Your Quality Monitoring: Engaging or Exasperating?

One of the worst methods of quality monitoring is the one that is based on finding everything wrong on a call or other type of customer interaction down to a seemingly molecular level.  I am definitely in favor of scored monitoring for skills but it must be balanced with common sense applied by the QA and/or coach listening and scoring those calls.  Unfortunately I find that the common sense factor is not always applied.

An agent recently shared with me his experiences with a quality monitoring and coaching process that is frustrating and disengaging for him and his team members. This particular agent has been receiving kudos from customers for going above and beyond, including verbal positives to his supervisor and emailed compliments from customers. He is a seasoned agent who also is relied upon to train newer agents on his team. Despite his positive feedback and great skills, he regularly receives multiple errors from QA on calls.

Upon listening to one of these calls that was considered by QA to have errors, I heard a great example of excellent listening and other skills demonstrated by the agent. During this call, I heard the customer say, “Thanks for your help. That’s all I need today”.  The agent replied with a sincere sounding thank you and ended the call positively.

QA however gave him an error because he didn’t ask, “Is there anything else?” at the end of that same call.

What would be gained by the agent asking what the customer had just answered?  Nothing.

Some quality managers with a “follow the carved in stone checklist” approach train their QA team to be a robotic error factory. At times, I’ve even observed QA and their manager view any questions or pushback from an agent regarding quality scores as a personal affront to their ability to monitor.  Email exchanges between agent and analyst may escalate until the agent gives up in defeat.

The agent in the example above told me he initially questioned the quality scoring error but after multiple emails with the Quality Analyst explaining why his question wasn’t necessary, he said that he finally gave up and accepted the error because he was “tired of fighting”.  To add to his frustration, his new supervisor with no prior call center experience did little to nothing to support him with this apparently not wanting to rock the boat.

Agents who are very satisfied with their job will provide the best customer experience and remain on the job longer. When we set up conflict between agents and quality through unrealistic processes or by creating a skill witch hunt environment, your agents will not only become dissatisfied…they will leave.

Is your quality program making agents feel engaged or exasperated?


About the author

John Englund

John is a copywriter at Intradiem. He has a background in print and broadcast journalism and digital marketing with emphasis on technology.

Similar Articles