program.
- Monitoring Specialist – The person who listens to and scores the agent call.
- Assessment – The scoring form completed by the Monitoring Specialist.
- Reviewer – The person doing the review of the assessment and Monitoring Specialist.
- What percentage of each evaluator’s assessments will be reviewed – 10% to 25% depending on overall monitoring volume.
- Who conducts the reviews – Anyone who has routinely monitored calls for at least 6 months can be a reviewer. Reviews can be conducted by the evaluator’s peers, managers, or even direct reports.
- How does the basic process work:
- The reviewer listens to and scores the evaluated call.
- The reviewer then does a compare and contrast with the original assessment.
- The reviewer and the evaluator meet to discuss any differences.
- How formal will the reporting be – Best practice is to focus on the discussion of results and not necessarily on the reporting. An evaluate the evaluator program is for really advanced centers with mature QA programs. A formal reporting process is most often not necessary.
Lastly, we see monitoring the monitor as an adjunct to, and not a replacement of, your ongoing call calibration sessions. As we’ve all experienced, some calibration sessions can fall victim to group think; where dissenting voices get tamped down. An independent monitor the monitor program can give recognition to otherwise unheard opinions.
At Centerfirst, we can help you design and implement call monitoring approaches that best fit your overall quality program and your organization’s culture. I hope you will comment, call (317-797-2244) or email (email@example.com) with your thoughts on this advanced call center process.