Don't Fall into the Deadly Trap of Call Center Metrics

This might be a world of "strategic calls" and revenue-driven customer service, and it is true that metrics like average handle time are losing meaning for many organizations, but do not dare assume that successful call center leaders are leaving performance metrics in the dust!

True, many are embracing customer satisfaction and NetPromoter scores as clearer indicators of excellence, but when it comes to overseeing their agents and maximizing investment into customer service, they cannot help but look at performance.

[eventPDF]

Consistent first call resolution, in particular, continues to represent a gold standard for call center management, at least for those Vice Presidents and other executives in attendance at the 7^thAnnual Call Centre Week Canada in Toronto, Ontario.

According to presenter Jane Torrance of Direct Energy, excellence against the first call resolution benchmark leads to reduced operating costs, improved customer and employee satisfaction, increased upsell opportunities and reduced customer complaints and negative word-of-mouth (if not an outright positive impact on brand advocacy).

It, for all intents and purposes, touches on every key element of a successful call center management strategy.

But those leaders who rely on first call resolution as a performance metric are cautioned to keep a sound perspective on the issue. Even a measurement that seems as straightforward and self-explanatory as "first call resolution" can be nebulous, and a consequence of that muddiness is a damaging pitfall for many organizations.

In short, there is a wrong way to measure FCR.

As detailed above, one of the key reasons for FCR’s ongoing relevance is its direct connection to the customer experience. It is not just a way to easily manage and evaluate staff—it actually speaks to the efficacy, enjoyment and value of each correspondence a customer has with the brand.

It, nonetheless, is technically a performance metric. It is not necessarily scoring customer satisfaction, loyalty, effort or anything of the sort—it is scoring how well the agents are performing.

As an unfortunate consequence, far too many organizations focus on an internal vision for first call resolution. They view first call resolution entirely through the lens of call center and call center agent, forgetting that resolution, at its core, is a measure that belongs wholly to the customer.

For organizations that actually care about customer satisfaction, there can be no debate—the "resolution" part of first call resolution must be defined by the customer. It is the customer—not the agent—who knows whether or not his inquiry has reached a satisfactory end.

The "first call" part must also be determined by the customer. Due to collapses in knowledge management and record keeping, it is entirely plausible that a customer who has tirelessly tried to reach the organization through various channels will be pegged as a "first-time caller" when his voice emerges on the other end of the telephone. But a resolution on that call, though probably the best the organization can do at that given time, is not first call resolution if the customer believes it took more than one "call" to achieve the desired outcome.

In a customer-centric world, performance metrics should be selected based on their connection to positive outcomes for customers. That reality, in and of itself, explains why organizations must view first call resolution as a customer-dictated measure. If call centers are not performing the way customers desire, they are not performing well.

An insular, organizational vision of first call resolution also carries another severe consequence: it drives agents towards detrimental interactions with customers.

If required to achieve first call resolution against a company standard, agents will naturally attempt to fit all customer complaints, questions and comments into one of a few "boxes" for which a typical, hasty, painless resolution is offered. This will minimize meaningful engagement and relationship-building, as the agent focuses on the broad, easily-addressable aspects of the customer’s call rather than the intricacies that complicate calls by getting at his true sentiment.

And so in addition to creating a disparity between the measured first call resolution rate and the percentage of customers who actually believe their issues to be resolved, the agent will actively undermine customer relationships as he seeks to deliver generic resolutions—quickly—at the expense of getting to know the customer and his expectations.

Customers, not managers, must be driving the conception of first call resolution. Their satisfaction is what is at stake with each interaction, and their happiness and brand loyalty is what is either strengthened or weakened when the call ends. We may use first call resolution to assess agent and organizational performance, but it only matters because it matters to the customer.

During her presentation, Torrance shared some key points to remember when measuring first call resolution:

• FCR is defined by the customer. While organizations should be building their processes and standards to align with the customer vision, it is never sufficient to use a purely-internal measure to assess agent performance. How the customer feels—and this will change from customer to customer, industry to industry, era to era—is what matters.
• Don't ignore channels. Customers might have accessed your brands through various touch points prior to calling the contact center; "first call resolution" cannot simply be a telephone-based proposition. All channels should feature the same level of agent resolve.
• Collect meaningful feedback from callers. First call resolution is a very specific concept, and post-call surveys and inquiries must be pointed enough to capture that feedback. That data—not the agent’s confidence that he followed the script and delivered the typical, generic "resolution"—is what provides the calculation basis.
• Adjust metrics accordingly. As noted, the era of "strategic calls" has made some metrics meaningless or counterproductive, and that fact is amplified by placing a high premium on first call resolution. Performance against average handle time, calls per hour and all metrics predicated on speed and volume rather than satisfaction could suffer as a result of a meaningful commitment to FCR.
• Transferred calls are not "second calls." If customer conception of satisfaction is what matters, they will typically be fine with a transfer if that transfer quickly gets them to the person who can properly resolve the matter. Agents should not feel discouraged from involving other team members and supervisors if it gets the job done—the only reason transfers should be penalized is if they are being done to "push off" angry customers.
• Resolution is not always instant. FCR is about giving the customer what he wants on the first correspondence, but what he wants might not always be something that can be exchanged over the phone or Twitter. If the call ends with a promise that tech support will show up to the customer’s house or that billing will mail a refund, this can count as FCR as long as the customer is happy and the promise is kept.