Consistency of Service
Is the New Target
By Maggie Klenke, The Call Center School
Just when you were managing to get control of your average speed of answer or service level result for the week, the industry has begun to migrate to an even more stringent way of looking at these results. We’ve all known for a long time that the service we provide on the busiest days and the busiest hours is not as good as the service during the low volume periods. But the great service during the overnight periods and low days helped us to bring up the average for the week without spending too much money staffing up to the peaks. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be adequate anymore.
What is Driving This Concept?
There are a couple of drivers changing the concept of service averages. The first is the Customer Relationship Management (CRM) movement and its focus on providing the customer a consistent experience. That is consistency among different channels such as a telephone call, email or web chat, but also consistency regardless of what day or time of day the customer decides to contact the center.
The second driver is the Six Sigma movement that is being adopted in a number of organizations. It is focused on driving out variation as well and bringing results into a narrow band of acceptability rather than averaging out results that may be way over and way under the goal.
Look for The Variances in Service Level
Looking at the table below, you can see that the service level provided across the day varies quite a lot. The weighted average for the entire day is just above 80% (the goal that this center set). Note also that there are four half-hours that are above the 90% level and four below the 70% level. So some periods are essentially overstaffed to make up for the periods when the service level was well below goal.
| Time |
Calls Handled |
Service Level % |
| 8:00 |
98 |
98 |
| 8:30 |
122 |
98 |
| 9:00 |
135 |
85 |
| 9:30 |
165 |
85 |
| 10:00 |
187 |
78 |
| 10:30 |
202 |
76 |
| 11:00 |
220 |
79 |
| 11:30 |
203 |
82 |
| 12:00 |
198 |
67 |
| 12:30 |
187 |
65 |
| 1:00 |
200 |
72 |
| 1:30 |
189 |
81 |
| 2:00 |
203 |
88 |
| 2:30 |
220 |
69 |
| 3:00 |
217 |
64 |
| 3:30 |
207 |
75 |
| 4:00 |
197 |
84 |
| 4:30 |
175 |
89 |
| 5:00 |
166 |
98 |
| 5:30 |
158 |
96 |
| 6:00 |
145 |
86 |
The inconsistency of the service provided is contrary to the concepts of CRM that suggest that providing the customer with the same experience every time is the goal. Here the 80% in X seconds goal is met on the average, but there are nine of the 21 half-hours that were below that goal, resulting in longer than desired delays.
On the other hand, service in the 90% and above level provides an almost instant answer rate that customers experience once and then expect. Later, when they call during a busy time and experience the wait associated with a service level in the 60% range, they will find this even more annoying than if they had never received instant answer in the past.
Variations Look Even Wider By Day of Week
The example given shows variations across a single day, but it is even more common to see wide variations among the days of a week. The total volume for the busiest day of the week often exceeds 25% of the total for the entire week. The weekend days are very light by comparison and even Wednesday and Thursday are often well below the peak day. So if the service result is averaged across the entire week, then the peak day service could be pretty poor all day, but higher than goal service on other days will net an average for the week that is acceptable. But does it make sense to overstaff the light days in order to make up for poor service during the peaks?
Schedule Flexibility Can Help
It is likely that the primary reason for the fluctuation in the service levels is a function of scheduling flexibility limitations. If the center had more part-time personnel and contractors that could step in as needed and disappear when no longer required, it would sure help to make a better match to the varying workload. Utilizing start times on 15-minute intervals and moving around breaks and lunches can help within the day. And more varieties of shift choices like four 10-hours, or three 10-hours with two 5-hours, or combinations of 4, 5, and 6-hour shifts for part-time people will help as well.
It is possible that your goal of meeting an average over the day or week will no longer be enough in the near future. It is good to begin planning for the focus on limiting variations and begin to measure the percent of periods during the day that the service goal was met (e.g., 85% of calls answered within 30 seconds in 80% of the half-hours), or the number of periods that remained within a band of variation around the goal (e.g., if the ASA goal is 30 seconds, then the band might be no more than 40 and no less than 20 seconds). This will provide your customers with the most consistent experience and minimize the money spent on overstaffing periods to make up for understaffed periods.
Maggie Klenke is a Founding Partner of The Call Center School, a company that provides a wide range of educational offerings for call center professionals. She may be reached at maggie.klenke@thecallcenterschool.com or 615-812-8411.
Copyright ©2010 Society of Workforce Planning Professionals. All rights reserved. |
