Do It Once or Do It Over - The Humpty Dumpty Syndrome
Let’s pretend that Humpty Dumpty is playing the role of single call resolution - today’s Holy Grail of measuring effectiveness and efficiency in today’s Contact Centers (as a Quality measure the jury is still out).
| Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall Humpty Dumpty had a great fall All the King’s horses and all the King’s men Couldn’t put Humpty together again |
Humpty Dumpty makes a call |
So there on the wall sits the fragile egg, just looking for an answer. The "stall" Humpty suffers represents the fractured processes that prevent frontline agents from having at their disposal the information, tools, and “permission” to resolve customer concerns. Consequently, Humpty is going to have to call back or be called back. Regardless of the agent’s amiability, Humpty’s need will not be met and the Holy Grail of single call resolution will not be achieved.
Oftentimes today, the resolution of customer problems is severely delayed and the quality of the interaction is compromised due to dysfunctional cross-functional relationships and processes that are in place. Sadly, this means actually deploying “obstacles” to the swift resolution that customers seek. Cross-functional dysfunction is the number one reason that the achievement of single call resolution eludes many. The situation may be due to systems, fiefdoms, or just plain dumdums!
I had to laugh to myself when visiting a Call Center whose management wanted frontline agents to “practice single call resolution” in an environment where systems were so dysfunctional that multiple contacts were required. There simply wasn’t a way for frontline agents to “practice single call resolution” on their own. This outcome can only be achieved via systems, processes, relationships, and leaders that are aligned to each other. The frontline certainly has its role from a quality and interaction perspective. But agents do not implement systems or design processes; they interact with them.
I have also encountered managers who assume that a totally “scripted” call will achieve single call resolution. Unfortunately, this strategy forces agents into a robotic and simplistic set of responses. It quite incorrectly assumes that the script will have the ability to predict the caller’s behaviors. This is highly unlikely! There is little point in recruiting people that are smart and possess “good communication skills” only to strip them of the privilege of using their brains once they log into the system for their shift. Here are some examples that illustrate why "true" first call resolution is often elusive and sometimes impossible.
I recall a conversation with the warranty department of my auto manufacturer. The only phrase the agent used to address my stated displeasure was, “I’m only authorized to apologize.” That’s the script - just keep saying it over and over. Trust me; this may be first call resolution. But it is the last car purchased from this manufacturer! Forget lifetime value!
I once observed calls at an insurance company where an agent had to inform a caller that his claim had been denied (the caller’s fifth attempt to get status)! The caller went ballistic. The agent handled it deftly, but at the end of the call asked, “Is there anything else I can help you with today?” Well, the caller went even more ballistic. After the call I said to the agent, “I’m curious. Why would you ask a question like that at the end of the call? His response was, “I have to; it’s worth 5 points on our quality score.” Somebody help me here. Is logic any longer relevant? That is the risk when the scriptwriter or architect doesn’t factor into the requirement some space for logic. UGH ...
Consider the department in which sales agents’ objectives are based on total calls into the unit - despite the fact that 40% of incoming calls must be transferred to other areas due to dysfunctional front-end IVR menu routing. Sales agents spend time transferring hopelessly lost and frustrated callers to other departments - transforming a would-be savvy sales operation into a switchboard function. Despite the discovery of these realities, the IVR menu remains in its same sorry state and sales objectives remain unmet (of course). But perhaps the most significant impact is declining morale - agents that were hired to sell, and whose compensation packages are linked to “closing” sales, are hogtied by handling misdirected calls. This situation is a challenge to correct due to the sheer number of departments, regions, managers, etc., required to correct it. IT "owns" the IVR. However, the IVR serves multiple departments which can cause limitations related to versions, capacity, etc. In a sense, there seems to be a regional tribal mentality that thrives on handling calls that are bounced around. This validates a load large enough for all departments to continue to exist.
Last week I had the opportunity to learn more about “unified communications.” A vendor was demonstrating many wonderful methods to improve access to knowledge about an individual’s availability for quicker entry to roles and/or skills needed to resolve questions or issues. This is not a new concept for the Call Center; for decades managers have been able to monitor the status and availability of agents. However, processes that require support from another department often leave the agent with little choice but to promise a "call back" due to required, but unavailable, cross-functional resources. Until now, peripheral support operations have been entirely invisible to the CSR in need. With unified communications platforms, other departments are able to make the status of their knowledge workers visible to others via a "presence" function feature. Truly, this seems like a wonderful idea. The technology is proven and available; but there will be human and organizational challenges.
The biggest challenge I see with unified communications is that so many organizations today are so cross-functionally dysfunctional, there may be much to be done before lifting the comfortable veil of invisibility. How willing are cross-functional departments in offering their people to lend real-time support to a Call Center or other department? Consider this conversation: "Hey, guess what? I want to list your staff in my Call Center agents' presence folder for expert advice on ... (fill in the blank on whatever process requires external support)." I have witnessed plenty of folks reading the caller ID and refusing to answer because they do not want to “get involved” in “someone else’s” problem!
This type of technology brings up lots of questions regarding the effectiveness, stability, and overall functionality of processes, procedures, and access to real-time information needed to truly achieve and measure first call resolution. So if you find that you have a few of your own Humpty Dumpty customers/callers out there, the fix is not likely to come in the form of a new performance metric. Single call resolution must be put in place first to measure process, and last to assess any individual contributor’s ability to properly utilize the process - not the other way around.
Identifying and documenting cross-functional dysfunction is generally a good place to start when single call resolution is on executives' minds. Silos (and other dysfunctional organizational relationships) create more customer experience failures than frontline agents ever could. Management at every level may have a Zen-like focus on single call resolution and think that it just might happen simply by imagining it.
My Best,
Kathleen
PowerHouse Consulting
360 Route 101, Suite 6
Bedford, NH 03110
www.powerhouse1.com
1-800-449-9904
(#30, Do It Once or Do It Over - The Humpty Dumpty Syndrome, September 2009)