We hate to be the bearer of bad news, but here it is: Nearly every QA process available today isn’t accurate enough to actually effect change in your agents. Many QA teams get lost in a gray zone — a place where the majority of opportunities that could be found are lost.
This gray zone is the gap between finding the mistakes in your calls and the tactics QA teams use to fix them. While the gap exists, more and more opportunities slip away and you’re left guessing on how to improve your conversations.
Let’s say you do two call recording reviews per month. And while these two calls took place at the beginning of the month, you listen to the calls and coach on them at the end of the month. Any insight you’ve gained from these two calls is roughly 30 days behind; meaning the agent had almost a month to keep making the same mistakes.
These are just the missed opportunities from the two calls you were able to review. What about the vast majority of calls that are passing by every month unreviewed? A whole month of potential mistakes, buried in 99% of your calls, that could be costing you millions in potential revenue. Not to mention, that’s a whole month where your customers could be leaving with a bad taste in their mouth.
Many contact center teams turn to speech analytics tools with automated scoring features to help fill the gap. Then, without fail, they find themselves having to manually complete scorecards themselves after the calls are done. That “automation” isn’t actually automatic and leaves teams with more work and without any time to actually improve calls.
Even if you could hire enough QA analysts to listen in on every call, that still wouldn’t fix the gray zone caused by plain ol’ human judgment. QA scorecards are based on strict criteria; in theory, it should be easy to tell if an agent made a mistake or not on a call. Your QA team does their best to be good judges, but that variability when manually scoring calls still opens up room for gaps.
Humans have the ability to understand context and nuances when making decisions. So why are we stuck thinking the right role for people in QA is checking off boxes and doing the scoring themselves? People can dig into exceptions, look at the context of conversations, and find patterns between agents to source new strategies for calls. Spending time once or twice a month to score calls is time wasted that could be spent fixing the mistakes as soon as they pop up.
Real-Time QA is how contact center teams can go from spending too much time on scoring calls to automatically catching everything that happens on a call and instantly improving them. How? When you score every call as they’re happening, your QA team doesn’t need to spend hours listening to a fraction of calls.
With the Real-Time QA Dashboard and Interactive Reports, you can see the scores for all your agents right as each call ends. That means you can make changes and recommendations at a moment’s notice Instead of waiting weeks to find a fraction of mistakes, you could be fixing them before they even happen. And with Real-Time QA Scorecards, there’s no subjectivity to scoring a call: You set the criteria, and Balto’s AI does the work for you.
In other words, Real-Time QA gets you out of the gray zone and into improving scores on every call.