I believe that an over reliance on metrics plague the call center industry at the expense of the customer experience.
“Answer that call in 30 seconds or else” is the cry of call center management, but does answering a call in 30 seconds really make that big of difference to a customer? Sure the call might be answered fast, but what if the representative on the other end is rude, frustrated, or just plain lousy at their job? I think I would rather wait a bit longer for a nice and competent person to help me.
Over the years I have heard many reasons why metrics matter to customers but I never bought into the logic. I think that that organizations look at metrics more as the holy grail measurement of success. Numerous times I have seen companies meet their metrics at the customers’ expense. It was more important to get the number (metric) instead of helping the customer.
I know there are good reasons for measurement, and I’m really not “anti-metric” per se. Measurement can help an organization understand strengths and weaknesses, as well as place focus on opportunities for improvement, but I believe there is a more logical and customer-centric approach to measurement.
A major problem with metrics is that they send mixed messages to call center representatives about performance. They are told to help the customer, but only within a certain time limit. As a result representatives focus on meeting a number instead of focusing on helping the customer.
Here are two of my favorite metrics and how they affect the customer experience:
1. Average Handle Time (AHT is probably the most schizophrenic metric out there)
AHT confuses the heck out of the representatives (help the customer but don’t help them that much because that takes too much time and drives up costs), and then it causes frustration because the representatives feel that they can’t do their job.
To add insult to injury representatives can be penalized by the Quality Assurance group for taking too long on a call. It’s no wonder that call center representatives seem a bit surly at times. Look at what they deal with every working day of their lives, and that directly affects the customer experience.
2. First Call Resolution (FCR borders on schizophrenic, but because of AHT First Call Resolution becomes an oxymoron)
How can a representative feel confident that they can do everything to solve a customer’s problem with a clock hanging over their shoulder? They can’t. And either the customer or the representative pays for that in the end.
If a representative rushes through the call, most likely a customer will have to call back because all of their problems might not be resolved. That of course creates a really lousy customer experience, as well as costs the organization more on the back end to handle one customer.
If a representative decides to take as much time as they need to help the customer most likely they will take a hit on their performance (through Quality Assurance) for just doing their job.
How can anyone feel good about themselves or the job in such a crazy environment? It’s a vicious circle, and there is no direct benefit for the customer.
If the people who drive the metrics (the call center representatives) are educated about the business, understand the metrics being measured and why they are being measured, as well as how each metric affects the customer experience the representatives will not only meet, but probably exceed the metric goals. (I have actually seen this happen)
Metrics have to be realistic, attainable, and customer-focused. They should be used for good, and not evil. Metrics should be guidelines, and not the end-all-be-all answer. Even more important metrics should not used “against” call center representatives, but as development opportunities to improve the customer experience.
The result will be a much more relaxed, happy, and customer-centric culture.
3 responses so far ↓
rummuser // August 12, 2008 at 3:58 pm |
The problem I suspect is an over dependence on mechanized systems and performance appraisals. The qualitative aspects of customer satisfaction suffers. If the metrics approach can be tempered with customer satisfactions surveys, a balance can be struck.
Do what you document and document what you do has started to emphasize on the documenting process more than the doing part of it!
The one question that is rarely asked is why the need for customer service monitoring at all. If the customer is getting all that he expects / or has been promised in the first place, there should be no need for any such activity at all!
If all the measurements can lead us to reach there at a fairly high hit rate, then perhaps the system is working.
gladdad // August 18, 2008 at 4:20 am |
Oh hallelujah!! Finally someone with a common-sense approach to CSR performance. Well I recall from my days on the floor the double-edged sword of Customer Service: AHT and FCR. These were mantras drilled into our heads by increasingly flustered managers. Service Level Management (SLM) desk always ringing your phone or sending Roamers out to see if you needed help. Moving to Tech Support offered some relief. They STILL wanted it, but understood better that each problem was unique.
No one ever really took the Customer Satisfaction surveys seriously, which I felt as a mistake. These were certainly a pain to compile, but WAS THE CUSTOMER SATISFIED should have been the determining factor over handle time.
Call center life « Gladdad’s Weblog // August 18, 2008 at 4:31 am |
[...] Call center life Filed under: You Can’t Make this stuff Up! — gladdad @ 11:31 pm This post is actually an expansion on the theme of a commet I left at http://richmclafferty.wordpress.com/2008/08/10/metrics-schmetrics/ [...]