I see the yearly deluge of call centre awards voting is upon us in the UK. Do call centre awards do any good or are they just an excuse for backslapping from a group peers who used to work in your industry but are now profiled external consultants with limited experience of best practice in disciplines?
Some UK awards get consultants in over the weekend for a 20 minute presentation by potentials, this is to a group of people who may or may not know what best practice in I/B call management (or whatever the discipline is), presumably due to time constraints they aren't able to question to any depth and the quality of the presentation is all, the subsequent award is paraded around as a benchmark of quality for years after.

I'm playing devils advocate of course but does anyone have any examples of real worth to customer, organisation and employee beyond or is it simply corporate badge wearing without challenging substance.

I'm a skeptic, so I don't believe in the value of awards (too many times awards are won on the basis of shmoozing with those in power, rather than on a meritocratic basis alone). However, that's just my own personal opinion. Others might find the stimulation of 'going for gold' increases productivity and it certainly can give everyone involved a morale boost.

John

From a purely selfish point of view getting nominated/winning an award is very useful for self promotion activities

The more public(to our peers) the ceremony, the more weight it carries on said self promotion activities.

So do I believe in the value of awards, yes, would I like to be nominated for an award, you betcha!

Haven't you just proved a point though, its just back slapping and advertising. I'm sure self promotion isn't the end goal of the award, I'd much rather be congratulated by a colleague with meaning as opposed to being applauded for doing my job and adding value - that's what I'm supposed to do. Sometimes the reality is a you scratch my back and nominate me this year Mr Supplier and I'll repay the favour by some other means but we both gain kudos.
If its just a means of self promotion for the firms involved then are the awards really serving any meaningful purpose?

As I said, purely selfish reasons, at the end of the day in this world of the individual we live in why else would an award ceremony exist.

This weekend was the Annual Soap Awards, if that isnt an excuse for pointless people to win pointless awards I dont know what is. Next year we will have the Reality TV Awards no doubt, with awards like "Best manipulation of a gullible public","Best faked emotional outpouring" or the hotly contested "Rich person who had a habit special award for doing not very much in an annoying manner"

Seriously, I did attend a company award ceremony last week and was nominated for an award having won another award earlier in the year. It felt good to be nominated and even better had I won. That is the point to an award, it is about making people feel special and as long as the playing field is level and open to all then long may they continue. Next year I plan to win!

Another excellent topic. Not to straddle the fence, but *some* awards have intrinsic merit, *most* do not, I believe.

IMHO, many awards are given based on the schmooze aspect at various executive levels. And as a quasi-sales person myself, I agree with Julian that winning various accolades in one's industry is great self- or company-promotion.

We just have to pay attention to *who* is giving the award, and why. If I thought Jodie Foster would show up to receive her "Brent's Actress of the Millenium" award, I'd create one. (Ms. Foster and I are not acquainted, by the way, but I feel sure that that small fact is the only reason we are not currently dating)

Back to your question, though, "...does anyone have any examples of real worth to customer, organisation and employee beyond or is it simply corporate badge wearing without challenging substance."

A customer service group that we know has recently won a number of "Freddie" awards, which are given annually in a number of categories for the best customer service provided by a frequent traveler program. What makes these awards valid is that they are scored objectively based on customer responses, and sponsored by a group that has no affiliation with any specific company.

Because of the high profile of these particular awards, frequent traveler groups all over the US go to great internal lengths to make a good showing each year.

Another valuable award to receive can be Vendor of the Year. Or Outsource Partner of the Year (Call Center Specific). Many large companies provide this kind of recognition to outstanding call centers that handle their outsource work. It drives the behavior of the call center (beyond, perhaps, than even an SLA) and (to Julian's point), the vendor can then leverage this to prospective clients as an example of their capabilities.

In each case, it could be argued that the customer is the inevitable winner, as the call centers must truly perform above and beyond in order to be honored. Depending on the criteria, of course....

I was going to lump "certifications" into this response, but I've gone a bit long here (surprise). But I'll pose the question: don't some or most certification processes amount to little more than an expensive merit badge as well?

Brent

In response to Brent's question:

"don't some or most certification processes amount to little more than an expensive merit badge as well?"

In my (humble) opinion, I suppose it would depend on what you mean by "some or most". Certification processes are like universities, colleges, etc. There are a (very) few that are taken seriously, and a large number that depend overwhelmingly on self-promotion to a credulous audience.

Basically, certification 'authorities' are selling reputation. Certification allows purchasers of services to reduce the transaction costs involved in assessing the reputation and past performance of a business. The basic logic would seem to be that if you have a relatively large number of small dollar value clients, you pay a certifying 'authority' to assess your standards and reputation *once*, so that potential clients do not have to do that assessment over again, every time.

So, in theory, certification can create value by lowering transaction costs. In practice, who knows? Ask your clients whether certification (would have) made any difference to their decisions. They are ultimately the ones that wind up paying for the cost of certification anyhow.

Obviously, there is no point in paying for certification from an outfit whose reputation is not markedly better than yours. And, equally obviously, word-of-mouth referral from past clients is (dollar-for-dollar) a lot more effective, but some certification is a possibly useful add-on.

And good luck with Ms. Foster. She's used to guys' attempts to impress her-- someone tried to kill the President of the U.S. to get her attention.
WP

Howdy, Wig, thanks for the response. I agree entirely.

Many outsource groups are required to have certain 'certifications' in order to be considered for a project from a large company. Having participated in a few of these 'certification auditing courses' as a consultant and occasional broker, I was amazed at how very little value some of these certifications provide.

It's nothing but a business, which isn't bothersome or surprising. But I have had dealings with one certification group that also has a consultancy arm. When they are hired to help large companies select vendors, can you guess what these consultants put at the top of their list of vendor 'musts'? That's right. Certification in the consultants' processes. It often costs over $100K (not to mention internal time and costs) to be 'certified' by some of these groups.

Good rule of thumb in a business deal: you can't get paid by two people on the same deal. And in a roundabout way, I think that's what some of these certification companies do.

OK, I feel better now. And, yeah, that jerk John Hinkley ruined it for all of on the Jodie Foster front. I wonder if I could convince Selma Hayek that no one will hire her in Hollywood until she's been certified by me. Hmm.

Brent

On the "rule of thumb"...it SHOULD be a universally enforced rule.

To be precise, getting paid by both parties in the same deal OUGHT to be considered corrupt business practice whenever you are (even silently) implying to one side that they are the only ones paying you. IF they both know they are both paying you, and thus cannot they expect your loyalty to either, then fine.

BUT it is not. The whole Enron/Arthur Andersen debacle was an example of exactly the kind of problems that result from this.

A top-notch accounting giant is supposed to be getting paid to deliver unbiased, objective auditing of a business. But said accounting giant is earning the lion's share of its revenues in *consulting* fees from auditing clients. If anyone suggests that these consulting fees might 'influence' the auditors, the self-serving speech about professionalism and 'chinese walls' starts up. Meanwhile said business' prospectuses and balance sheets ought to be in the 'fiction' section at Barnes&Noble, not filed with the SEC.

I am not as charitable as you are, Brent. This is not a "roundabout way" of getting paid by two people on the same deal. This is a thinly disguised KICKBACK. Ultimately the purchaser company is paying for it, because the consultant is demanding it from any vendor it proposes, thus any vendor selected is going to pass the cost on to the purchaser.

I must admit that I am amazed that any large company would seriously consider engaging a 'consultant' that would demand certification in the consultants' own processes as a vendor 'must'. If I was selecting a consultant on behalf of said large company, this would be a RED FLAG for me.

I would suggest that you make an anonymous phone call to the higher-ups of such purchaser companies and point this issue out. Chances are good that whomever selected these consultants is sniffing after kickbacks too. Suggest that they call in whomever it was that selected these consultants, and ask them, point-blank, if they have an under-the-table financial deal with these consultants. Suggest that they video and audio tape the meeting.

This is only my opinion, but it would seem that whomever selected these consultants is either dishonest or not too bright. Either way, this person should be FIRED, and these consultants BLACKLISTED.

And if you can convince Hayek you could blacklist her in Hollywood...call me, because we're going to start a talent agency.

WP

Wig,

Thanks for the response. I must admit that I have ostensibly 'matured' from a wide-eyed go-getter who wished only to work hard, help people and change the world for the better in the process. Ah, the glassy-eyed, naive good old days.



While I like to think I'm still a hard-working go-getter, the thoughts of actually changing the world have been pared down to just changing the things I can.... :)

In conversations with friends who work in various fields, the most common issue that we-who-have-made-it-into-our-mid-thirties all have is our profound disappointment with 'big business'. The politics, the leers that pass for smiles, CYA tactics, bonuses for nothing, promises that were not kept and the confusion at watching mediocre talent rise up the corporate ladder. Another string on this site has a few references to this as the 'American way', although I had always presumed that business was business everywhere....?

Personally, I abandoned the corporate ladder mid-rung, in an attempt to avoid becoming that which I beheld with such disdain. And so far, I think it has worked. I think. I hope.

As far as large companies actually participating in certification/consultant type of behavior, I'm not as surprised as I would have been a few years ago. While the CCV site is chock-full of call center professionals, most large companies are not.

Most large companies know how to do one thing: whatever it is that their company does or sells. A wireless company knows wireless, a computer company knows computers, etc. All of these companies are required to have a customer contact component, but do not have the internal expertise required to do it properly.

So what do they do? "Get certified! Everyone feel better now? Great. What is it exactly are we certified in? Ah, never mind, put out a press release! Oh, and these certification guys have a consulting arm? Sweet! Perfect! Put them on retainer and let them handle the call center stuff."

Sound negative? Hopefully not. One can view this type of thing with bitterness and condescension and self-righteousness, I suppose - but none of those things pay the mortgage. One can only try to understand the way large companies think and behave, and then determine whether or not it will be worthwhile, fiscally or karmically, to do business with them.

The good news: there are plenty of good and upright companies with which to do business. They are more difficult to find, but they are there. And we have found that it is much more worthwhile to do business with 'good' companies, than with 'big' companies. Although 'good, big' companies are even better.

Brent

PS - No calls back from Selma. I wonder if Drew Barrymore is still in LA....