Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
* The industry defines “Superior” noise-canceling headsets as those able to eliminate 90% or more of the background noise.
VIDAL CONSULTING GROUP
A series of three contact center studies were conducted in order to better understand the effects noise-‐cancelling communication headset technology
could have on contact center operations.
The participating contact centers were: Defender Direct, Williams-‐Sonoma and Ucare.
This report compiles the results of one of those studies.
Effects of Superior* Noise-‐Reduction Headset Technology on Contact Center Operations December 2013
2
Negligible or Negatively Affected
• Agent Adherence
• Average Hold % in support related calls
Positively Affected • Agent Experience
• Customer Experience
• Customer Satisfaction
• Average Revenue per call
• Average Hold Time % for sales related calls
• Average Handle Time
Executive Summary
This study, conducted at
a contact center with over
500 seats, was designed to
identify the effect of superior*
noise-cancelling headsets on
the operations of the center,
by tracking shifts in critical
key performance indicators.
Agent Experience Improved After introducing the noise-cancelling headsets agents were less distracted by ambient noise and experienced increased engagement with the customer. See pages 8 and 17. Customer Experience Improved The introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets resulted in a dramatic increase in the percentage of agents who thought the customers could hear them “very clearly”, from 15% to 48%. See pages 8 and 16. Customer Satisfaction Improved Improved engagement in the agent/customer interactions resulted in increased customer satisfaction. Customer Satisfaction increased a net +3.0% for agents using wired noise-cancelling headsets and +3.1% with wireless. This increase is notable in this contact center that already boasts customer satisfaction scores above 90%. See pages 4 and 10. Average Revenue per Call Improved More engaged and more satisfied customers buy more. The agents using the noise-cancelling headsets had a +21% net increase in Average Revenue per Call compared to the Control Group. See page 4. Average Hold Time % for Sales Calls Improved Agents using noise-cancelling headsets had a drop of -17% in Average Hold Time %. As we know, from many previous studies, reduction in hold time directly correlates with increased customer satisfaction. More satisfied customers buy more. Average Handle Time (AHT) More Consistent The introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets had a clear impact on the consistency in AHT (seen as a tighter data group) across all agents. The introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets did not, however, decrease AHT as compared to the control group. See pages 5 and 11. Conclusions Communication headsets with superior noise-cancelling at the microphone have a notable positive effect on the agent/customer experience. This improved experience results in increased Customer Satisfaction and a subsequent increase in Revenue per Call.
Benefits of Superior Noise-Cancelling Headsets
The management of the contact center summarized the results of the study as follows: Better Agent/Customer Engagement = Happier Customers = More Sales
Note: Overall results are on page 9. *Superior noise-cancelling headsets are defined as those able to eliminate 90% or more of background noise.
“ . . results in increased customer satisfaction and revenue per call.”
3
Purpose The purpose of the study is to determine what impact, if any, there are on contact center operations with the use of headsets with superior noise-cancelling at the microphone. Description Contact Center Description: A high-end American consumer retail company that sells kitchen wares, furniture and linens, as well as other house-wares and home furnishings.
Industry: Premium kitchenware retailer
Environment: US based contact center, 500+ seats, Inbound Support and Sales
Telecom System: Avaya 9640
Timing: The study was conducted between October and November of 2013
Methodology In pursuit of our purpose, the study introduces noise-cancelling headsets into a controlled contact center environment. The effect is measured through the tracking of a series of key performance indicators (KPIs) along with agent experience comments gathered through a pre and a post survey. Sample Set • 40 total agents within a single managed team (inbound sales/support) –20 agents - wireless VXi V150 headsets –20 agents - corded VXi Passport 21V Binaural headsets model Control Group • 40 agents of a similar group/team. Trial Duration • 3 weeks Key Performance Indicators tracked through pre-test and test measurements. The KPIs are: • Customer Satisfaction • Hold % on Registry Calls • Average Handle Time • Hold % on Sales Calls • Agent Adherence/Logged-on • Hold % on Support Calls • Revenue Per call Data • Pre Data: 4 weeks of data collected for the Sample Set and the Control Group.
• Test Data: 3 weeks of data from the Sample Set and the Control Group.
• Pre and Test Data are averaged and compared.
Background
Contact Centers are inherently difficult operations to manage because of the large number of internal and external variables that affect them. The more efficient and effective contact centers share the ability to manage these variables while exploiting synergies across people, processes and technology.
Vidal Consulting Group has undertaken a series of contact center studies to assess the benefits contact centers can expect through the implementation of certain technologies. In this particular case study, the technology being tested is that of communication headsets with superior noise-cancelling at the microphone (henceforth, noise-cancelling headsets.) Superior noise cancelling is defined as those headsets that are able to eliminate ~ 90% of the background noise.
This is a report of a single contact center, and a part of our study.
4
Revenue/CallPre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
$151.02$131.08$141.01$155.07
$151.26$138.46$144.62$126.58
0.2%5.6%2.6%
-18.4%
Post ChangeCustomer SatisfactionPre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
95.9593.6795.1096.67
98.6796.2097.4796.38
2.8%2.7%2.5%-0.3%
Post Change
KPI: Customer Satisfaction
Customer Satisfaction is measured via a post experience volunteer customer survey, delivered by telephone immediately after the customer interaction.
Observations • The Control Group showed a decline in Customer
Satisfaction of -0.3% in the test period as compared to the pre-test period; while the Total Sample (Wired+Wireless) showed an increase in customer satisfaction of +2.5%, from a score of 95.10 prior to the test to 97.47 after the introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets.
• Participants clearly felt that the customers could hear them better when using the noise-cancelling headsets. In the pre-agent survey, when asked, “How clearly do you feel your customers can hear you?” 14.6% responded “Very Clearly” with a score of 9 or 10 on a 0 to 10 scale. The same question in the post-agent survey showed 48.4% for the same response See page 8 and Appendix A.
• Marginal difference in Customer Satisfaction between wireless and wired noise-cancelling headsets.
Indication Based on the measured results and the experiential impression of the agents, noise-cancelling headsets have a direct positive impact on customer satisfaction.
KPI: Average Revenue per Call Observations • The Control Group showed a decline in Average
Revenue per Call of -18.4%, which was in line with the overall departmental results for that same period, while the Total Sample (Wired+Wireless) showed a +2.6% increase, a significant net difference of +21% (from -18.4% to +2.6%) for the agents using noise-canceling headsets compared to the control group.
• The Wireless Sample group was relatively flat in revenue per call (+0.2%), while the Wired Sample group had a more significant increase of +5.6%. The rationale for the difference between Wireless and Wired was not apparent at the time of the study.
Indication Customer Satisfaction may result in Increased Revenue per Call – Call center management partially attributed the increase in Average Revenue per Call of the Participating Sample group to the increase in Customer Satisfaction. As commented by one of the team managers “Happy customers buy more.” It is also logical to assume that it is easier for agents to sell if the customer can hear them clearly with less background noise.
“Noise-cancelling headsets have a direct, positive impact on customer
satisfaction.”
5
Avg Handle TimePre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
6.077.456.777.08
6.297.086.716.55
3.7%-4.9%-0.9%-7.5%
Post Change
Average Handle Time
is defined as the average
time it takes an agent to
handle a contact, including
post call work time.
KPI: Average Handle Time (AHT)
Observations • The Control Group showed an Average Handle Time (AHT) reduction of -7.5%
between the pre-test and the test period, while the Total Participants (Wired+Wireless) showed a much lesser reduction of -0.9%.
• The introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets increased the consistency of AHT across agents. The average spread between the highest and the lowest AHT during the pre-test period was 1.55 minutes, while the average spread after the introduction of the noise-cancelling headset was 0.98 minutes, a reduction of 36.8%. The difference in density of AHT data points before and after the introduction of the noise-cancelling headsets is clearly apparent in the AHT graph on 11.
• Contact center management attributes the increase in AHT in the participating group to an associated increase in Customer Satisfaction due to better engagement with the agent. In their words, “It takes time to satisfy a customer.” As such, the price for increased customer satisfaction, and the associated revenue increase may be an increase in the AHT.
Indications • The increased AHT may be a side effect of increased engagement leading
to increased customer satisfaction. It takes a minimum amount of time to satisfy a customer.
• The introduction of noise-cancelling headsets may have an equalizing effect across agent, which shows itself in more consistent AHT across the agent population.
• The relatively higher AHT as compared to the control group may also be a side effect of the relative increase in Revenue per Call for the agents using the noise-cancelling headsets. More time is required to sell more products.
“… A more consistent AHT
across the agent population.”
6
Hold – SalesPre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
4.89%5.75%5.32%4.53%
3.75%5.07%4.42%4.56%
-23.4%-11.8%-17.0%
0.8%
Post Change
Hold – RegistryPre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
8.67%7.24%8.01%6.53%
6.03%6.03%5.85%6.19%
-30.5%-16.7%-26.9%
-5.2%
Post Change
Hold – ServicePre
WirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
7.30%7.42%7.36%6.46%
8.08%7.50%7.72%6.17%
10.8%1.0%4.9%
-4.5%
Post Change
Average Hold % - Sales
Average Hold % in Sales calls is the average percent of the call duration that the customer is placed on hold. Management’s experience already correlates reduced hold % to increased customer satisfaction. Observations • The Control Group showed a slight increase in Average Hold % of 0.8% between the pre and the test periods, while the
Total Participants (Wired+Wireless) showed a decrease of -17.0%. This correlates with the accompanying customer satisfaction increase of the participating group.
• As expected, due to its offering of freedom of movement, the Wireless Sample group showed a higher reduction in average hold time (-23.4%) than the Wired Sample group (-11.8%.)
Indications • Increased audio clarity and engagement facilitated by the noise-cancelling headsets may reduce the need to place the
customer on hold.
• Increased mobility with wireless headsets clearly reduces the need to place the customer on hold during a sales call, because the agent can move to research and reference areas while speaking with the customer.
• Reduced Average Hold % contributes to improve Customer Satisfaction and to increased Revenue per Call.
Average Hold % - Registry Sales
Likewise, the Average Hold % for Registry sales calls for Total Participants (Wired+Wireless) showed a considerable reduction in hold time when compared to the Control Group, -26.9% vs. -5.2% respectively.
Observations mentioned for Average Hold % for Sales calls (above) apply to Registry Calls. Average Hold % - Support
Service and support calls are different from Sales calls in that hold time is driven by complexity of the question and/or the relative knowledge of the agent.
The Control Group showed a reduction of hold time % for service/support calls of -4.5% between the pre and test periods, while the Total Participants (Wired+Wireless) showed an increase in hold % of 4.9%.
This observation is not yet attributed to any particular cause.
7
PreWirelessWiredTotal Wired + WirelessControl Group
88.26%84.76%86.52%87.56%
90.33%86.95%88.59%90.29%
90.33%86.95%88.59%90.29%
Post ChangeLogged-on Adherence
2.3%2.6%2.4%3.1%
Logged-on adherence
is defined as the percentage
of scheduled time that the
agent is at his/her station and
logged onto the system. Logged-on Adherence Observations • The Control Group showed an increase in Logged-on Adherence of +3.1%
between the pre and test periods, while the Total Participants (Wired+Wireless) showed a lower improvement of +2.4%.
• The majority of the Control Group improvement compared to the Participating Group occurred in the first week of the test period. Thereafter, all participating categories improved Logged-on Adherence while the Control Group decreased (see Appendix A – Logged-on Adherence Chart).
Indication The lower improvement in Logged-on Adherence for the participating group may be attributed to initial agent preoccupation with the study and becoming accustomed to new equipment.
8
PrePost
0-5 (Poor)50%23%
6~845%29%
9~10 (Best)5%
48%
How Would You Rate the Sound Quality of Your Headset?
How Clearly Do You Think Your Customers Can Hear You?
PrePost
0-5 (Poor)37%23%
6~849%29%
9~10 (Very Well)15%48%
Does the Noise Level in Your Work Area Make itDifficult to Understand or Hear Your Customer?
PrePost
0-5 (Prob)68%60%
6~822%13%
9~10 (NP)10%27%
How Comfortable is Your Headset?
PrePost
0-5 (Not)55%13%
6~838%35%
9~10 (Very)7%
52%
Overall How Happy Were You With Your Headset?
PrePost
0-5 (Not)47%32%
6~843%13%
9~10 (Very)10%48%
Effects Perceived by a Majority of Test Agents
• Better Sound Quality
• Customer could hear the agent better
• Ambient noise is less of a problem
• Headsets are more Comfortable
• Noise-cancelling Headsets are better
Agent Pre/Post Survey Results A pre and a post agent survey were offered to all participating agents. This survey was designed to capture the experience and impression of the agents, both in their working environment and with the original and new headsets. Observations
• At the time of the study 38% of agents had had their headset for 1 year or more and 52% of the agents had their headsets more than 9 months.
62% of participating agents perceived the sound quality of the noise-reduction headsets to be better than the original headsets. 71% of participants feel customers heard them more clearly when using the new headsets as compared to the original headsets. 68% of the participants felt the ambient noise level was less problematic when using the noise-cancelling headsets. 71% of the participants found the noise-reduction headsets to be more comfortable than the original headsets. Overall, 61% of the participants felt the noise-cancelling headsets were better than the original headsets.
9
Proposed Cause and Effect Relationship
IncreasedAHT
ReducedHold Time
ImprovedCustomer
Satisfaction
IncreasedRevenueper Call
WirelessMobility
NoiseCancellation
ImprovedEngagement
How do these finding relate to each other? After discussions with the contact center team, we propose the following as a most likely scenario. • The introduction of these noise-cancelling headsets had
a positive effect on the quality of the agent/customer interaction, as compared to the Control Group.
• The improved quality of the interaction had a positive effect on customer satisfaction and engagement. This may have triggered an increase in AHT.
• In this contact center’s business model, customer satisfaction has a usual and direct positive affect on Average Revenue per Call. Thus, we conclude that the noise-cancelling headsets had a positive influence on Revenue per Call.
• The freedom of mobility provided by the wireless headsets had a positive effect on Hold Time % per call, which resulted in increased customer satisfaction.
In general we can say the results of the study show the following: • Agents report a better customer interaction as a result
of the superior noise-cancelling headsets (background noise reduction ~ 90%).
• Customer Satisfaction had a considerable increase over the Control Group while using the superior noise-cancelling headsets.
• Average Revenue per Call increased for the Participating Group, as compared to the Control Group.
• Average Handle time increased with the introduction of the new headsets as compared to the Control Group.
• Average Hold Time % in Sales and Registry calls decreased substantially for the Participating Group as compared to the Control Group. Average Hold Time % increased for Customer Support calls.
The conclusions mentioned here are driven by the information and insights gathered through the case study, and may not hold for other contact center environments. The conclusions have been discussed and validated with the contact center’s management team.
Overall Conclusions
10
Appendix A
Pre Test
Pre Test
11
Pre Test
Pre Test
12
Pre Test
Pre Test
13
Test Pre
14
Appendix B
15
16
17
18
19
