Hi everyone.

The call centre has traditionally received bad press and developed a reputation for being the 'new sweatshops' and treating their staff poorly and with unnecessary pressure. At the same time, the public perception of call centres is not good as increased levels of automation and technology places increasing distance between the caller and their objectives (at least in the consensus view).

We are representative of an industry in turmoil yet thriving; one of the largest market sectors by employment, our industry has rejuvenated deprived areas and attracted investment into cities and out-of-town locations alike. Yet still there are black clouds gathering over the heads of this industry.

CallCentreVoice was setup partly as a reaction to the bad press and 'sweatshop' image as a way to help improve things from within; in a year or so we've grown in numbers and gone a long way toward spreading the word of best practice and customer satisfaction. But it's not enough.

In our second year, we wish to identify the areas which need to be addressed and set about developing strategies which will help build a solid foundation for this industry as it begins to mature. We wish to create an environment to enable our members to collaborate and put theory into practice. We want to raise the profile of this industry in a way that it sorely needs, and we want to see things improve.

So, where to start? I'm writing this as a prompt, a preface if you will, to stimulate discussion on the things that need to be addressed and latterly how we should go about addressing them.

We need to firstly identify the weaknesses in this industry at large (our diagnosis) then identify where we wish to be with this industry (our prognosis) and then establish key techniques which will enable us to progress from diagnosis to prognosis via a series of easily implementable steps.

So, to start the ball rolling: the question is:

"Why is our industry seen as a generally bad thing?"

Any thoughts?

John

Hi,

As with many things I feel that it is a case of a few bad eggs. The media get hold of the cases that will create a sensational headline and thats what gets into the public eye.

"Call Centres - Quite a nice place to work Actually" not quite as good as "Call Centres - 21st Century Workhouses"

Hi Alex,

You have a good point about it being a few call centres spoiling it for the masses - and we all know about the media and how they love extremity as a basis for column inches - but even so, there must be something more to it than that. For instance, other industries also have their 'bad eggs' yet don't seem to attract the vitriol that our industry does. It's a curious phenomenon, and one which CallCentreVoice would like to work to reverse (if possible).

John

John, this is a great topic, and one that perhaps we can attack together.

In my opinion, in the US at least, the negative public perception of call centers began in the 1980's with the breakup of 'Ma Bell'. During the deregulation of the phone company (emphasis on THE), the new market created competition in an area where there previously was none. Ma Bell's new competitors aggressively began outbound calling projects to sign up her customers into their new (and improved?) service. Ma Bell then created her own counter-offensives, and WHAM, dinner-time would never be the same.

This type of campaign proved to be a relatively inexpensive method of gaining market share, and soon leaked over into every other imaginable industry as a sales and marketing tool. In the US at least, unless one makes the effort to get on 'no call lists' or some such thing, our phones ring off the hook from people trying to sell us something.

Bottom line, it's an irritation and inconvenience. In addition, Alex's comment about media hype is correct, in my opinion. We all read/hear about the elderly people who unwisely send in their life savings to some fraudulent scam, based on the high-pressure (and presumably convincing) phone calls from some salesperson. This, coupled with the irritation of 'legitimate' sales calls to our homes and businesses, has created a generally negative viewpoint of our industry.

Further (sorry), on the inbound side, there is a general irritation among consumers with technology that is not helpful(IT-related); with apathetic or incompetent live personnel on the other end (QA/HR-related); with agents not having any idea about the ad you are calling about (Marketing-related); with long hold times or even busy signals when we call (Operations/Management-related).

The task of cleaning this up is a big one. But I agree that determining the root cause of the overall negative perception is the right place to start. I'm anxious to hear others' view on this as well.

Brent

I thought I had posted a contribution to this thread yesterday, but it hasn't appeared so I assume I didn't hit the right buttons :o(

Here's an abbreviated version:

1. People used to like service locally and from people who to some extent knew them. They now get a remote and impersonal series of unrelated interactions. The change was not customer-driven and not sold-in.

2. CSRs in general don't listen or have rapport with much of the market.

3. Quantity has taken priority over quality.

4. Has the industry oversold itself to itself ?????


Just some thoughts from someone on the periphery of the industry with views that seem to be confirmed anecdotally by people inside and outside the CC world.


Alan .............

Dear Brent and John,

Thanks for the excellent topicand posts. Let me add to what is said already - technology enabled services delink the actual experience of personal interaction. It is the problem with automation. As long as the information sought is routine- frequently asked types like status of reservation - automation is ok. The moment the customer wants alternatives - there are problems. We need intelligent systems to handle or human interface becomes necessary. According to me the root cause is overusage of and over dependence on automation. This has changed the perception of the customer.

I shall discuss other points later.

Vedula

As someone who worked in the industry, then vowed never to again, and then did! I'd like to offer my viewpoint.

Quantity not Quality.
Answering the query not resolving it.
Automation not people.
Training on call taking technique's not products, knowledge and true empathy.
Todays cost and not tomorrow's

I agree that all is not bad, but there are too many instances like these. Show me a call centre that truly places the emphasis on the quality of service over the stats such as service level and average ACD and ACW times, and also employs people who are the standard bearers for the company rather than the lowest paid, where training places more emphasis on knowledge and understanding than in how to reduce call handling time using "call management techniques".

On automation, I agree with an earlier point, I never asked for it and although I sometimes use it I would still rather speak to a human as i know what my own computer does to my information.

This is not to say that all call centres are bad at everything, or anything, just that much seem's to have been done with the call/contact centre in mind and not the people who use it. I have no interest in how long my call takes, provided I achieve what I called for. I want to speak to someone who seems to know everything there is to know about the subject and I want to speak to someone who has the power to deal with my query regardless of the nature (empowerment is another bug bear of mine).

I think many of these problems have been driven by an ever increasing expectation. There are many good things about call centres, but that wasn't the subject so excuse my rambling.

Wednesday: Phone rings, wife picks up and gets 10 seconds silence followed by hang up

Thursday: Ditto

Friday: Ditto

Saturday: Ditto

Monday Ditto, however, this time at the end of the 10 seconds someone speaks, it is our current gas supplier, caller asks to speak to me. But I'm at work replies my wife, can she help. Bluntly and in no uncertain terms the caller tells her he would be breaking the law if he tells her anything and that he can only speak to me, if I want her to be able to discuss things with him or his company then I will have to write giving my authority. Bit pointless replies my wife as we will have changed suppliers by the end of the week and the call ends there at stalemate.

So what have we got then, bad use of technology, the gas supplier's predictive dialler obviously is not very good at predicting agent availability leaving my wife to think we have a nuisance caller (well we have but not the sort she thought it was) and unhelpful/aggressive agents. He was correct regarding disclosure, Data Protection Laws have made companies very careful about who they speak to, but this does not excuse bad attitude especially when the whole point of the call was to try and retain custom. This gas supplier by virtue of it's near monopoly position is currently constrained from drastic price reductions to retain market share so all it has to distinguish itself with is customer service so after this call it has no chance of retaining me.

I would like to think this is a one off, but sadly it isn't.

JC an excellent topic. I agree with Brent that its something we should really try and tackle.

For my part the paradox of high business objectives and low business delivery has long made me chuckle. Especially as so many people cannot/will not see that the root cause stares them in the face daily.

For me this root cause of all of this is simply(!) that 'business' cannot/will not apply the societal rules (those relating to human personal relationships) that have been honed and proven to work over countless thousands of years.

When 'modern' man walks into the office everything that has been programmed into him about how and how not to treat people is shelved for a set of rules that are exclusive to the business environment. I know not where these come from but consistently they fly in the face of everything as individuals we feel is right.

As Alan kind of points out, people like to establish relationships. We now patronisingly (mostly at least) call this the 'corner shop experience'. Alan's observation is spot on. We (customers) now hate it because we are not allowed (by business chiefs) to develop a relationship with an individual. This means we cannot develop the trust in them and what they provide so crucial in determining whether we buy again (LOYALTY).

I guess Brent might say, "But you have to make a buck/keep costs down etc." I agree wholeheartedly BUT. Lets think outside the box a little. Why have we gotten where we are?

The pension fund investors (the biggest single group of shareholders on teh planet) would say, "We need better returns on our investments to provide for those we are charged with looking after" On the face of it its true but just think of the consequences. Brent and John hold shares in my Co, Alan and I hold shares in theirs. In order to get the best returns on our investments we end up driving each other to work harder. As we work harder we want more wages. This causes the cost of living gets higher so we drive harder returns... Part of the drive is to reduce costs. Because we do not apply the relationship rules that work we set about inventing/trying new ones based on our 'business' experience. Again these are flawed in that they rely on technology so they cannot work. Its an endless spiral that can never end - UNLESS.

Possibly(!) what we can do to break this endless loop is to REDUCE our expectations. Yes that's right REDUCE our expectations. Instead of expecting some poor sucker to work till 2am, do your shopping at 6pm. If everyone eased off from these massive expectations we'd all have better quality lives - IMHO.

The point of this is that it recognises that OTHER people have lives too and that taking that into appropriate consideration would increase the quality of the relationships. So, back off those unreal expectations a tad. If you stop driving me I'll stop driving you.

Thoughts anyone?

David

DND,
Just when I think I'm able to peer, ever so cautiously, into your cognitive processes, and to predict with some accuracy what you may say, your creative problem-solving skills catch me just to the left of my periphery.

Your solution of decreasing our expectations of the call center is compelling. Are you suggesting, then, that as consumers our expectations are too high? And that the problem is that we are abandoning the lessons of courtesy and respect for others that we observe in a traditional live human interaction, in favor of a 'me, me, me' attitude of a relentless consumer? Holy guacamole - I think I may agree. In principle, at least.

Your connection of this attitude to the business world itself is profound. It is quite true, I agree, that businesses continue to attempt to differentiate their products and services by providing value-added features, such as 2AM shopping. This, in turn, raises the expectations of the consumer to believe that *all* services should be 24/7, for instance, and that those which are not, must be somehow inferior and deserving of our ire. Hence, the negative public perception of the industry in general.

This ties in with Alan's question: "Has the industry oversold itself to itself?". Absolutely - it's a horserace to provide customers with compelling reasons to do business with their company. And most companies, in their haste to be first, have neglected to do it correctly. This is exhibited in Robert's and Julian's posts as well. We used to call it 'throwing against the wall and seeing how much will stick'. Excuse the phrase, please.

I would suggest only this: that instead of the consumers themselves easing back on their expectations, that the companies themselves try to just get it right the first time. Yes, I'm a proponent of businesses making money, controlling costs, and all that short-sighted capitalistic stuff - but I am also in total agreement that the best way to do that is to actually *spend* the money on the right technology, *spend* the money on excellent people and training, and *spend* the money on making the customer happy. As I've said before, it's not an either/or question - it's simply a matter of balance.

Brent

Good stuff.

I think this is key. In order to differentiate our services from the opposition we have said we will provide x, y and z services. The customer now expects x, y and z as standard from everyone, they also however expect our costs to be lower because they want the best value for money.
I think we need to decide exactly why call centres came about. Now we all know about economies of scale created by the large call centres, but why did we build them. "To improve customer service" is the most common reply, more accurate however I think would be to maintain the level of service and reduce the costs of servicing those customers.
My work is technology orientated, I design automated solutions for my customers using various technology. A proposal I often make the the business managers is that they should direct calls to the floor if they have the availability of agents at that time. Do they do it... no they want to improve mitigation in the IVR system. Money before CS but the agent is free, you are paying them no difference in cost but improved CS.
My experience also says that we often use technology to give techy solutions to non techy problems. A complex call routing to lots of different agent groups because they have not trained all the agents sufficiently.
Finally and another personal pet project that I have not got anyone to impliment yet. Personal service routing, we can ID callers and send them to agents who have dealt with their call before, it's easy to do and it will build a personal relationship up.

So what have we got so far, high customer expectations, expectations from the business of cost reductions, the often poor use of technology and agents who because of the above reasons are treated like robots.

Alex wrote:

"So what have we got so far, high customer expectations, expectations from the business of cost reductions, the often poor use of technology and agents who because of the above reasons are treated like robots."

Yes, it's a fair summary of where we are. Those people who are 'treated like robots' (good phrase!) fuel the fires of the media by popping up at every opportunity as prosecution witnesses in the Great Call Centre Trial.

What we (as the free-thinking, proactive call centre leaders of today and tomorrow) need to do is to set about the conditions for effective change in:

• Attitudes - people calling call centres and using contact centres are individuals and deserve not to be shoehorned like pegs into the management square or round holes...


• Conditions - make call centres better places to work, by reducing the stress levels on staff through both a concerted effort to minimise pressure and unrealistic deadlines and by offering a better deal - holidays, bonuses, more money, free muffins, whatever...


• Quality - stress that the most important thing is not actual throughput but achievement; achievement in customer satisfaction, accuracy, timeliness, friendliness, the caller experience...


• Motivation - offer positive feedback systems to reward and encourage employees, not negative ones to punish and pressurise...

...there are many more potential areas in which we can make a difference. What is clear is that this is an industry which is into the 'storming' phase of its lifecycle - in true team-theory terms, we have to advance beyond the 'storming' phase to the 'performing' phase, in which synergy is the goal...

We can do this by educating new members, establishing good practice and encouraging each other to help take their own centre into the 'performing' phase. Until we do that, I don't think we can seriously progress beyond the many problems that prevent us achieving a solid and positive media image.

John

Anyone heard the new Quizno's radio commercial? They pit a telemarketer against an Anaconda. They say 'Well, a telemarketer is pretty much a snake.' Then they of course have the Anaconda swallow the telemarketer and they think it's funny.

Unfortunately there are some bad telemarketing firms that make the whole callcenter business look bad. And media types have picked up on it and are now adding to the problem.

Johns ‘one liner’ how can we change etc, is a challenge of gargantuan proportions.

To a person we agree an objective (better/best customer service) and almost as completely we agree on the attitude required to get there. However, we are faced universally with a single hurdle at an individual level, how to achieve the results we need without losing our job through rocking that unstable boat named "Management Ego".

The person(s) who discover how to crack that nut will make Bill Gates look like a loser.

Somehow, somewhere what we need is someone to take what is currently seen by investors as a commercial gamble and put their money where their mouth is. Build a business that 'truely' puts its customers first but is also honest enough to manage those customers' expectations too.

I'm sorry to have to say it publically but until then there can/will be no significant change. The downward spiral of expectations vs delivery will continue, albeit at differing paces, until we can effect change where it 'really' matters - not at board level but even higher at investor level. Its only once we pull back from this relentless pursuit of the impossible (ONLY UNDER THE CURRENT REGIME) we can consolidate and begin to deliver.

So, who’s going to jump off the treadmill first? As it currently spinning at 500mph there will need to be a number try before someone lands on their feet…

Any brave souls out there with enough money to DO?

David

This caught my attention:
Quantity not Quality.
Answering the query not resolving it.
Automation not people.
Training on call taking technique's not products, knowledge and true empathy.
Todays cost and not tomorrow's

The last line in particular is telling. Too many businesses (not limited to call centers!) put today's profits first and foremost, and seem oblivious to the costs they may incur down the road by making poor decisions today.

I think another HUGE problem with inbound call centers is that the clients do not empower the agents to resolve the query, and not just answer it! And this ties in with that last line. If we can screw the consumer/caller, that is more $$ NOW in the company coffers, and never mind that a large percentage of those consumers may never do business with the company or the call center again as a result of poor service and lack of resolution to the situation. Account management is too often so concerned with keeping clients that they have no cojones when it comes to educating clients about what works and what does not - AMs will promise the moon to clients, and the agents suffer because the AMs have no clue as to the challenges of the daily life of a CSR.
I should shut up now or I will stay on this particular soapbox forever....lack of communication between departments; misunderstanding of the roles of others and how they integrate to make the business work(or not work!); closed mouths and closed minds (infomation being limited to The Powers That Be, thus causing fear, uncertainly and gossip among the rank and file); etc. etc. etc.....
Shutting up now. :-)

To continue this excellent topic: there are some call centers out there that do create a positive image. Land's End is known in their industry for excellent call center services; Southwest Airlines and their entire outlook on customer-focused service, including their call center; Starwood Hotels & Resorts has award-winning customer service, particularly in their frequent traveler program. Who else?

Why are they different? Why don't we ask them? Who has good *positive* stories to tell, be it an experience you've had as a consumer, or as someone who works in one of these mythical Shangri-las? Let's piece it together.

I agree that it's easier to bash the 'upper-level' management - but we all must realize that, if we are to truly cause positive change, then the idea must be *sold* to the decision-makers. Just like any deal.

And remember, also: there is no such thing (that I know of) as a degree in call center operations or call center management. Or call center anything, for that matter. Most of the people that run call centers went to school for something else. Educating them to the virtues of the value of the customer life cycle may take some... patience.

Brent

It's a good question, but one that is easily answered. Have you all tried being a full time call centre agent for a day, a week or even a month? The average operation patronises you, doesn't trust you enough to go to the toilet in a reasonable amount of time, sets impossible goals (e.g. answer 20 calls an hour, but adhere to our ridiculous set of scripted do and don't, while providing exemplary service), and basically treats you like a child.
A thread posted a few above this one was created by a call centre manager toying with the idea of ditching breaks to squeeze a bit more productivity from workers. I can't believe there is even a debate about this. Of course workers are going to be enraged and do less work, you don't need a study to prove this.
Until our industry learns to treat its employees like human beings by dragging its collective eyes away from the ACD stats and looking at the reality of the situation, the awful image it has will remain, and rightly so.

I've been on both sides of the fence, and the trends i've noticed are quite alarming, but the bottom line will prevent call centers everywhere from adopting what needs to be done to make it all right.

The primary problem is that of service. The reality is, that an individual is 20 times more likely to speak about a poor service experience than a good one. Now, a poor service experience might add up to refusal to issue a refund for services incorrectly provided, or as simple as a call which did not go as the caller intended.

So, what to do? First, arm your representatives with the tools they need to SATISFY the customer. Grant them some decision making ability to say, "Oh sure, we can credit your account no problem, or here, take this instead!" This takes the callers mind from the problem, and gets them thinking about solutions instead.

The pitch i'm making in my small call center is to arm my reps in such ways. Credits, refunds, and the like have NEVER been mentioned here, much less practiced. In addition, we don't care about call times.

However, we use some techniques to lower call times. For example, we might publish call center stats, including call times, and speak at length during meetings about the numbers various reps had, congratulating those who's times were lower. This makes the rep subconsiously lower their times, as they're being mentioned and addressed, and does it without pressuring the rep into bad service.

We provide everything the rep needs to accomplish their duties, and bring their mind down to the call level. In most environments, representatives feel that their job is an endless monotone of the same thing over and over, without much diversity. By focusing on the singular call, we give our representatives a sense of accomplishment. The task at hand is not answering the phone, but resolving that singular issue or call.

Another contributor to the problem is that anyone can be a call-center representative. Corporations do not put enough emphasis or realization that these people are the face of your company, and drive the success or failure of your products or services. As a result, training is often inadequate, and representatives have no bonuses or fringe-benefits. The sales team might get signing bonuses, be flown from here to there, etc, while the Service Rep sits dutily at their desk, taking call after call. I strongly feel that corporations do not appreciate their front-line as much as they should. From managers up, the top tier of the company generally doesn't know who the representatives are, or how they are impacted by their duties.

To fundamentally change the industry, we must enhance the jobs and appreciation our representatives recieve. Happy people are productive people, and are likely to stick around longer. Things like churn not only effect how the call center operates, but also effect the morality of the team. I agree that the focus should shift from the cost now, to the cost in the long run. In addition, companies should strive to empower their customers, actively seeking their guidance and feedback.

As a customer, it's impossible to find the information you need on your own. You can't just go to a web-site and find exactly what you're looking for. Good service is not only how the call center operates, but also how the company supports the products it provides.

All

If we go back to the original question which John asked it was about the reputation CC's have gained as employers?

The focus of this seems to have been lost, in order to build the reputation and profile of a business we need to stop looking at our customers, and start looking at our staff.

Take it as read that your customers want to speak to a person (and a freindly one at that), empowerment to solve the problem would be nice but is not always possible (thats why we have team leaders/ managers etc) but lets look at one dynamic fact. (because I'm no longer going to talk about customers).

An old frase in sales "smile before you dial", if your staff are happy they will sound happy and be positive over the phone even if they cant solve a problem a customer has, it will be a nice call for all. Have you ever treid being angry at a happy person "impossible".

HOW DO WE MAKE THEM HAPPY???

Far to often we focus on physical things (( call time, surroundings, computer system, PAY, hours, breaks, etc etc)) none of that should matter what should is PEOPLE,,, OUR PEOPLE.. we need to decide which managers are people managers and which are process managers. The people managers once identified need to be making people happy!!!

Training, One to One Attention, rewards, personal goals, tell jokes, what ever they need to do make people happy...

I promise you this, with the right staff in place, and with the right people managers in place, your customers will be happy, they wont even notice that they have only been on the phone for two seconds. and back to the first question,,,,,,, staff attrition will fall staff morall will rise customer satisfaction will improve and the world (of callcentres) will be a better place........ or will it??

Scott

Scott,

Sorry in advance for the comments below, but I thought your words are actually indicative of the problems originally outlined so well by John - I can imagine him tearing his hair out at this - here goes ...

1. You said: "If we go back to the original question which John asked it was about the reputation CC's have gained as employers? The focus of this seems to have been lost...".

John's 1st paragraph clearly gives equal weight to CCs as Employers and CCs relationships with Customers.

His 3rd paragraph says: "... spreading the word of best practice and customer satisfaction"

His question was: "Why is our industry seen as a generally bad thing?".

Like many CCs I contact as a Customer your interpretation of what is being said is not what is actually being said.

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule One - Listen, Understand and Think before speaking!


2. You say: "...we need to stop looking at our customers, and start looking at our staff."

Wow!

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Two: Stop looking at your staff until you understand your customers - only then will you know what sort of staff are needed, the knowledge and skills required and how they should behave.


3. You say: "Take it as read that your customers want to speak to a person ... thats ... lets ..."

No, let's "take it as read" that some customers want an email response and that some customers beleive that grammar matters and sloppy grammar might be a sign of a sloppy person or a sloppy organisation.

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Three: If you need to write to customers only use staff who can write right - irony intended!!!


4. You said: "An old frase [ouch!] in sales 'smile before you dial', if your staff ... cant solve a problem a customer has, it will be a nice call for all. Have you ever treid being angry at a happy person 'impossible'."

I like some of the old sales sayings. Smiling is a certainly A Good Thing, but only up to a point - if staff are too jolly they will not be in the right frame of mind to deal with many calls.

If I am angry as a customer and call a CC I don't want "happy". I do want symapthy and genuinely meant apologies. I want the member of staff to be a real *Customer* *Service* *Representative" not a *Company* mouthpiece. I might want them to be angry with me agianst what has gone wrong. The last thing I want is "Happy"!

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Four: Always learn from others, but only apply that learning in context and with proper consideration.


5. You said: "Far to often we focus on physical things (( call time, surroundings, computer system, PAY, hours, breaks, etc etc))"

Absolutely.

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Five: Always agree with people when they're right!


6. You said: "I promise you this, with the right staff in place, and with the right people managers in place, your customers will be happy ..."

Great statement - we might debate the phrase "right staff" though.

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Six: Recruiting the right staff is easier than trying to turn wrong staff into right staff.


7. You said: "and back to the first question,,,,,,, staff attrition will fall staff morall will rise customer satisfaction will improve and the world (of callcentres) will be a better place........ or will it??".

Three interesting little words at the end, there!

*** AJT's Call Centre Rule Seven (to self): It is sometimes better to detect a possible wind up before going off on rants :o)


Regards to all on this much under-used resource.

Alan ............