Customer care professionals are well aware of – and ample research has clearly confirmed – the importance of having a formal quality monitoring program in place in the call center.
For instance, a recent study conducted by management consulting firm The Ascent Group revealed that companies that have implemented call quality programs have realized significant improvements in call quality, customer satisfaction, employee and overall call center performance, as well as lower employee turnover, lower absenteeism and higher morale.
The benefits are clear, but the exact means of realizing those benefits remain ambiguous to many managers. Some centers race to implement a quality monitoring program in hopes of achieving the aforementioned results, but instead find themselves struggling with inconsistent processes and alienated staff.
Experienced customer care managers and consultants agree: effective monitoring is a challenge. According to respondents to The Ascent Group’s study, the biggest hurdles include overcoming resistance from call center agents; finding the time to monitor and provide feedback; calibrating accurately; and coaches and monitors who lack expertise in quality assurance.
These obstacles are not insurmountable, as evidenced by the numerous call centers that have had great success with their quality monitoring efforts. A close look at these companies’ programs reveals that although they may not be doing everything in the exact same way, they do share certain innovative approaches and strategies, which we examine in detail below.
Dedicated Quality Monitoring Specialists
Although call centers have traditionally placed the responsibility of quality monitoring on the shoulders of busy supervisors, many successful centers are starting to take a different tack – employing designated monitoring specialists whose sole focus is on quality assurance in the call center.
Such an approach not only ensures that quality monitoring doesn’t get swept aside and forgotten; it frees up managers and supervisors to focus on other crucial tasks such as forecasting and scheduling, incentives and training – leading to further performance improvement and customer satisfaction.
In the best centers, quality monitoring specialists are carefully selected based on specific criteria to ensure consistent and solid performance in their important roles, say Jeff Furst and Michelle Cline of FurstPerson, a firm that specializes in finding, hiring and retaining call center staff. They concur that “call centers spend much time and effort developing the quality assurance process, but not on identifying the type of person who can successfully implement the process; not everyone is suited for the role.”
When selecting specialists for a quality monitoring team, Furst and Cline recommend focusing on each candidate’s problem-solving skills; ability to multitask; knowledge of the call center’s policies and procedures; attention to detail; listening skills; and proficiency with coaching and providing feedback to agents.
Formal Calibration
Even with dedicated monitoring specialists in place, some call centers still struggle to achieve the results they hope for. More often than not, the problem stems from a lack of consistency in how call centers conduct monitoring sessions. Problems can also arise in connection with how a call center evaluates calls. Such problems, in turn, can often lead to confusion and a loss of faith among agents in the center’s quality assurance system.
To address these issues, more call centers have incorporated formal calibration sessions into their monitoring programs. As defined by Marcia Hicks, a senior consultant with Kowal Associates, “Calibration is the process by which you remove variation in the way performance criteria are interpreted from person to person.”
Top call centers typically do this by having those who conduct monitoring sessions convene, listen to several calls together and rate the calls individually. Then – and most importantly – they discuss their evaluations in a group setting. Some centers use a facilitator to run these calibration sessions and help monitors come to a general agreement on evaluation practices and interpretations.
“Calibration is the best preventive maintenance against [agent] allegations of inequity and favoritism,” Hicks explains. “It eliminates perceived ‘bias’ by ensuring consistent scoring. When calibration is achieved, it will not matter who did the monitoring and the scoring; the outcome will be the same.” Hicks adds that calibration is neither a quick nor easy process, but that “the rewards will be worth it in the end.”
Agent Empowerment and Involvement
Calibration isn’t the only way that effective call centers gain agents’ acceptance of quality monitoring practices.
Many centers today actually encourage agents to help create and shape these very practices. Prior to implementing or revamping a formal quality monitoring program, these centers solicit feedback from agents about issues such as what they feel constitutes fair performance measurement objectives, what methods of monitoring they prefer and what they expect from the coaching and feedback they receive.
“If you’re just embarking on a monitoring program, the single most important thing you can do to secure agent buy-in is to involve them in designing the program,” says Jean Bave-Kerwin, president of JBK Consulting.
She adds that, after soliciting input from agents and using agents’ input to help develop the program, it’s important to communicate to agents the details about how the program is actually going to work. This will help to gain further buy-in and eliminate the “fear of the unknown,” she says. “Agents may have questions such as, ‘Who will rate my performance? How? When? What will they be looking at? Will the expectations be fair?’”
Top call centers continue to value agents’ opinions and suggestions about monitoring long after they implement their quality assurance programs. These centers seek agents’ input throughout the life of their quality programs. They regularly survey staff to ensure not only that they are satisfied with how the center monitors calls and delivers feedback, but also to find out if agents detect any changes in customers’ behavior or expectations that may impact what the call center needs to measure when monitoring. Some centers have even implemented agent-led quality task forces to ensure that they don’t mute the voices they monitor.
Another way call centers have gained agents’ support of and enthusiasm about quality monitoring is by allowing them to monitor themselves. Agents listen to a recording of a call or review a transcript of on-line communication with customers. They rate their own performance in collaboration with a quality specialist or coach who provides guidance and additional feedback.
A few centers have raised the bar of monitoring innovation by introducing a “peer monitoring” element into their quality assurance programs. In this setting, agents take turns monitoring one another and providing feedback, typically under the supervision of an experienced monitoring specialist.
