QATC Survey Results

This report details the results of the most recent QATC quarterly survey on critical quality assurance and training topics.  This quarterly survey focused on instructor/trainer competencies and how their success is measured.

Participant Profile

The largest number of participants are from contact center operations with between 51 and 200 agents.  However, the balance is widely dispersed across all ranges. This mix of respondents provides a broad spectrum of contact center industries.  Financial, healthcare, and insurance have the largest representation, but there are participants from a wide variety of industries.

Competency Training

Respondents were asked if they had competency training for new instructors or trainers in their center. Just over half (55%) responded yes. 

Areas of Focus 

Respondents who responded with a “yes” to the previous question were asked about the areas of focus for the competency training.  Some of the training competencies currently being assessed were content (30%), delivery (22%), communications skills (11%), leadership (4%), and preparation (4%), with 29% of respondents responding with “other.”

Instructor Observation

Respondents were asked if their instructors were observed by others to evaluate performance. Seventy percent responded with a “yes” to observation.

Frequency of Observation

For those centers that do observe instruction, responses were evenly split between just doing on an as-needed basis (43%) or 2-4 times per year (43%).  Three percent responded that they did only once per year.

Objectives Tied to Organizational Goals

Respondents were asked if instructors had performance objectives tied to organizational goals. The majority (57%) responded that they did not. 

Primary Functions

Respondents were asked about their instructors’ primary functions.  The biggest percentage said their instructors both design and instruct (38%).  Twenty-three percent said their instructors did full-time instruction while 18% said they did part-time instruction.  Another 11% indicated that their functions were to instruct as well as manage others.

Training Council

Respondents were asked if they had a “training council” in their operation, made up of stakeholders from other parts of the organization (operations, management, quality, etc.) The majority (54%) said no, with another 39% responding affirmatively.  Assembling a training council is beneficial to the center to ensure the needs of all partners are being met and that a communications network is in place to stay abreast of content changes, process updates, etc.

Tracking Performance and Progress

Respondents were asked how long they tracked the performance of students upon completion of training. The majority (53%) tracked performance for more than 60 days, while another 24% tracked for 30-60 days. Another 2% tracked performance for less than 30 days, with 17% not tracking performance on the job at all. 

Quality Audits

Respondents were asked if their instructors performed quality audits on their trainees upon completion of training. Responses were fairly evenly split with 47% doing the audits and 40% not doing the audits. Another 13% responded with “other,” perhaps suggesting the audits are done by someone other than instructors.

Quantity of Calls Reviewed

Respondents were asked about the number of calls reviewed per month per employee. The largest percentage (58%) said only 1-4 calls. Another 24% reviewed 5-9 calls per month, with only 8% reviewing 10 or more calls.  This variation in call count may be due to sizes of centers, with larger centers having more QA staff devoted to call reviews, while smaller centers may have to rely on team leaders and supervisors to do call review duties among other tasks.

Quantity Results Tied to Instructors

Respondents were asked if quality scores were linked to instructor objectives. Most (62%) do not tie scores to performance objectives, with 38% saying they do.

Respondents who answered yes to this question followed up with more information about how the two were linked. Here are a few of their responses:

• If the audits reveal a trend in a new hire group, the training module and/or teaching methods will be reviewed to make sure they are clear and effective.
• Results are lumped into their yearly performance plan.
• We look at the success/failure of each area by class and rep and track trends by trainer and areas they need to focus on more.
• After the third full month following the class ending, the participant’s average audit results should meet expectations.
• The instructor’s goals include the agent’s competency at end of training.
• Performance is reviewed specifically within the first 90 days, and the training team is held accountable for metrics for the first 45 days. The remainder helps determine how effectively the agents retained the info and the ease/use of resources they have available to them.
• If agent is not ready for floor (operations), they will receive refresher training and possible nesting again for more personal assistance.

Summary

This survey provided some insight into the expectations and competencies expected from contact center trainers/instructors.  Just as frontline staff are observed and their performance measured, it is important to observe instructors regularly to ensure the quality of the training. This can be done by surveying students, direct observation of training sessions, and testing students as they complete training.  However, the real mark of successful training is for the students to be able to apply what they’ve learned on the job after training.  It is critical to measure their results in order to continually evaluate the training program (including instructor performance) to ensure both are preparing students to perform well on the job and meet organizational objectives. 

We hope you will complete the next survey, which will be available online soon.