Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Yesterday, I was browsing on  Wonderful site: it has a pretty cool forum that could use more frequent participation.  Stop by.  :)  Back to my point.  First thing I see is a post titled, "Why does a call center's QA teams suck?" 
(blink)  We do?  Boy, somebody must have gotten a really bad QA score, was my first thought.  He/she goes on to wonder if QA is human, whether we care about the "galley slaves," and whether QA thinks they are God.  Wow.  If I'd have known we had that much power, I may have used it a long time ago.  (KIDDING!) 
But then, he/she asks, Who QA's the QA team?  Good question. 
Calibration sessions are the most informative and educational parts of the QA process.  In our calibration, we have several members of our senior management team: they are given so many evaluations that have already been graded by QA.  They listen to them, and they score them.  Then we compare all scores to the QA score, discuss why we scored the way we did, and make changes as needed.  The QA team then has more of an idea how senior management feels, and how they need things to be done: and senior management has more of an idea what goes on in the call center.
We are held up to a very high standard.  At this point, the average of the management teams scores and the QA score have to be 5 points apart.  We have just rolled out a new QA form, so calibration is more important than ever as we work out the kinks.  QA is monitored: we are being very closely watched by our management, and we cannot do anything that is out of line with the policies of the company.
On a more personal note, I understand how the person feels.  QA can seem impersonal.  In our center, we have no contact with the call center floor.  It's a small center, so we know everyone very well: but we are detached so we can be fair.  The CSR may be sick: they may have personal problems: anything that could be affecting the performance.  While we care about the situation, we can't take any of that into consideration.  The driving focus of the QA department: were that customer's needs taken care of, and was it done in a friendly, professional, courteous manner?  If not, then we start the ball rolling to fix the problem.
We have so many people to answer to.  We have the CSRs, supervisors, management, and ultimately, the customers.  We try to take care of everybody.  It's a tough job, but it's very fulfilling. 
If you're not in QA, and want to understand more, ask your supervisor if you can go sit with a QA rep for a few hours.  This will give you a good insight into our world.  Who knows?  Someday, you might even be one of us.  :D
Off to the morning coffee.  I can't QA without coffee.  That would be like climbing Mount Everest without a rope.  Disaster would ensue.  The day would not be pretty.


Blogger JT said...

The big flaw in this post is when you say:

"The CSR may be sick: they may have personal problems: anything that could be affecting the performance. While we care about the situation, we can't take any of that into consideration."

Of course you can take it into consideration, and the customer would too, if they knew. If you're judging quality, you need to take everything into account. Otherwise you come across as ... robots.

8:01 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home