This report details the results of the most recent QATC quarterly survey on critical quality assurance and training topics. Over 60 contact center professionals representing a wide variety of operations provided insight on how training & QA work together in the contact center.
Number of Agents
The largest number of participants is from call center operations with more than 500 agents and from organizations with 101-200 agents. However, the balance is widely dispersed across all ranges. This mix of respondents provides a broad spectrum of call center sizes. Health care, financial, utility, insurance, and “other” have the largest representation but there are participants from a wide variety of industries.
Number of Trainers
Respondents were asked how many full-time trainers work in their contact center. One-third responded that they have 3-5 trainers, while 24% said 1-2 trainers. Fifteen percent said both more than 10 and 6-10, while 13% said they have no full-time trainers.
Number of Quality Assurance Personnel
When asked how many Quality Assurance (QA) personnel work in their contact center, 31% said they have 3-5 QA personnel, while 19% said 1-2 personnel and 18% said more than 10. Sixteen percent said they have 6-10 and the same percentage said they have no full-time QA personnel.
Training & QA Personnel Dedicated to Contact Center
When asked if Training & QA personal are dedicated to the contact center, over half (64%) indicated they are. Only 10% said that neither group are dedicated to the contact center.
Who Analyzes Quality Scores for Trends
Respondents were asked who analyzes quality scores for trends that are affecting multiple agents. Over half (63%) said that QA department personnel provide this function. There were 10% who said that no one analyzes the quality scores to see where things might be going wrong.
Typical Next Step if Multiple Agents are Making the Same Errors
When asked what the typical next step is if multiple agents are making the same errors, almost half (46%) said that the training department is alerted that a training class may be needed. Thirty-one percent said that supervisors are directed to coach their personnel individually. Twenty-three percent answered with Other, which may mean that this information is not collected or shared with other departments.
QA Team Alerted After New
Respondents were asked if the training team alerts the QA team to look for specific activity when a new training program has been completed. Over half (55%) said that this happens frequently. Twenty-nine percent said this happens only if the activity requires a change in the QA scoring form. Eight percent said this never happens and the same percentage said that it rarely happens.
Most Successful Way to Keep
When asked if the training and QA personnel meet to discuss common issues and solutions, 35% said this happens only as needed, but another 33% said it happens frequently. Sixteen percent said these meetings are regularly scheduled but happen infrequently, and another 16% said this never happens.
Changes That Would Help Training
& QA Teams Work Together
We asked the respondents to tell us what they would recommend to change the way their training and QA teams work together to improve performance. Here are some of the responses:
- I think these groups belong together under the same management. When they report up through different senior leaders, I find that priorities can become misaligned and a natural disconnect starts to occur.
- More frequent touchbase between the both teams. Currently only the managers are meeting monthly, not the entire teams.
- Communication is key, but also flexibility in addressing things on an individual basis. Not everyone learns the same way or at the same pace or with the same methods. Training and QA need to communicate effectively and consistently to ensure that the CSR’s needs are being met with the correct approach. If there is a training gap, the QA scores will certainly catch it, but is it necessarily the CSR’s fault for learning differently?
- We have 3 departments that take different calls so it would be helpful to have a person dedicated to each team. Also, working hand in hand with our training department would help better align each area.
- Our “dedicated” (they deliver/design our training but also design other departments training – just don’t deliver it) trainers report to Corporate Training and the QA personnel report into the call center. It would be much better if trainers reported to the call center and had more involvement and a pulse on what’s happens in the center. Right now, they are so caught up in any spare minutes going to other projects, they can’t focus on what’s needed in their dedicated department.
- We’ve just decided to create a role for a liaison between the two teams to bridge the gaps we have in working together. More regular meetings/discussions on upcoming, current, and future training plans. Increase the reviews of reporting as a team.
- I think quality should attend training classes.
This survey provides insight into how the training and quality assurance departments work together in the contact center. There seem to be some gaps in the relationship between the two departments that could make the process for correcting agent errors and agent coaching easier. If the two groups could meet together more frequently and share information more freely, this could assist agents to get the information they need.
We hope you will complete the next survey, which will be available online soon.