Are You Setting Your Quality Team Up For Conflict? Part II

In Part I of my post, I addressed conflict coming from Report Structure Issues.  Conflicts can also arise from the design of the quality program and poor training or the communication skills used.

QUALITY DESIGN FLAWS WILL BRING CONFLICT

When you are designing the tools used by quality analysts, you may be setting expectations based on a checklist rating skills using a “did it happen or didn’t it happen” method.  There are times when the customer interaction requires an agent skill to change or not be used at all.

A manager shared this story of checklist focused quality monitoring:

The agent had a flawless customer experience demonstrating great skills and the customer sounded very happy with the service provided by the agent.  She even complimented the agent during the call.

 At the end of the call, the customer said, “Thanks…you’ve answered all my questions. That’s all I needed.  I’m going to call my husband right now and let him know”.  The agent thanked the caller appropriately and ended the call nicely.

Despite this wonderful customer interaction, the quality analyst scored him negatively for one skill.  According to the quality rating form, the agent did not ask, “Is there anything else?” 

The customer clearly stated that she was satisfied and added that she had all the information needed.

Instead of hearing what the customer said to the agent about having “all I need”, the quality analyst was focused on the quality checklist box for “anything else?”  that needed to have a yes or no.

• Is your quality monitor format rigid without opportunities for the analyst to make exception for certain call types?
• Have you asked your analysts what think their job is?   It’s amazing how many managers expect their analysts to state what’s on their job description, when in reality, the analysts doesn’t see their role the same way.

• Do your analysts just see their role as a check-off of skills or are they listening to what the customer says to judge quality?

• Does your quality program rate technical skills separately from soft skills so you can see if agents excel in both or one of these?

• How often do you review your quality monitoring tools to insure that they are providing you with the information needed for coaching skills?

POOR TRAINING AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS WILL BRING CONFLICT

An agent shared this story with me recently and showed me the emails related to an interaction with a quality analyst who had given him major quality error, which he said was incorrect.  These are the emails exchanged:

Insurance Quality Analyst email sent to Agent:  “You’ve made an error in the data entered for this call.  I listened to the call and you did not speak with the actual customer.  You spoke with his wife.  If you disagree with this error, please respond.

Agent email response: “Yes, I disagree.  I did not make an error.  Please check the customer profile to confirm.

Analyst reply:  “No. You did make error.”

 Agent reply:  “OK”

If you just looked at the dialog in the emails, it appears that the analyst and the agent disagree on the error, the analyst rechecked and confirmed the error, and that the agent finally accepted the error.

However, this wasn’t the end of the story.  After further investigation, the error was finally removed.  So, what actually occurred?

The quality analyst said that she had listened to the call, heard that the agent was speaking with a woman instead of speaking with a customer named Michael Smith directly. This would definitely be a violation of their insurance procedures and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

After the agent’s supervisor listened to the same call, he heard the agent correctly and thoroughly verified the customer’s identification and had shared information with the Michael Smith on file.  Michael was the woman caller’s name.

The analyst admitted that she had not listened to the call a second time or even looked at the customer’s account information.  She said she had missed hearing the woman identify herself as “Michael” at the start of the call.

Then, why did the agent just respond with “OK” to accepting the error when he knew he had not done so?

The agent told me that others on his team were experiencing similar situations with other quality analysts.  When they reported these issues to their supervisor, they were told it had been sent to the quality manager for review, and the agents would later receive a canned “Your error has been removed” email from the original analyst.

The agent added that these false errors still continue and that he and his teammates have decided to stop interacting with the quality analysts who email and just forward these issues to their contact center supervisor with their reason for not accepting the error.

If these issues with communication and poor quality observation skills are continuing, it is obvious that the quality manager is not coaching with his team.

• Is the Quality Manager monitoring and rating calls together with each analyst to coach them on their observation skills?

• Is the Quality Manager pulling some random emails to check on their written communication skills and direct interactions with agents?

• If the analysts are also doing coaching with agents, have you sat in and observed them coach and then coached while they observed you?

Do your supervisors and the quality analysts have similar coaching activities and goals, and discuss with each other so that they are working towards the same results?

……….

This article originally appeared in the Contact Center Pipeline January 2013 issue

Are You Setting Your Quality Team Up For Conflict? Part I

Unfortunately, conflict between Quality teams and Contact Center teams happens more often than it should.  Managers on both sides will say that it is probably due to personality conflicts or simple miscommunication.

While those factors do play a part at times, we need to dig deeper to find out what is really going on.  From my own observations and feedback from center employees, I’ve found that some companies actually set conflict in motion through their reporting structure, the design of the quality program and tools being used, or even poor QA training and coaching.

REPORTING STRUCTURE ISSUES WILL BRING CONFLICT

The Quality Manager and the analysts most often report to an operations executive who may not be actively involved in the day-to-day front line management of the center. The Contact Center Director or Manager and the Quality Manager are usually peers in this scenario.

Although companies design this structure of separation to have what they feel is an unbiased look at quality, they may also unwittingly be setting an “us versus them” conflict in motion.  The responsibility for fostering a cooperative relationship between quality and center operations lies with the executive level manager they both report to.

If the quality manager and center director have an adversarial relationship, their teams will pick up on this and the conflict will happen during their interactions as well.

One activity where conflict between individual analysts and supervisors or between both teams can be seen is during calibration meetings.  In these sessions, everyone listens to agent calls and observes system entries, rates skills together and discusses opportunities to improve.

Many calibration sessions become more about “I’m right and your wrong” finger-pointing with voices raised in argument over the tiniest details.  Of course the customer’s experience is often lost in this type of scenario.  Worse yet, I’ve seen quality and center managers sit back and allow this to happen and then privately talk with their team afterwards about how ridiculous the other team was acting.

Our quality and the contact center operations teams need to come together and agree on goals and missions for the best customer experience and business efficiencies and results.

Quality monitoring must be based on facts, not emotions.  Analysts, supervisors and their leadership must also be willing to admit when one of them erred in scoring or when an agent reporting to them failed the customer.  The ability to admit mistakes and learn from them is more important than grandstanding in front of the group.

Regardless of the reporting structure used, we need to insure that we are committed to the common goals and avoid the blame game or taking things personally.  We expect our agents to take feedback and coaching with an open attitude so the same expectation should be there for our quality and leadership teams in the center.

….PART 2 WILL FOLLOW SOON!

This article originally appeared in the Contact Center Pipeline January 2013 issue

Guest Post: Crawl, Walk, Then Run: 3 Training Tips to Boost Agent Performance

I’m honored to have Matt McConnell’s wonderful article on training tips appearing on my blog today.  Matt is the chairman, president and CEO of Intradiem. You can read more about Matt and Intradiem at the end of the article.

 

The cat is out of the bag. Sixty-nine percent of contact center leaders say agent training positively impacts customer satisfaction. Yet, despite its effectiveness on quality and performance results, 46 percent of the same respondents don’t train their agents frequently. Notice a disconnect?

Most of the traditional methods used to manage agent performance just aren’t working anymore for contact centers. The ongoing operational demands, combined with the budget restraints and resource limitations have left many coming up short when it comes to developing and effectively training their front line. And many contact centers find themselves delivering the same cookie-cutter training for their entire workforce. The result is uninspiring training sessions for agents and lackluster results for your dashboard. Instead, consider a “crawl, walk, run” approach to maximize performance results using personalized agent training.

A contact center’s journey to achieving a high-performance culture isn’t an easy feat – it’s marked by milestones. Take your agent performance from its first wobbly steps to running at full speed using the “crawl, walk, then run” method below.

Crawl back to the basics.

By its nature, training should be targeted, but it’s difficult for managers to create digestible content that doesn’t require half-day sessions due to scheduling limitations. After all, you want to be sure your agents are able to take in as much as possible. However, adult learning theory affirms that short lessons have the best chance at retention. This concept is clearly important in a fast-paced environment like the contact center where the unplanned nature of calls gives agents less control over their day than most. So, remember to focus on first things first. A 15-minute learning break allows a short break for targeted information that is used on the next call for maximum reinforcement.

Walk the walk with personalized training.

Even if training is provided frequently, a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t provide maximum value. If the center and the agent invest time in training, it should meet the needs of both. An agent does not want to be trained on something that isn’t relevant to their needs, and the center doesn’t want to train an agent on an area at which he or she excels if there is another area that needs improving.

Basing individualized training on performance meets the targeted criteria and provides the highest value.

According to recent data, we retain 5 percent of what we see/hear, 10 percent of what we read, 20 percent with a visual and 30 percent with a demonstration. Create quick quizzes at the end of training sessions to help agents retain more information and “walk the walk” by giving them ample opportunity to apply their new skill set.

Run circles around your performance goals by finding time for training.

Too often training is an infrequent occasion as opposed to a consistent, systemic part of the contact center operation. Many centers provide agents with access to a learning management system or knowledge base with the hopes that agents will go get the information and knowledge they need. Considering the enormous pressures to meet service levels, it isn’t hard to figure out why so much of what is scheduled doesn’t occur and why agents don’t often take the initiative to get the information they need when they need it. Yet dips in call volume occur when agents have little to do. The underutilized asset in this equation is this down time between calls. Pushing training to your agents during these small pockets of down time is the only way to ensure training happens frequently.

A Last Word

Performance-based training gives you the ability to deliver the right training to the right agent at the right time. By embedding a measurement system that shows how much, who is getting training as well as its link to performance, constant improvement through training becomes systemic.

About Matt McConnell
Matt McConnell is chairman, president and CEO of Intradiem. Matt co-founded Intradiem in 1995 with a vision of helping companies increase the level of customer service they deliver by improving the performance of their agents. Today, Intradiem is a leader in its market with more than 450,000 call center agents around the world using Intradiem every day. Matt is the author of the book Customer Service at a Crossroads and holds 11 software patents.

Intradiem, formerly Knowlagent, is the leader in intraday management solutions for contact centers. Its patented software increases agent performance and productivity by making idle time useful, enabling agents to work on personalized and prioritized activity queues consisting of training, coaching, communication and other off-phone activities. Intradiem’s call center solutions are on-demand, easy to use and require no capital expenditures. For more information, call 888-566-9457 or visit us online at http://www.intradiem.com.

You Loved Me When I Was A Prospect But Now…

A friend recently told me about their experience in refinancing their mortgage

When You’re A Prospect

with a large bank.

His story reminded me of a joke I once heard.

A man died and was at the gates of heaven.  St. Peter stood at the gate and asked him if he wanted to go to heaven or hell.  The man said, “Heaven, of course”. 

St. Peter told him that before he made a final decision, he could have a tour of both places.  The man agreed.

He got on an elevator and was soon greeted by Satan in Hell. The man was shocked! Satan was dressed in a tuxedo, drinking a martini and offered the man a drink.  He led him into a beautiful casino where everyone won every game.  Satan took him outside and showed him the gardens and the endless rounds of golf that could be played at the course there.

The man left and went back to St. Peter for his tour of Heaven.  It was very nice…beautiful music playing, quiet places to rest, peaceful and lovely.   He thought it was very pleasant, but nothing like the exciting fun times he had seen in Hell.

He told St. Peter, “I’ve made up my mind.  I’m going to go to Hell”.  He went into the elevator and descended to Hell.  When the doors opened and he stepped off, there was fire and brimstone and terrible things happening all around him.  He saw Satan and asked, “What happened to all the wonderful things you promised me when I was here earlier?”.

Satan replied, “Earlier you were a prospect…Now you’re customer!”

…..My friend’s experience had some similarities.

During his “Heavenly” prospect stage

The Loan Officer was so nice.  The lender called back, quickly responded to questions, promised that everything would be taken care of for him.  The bank was eager for his business.  The Loan Officer would even come to his work or home to discuss and help with documents. Given his financial situation, he was told the refinance should be a “piece of cake”.  My friend agreed to begin the process.

Then he entered Customer “Hell”

He never heard directly from the Loan Officer again.  He had filled out endless amounts of papers, signed documents and jumped through the financial hoops needed for the deal, despite being promised “easy” process.  The online process-tracking that customers could view on the bank website showed multiple errors: 15 documents still needed, although 12 of them had been mailed to the Loan Officer.  One document being requested was about child support or alimony received as income used in the qualifying even though he had told the Loan officer there was no such income.

He emailed the Loan Processor and was told that “everything was fine…don’t worry”.  A week later a threatening letter saying “you better send us these documents or else” arrived.

My friend had had enough.  He emailed the bank parties involved and wrote that he was ready to cancel everything.  Within minutes of sending the email, he received a call from the processor apologizing. Suddenly there was great service and smiles from all involved. The website information was correctly updated and initial approval for the loan was received.

The bank was lucky that my friend was willing to give them the chance to fix things. It’s too easy for our customers to move on and look for someone else who will treat them well both as a prospect and when they are a customer.

Ask your sales and service teams…Are we making our customers feel valued or just focused on bringing in the new business?

Guest Post: The Little Things Really Do Matter to Customers

I’m pleased to have Stefanie Amini Guest Post on my Blog today.  I hope you enjoy her post as much as I did.

Stefanie Amini is the Marketing Director and Specialist in Customer Success at WalkMe, the world’s first interactive online guidance system.  She is chief writer and editor of I Want It Now, a blog for Customer Service Experts. Follow her @StefWalkMe

The Little Things Really Do Matter to Customers

Empathy is a social drive in all of humanity. It is the ability to feel what our brethren feel, and to care deeply about making them feel better, or to make them feel good with no obvious reward to ourselves. This empathic drive in our species is what has allowed us to persevere over the obstacles of our history, which were many, and has given us a very important element that lets civilization work – ethics.

But, there’s more to it than that. When we think about making someone happy, do we think about making them smile, or do we think about some grand gesture to ensure extreme elation in people? Usually, whether we want to admit it or not, we think far too grandiose when we talk about “making people happy”. We greatly devalue the power of simply making someone smile or laugh, or the pure goodness of showing just a brief nod of courtesy or respect to others. We underestimate how far these little things really go.

Businesses make this mistake too, and that’s a very unfortunate thing. Obviously businesses have a less than selfless motivation for making their customers happy, but a good business cares about their customers and their happiness above and beyond profitability too. Either way, the same paradigm exists and the same problems arise from it. Companies try too hard to make their customers happy by trying to unabashedly impress them with grand gestures that often either don’t work, turn out to be impossible, or are too general and absurd.

It’s time to think about this with a smaller metric. Consider the last time someone went out of their way to make some grand gesture to make you happy. Did you feel a little guilty accepting such hospitality? Probably. Now, compare this to someone who was just, with no prerequisite, was respectful, or just made you smile or laugh. They stand out in your memory, do they not? And was there any guilt in enjoying the laugh, smile or edification they bestowed upon you by this little, selfless and cost-free gesture? That’s highly unlikely!

Now, draw a parallel in business, with making your customers happy in the long run. One can divide this into smaller things, in the way of just showing extra courtesy to your customers, and bringing a humble but lasting smile to their faces. What are some ways to do this? Well, from one industry, demographic and scenario to the next, there are a ton that can’t really apply across the board, but there are some generalities in business where it does.

For one, in CRM, individuals who deal with distressed customers, but are willing to laugh with them, to empathize with them and speak to them on their level are an excellent step. Making a customer smile through empathy isn’t hard. If they complement your great customer service, thank them deeply and sincerely, because they will get a smile out of having made you smile in turn. See, it goes both ways with that.

Small incentives and shows of gratitude also work well. You don’t have to offer some grand free prize to a millionth customer, or as a reward for years of loyalty. Simply offer small discounts, or tokens of appreciation that may not even be worth a lot, but show that you care. This will get a smile out of the customer, and they will remember that you care. This will stay with them.

Finally, you probably don’t have to spend a fortune on CRM software or high technology to wow your customers. You need only to keep it simple, and make it very direct and easy for a customer to contact you. The ease of procedures and the simplicity of handling things will bring a smile to their faces, when they’ve been through the wringer with other companies in the past on this.

It’s the little things like this that make people smile, and while a smile is a little thing itself, everyone remembers someone or something that just brings a pure and simple smile to their face. Something that wows them is subject to novelty wearing off given time.

Coaching Numbers or What They Really Mean?

As Contact Center managers, you have a lot of power.  OK…some days it sure doesn’t seem that way, but you really do.  Your supervisors and quality team are listening to you and are observing what you are focused on.

When you talk about metrics, what are you saying to them? If you talk purely “number” goals all the time, your quality coaches will be talking just “numbers” too.  They’ll often repeat what you are saying word for word during their coaching sessions with agents.

When  metrics are discussed during individual agent coaching sessions, you need to make sure that your “coach” knows how to explain them in terms of Customer Experience.

One of the metrics numbers that seems to get a bad rap these days is the length of the call. Some coaches aren’t bringing it up at all in coaching sessions.  There were some managers who actually tracked and rewarded based on the length of call “metric” set. Some don’t reward but are seemingly obsessed with setting a number for call length average based on studying this metric if reported by any other call center in the universe.

I’m a proponent of monitoring and coaching all types of calls.  Long, short and in between.  I don’t advocate setting an exact length of call goal for every call and then holding agents’ feet to the fire.  I do advocate learning if the call was handled appropriately in a likewise appropriate amount of time.

Long Calls:  When I hear lengthy agent calls, I think about my Dad’s famous driving “shortcuts” whenever he took our family somewhere. When he mentioned that he knew quicker route, my Mom would roll her eyes and we knew what was coming.  We could always plan on adding 20 plus minutes to the original length of the trip.  Hopefully the shortcut would involve a stop for ice cream. My father seemed to find ice cream regardless of the route. His passenger “customers” at least were given a treat for their troubles and perhaps that was his true goal.

Some of our agents don’t see the service or sales target straight ahead, but instead, go in circles on their way to closure.  they are not taking the simplest and shortest route to reach the customer goal.

Unfortunately we don’t have virtual ice cream to offer our customers who are stuck in lengthy calls that seem to be going nowhere.

Short Calls: When calls are too short, I worry too because the agent may have missed an opportunity to be proactive, add some additional tips, or listen better for clues for upselling and cross-selling clues.  Worse still are the agents who blend speed with talking over customers. Sally may have taken twice as many calls as the other agents, but what is happening during those calls?  Are they brusque and disinterested sounding, even though she took care of “business”?

Metrics should always be a part of coaching as long as they mean something to the customer and our business needs.

I love to see quality monitoring forms for calls that incorporate metrics as well as the soft skills and other skills needed for best quality.

We just need to make sure that our coaches aren’t just reading metrics numbers to agents, but are instead preparing for their coaching sessions by reviewing those numbers and how they relate to skills demonstrated and the overall customer experience.

Poor Communication = Poor Banking Customer Experience: Part II

In Part I of my article on communication breakdowns, I focused on

Use Familiar Language:  avoiding jargon that can be confusing or may seem misleading
Create a Conversation: ask questions and interact instead of lecturing the customer
Show You Care:  showing Empathy and interest to build trust and value

In addition to these verbal interaction points, there are more opportunities to successfully create a wonderful Customer/ Member Experiences.

More Than Words

While the words we choose are important, we can’t forget about nonverbal aspects of communication, especially in a branch setting. Face-to-face interactions bring the added challenge of body language, which can drastically alter the meaning of what we say. Are your representatives sending the right signals? These may include:

• Greeting customers as they enter

• Making eye contact during conversations

• Using positive facial expressions

• Avoiding negative gestures: sighs, yawns, shrugs

Lobbies and offices are communicating with customers too. Does your waiting area welcome customers, or does it order them to line up? Do tellers call out “next,” or offer a personal greeting? Can customers smell the burnt microwave popcorn in the break room?

Beware Mixed Messages

Lastly, consider how your organizational language compares with your interpersonal language. What will customers think if your brochures describe product features that aren’t on your website? Or if a representative answers a customer’s question with, “I don’t know anything about that. We’re the last to know.” (Yes, one actually said that to me). Inconsistent communication is as bad as no communication. All channels need to deliver the same messages. For example:

• Use clear, easy-to-understand content (no jargon) for website, email and customer communications

• Avoid “copy and paste” emails that do not address a customer’s specific question

• Maintain a knowledge base for employees that is updated regularly

Lead By Example

We must also ensure that our communication style and word choices are the same ones we want employees to emulate. It’s all part of getting everyone in your institution to communicate well. The challenge is a big one. But when customers get the right messages, their responses will be well worth it.

This post originally appeared in my article for Deluxe Knowledge Quarterly publication December 2012.