Does Average Handle Time (AHT) Have a Place in the Modern Call Center?

Share | Rate this Article: (2.2 Stars | 43 Votes)   Thanks for your rating!

I am strongly pro average handle time as a target, so long as it is used appropriately, and all the elements that make up the average handle time are applied correctly. My reasoning follows, plus why I consider the average handle time got a bad name. Of course, like the majority of measures, average handle time cannot be used in isolation, because it does not measure call center service levels, efficiency, quality, outcome or customer experience of the call, although these are reflected through the handling time.

Average handle time got a bad name because it was misused and abused. The measure was targeted to fit the budget by people lacking the knowledge and understanding of the components of a successful call. These individuals also lacked the knowledge of how those elements would be affected by targeting average handle time.

Not All Call Center Managers Are Equipped to Discuss Average Handle Time

New products or procedures were added without taking into account the implications on average handle time, or how it could be maintained, without affecting the quality of calls. Pressure was applied to maintain average handle time when new products were introduced to ensure they cost in. Similar situations would arise when IT changes (software, applications and infrastructure) were made without measuring or considering the consequence.

The debate should be balanced with the point that not all managers in call centers, were aware or equipped to have a meaningful discussions about changing average handle time, how to quantify the affects, or  were able to explain the cost implications to the business of a decrease or increase of n+ seconds on the average handle time.

Average handle time was normally the target of the call center representative in addition to the call center manager. Average handle time as the main target is inappropriate because it confuses the call center representative. It is of interest to call center managers but counter productive for achieving revised call center targets that account for quality.

In Theory Average Handle Time Is Not That Bad

In theory average handling time should be the easiest call center measure to use because it is what it says it is. It’s an average of what is going on with call handling times. The issue does not lie with the measure, but with the lack of understanding of the players in the call center who use it. This ensures that all people who are fully educated and understand the parts of average handle time are taken into account.

Some of the key elements that affect average handle time are: call type mix; the call center representative’s efficiency, call center representative skill level, the effectiveness of the IT systems and applications, processes, training, coaching and development. I have demonstrated these elements below in an average handle time force-field diagram below. (Click on diagram to enlarge.)


Common Responses to the Average Handle Time Topic

“But it’s different in our call center.”

“Average handle time is not relevant on outbound.”

“I don’t mind how long call takes so long as they make the sale.” 

Average handle time is relevant regardless of the call type that is handled, the measure is valuable, and very usable. Average handle time provides a quick and effective indicator that a call center representative is out of step with the norm and further investigation is required. This considers all other constituent parts and measures e.g. sales, quality, first time resolution, customer satisfaction, etc.

Average Handle Time Findings Can Be Positive or Negative and Should Add Value to Training

This can bring important hidden issues to the surface because average handle time can expose process failures. This insight into average handle time provides a powerful argument to have the issues addressed.

Average handle time is a fundamental part of resourcing a call center, being used to calculate the number of call center representatives against call volume and the required service level. Therefore it must be a used appropriately for budgeting and/or to demonstrate the impact of, changing process and procedures, e.g. IT changes, process failures, turnover with call center representatives, new or add-on products and marketing initiatives.

If average handle time is not monitored within the call center I would suggest educating those who need to be more aware of its purpose. Also there is a risk that resourcing and finance will make the decision without sufficient robust input from operations.

What Are the Alternatives to Using Average Handle Time—Quality Measures, Sales, Number of Complaints?

Of course these are all valuable measures alone, but used with average handle time they provide a fully round argument. Understanding the average handle time movers could avoid the situation where head count was reduced but the service level target, PCA, was to be maintained, which results in some call centers suppressing calls to meet the target. Unfortunately, this is not only bad practice but a double edged sword, because customers affected by call suppression will refer to it during the call, resulting in an increased average handle time.

I have successfully used average handle time to; have new equipment installed and the call center refurbish saving 50 FTE; saved £1m per annum by changing a call center Process; secured funding for the implementation of a Voice response solution for customer verification.

Don’t Avoid Average Handle Time as a KPI

It would be naive to avoid average handle time as a measure, but like all the other call center measures, it cannot be used in isolation. There needs to be a full set of measures that are suitably weighted to demonstrate effectiveness, quality and value for money that is being delivered by the call center; therefore don’t forget the tail measures. Average handle time should not be used to pressure call center representatives and call center managers but to ensure they examine and question changes that are detrimental to service and best practice is shared. 

It is not possible to carry out proper sizing and pricing without average handle time, whether this is for budgeting or to demonstrate the impact of, changing process and procedures. Given a well founded and robust average handle time, anyone should be on solid ground when discussing budgets, FTE and pay.

Value for Money in the Call Center

We should also not lose sight of the fact that the cost for every person and piece of infrastructure is passed onto the customer through the services and products provided by the company. Surely, the aim for any business, therefore, is to deliver an efficient, good quality and cost effective call. All the tools available should be used to delivery value for money, in the case of a call center a good quality and effective transaction, average handle time with other relevant measures used appropriately can ensure that this is delivered. Food for thought; the cost of adding one second to the average handle time in a call center I managed was £10,000 plus 3 FTE. 

Final word on call center measures: Like average handle time it is as easy for any other call center measure to drop from favor, if the call center measure is not understood and used appropriately. Therefore we should not forget that whatever measures, commission or bonus that are used in a call center it is vital to ensure that the tail is measured and desired outcome(s) are delivered. 

First published on Customer Management IQ.

Contributor: Ben Bennett

Share |

Ben Bennett is a highly successful and professional manager, with a wide range of experience within a large corporate telecoms company and retail environment. Bennett has extensive experience in all aspects of the call center. He’s led a successful implementation of call center resourcing tools, i.e. Aspect eWFM 2000 (previously know as TCS), Pipkins and QMAX, within single and multi-site environments. He’s been responsible for the selection, negotiations, planning and implementation, and hands-on daily management of Telecoms equipment, in particular ASPECT ACD with Contact server, Avaya Index, SER and Melita predictive dialers, and call recording solutions. Bennett also is familiar with the development and management of call flow principles, rules and skill based routing both on ACD’s and at non-geographic level, with DR options. All new technology implemented without operational disruption in centers with circa 500 seats.

 

You Should Check Out:

Average Handle Time: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

Working Smarter Not Harder for Process Excellence in the Call Center

Doing More With Less in the Call Center and the Dangers of Average Handle Time

Report Abuse   fiesler46 02/05/2010 9:16:17 AM EST New theories in contactcenters are that AHT is not relevant and FCR is the KPI that should replace it. Ofcourse FCR is the c-sat driver as we all know. It is very naive to think that AHT isn't relevant. If somebody gives me this story, i always answer with a counterquestion: 'Are you responsible for the budget? The answer is always: 'No' . My answer always is: 'I didn't think so'. The problem with the reputation of AHT is that it always used by poor managers and CEO, CFO's to manage operations as the only measure. Knowledge of business is poor with these guys. Because of the way businessess are structured (top-down) the people who do know, have no influence in the decissionmaking. AHT is, as Ben says, a culmination of a lot of variables, so actually , you can't manage AHT, just all the variables. These are the same that drive FCR. If you do not understand this, you have no business managing a contactcenter Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   Steven 02/04/2010 9:55:11 AM EST Ben, I am sorry to say that you wrote a bad article about AHT (Average Handle Time). You don't get it, in practice it’s quite different ! Your article gives the impression that you are a theorist or a manager, without a prolonged and real experience as an agent on the telephone. I am an agent (CSR) with more than 20 years of daily experience in many Contact centers and I am sorry to say that your article sounds as if you are one of those managers receving a bonus by achieving an arbitrary goal like AHT, at the end of each year. Why should a counter-productive and irrelevant KPI (Key Performance Indicator) like AHT mean more than sales, upsell, cross-sell, loyalty, retention, positive feedback from customers, a better agent-motivation and less complaints ? Viewed as Cost centers for so many years, reducing call time has meant reducing costs. People began to believe that reducing call times would make customers happier because their calls would be shorter. Well, they're not ! In fact, while companies have been focusing on reducing AHT, customer satisfaction ratings have dipped to an all time low. For Contact centers, it has been a hard lesson to learn that customers only care about the outcome of their call. Customers want a complete and accurate answer and a correct solution to their problem, the right way, the first time. They don’t care about a stupid and obsolete AHT-goal in a Contact center. How well they were served, not how long it took, drives the customer’s impression of an organization and their propensity to purchase or recommend. LET'S NOT BEAT ABOUT THE BUSH : A) Contact centers are obliged to use measures that really matter to the customer, not some internal measure like AHT that the customer doesn't care about ; B) The cost of acquiring new customers is ten times as high as the cost of customer retention ; C) There are NO industry agreed on definitions or standards on applying AHT ; D) As proven, there are at least 14 reasons why AHT largely (90%) depends on sheer circumstances and situations which CANNOT be controlled by agents themselves ; E) Reducing AHT in Contact centers equals : "A contest to minimize the average time it takes an agent to LOSE good customers, by rushing, interrupting and snapping those customers, in order to produce BAD service a few seconds faster" ; F) In many Contact centers, it became apparent that the center’s best agents — the ones who consistently achieved their sales, first call resolution, accuracy and customer satisfaction targets — would no longer be eligible for bonuses, merit pay raises or promotion because they were not meeting the mandated AHT-goal. CONCLUSIONS : 1) For Contact centers, operating at the highest levels shouldn’t mean processing the most calls in the shortest possible AHT, constantly driving agents to a AHT-craze that nicely links to a irrelevant “budget” ; 2) Striving to produce BAD service a few seconds FASTER, by rewarding agents on the basis of a short AHT, will not have any effect. It’s a recipe for disaster and the customers are the ultimate losers. The focus should be on the customer, not on a stupid target like AHT ; 3) AHT may simply be used internally, for staffing purposes, nothing else ; 4) The desire for great customer service is 180 degrees in the wrong direction from pushing agents to meet or exceed their AHT ; 5) A customer doesn’t want to be HANDLED, he wants to be SERVED ; 6) If you reward short AHT’s, you will also get more call-backs, more complaints, more stress, burnt-out agents, higher training costs for new hires and lower agent-motivation ; 7) AHT is a counter-productive, blunt, obsolete, short-sighted, meaningless, irrelevant, stupid and useless goal ; 8) No wonder that more and more Contact centers transform from a poor Cost center into a sound “Value center”. Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   lisa.schulman 02/03/2010 12:15:46 PM EST LEAN 6 SIGMA FOR AHT AND 1st CONTACT RESOLUTION! IQPC’s 2009 Call Center Excellence Award Winner for Call Center Leader of the Year is Gordon Pullan, Assistant Vice President, Participant Information Center of MassMutual Financial Services. I am pleased to announce that Gordon has joined the speaker faculty of our 11th Annual Call Center Week June 2010 Vegas. Find out how the company is implementing Lean Six Sigma projects for AHT and 1st Contact Resolution to streamline work and reduce waste. The company is holding employees accountable to high standards and giving them the opportunity to excel. Attend his session and learn strategies for setting high standards and holding onto top performers as the market rebounds and job opportunities open up. Hope to see you at the event! For more information about the event and our Excellence Awards, please visit www.callcenterweek.com Lisa Schulman, Sector Leader and Executive Producer IQPC Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment

Report Abuse   debmalyadutta 02/02/2010 12:57:27 PM EST Nice article Ben . I agree with you that AHT is still a relevant KPI . The flaws lie in its contextual usage / interpretation . Without doubt , AHT points to operational efficiency and operational efficiencies directly co-relate to operational costs . Like very nicely illustrated by your diagram , what is important is to understand what factors are influencing fluctuations in AHT within your Contact Centre . Be it an upward trend or a downward trend in AHT , it is absolutely necessary to understand 1. the root causes i.e factors influencing the change 2. the factors that interplay with this fluctuation i.e quality of interaction First Call Resolutions , Complaint management efficiencies and most important the customer experience index . It could well happen that if used in the wrong context which could be due to a lack in education , an agent might reduce his interaction /handle time at the cost of a good experience i.e - not going that extra mile with the customer not giving an impression of being likeable to the customer not being proactive in discussing the customer's issues Replies (0) Post a reply Sign in or Sign up to post a comment