Our group recently delivered a QA audit for a client. In this project, our group took a random of sample of phone calls that had already been scored by the team’s supervisors and QA personnel. We scored the same calls using the client’s internal QA scale, we then tracked and reported the differences. In addition, our team noted areas of the client’s internal scale which we believed were creating problems for their QA efforts internally.
The results of the audit yielded data that is allowing the management team to address key issues within their internal QA process. Going into the audit, they believed that some supervisors were being less than objective in their analysis. The audit not only proved their suspicions, but they now have objective, detailed data to help manage their efforts to bring the supervisors back in line with the rest of the team.
The audit also provided data showing where their QA scale was likely driving differences between supervisors simply because of lack of definition or behavioral elements being listed in multiple places within the scale. In addition, there were sampling and methodology issues that undermined the validity and actionability of their internal data.
The client walked away with data that will help them manage their supervisory staff and specific action steps to make their internal process more effective. If they act upon the information there will be savings in both calibration time and frustration. CSRs will be held to a more consistent standard which will increase quality and diminish internal conflict over QA results.
Is your QA process a source of pain and managerial frustration? An objective audit of your process may be just what the doctor ordered. The results and prescribed improvements might just ease that nagging pain in your patootie.