Method of evaluating contact center performance
A method and apparatus are provided for objectively grading a performance of a contact center based upon input from a plurality of customers of the contact center. The method includes the steps of receiving a consumer importance rating and a consumer satisfaction rating on the performance of the contact center from a multiplicity of customers of the plurality of customers of the contact center for each entry within a set of categories including empathy and advocacy, efficiency and automation, determining a maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories based upon a relative value of the importance ratings provided by the plurality of customers and assigning a point score to each entry of the set of categories based upon the maximum point score for the entry and the satisfaction ratings of the plurality of customers for the category.
1 . A method of objectively grading a performance of a contact center based upon input from a plurality of customers of the contact center, such method comprising:
receiving a consumer importance rating and a consumer satisfaction rating on the performance of the contact center from at least some customers of the plurality of customers of the contact center for each entry within a set of categories including empathy and advocacy, efficiency and automation;
determining a maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories based upon a relative value of the importance ratings provided by the plurality of customers; and
assigning a point score to each entry of the set of categories based upon the maximum point score for the entry and the satisfaction ratings of the plurality of customers for the category.
2 . The method of grading the contact center as in claim 1 further comprising summing the point score assigned to each entry of the set of categories to provide an overall contact center grade.
3 . The method of grading the contact center as in claim 1 wherein the step of determining the maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories further comprises averaging the importance ratings from the plurality of customers among the entries of the set of categories.
4 . The method of grading the contact center as in claim 3 further comprising dividing an average of the importance rating from the plurality of customers for each entry of the set of categories by the average importance rating among the set of categories and multiplying the dividend by a predetermined base point score for the set of categories.
5 . The method of grading the contact center as in claim 1 wherein the step of assigning a point score to each entry further comprises averaging a satisfaction rating among the plurality of customers for each entry, dividing the average by a predetermined highest relative satisfaction rating for the entry and multiplying the dividend by the maximum point score for the entry.
6 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 1 further comprising providing a contact center grade for each of a plurality of contact channels.
7 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 6 further comprising grading the contact center based upon a most recently used contact channel of the plurality of contact channels.
8 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 6 further comprising defining a telephone as one of the plurality of contact channels.
9 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 6 further comprising defining an e-mail as one of the plurality of contact channels.
10 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 6 further comprising defining on-line chat as one of the plurality of contact channels.
11 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 1 wherein the category of empathy and advocacy further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a contact center agent is knowledgeable and informed, speaks clearly/easy to understand, is patient, friendly and courteous, takes responsibility for resolving issues, appreciates your business, is professional, cares and wants to help, understands the situation, is flexible and creative, uses consistent policies and procedures, presents an image that is consistent with a company image and provides follow up to make sure an issue is resolved.
12 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 1 wherein the category of efficiency further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer is able to speak with an agent without long delays, whether an agent has authority to solve problems without transferring to another agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue in a single interaction, whether the contact center is able to minimize wait time, whether the contact center is able to establish a clear connection without delays or lags, whether a customer is able to quickly talk with an agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue without transfer, and how quickly the contact center answered a contact.
13 . The method of objectively grading the contact center as in claim 1 wherein the category of automation further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer has easy access to an agent from an automated menu, whether a first contact is with an agent instead of an automated system, whether an easy-to-use automated menu is presented, whether a number of contact options are presented, whether a customer can easily access an agent while browsing an website of the contact center and whether an automated system is provided that resolves issues.
14 . An apparatus for objectively grading a performance of a contact center based upon input from a plurality of customers of the contact center, such apparatus comprising:
means for receiving a consumer importance rating and a consumer satisfaction rating on the performance of the contact center from at least some customers of the plurality of customers of the contact center for each entry within a set of categories including empathy and advocacy, efficiency and automation;
means for determining a maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories based upon a relative value of the importance ratings provided by the plurality of customers; and
means for assigning a point score to each entry of the set of categories based upon the maximum point score for the entry and the satisfaction ratings of the plurality of customers for the category.
15 . The apparatus for grading the contact center as in claim 14 further comprising means for summing the point score assigned to each entry of the set of categories to provide an overall contact center grade.
16 . The apparatus for grading the contact center as in claim 14 wherein the means for determining the maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories further comprises means for averaging the importance ratings from the plurality of customers among the entries of the set of categories.
17 . The apparatus for grading the contact center as in claim 16 further comprising means for dividing an average of the importance rating from the plurality of customers for each entry of the set of categories by the average importance rating among the set of categories and multiplying the dividend by a predetermined base point score for the set of categories.
18 . The apparatus for grading the contact center as in claim 14 wherein the means for assigning a point score to each entry further comprises means for averaging a satisfaction rating among the plurality of customers for each entry, dividing the average by a predetermined highest relative satisfaction rating for the entry and multiplying the dividend by the maximum point score for the entry.
19 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 14 further comprising means for providing a contact center grade for each of a plurality of contact channels.
20 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 19 further comprising means for grading the contact center based upon a most recently used contact channel of the plurality of contact channels.
21 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 19 further comprising defining a telephone as one of the plurality of contact channels.
22 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 19 further comprising defining an e-mail as one of the plurality of contact channels.
23 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 19 further comprising defining on-line chat as one of the plurality of contact channels.
24 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 14 wherein the category of empathy and advocacy further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a contact center agent is knowledgeable and informed, speaks clearly/easy to understand, is patient, friendly and courteous, takes responsibility for resolving issues, appreciates your business, is professional, cares and wants to help, understands the situation, is flexible and creative, uses consistent policies and procedures, presents an image that is consistent with a company image and provides follow up to make sure an issue is resolved.
25 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 14 wherein the category of efficiency further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer is able to speak with an agent without long delays, whether an agent has authority to solve problems without transferring to another agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue in a single interaction, whether the contact center is able to minimize wait time, whether the contact center is able to establish a clear connection without delays or lags, whether a customer is able to quickly talk with an agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue without transfer, and how quickly the contact center answered a contact.
26 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 14 wherein the category of automation further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer has easy access to an agent from an automated menu, whether a first contact is with an agent instead of an automated system, whether an easy-to-use automated menu is presented, whether a number of contact options are presented, whether a customer can easily access an agent while browsing an website of the contact center and whether an automated system is provided that resolves issues.
27 . An apparatus for objectively grading a performance of a contact center based upon input from a plurality of customers of the contact center, such apparatus comprising:
a memory adapted to receive a consumer importance rating and a consumer satisfaction rating on the performance of the contact center from at least some customers of the plurality of customers of the contact center for each entry within a set of categories including empathy and advocacy, efficiency and automation;
a weighting process that determines a maximum point score for each entry of the set of categories based upon a relative value of the importance ratings provided by the plurality of customers by averaging the importance ratings from the plurality of customers among the entries of the set of categories and dividing an average of the importance rating from the plurality of customers for each entry of the set of categories by the average importance rating among the set of categories and multiplying the dividend by a predetermined base point score for the set of categories; and
a point processor that assigns a point score to each entry of the set of categories based upon the maximum point score for the entry and the satisfaction ratings of the plurality of customers for the category by averaging a satisfaction rating among the plurality of customers for each entry, dividing the average by a predetermined highest relative satisfaction rating for the entry and multiplying the dividend by the maximum point score for the entry.
28 . The apparatus for grading the contact center as in claim 27 further comprising a summer that sums the point score assigned to each entry of the set of categories to provide an overall contact center grade.
29 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 27 wherein the category of empathy and advocacy further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a contact center agent is knowledgeable and informed, speaks clearly/easy to understand, is patient, friendly and courteous, takes responsibility for resolving issues, appreciates your business, is professional, cares and wants to help, understands the situation, is flexible and creative, uses consistent policies and procedures, presents an image that is consistent with a company image and provides follow up to make sure an issue is resolved.
30 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 27 wherein the category of efficiency further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer is able to speak with an agent without long delays, whether an agent has authority to solve problems without transferring to another agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue in a single interaction, whether the contact center is able to minimize wait time, whether the contact center is able to establish a clear connection without delays or lags, whether a customer is able to quickly talk with an agent, whether an agent is able to resolve an issue without transfer, and how quickly the contact center answered a contact.
31 . The apparatus for objectively grading the contact center as in claim 27 wherein the category of automation further comprises a subset of categories where the subset is selected from the group consisting of whether a customer has easy access to an agent from an automated menu, whether a first contact is with an agent instead of an automated system, whether an easy-to-use automated menu is presented, whether a number of contact options are presented, whether a customer can easily access an agent while browsing an website of the contact center and whether an automated system is provided that resolves issues.
32 . A method of objectively grading a performance of a contact center based upon input from a plurality of customers of the contact center, such method comprising:
receiving a rating on the performance of contact center from each customer of the plurality of customers for each entry within a set of categories including empathy and advocacy, efficiency and automation;
receiving a relative importance rating from each customer of the plurality of customers for each entry of the set of categories;
weighting each entry of the set of categories based upon a relative importance of the entry among the plurality of customers; and
grading the contact center based upon the ratings and the weightings of each entry of the set of categories.