coachpalooza summary report: call center coaching benchmark
DESCRIPTION
To better understand the call center agent coaching environment, Knowlagent conducted Coachpalooza, a focus group series. This summary report includes all 20 distinct key findings as well as all survey response data.TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
’05 all Center Focus Group Series
y Report
Coachpalooza A C Summar
A Coaching Report from Knowlagent By: Debbie Qaqish and Dwight Lucas
Fall 2005
![Page 2: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 2
2
a registered trademark of Knowlagent, Inc. Value-Driven Coaching Model for the Call Center™ and Value-Driven Coaching Model™ are trademarks of Knowlagent, Inc. All other trademarks
cument are the property of their respective owners.
The information contained in this document is proprietary to Knowlagent, Inc. Unless you are the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the intended recipient), you may not read, print, retain, use, copy, distribute or disclose any information contained in this document.
Copyright© 2005 Knowlagent, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Knowlagent® Inc.
Knowlagent® is
used in this do
![Page 3: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 3
3
Table of Contents Overview ...........................................................................................................................4
....................4
Sections of this report ......................................................................................................5 6
I. Coaching Attitudes....................................................................................................7
Coaching Metrics .................................................................................................... 12
.................. 20
. .................. 22
.................. 23
VI. Key Performance Indicators.................................................................................. 30
36 Section II: Key Findings from Coachpalooza ‘05 .................................................................... 40
.................. 40
.................. 42
.................. 42
Information............................................................................................................... 44
Process..................................................................................................................... 45
.................. 48 50
.................. 52
.................. 52
.................. 53
53
Process Questions.......................................................................................................... 54
Process Best Practices .................................................................................................... 54
People Questions ........................................................................................................... 56
People Best Practices...................................................................................................... 56 Conclusion........................................................................................................................ 57
Methodology ...............................................................................................
Section I: Pre-Focus Group Surveys ......................................................................................
II.
III. What Gets Coached...........................................................................
IV Coaching Follow-up ...........................................................................
V. Coaching Resources ..........................................................................
VII. Coachpalooza ’05 Demographics ...........................................................................
Key Findings at a Glance...............................................................................
Key Findings Detail ......................................................................................
Time ......................................................................................................
People ....................................................................................................
Section III: The Value-Driven Coaching Model™....................................................................
Time Questions ...........................................................................................
Time Best Practices......................................................................................
Information Questions ..................................................................................
Information Best Practices ..............................................................................................
![Page 4: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 4
4
Overview
“We recognize the value of coaching…we just don’t have time to do it.”
- Coachpalooza ’05 participant
Coaching is one of the highest impact, yet overlooked, ways to achieve coin the call center. The best centers know this, and are attempt
mpany goals ing to develop coaching
truggling with how nt.
d the call center coaching environment, Knowlagent conducted Coachpalooza ’05, a Focus Group series with seven large call center groups that
This strategic initiative allowed
g in the dynamic call center environment
d leading companies from a variety of industries including financial services, insurance, retail, telecom, and travel, with agent populations ranging from 450 to 12,000.
05 Summary Report is the compilation of data and insights gathered
ather quantitative
pervisors
upervisor Focus Groups that included team and individual activities and discussions
Following the completion of each Focus Group, the Knowlagent team prepared a detailed Coachpalooza ’05 Report of Findings for the participating organization that highlighted key coaching findings for that group. As a conclusion to the Coachpalooza ’05 program, Knowlagent has prepared this Summary Report to present the common themes from all groups.
models, tools and initiatives to drive coaching, yet even the best are sto deliver enough quality coaching in the unique call center environme
To better understan
included 53 supervisor and manager level participants.us to better understand:
• the attitudes towards and the perceived value of coaching • how coaching is conducted and measured • what gets coached • the challenges to coachin
Participants in the Focus Group series include
This Coachpalooza ’from all activities associated with these Focus Groups.
Methodology
Coachpalooza ’05 was an intense Focus Group series designed to gand qualitative data. There were several methods used including:
• Pre-Focus Group Surveys administered online for executives and su
• On-site, ½ day S
![Page 5: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 5
5
Sections of this report
Section I: Pre-Focus Group Surveys
The Pre-Focus Group Surveys were designed to give the Focus Group team an early ching environment of the center. Specifically, the survey looked for:
coaching
ing
s
or responses
II: Key Findings
ings Section is based on all information from all sources and the findings rized into four distinct groupings:
nded Best Practices
y strongly believe in the value of coaching, yet few of them seem to be able to convert that belief into action. There appear to be a number of environmental, cultural, and technology driven inhibitors that restrict coaching from occurring and that obscure the effectiveness of coaching. The Value-Driven Coaching Model was developed based on findings from the Coachpalooza ’05 to provide a simple structure for addressing these inhibitors and for providing a sense of priority and synergy among key elements.
indication of the coa
• attitudes towards
• metrics of coach
• what is being coached
• coaching resource
• similarities and differences between executive response and supervis
Section
The Key Findare catego
• Time
• Information
• Process
• People
Section III: The Value-Driven Coaching Model & Recomme
All call centers in the Coachpalooza ’05 event say the
![Page 6: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 6
6
Section I: Pre-Focus Group Surveys
The Pre-Focus Group Surveys were designed to give the Focus Group team an early indication of the coaching environment of the center. Specifically, the surveys looked for:
coaching
visor responses
-site Focus
ugh there were a few questions ding two
swered 31 er headcount
sors.
ptures the responses to each question for each group and ties or differences in each group’s set of responses.
responses from the Pre-Focus Group Surveys:
es
4. Coaching Follow Up
5. Coaching Resources
6. Key Performance Indicators
7. Coachpalooza ’05 Demographics
• attitudes towards
• metrics of coaching
• what is being coached
• coaching resources
• similarities and differences between executive response and super
The Pre-Focus Group Surveys were administered online to both the call center executive sponsor and the group of supervisors who were to be in the onGroup.
The surveys for each group were almost identical, althothat were unique to each group. Supervisors answered 30 questions incluquestions regarding experience that executives did not. Executives anquestions, including 3 questions not asked of supervisors regarding centand company perception regarding the coaching of supervi
The following section cadiscusses the similari
There are 7 sections of
1. Coaching Attitud
2. Coaching Metrics
3. What Gets Coached
![Page 7: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 7
7
I. Coaching Attitudes
1. My company understands the value of coaching agents
While all executives said their company understands the value of coaching agents, 22% of supervisors disagreed or had No Opinion.
My company understands the value of coaching agents
5% 5%
39% 39%
0% 0% 0%
12% 20%
80%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 8: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 8
8
2. My company understands the value of coaching supervisors
All Executives said their company understands the value of coaching Supervisors. This question was not on the Supervisor survey.
(Executive Responses)
My company understands the value of coaching supervisors (Executive Responses)
0% 0% 0%
100%
0%0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree StronglyAgree
![Page 9: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 9
9
3. The agents understand the value of coaching
There was general agreement on this topic between executives and supervisors.
The agents understand the value of coaching
2%7%
0%
68%
22%
0% 0%
20%
80%
0%0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 10: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 10
10
4. The supervisors understand the value of coaching
Although supervisors were more emphatic, there was general agreement on this topic between executives and supervisors.
The supervisors understand the value of coaching
2% 0% 0%
22%
76%
0% 0% 0%
80%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 11: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 11
11
5. Supervisors are comfortable coaching
Supervisors indicated they are comfortable coaching, but executivexpress the same belief. The large majority (93%) of supervisors indiwere comfortable coaching, but only 50% of executives stated thei
es did not cated they
r supervisors were comfortable doing so. Supervisor responses on this item were consistent with other questions that indicate very high confidence in their ability to do their jobs.
I (supervisors) are comfortable coaching
2% 2% 2%
22%20% 20% 20%
40%
0%
71%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 12: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 12
12
II. Coaching Metrics
1. On average, how much time is spent coaching each ag
Both executives and supervisors believe that agents receive a smacoaching on a daily basis. Only 22% of supervisors indicated tagent more than 20 minutes per day. In contrast,
ent per day?
ll amount of hat they coach each
44% of supervisors say agents receive less than 10 minutes of coaching per day, as do 100% of executive respondents.
On average, how much time is spent coaching each agent per day?
100%
0 0
34%
22%
44%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
1-10 minutes 11-20 minutes Over 20 minutes
Supervisors Executives
![Page 13: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 13
13
2. On average, how much time does each supervisor spend on overall
ved in overall eived that
isors delivered over three hours of coaching per day, 80% of supervisors indicated that they actually spent less than two hours per day on coaching activities.
coaching activities per day?
Supervisors appear to spend a small percentage of their day involcoaching activities. While 20% of executive respondents percsuperv
On average, how much time do you (Supervisors ) spend in all coaching activities per day?
2%
22% 20%20%
15%
34%
7%
20%
40%
20%
0%0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
1-10 m
inutes
11-20
minu
tes
21-30
minu
tes
31-60
minu
tes
1-2 ho
urs
3-4 ho
urs
Supervisors Executives
![Page 14: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 14
14
3. On average, how much time is spent coaching supervisors on a
e value of eive little on-going coaching.
of supervisors
In contrast, 75% of the executives perceived that supervisors were receiving over 2 hours of coaching per month.
monthly basis?
Despite a consistent and strong belief that companies understand thcoaching in general, most supervisors said they recThe dispersion of responses on this topic was quite varied, but 57%stated they receive less than one hour of coaching per month.
On average, how much time is spent coaching you (Supervisors) on a monthly basis?
25%
0%
20%23%17%20%20%
14%
0% 0% 0% 0%
25%
50%
0%10%
20%30%40%50%
60%70%
None
1-30 m
inutes
31-60
minu
tes
61-12
0 minu
tes
121-2
40 m
inutes
>240
minu
tesVari
es
Supervisors
Executives
![Page 15: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 15
15
4. On average, how much time do supervisors spend each day
utes per day of executives who
ated that supervisors spend less than 30 minutes on prep time each day. This finding further substantiates that coaching typically occurs in an informal manner.
preparing for a coaching event?
The overwhelming majority of supervisors spend less than 60 minpreparing for all coaching activity. This was supported by 100% indic
On average, how much time do supervisors spend each day preparing for a coaching event?
26%
3% 3%
100%
69%
0% 0%0%0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
0-30 minutes 31-60minutes
1-3 hours 3-5 hours
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 16: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 16
16
5. On average, how much time do your supervisors spend each day
One group of supervisor participants spent over 30 minutes per day conferring with peers, but the overwhelming majority of supervisors do not.
conferring with peers on coaching?
On average, how much time do your supervisors spend each day conferring with peers on coaching?
0% 0%
100%
0% 0%
14%
86%
0%0%
25%
50%
75%
100%
0-30 minutes 31-60minutes
1-3 hours 3-5 hours
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 17: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 17
17
6. Please indicate the percentage of total coaching devotecoaching (improving performance,
d to positive congratulations, career growth,
of their at supervisors spend
only 25% of executives responding that more than 60% of coaching was positive. Also of note is that 25% of executives were not sure on this topic.
etc.)
A slight majority (52%) of supervisors said they spend 60% or more coaching time on positive coaching. Executives perceived thless time than they indicated on this topic, with
Please indicate the percentage of total coaching devoted to positive coaching.
0%
25% 25%
0% 0%
25%
28%
24%
15%
21%
12%
25%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Not Sure
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 18: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 18
18
7. Please indicate the percentage of total coaching devoted to negative etc.)
Only 6% of supervisor participants indicated that in excess of 60% of their coaching is negative.
coaching (attendance, compliance, low motivation,
Please indicate the percentage of total coaching devoted to negative coaching.
44%
3%
25%
3%0%
25%
0%
25% 25%
0%
25%25%
0%5%
10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
0-20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% 81-100% Not Sure
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 19: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 19
19
8. Supervisors have sufficient time to coach each day
71% of supervisors stated they do not have enough time to coach. This belief was further supported during the Focus Group sessions in which every supervisor indicated they did not have enough time to coach.
Supervisors have sufficient time to coach each day
39%
5%
20%
5%
20%
0%
32%
20%
40%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 20: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 20
20
III. What Gets Coached
1. What are the events that trigger coaching in your cent
The following list represents the top ten events that trigger coaching center. Responses are listed in order of those that occur most fthat occur less frequently in the Pre-Focus Group Surveys.
er?
in the call requently to those
Unsatisfactory metrics, low attendance, and poor quality scores are the top three events that trigger
n the call center.
ics were listed most frequently in this
sfactory Quality Scores trigger coaching in the call center
any ation to agents and answering various questions and requests
procedures and
includes a variety of negative behavioral issues ng poor customer interaction, morale and lack of motivation
e o Performance was listed as an event when agent performance was
lacking and goals were not being met • Sales
o Low sales numbers o Monitoring o Errors
coaching i
• Metrics
s per hour, AHT and statisto Callcategory
• Attendance o Poor attendance and tardiness issues
• Quality Scores Unsatio
• Communications/Questions o This category includes relaying departmental and comp
informfrom agents
• ompliance Co This category includes non-compliance with company
guidelines or departmental standards and goals avior Issues • Beho This category
includi• Performanc
![Page 21: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 21
21
2. What are the top 3-5 events that trigger supervisor coaching
d below. The responses are listed in order of those that occur uently in the Pre-Focus Group
is category includes reviewing reports
ck is received from
o team does not meet monthly goals • Call Escalations
o Coaching occurs when a sampling of escalations is reviewed • Observation
opportunities?
According to executives, the top 3-5 events that trigger supervisor coaching opportunities are listemos ret f quently to those that occur less freqSurveys: • Call Monitoring
o Th• Feedback
o Supervisors are coached when negative feedbaagents
nce • Performa Coaching occurs when a
![Page 22: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 22
22
IV. Coaching Follow-up
1. Please describe how you follow-up with coaching interact
Several methods of follow-up were identified during the Pre-Focuhe he follow-up varied from daily to monthly, and w
ions
s Group Surveys. as nearly always
he following represents how ollow-up with coaching interactions:
-on-one ching and follow-up regarding progress
• Review goals with agent and follow-up • Verbally • Written Log Review
T timing of tmanually tracked and managed by supervisors. Tmost supervisors indicated that they f
• One• Continual coa
![Page 23: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 23
23
V. Coaching Resources
1. Which of the following do supervisors regularly consult prior to a
heavily on their managers and other supervisors for coaching consultation, and do not consult Human Resources or Training as frequently as executives perceived.
coaching activity? Choose all that apply.
Supervisors stated they rely
Which of the following do supervisors regularly consult prior to a coaching activity?
31% 31%
8% 9%
19%
0%6%11%
4% 6%
25%25%
19%
6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Other S
upervi
sors
Superv
isor's
Man
ager
Manage
rs ou
tside
the g
roup
Human Res
ource
s
Training/D
evelo
pmen
t
Quality
Mon
itorin
gOthe
r
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 24: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 24
24
2. In reference to the previous question, which of these resources do
Supervisors indicated they consult other supervisors more often than their managers, and rarely consult other departments.
supervisors use most frequently?
In reference to the previous question, which of these resources do supervisors use most frequently?
7% 7%
41%
5%3%3%
34%
0%0%0%
25%
0%
50%
25%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%
Other S
upervi
sors
Superv
isor's
Man
ager
Manage
rs ou
tside
the g
roup
Human Res
ource
s
Training/D
evelo
pmen
t
Quality
Mon
itorin
gOthe
r
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 25: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 25
25
3. My company has a clear coaching process for supervis
There w
ors
ere a wide variety of responses on this topic. Of note is that executives were less convinced there is a clear coaching process in place than were supervisors.
My company has a clear coaching process for supervisors to follow
5%
20% 17%
39%
20%
0%
40%
0%
40%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 26: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 26
26
4. My company has a dedicated program for training supervisors on
es have , respondents there was a
rs believed a program existed. Of the seven centers we visited as part of this research, only 2 had a formal program for training coaches.
how to be an effective coach
There were a wide range of responses regarding whether companidedicated programs to train coaches. Even within the same companywere widely varied on this topic. Executives were split as to whether program, and only 44% of superviso
My company has a dedicated program for training supervisors on how to be an effective coach
7%
20%
0%
60%
0%
40%
0%
29%12%
32%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 27: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 27
27
5. My company has a clearly defined coaching role
There were a wide range of responses regarding whether companieclearly defined coach role. Responses to this topic we
s have a re very similar to the
previous topic regarding training coaches. Only 20% of executives stated that the role was clearly defined, and only 44% of supervisors concurred.
My company has a clearly defined coach role
7%
27%22%
0%
60%
0%
29%15%20%20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 28: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 28
28
6. Supervisors have all the right tools to be an effect
Most supervisors indicated that they have all the right tools to coach,executiv
ive coach
but es disagreed. Although the majority of supervisor respondents stated they
had all the tools necessary to be an effective coach, a majority (75%) of executives disagreed.
Supervisors have all the right tools to be an effective coach
7%
27%
7%
27%20%
60%
0% 0%
32%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 29: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 29
29
7. Supervisors have all the right skills to be an effective coa
Supervisors said they have the right skills to be an effective coachdisagreed. The overwhelming majority of supervisors (87%) statright skills to
ch
, but executives ed they had all the
be an effective coach. Only 7% disagreed with this statement, yet 75% of executives stated that supervisors do not have the right skills to be an effective coach.
Supervisors have all the right skills to be an effective coach
2% 5% 5%
41%46%
20%
60%
0% 0%
20%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
StronglyDisagree
Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 30: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 30
30
VI. Key Performance Indicators
tives did not nce Metrics for their center. For example, while
17% of supervisor participants indicated that First Call Resolution was a KPI, no executives indicated that as a key metric.
1. What are the KPIs for your call center?
It was interesting to observe that supervisors and call center execualways agree on the Key Performa
What are the key KPIs for your call center?
15% 15%
0%
21% 21%
12%
24%
17%17%14%
29%
14%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
First CallResolution
AHT CustomerRetention
QualityScores
Revenue Other
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 31: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 31
31
2. Please rate your performance against First Call Resolu
There appears to be confusion regarding this metric. The majo
tion metrics
rity of executive respondents did not indicate that First Call Resolution metrics are applicable, yet 71% of supervisors indicated that they are meeting or exceeding their goal.
Rate your performance: First Call Resolution
0%
40%
0%
60%
24%16%
55%
5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Not Meeting Goal Meeting Goal Exceeding Goal N/A
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 32: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 32
32
AHT goals, yet only 19% of supervisors agreed with the executive assessment. Additionally, 32% of supervisors indicated AHT was Not Applicable, but no executives did so.
3. Please rate your performance against AHT metrics
The majority of executives indicate that they are not meeting
Rate your performance: AHT
19%
38%
11%
32%
60%
40%
0% 0%0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Not Meeting Goal Meeting Goal Exceeding Goal N/A
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 33: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 33
33
2. Please rate your performance against Revenue metrics
Of the supervisors responsible for revenue metrics, the majority said they were meeting or exceeding their goals.
Rate your performance: Revenue
11%
32%
20%
60%
0%
20%
43%
14%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Not Meeting Goal Meeting Goal Exceeding Goal N/A
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 34: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 34
34
metrics
jority of supervisors stated they were meeting or exceeding customer goals in this area. An interesting note is that 40% of executives did not state this as a key metric.
Please rate your performance against Customer Retention
The ma
Rate your performance: Customer Retention
62%
8%
20% 20% 20%
40%
3%
27%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Not Meeting Goal Meeting Goal Exceeding Goal N/A
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 35: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 35
35
trics
The majority of supervisors indicated they were meeting or exceeding customer goals in this area. The executives were not as optimistic.
Please rate your performance against Quality Score me
Rate your performance: Quality Scores
49%
0%
40%
60%
0% 0%
24%27%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Not Meeting Goal Meeting Goal Exceeding Goal N/A
SupervisorsExecutives
![Page 36: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 36
36
)
and had a fairly even distribution of experience. Interesting to note is that 31% of the supervisors had more than 5 years experience and 54% had more than 3 years experience.
VII. Coachpalooza ’05 Demographics
1. How long have you been a supervisor? (Supervisors only
Coachpalooza participants were top performers in their companies
How long have you been a supervisor or coach?
23%
23%
23%
31%
Less than 1 Year
1-3 Years
3-5 Years
More than 5 years
![Page 37: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 37
37
How long were you an agent before becoming a supervisor?
75% of Coachpalooza ’05 participants became supervisors after less than three years as agents, while only 6% became supervisors after more than five years.
(Supervisors only)
How long were you an agent before becoming a supervisor?
16%
59%
19%
6%
Less than 1 Year
1-3 Years
3-5 Years
More than 5 years
![Page 38: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 38
38
2. How many supervisors are in your call center? (Executive responses
oachpalooza ’05 was held at single centers within organizations with multiple centers. The numbers below reflect the size of the individual center, not the entire company.
only)
The C
How many Supervisors are in your call center?
11
26
35
15
![Page 39: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 39
39
3. How many agents are in your call center? (Executive resp
The C
onses only)
oachpalooza ’05 was held at single centers within organizations with multiple centers. The numbers below reflect the size of the individual center, not the entire company.
How many agents are in your call center?
290
425
400
240
![Page 40: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 40
40
Section II: Key Findings from Coachpalooza ‘05
dings from Coachpalooza ’05 fall into four primary categories:
• Process • People
time on activities that do not directly interact with agents such as report compilation, data analysis,
oaching.
time lag between the event that triggers a coaching activity and the opportunity metimes up to one month, which reduces the
effectiveness of the coaching when delivered.
s.”
mation regarding their
Process
aching roles and coaching
methodology in the way that supervisors follow-up on coaching activities.
9. Managers have little visibility regarding what coaching is taking place in the call center, and how that activity is impacting agent performance.
10. Executives, managers and supervisors all agree that more coaching would have a positive impact on performance.
Key Findings at a Glance
The 18 Keye Fin
• Tim• Information
Time
1. Supervisors as a whole spend a tremendous amount of
administrative functions, and special projects that leave little time for c
2. Every supervisor expressed a desire for more time to coach agents.
3. Theto deliver coaching is often long, so
Information
4. Supervisors act as “information integrator
5. Agents generally do not always have timely access to inforperformance, and also do not always receive information necessary to improve performance in a timely manner.
6. Coaching is not typically a metric in the call center.
7. There is great variability regarding the clarity of coprocesses.
8. There is little consistency or formal
![Page 41: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 41
41
11. There appears to be little or no distinction between managing and coaching in the
rmers receive little or no coaching.
There are no documented ROI analyses on coaching
most r skill development.
ing, very few
and are despite working long hours
that most agents can handle more accountability for their performance, but only if given the appropriate environment.
18. Although executives claim to see the value of coaching, supervisors are rarely trained to be managers or coaches.
call center.
12. The coaching that is delivered in the call center is generally targeted toward low performers, while mid and higher level perfo
13.
People
14. Supervisors are extremely self-confident in their coaching skills yetexecutives feel that supervisors need furthe
15. Although nearly every supervisor participant saw the value of coachsupervisors said they needed coaching themselves.
16. Supervisors have a genuine desire to develop their team members frustrated that they do not have enough time to do soand weekends.
17. Supervisors seem to believe
![Page 42: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 42
42
Key Findings Detail
e on activities that directly interact with agents such as report compilation, data analysis,
ime for
or comments s that do not
tion, data analysis, for coaching. It
administrative hats
jor source of nts and the coaches, but especially the coaches. For
ts work long hours and s. One
overwhelmed
2 nts.
nd more time ps to improve
activities that the ustration that they could
not spend more time coaching agents.
At the beginning of each Focus Group, the supervisor team was asked, “If you could change one thing about your coaching environment, what would it be?” The unanimous response was they all wanted more time to coach agents. This sentiment was constantly reinforced during the Focus Group activities.
Time
1. Supervisors as a whole spend a tremendous amount of timdo notadministrative functions, and special projects that leave little tcoaching.
With every Focus Group we facilitated, we discerned from supervisthat they appear to spend a tremendous amount of time on activitiedirectly interact with agents such as report compilaadministrative functions, and special projects that leave little timeappears that the supervisor role encompasses many different making it difficult for them to find time for their coaching role.
This “administrative clutter” we observed in all the centers is a mastress for both the ageexample, we noted that many of the Focus Group participanweekends on a regular basis attempting to cover all of their obligationparticipant stated they do not take vacation because they are too with work upon their return.
. Every supervisor expressed a desire for more time to coach age
The good news is that supervisors actually want to be able to specoaching agents! We observed a firmly held belief that coaching helperformance and that coaching was one of the highest impactsupervisor could do. We also observed a high degree of fr
![Page 43: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 43
43
3. The time lag between the event that triggers a coaching activity and the opportunity to deliver coaching is often long, sometimes up to one month,
ered.
tween the hat the ue to lack of re due to low
ritization of agent coaching. For example, many supervisors admitted to using Sundays to catch up on quality monitoring calls, which calls into question the
d the opportunity to
which reduces the effectiveness of the coaching when deliv
Supervisors consistently reported that significant time may pass beoccurrence of an agent action that requires coaching, and the time tsupervisor delivers the coaching required. In some cases this was dtimely information such as performance reports, but some cases weprio
effectiveness of monitoring given the gap between the call ancoach.
“It could take us a week from the time we know to the time to coach. The supervisors have to find the call, listen to the call, and review the information.”
- Coachpalooza ’05 participant
![Page 44: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 44
44
Information
4. Supervisors act as “information integrators.”
Each day supervisors are deluged with data and charged with filteriappropriate information to make decisions for how to effectively macoach their teams. Many participants said they had to manipulate,out reports to he
ng the nage and
print and hand-lp the team and individual agents view metrics and performance
numbers. These activities take a lot of time and as a result, are not always mpact center and
left to supervisors, supervisors can become a bottleneck to communication. We
neck places a ipation and
ance.
n regarding necessary to
me of the ted that
aily reports to the agents, dropping them in centers where this was prevalent, we
often heard supervisors express a belief that agents could and should be ence of optimal
oint out and
6. Coaching is not typically a metric in the call center.
managers are rmance goals
any metrics for why
more coaching does not happen.
At the same time, it is surprising that given the amount of verbal attention around the topic of coaching, it is not yet a metric in the call center. We did not see any attempts to measure how many coaching interactions happen on a daily basis, what topics are being coached, or if the coaching was effective. Considering the metric driven nature of call center performance, it is not surprising that coaching is often dropped to the bottom of the supervisor “to do” list.
performed completely or in a timely manner to help optimally iagent performance.
Further, because dissemination of key information to agents is often
observed that this type of information integration and resulting bottlehuge strain on the supervisor and seems to lessen the active particaccountability of agents in their own perform
5. Agents generally do not always have timely access to informatiotheir performance, and also do not always receive informationdo their improve performance in a timely manner.
Many participants pointed out that agents do not have direct access to soinformation for which they are accountable. In some cases, we nosupervisors printed and distributed dchairs, posting on the supervisor wall, etc. In
assuming more accountability for their own performance. In the absinformation flow, the agents had to rely heavily on supervisors to phelp with any performance issues.
In the call center, what gets measured gets done. Supervisors andmetric-driven and will adjust their actions as necessary to hit perfothat are top-of-mind. In the seven centers we visited, we did not see around coaching. This lack of coaching metrics may be a primary reason
![Page 45: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 45
45
Process
7. There is great variability regarding the clarity of coaching roles and coaching
h 60% of oaching role and
utives perceived rvisors to follow
stion. Supervisor responses varied between
up activities in d when coaching
nd coaching to the identical event, ches that
d coaching
ple, one team while another team member would wait up to
8
notes, or acking the
group , delivery and
aching activities. Each group and even each supervisor was no
ders to keep up with e and provided
9 g place in the enter, and how that activity is impacting agent performance.
Our research indicates that executives place a high value on coaching as a performance enhancing activity for the supervisor, agent and the business. Conversely, we also observed that these executives have little to no visibility into what coaching is happening, why it is happening, how often it happens, and what impact it is having. During all of our debrief sessions with call center executives, this was the most asked question, “How can I get visibility into coaching in my center?”
processes.
We first observed this through the Pre-Focus Group survey in whicexecutives perceived their centers did not have a clearly defined c20% had no opinion on this question. Additionally, 40% of execthat their center did not have a clear coaching process for supeand 20% had no opinion on this quetremendously on both of these questions and ranged fairly equallystrongly agree to strongly disagree.
This finding was further highlighted during the various Focus Growhich we observed great variability in how coaching was done anwas delivered. For example, in the same team awe observed supervisors taking drastically different coaching approavaried from sending an e-mail, to a coaching “fly-by,” to a schedulesession.
We also observed variability in timing of coaching delivery. For exammember would coach immediately two weeks before coaching on the same topic.
. There is little consistency or formal methodology in the way that supervisors follow-up on coaching activities.
We observed that supervisors generally rely on memory, paperspreadsheets to track required follow-up actions including treffectiveness of the coaching interaction. This was uncovered in the exercises in which participants were asked to identify the preparationfollow-up for specific cohad a slightly different method for handling the interaction, and theremethod mentioned for tracking the interaction for subsequent follow-up.
One center had an online coaching log and one used large bincoaching notes. In both cases, the methods were manually intensivinsight only for supervisors.
. Managers have little visibility regarding what coaching is takincall c
![Page 46: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 46
46
10. Executives, managers and supervisors all agree that more coaching would
g consensus of opinion on this topic during the on-site g makes a
on the aching was consistently rated as the highest impact activity.
1 and coaching
ction between roups draw
their own conclusions and express coaching in any way that made sense to their ive any
a distinction n coaching and managing. As a result, the coaching bucket seems large.
1 d toward little or no
p to 80% of supervisors’ coaching time is spent with low performers on punitive issues.
t is not being done tions like – “What is
high performers?” and “How much could center performance improve with dedicated coaching time spent with the mid and high level performers?”
have a positive impact on performance.
We observed a very stronFocus Groups. Almost every participant expressed a belief that coachinhuge difference in performance.
For example, during one particular Focus Group activity, we asked participants to identify their key activities each day and the impact that activity hadbusiness. Co
1. There appears to be little or no distinction between managingin the call center.
We intentionally did not supply a definition of coaching or a distincoaching and managing for the Focus Groups. Rather, we let the g
business. As a result of this, we observed that the supervisors perceinteraction with an agent as coaching. They did not seem to drawbetwee
2. The coaching that is delivered in the call center is generally targetelow performers, while mid and higher level performers receivecoaching.
We observed that the 80/20 rule is definitely in place in the call center. U
While this is not a surprising key finding, it does indicate whaand how much is yet to be leveraged. It also raises queshappening to these mid and
“The time we do have to coach has to go to low performers.”
- Coachpalooza ’05 participant
![Page 47: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 47
47
13. There are no documented ROI analyses on coaching.
We observed a strong belief that coaching helps improve the pagents, of supervisors and ultimately, positively impacts the businesswas evident from the answers to the Pre-Focus Group Surveys, comcaptured during the Focus Groups, and was consistent across both and management participants. At the same time, we did not see any documented
erformance of . This belief ments
the supervisor
yone asking or a variety of reasons including:
lief that no one alidate that value.
- There may be the belief that coaching cannot be measured in such a way as to create an ROI analysis.
ROI analysis on the value that coaching delivers. Nor did we hear anfor such documentation. This could be f
- The “value” of coaching seems to be such a fundamental beseems compelled to v
![Page 48: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 48
48
People
14. Supervisors are extremely self-confident in their coaching skills yet most .
skills to be a h in the
Pre-Focus Group survey and then again during the Focus Groups sessions. s needed to
1 oaching, very
tent belief in the value of coaching, we observed that supervisors receive little coaching themselves. Most participants during the Focus Group
from re attention. As
executives feel that supervisors need further skill development
Virtually every supervisor in this study said they had all the requiredsupervisor and were very comfortable coaching. They expressed this bot
Ironically, 75% of executives disagreed and indicated that supervisorfurther develop their coaching skills.
5. Although nearly every supervisor participant saw the value of cfew supervisors said they needed coaching themselves.
Despite a consis
sessions indicated they received less than one hour per week of coaching their managers, and there were no indications of a desire for moone supervisor stated:
“My manager lets me know if something needs improvement. I like the fact that they seem to trust me.”
- Coachpalooza ’05 participant
In contrast, executives perceived that supervisors were receiving considerably more coaching than what was actually occurring and seemed to place high value
1 bers and are hey do not have enough time to do so despite working long
hours and weekends.
The commitment to developing team members was evident in every Focus Group Session. Supervisor participants were asked, “What do you like most about your job?” Every response was around developing team members and watching them grow. At the same time, the participants’ biggest frustration was not having enough time to do so.
on the coaching of supervisors.
6. Supervisors have a genuine desire to develop their team memfrustrated that t
![Page 49: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 49
49
17. Supervisors seem to believe that most agents can handle more accountability for their performance, but only if given the appropriate
f the agents s created by the
nvironment. The e enough timely
n and skills to be fully accountable. At the same time, the supervisors expressed a strong belief that their agents wanted more accountability, could
environment.
This key finding emerged as supervisors were discussing the issue orelying too much on the supervisors for guidance. This reliance wacurrent processes and data flows that form the center operating eresult is many supervisors indicated that agents do not havinformatio
accept more accountability and this would make a big impact on center performance.
“Make the agent more responsible for their performance and they will have to take responsibility for their behavior. Now they wait on us to tell them what to do.”
- Coachpalooza ’05 participant
One call center executive noted that this kind of responsibility is the first step
1 visors are
lly had any formal centers we visited
shadow more tenured supervisors
d questions around how much shadowing was actually done, the answer was “very little.”
Because few supervisors have been trained on how to manage or coach personnel, they are left to draw on personal experience. Ironically, previous experience has proven to have little value, as most supervisors were top-performing agents and thus received little coaching prior to promotion.
towards “professionalizing” the role of the call center agent.
8. Although executives claim to see the value of coaching, superrarely trained to be managers or coaches.
During Coachpalooza ’05, we found that only 2 centers actuatraining on how to be an effective coach. The majority of theused an “on-the-job” approach in which new supervisors wouldtenured peers. We observed some friction between new andsolely based on time constraints. When asked more detaile
![Page 50: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 50
50
Section III: The Value-Driven Coaching M
As this paper has indicated, there are a number of environmental, culturaltechnology driven inhibitors that reduce the amount and frequency of as obscure its effectiveness when delivered. We generally observedactivity that falls squarely on the shoulders of superv
odel™
, and coaching as well
that coaching is an isors alone with little regard to
helping the supervisor juggle all the day to day realities of their job. The following graphic, “Call Center Coaching Today” illustrates the situation:
![Page 51: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 51
51
Based on our extensive research and findings from Coachpalooza ’05, a that addresses these inadequacies and provides the structure for a multi-dimensional
model emerged
approach to ensure coaching delivers the value “promised” to the agent, the customer,
act it can words. This
d enables the value coaching can bring. Our expectation is that with the right structure, call centers can begin to put coaching into action to its maximum effectiveness. Based on our Key Findings, this model addresses four dimensions for creating coaching value.
and to the business.
We call it the Value-Driven Coaching Model for the Call Center™. Our research clearly indicates a strong belief in the value of coaching and the strong impmake on the business. At the same time, we saw little action behind themodel recognizes an
![Page 52: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 52
52
The following set of questions can be used to help you apply the model to your coaching environment.
eliver
r agents to coaching?
coaching?
Does this impact the effectiveness of the coaching ed?
Ti
1.
be coached, and everyone agrees that coaching is ust clear away the
uate the need on which they
er if agents can’t gents to be
3. To optimize the coaching that does occur, deliver it as close as possible to the “most coach-able moment.”
The more time elapses from an event, the less effective coaching becomes. To minimize the time gaps, coaches need to know about triggering events as soon as possible – and they need to act on this information as soon as possible.
Time Questions
Are you challenged with finding time to dcoaching?
Are you challenged with finding time foreceive
Do you have too many time delays in delivering
that gets deliver
me Best Practices
Make time for supervisors to coach.
Supervisors desperately want to coach, agents want to a high value activity. Companies m“noise” that prevents supervisors from spending more time with their agents. For example, either automate or re-evalfor the administrative tasks they perform and the “special projects” work.
2. Make time for agents to receive coaching.
Even if supervisors have the time available to coach, it won’t matttake a few minutes to be coached. Companies need to find time for acoached.
![Page 53: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 53
53
Information Questions
ad?”
timely and relevant?
Are these coaching metrics tracked and monitored?
Information Best Practices
4.
Take a hard look at what supervisors are doing to compile and distribute data. e required. Other
and it is no longer relevant, so confirm d.
5. n that helps make decisions that improve performance.
If a metric is real-time or almost real-time, the information required to coach that vailable real-time. Determine the information that supervisors
very to the
6.
What gets measured gets done. Implement a tracking and monitoring program for coaching activities. Call centers run off metrics, so if there is not a metric established for an activity, it automatically slips down the priority list. By establishing methods to measure coaching and institutionalizing those metrics, centers will see a rise in coaching.
Are your supervisors on “information overlo
Is the information they work with
Have you established coaching metrics?
Clean up the data clutter to free up more time for coaching.
Much of the information may be easily re-packaged to reduce timinformation’s useful life may have passedwith the appropriate stakeholders that the information is still neede
Provide call center coaches with timely and relevant informatiothem
metric should be aneed and the timeliness with which they need it, then match the delineed.
Make coaching a metric.
![Page 54: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 54
54
Process Questions
ics – both traditional
r?
What other work processes will need to change based on a value-driven coaching process?
Process Best Practices
7. oaching Best Practices.
informal and
Create, document and communicate a complete set of coaching best practices.
h these best practices.
8. s and the ciated tracking and monitoring of coaching metrics.
practices for tutionalize
est practices to specific situations, the knowledge gained with each experience is leveraged throughout the coaching team.
Tracking coaching brings visibility to the topic and sends the message that it is a key activity in your center. By implementing a technology solution to track coaching, you will reduce the manual effort required by supervisors and create a solution that can be shared by the entire center.
Do you have a clearly defined coaching process for all metr(ex. AHT) and non-traditional (ex. revenue)?
Have you clearly defined the role of the coach in your cente
Formalize and institutionalize C
The entire team can benefit by documenting and sharing best practices learned over time. To do so, follow these steps:
Review all of your current coaching practices.
Look for what is formal and company mandated versus dependent upon the experience of the individual supervisor.
Ensure that your coaches are skilled enough to work wit
Use technology to help institutionalize coaching best practiceasso
Just as knowledge bases and job aids are used to capture the bestproduct and customer issues, technology can be leveraged to insticoaching as well. By building a set of b
![Page 55: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 55
55
9.
ion between he groups draw
e sense to their rceive any
eraction with an agent as coaching. They did not seem to draw a distinction et seems very
As a company defines all of their coaching best practices as stated above, the natural difference between coaching and managing should become apparent.
Define the difference between managing and coaching.
We intentionally did not supply a definition of coaching or a distinctcoaching and managing for the Focus Groups. Rather, we let ttheir own conclusions and express coaching in any way that madbusiness. As a result of this, we observed that the supervisors peintbetween coaching and managing. As a result, the coaching bucklarge.
![Page 56: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Dr iv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 56
56
People Questions
lationship?
lity?
Are your supervisors ready for a new level of accountability and responsibility?
People Best Practices
10
out coaching, and they are correct. Supervisors need training on how to be a complete
de coaching on less traditional
11
Supervisors believe that good coaching creates shared accountability for agent performance. Create programs that allow agents to take a more aggressive role in their own performance improvement. Provide the supporting information and processes to empower them to take responsibility for their own performance. Then provide them time to be coached when needed.
Are your supervisors prepared to coach?
Are your supervisors and agents ready for a new coaching re
Are your agents ready for a new level of accountability and responsibi
. Supervisors need training even if they don’t think they do.
The executives in our survey indicated supervisors had more to learn ab
coach including expanding their skills to inclumetrics like revenue, customer loyalty and career goals.
. Create shared accountability for agent performance.
![Page 57: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Fall 2005 ©Knowlagent. All rights reserved. 57
57
Driv ing value at the front l ine of business.
Conclusion
Our research indicates that most call center executives agree that coaching is a high value activity, yet few agree that coaching is happening at the rate or level of
ld?
ific intent of e. During the sent their Key
was the question everyone wanted answered. At the most basic level, our
chieving less than
ppropriate supporting environment to find time and are empowered to prioritize coaching, the amount and effectiveness of coaching in the call center will continue to lag. Additionally, until coaching becomes a metric that is tracked, monitored and coached-to like AHT, adherence, quality, revenue, etc, it will be pushed to the bottom of the “to do” list.
effectiveness they need for their business.
So, why isn’t coaching happening – as much or as effectively – as it shou
While the Knowlagent team did not begin Coachpalooza ’05 with the specanswering this question, it emerged as THE significant and pervasive issucourse of all of our interviews and the follow-up with each company to preFindings, thisresearch indicates that many companies are addressing the complex, multi-dimensional issue of coaching with a simple, one dimensional approach and are adesired results.
Our research indicates that unless supervisors are provided with the a
![Page 58: Coachpalooza Summary Report: Call Center Coaching Benchmark](https://reader033.vdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051513/54687ec1af795988338b5b1e/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
9/1/2009 58
About Knowlagent
ement processes, solutions for
tributed to off-phone activities while improving the key metrics that matter most
the amount, frequency and effectiveness of coaching, ultimately improving key
all agent productivity.
lution, you can:
tools to diagnose reate individualized solutions.
aches and agents to nce gaps.
• Dramatically increase the amount, frequency and
coaching.
ervisors and
With Knowlagent, you can optimize frontline performance faster and more affordably than ever before. You can spend less and get better. For more information about Knowlagent Coaching and our other on-demand agent management solutions, visit us at www.knowlagent.com
By automating traditional call center managKnowlagent’s on-demand agent managementtraining, coaching and hiring reduce spending at
to you.
Knowlagent Coaching™ helps you increase
metrics such as sales conversions and over
With Knowlagent’s on-demand Coaching so
• Increase supervisor span of control by as much as 20%.
• Provide supervisors with easy-to-useagent problems and c
• Automatically schedule time for comeet to review performa
effectiveness of coaching.
• Measure the impact and effectiveness of
• Create shared accountability between supagents.
.
3157 Royal Drive, Suite 100 Alpharetta, GA 30022 888-566-9457 www.knowlagent.com
11800 Amberpark Drive Suite 200 Alpharetta, GA 30009 Main: (678) 356-3500 Toll Free: (888) 566-9457 www.knowlagent.com