Witness justification 3

[ezncool]

I am proposing an installation of the witness call recording system in our company. I, of course, have to come up with a justification and what the ROI will be. I have some ideas on how it can mold better agents which can provide better customer satisfaction, provide proof to help decisions on appeals and grievances, eliminate he said/she said scenarios...etc. Has anyone done a justification for the purchase of their call recording systems? How did you justify it and what sold your management in getting it? Any advise would be appreciated.



ezncool
I have no technical solution to your management problem

 

[dufus2506]

If this is a 'random sample' system, it's only purpose would be to monitor agent quality. This is something that ROI calculations don't factor into really well, unless you have significant agent turnover in your call center.

If you're constantly hiring agents, then it has some value in shortening training cycles, and early identification of agents who might not fit well in their role. But that's about it. Since you have to spend the money to hire and train agents anyway (and most call centers can't afford to be picky about who applies) it really doesn't reduce or eliminate any expenses.

If your call center makes money on every call, and sales are an objective, you might have the single argument of reduced learning curve for agents. (And therefore speedier returns and more profits.) It's a stretch to make that argument sometimes.

If this is a 'record every call' system to allow a record of the conversation (which is sometimes required by agencies like the SEC) then it's easy. Just create a liablity argument. How much could you stand to lose if a caller were to challenge the outcome of a call. The system simply becomes an insurance policy with a one time fixed cost.

In my opinion, most agent monitoring systems like these have little or no value to a call center that is properly managed. Those that have calls where a fixed scripted text must be followed have little to evaluate except 'did vs didn't' follow the script, and those that have random calls that are all different with different outcomes, are really only evaluating the outcome based on a subjective opinion. (Not a good measure.)

If agents have clear directions, and good assistance when they need it, then call centers who implement such systems rarely see much benefit.

If you find yourself seaching for justification to buy any system, then you probably don't need it. Systems should fulfill something that you clearly lack in your organization. You should never have to 'create' a need for them to exist.

Unless someone in your organization is coming to you requesting the system, I'd forget it. Spend the money on pizza and training sessions for the call center once a month... you'll get more goodwill, happier, more well-adjusted, and better trained agents out of that than any agent monitoring system could produce.

Carpe dialem! (Seize the line!)

 

[ezncool]

This is a very well written suggestion/opinion. I appreciate the different approach that was applied to it. Thank you for responding.


ezncool
I have no technical solution to your management problem

 

[dufus2506]

Thank you for the compliment.

I'm not saying 'Don't monitor agent calls.' That would be rash, and would probably lead to poor customer service. Agents will do what they will, when left to their own choices.

However, live monitoring (or at least the awareness of live monitoring) is usually sufficient to keep agents on their toes.

If you want to do feedback sessions with agents that you monitor, then simple and far cheaper recording systems exists to record a call in progress. (Radio shack can help you there.) And I wouldn't even do the feedback sessions unless there was something in the call that was tangible, and could be fixed. (i.e. An agent who lies to callers to make a sale.)

My earlier response stems from my experience where I worked in a call center that did live monitoring, and then moved to a similar system, (Dictaphone's system, I think it was).

We suddenly found the need for more people (3!) to critique the endless flood of recorded calls. After we had used it for a year, the call center's performance wasn't at all improved by any measure we had. I checked; no increase in sales, no decrease in data entry errors, no difference in call stats.

Sadly, the feedback sessions were also seen as criticism by the agents who were already feeling tons of pressure to make sales.

So, we ended up with a new system to manage, a larger group of critics, and grumpier agents.

Oh well...

Carpe dialem! (Seize the line!)

 

[telcomnewbie]

My company has Witness and while it's a nice system, we deal with constant issues when upgrades or patches are pushed down the network via SMS; an agent's workstation is moved or someone is reimaged. Anything that impacts their workstation has a potential to impact the recording of the data. In our environment we spend a lot of time troubleshooting loss of recording so this is a high maintenance issue.

My group supports voice (and the Witness system) and another group is responsible for the data side (and workstations), which is part of our issue.

Karen
ccdesigner

 

[DAVIDPAYNE]

The are some finical reason that you may want to consider. Some of the finical rating companies look at how often you record Agents as part of there rating system for your company. Depending on what kind of company your are this could impact your finical ratings. (I am not a accounting, but my understanding is, that this can be a big deal.)

David

 

[shoehorn]

ezncool,

We have used Envision Inc's Click2Coach call recording system since Mar. 2001. It was implemented as a QA monitoring system and modified to auto-record credit card based sales and specific state legal recording. Previously the supervisors and QA reps would have to tie their phones up using service observe to record agents' calls into a tape recorder. The tape was necessary as is the call recording in C2C because agents will argue with supes and QA over what they did or did not say on a call. Without the recording and screen capture we have had we would not have been able to catch agents dropping calls while they were surfing the web, making racist remarks, using profanity, giving misinformation, making illegal sales (because they were ineligible to sell in a particular region or the customer was ineligible to make a proxy purchase for someone else), and making personal calls when they were on company time. We don't use the system as a full-time call logger but schedule agents to be recorded either by login ID for inbound or by extension for outbound and randomize the recording by setting the record for once every x number of calls. We have used the system to resolve customer disputes over payment options and coach agents to improve productivity. We also have been able to use the system to create training clips for the agents to playback at their workstations through the intranet or at specific training PCs. I hope this info helps. We are on version 5.1 of Click2Coach and the current release is 8.x.

shoehorn

 

[janaya]

We too use Witness. It is a great tool, if used correctly. I can see where you would get grumpier agents and more work, if you did not understand the purpose of the tool, and be able to sell that to the agents.

I don't think I have ever met an agent that was completely opposed to having their call recorded. You should hear the normal, "I don't think that's legal..." rhetoric, but that will usually end when deadweight is removed from the business.

About the maintenance, I agree. It's an everyday event. John Doe didn't get screen. Jane Doe didn't get voice. All recordings sound like echos. It's a daily battle, and we actually have an entire department dedicated to the maintenance of the system. But...

I think the need, at least in our business is justified. It has probably saved the company way more money than the system cost initially, and saves enough to warrant a team of techs to support it. Now I say team, but it's actually about 3 people dedicated to service about 2000 people.

hate to babble, but I hope this gives some insight.

John

 

[telcomnewbie]

John,
You're right - it's a great product, and I agree that it would be worth it if they can justify a tech support group. Unfortunately, Witness is added onto a million other things I have to do and I'm the sole person in my group trying to keep it running which is more than a full-time job.

We use it for recording 100% of our Human Resource calls and they are constantly having us pull recordings for legal reasons and court cases. Just be sure to get dedicated tech support of at LEAST two people full-time.

Karen
ccdesigner

 

[ezncool]

We are initially looking at the contact store for all agent recording and maybe grow it as we use it. Screen capture will not be a segment that will be included on this purchase. Is the maintenance on the voice-only part of this system as involved as when screen capture is added? I was under the impression that the witness system is more self maintained than other call recording systems in the market.




ezncool
I have no technical solution to your management problem

 

[janaya]

YOu know, to be honest, I have never seen a system like Nice or Witness that didn't record Screen and Voice. I guess the hardest part of the maintenance is moving people. we have hotel seating here, so anyone can sit anywhere, log in and start working. If they do not sit in their assigned cube, then the recordings get all mixed up and most of the time, they do not record screen or voice.

When you move someone, you have to go in and change the internal database on each person. In an environment that requires screen and voice, there is just more information to enter. With NICE we just keyed in the persons NT login and all the DN's and Position ID's (From Meridian PBX) and they could sit anywhere and NICE would take care of the rest. One time entry and only new ones needed. Did not have to change when people moved.

either way, with a new product like this, they are going to pull you in different directions, from install to upkeep. If HR is the primary end user, then they should be granted the ability to pull their own recordings.

We can't even copy and forward recordings without approval from our Legal Department.

 

[SF0751]

We just installed Witness eQuality. The setup to record voice & data is similar to what janaya described for Nice. We put in each physical station where an agent COULD sit (we have free seating) and for each physical phone, we put in the workstation name of the PC in that cubicle. The agent logs onto the phone, the Witness system notes the ACD ID that is logged into that physical station, and both the voice and data recordings are synched up. As long as the initial information is kept up-to-date, then there *should* be very little ongoing maintanence.

Susan
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." - Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson (1894)

 

[janaya]

SF0751, is your system trunk side or station side? we use station side. which is why I think it's a big hassle.

 

[SF0751]

We are also using station-side recording. The only hassle was keying the information into the system in the first place - Witness doesn't have an import feature and I had to watch out for "fat-fingered" entries.

Susan
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example." - Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson (1894)