Average Handle Time: An Antiquated Call Center Metric

AHT is exactly what it means. It's an average time for handling calls during a set range. Being efficient and effective will compensate for the odd long call, in addition to the short calls. So it's NOT an antiquated metric. The simple analogy of having someone fix your car in an efficient manner speaks volumes to the basic concept. e.g. Would you like to pickup your car from a true professional who is effective & efficient in a day OR would you rather wait three days from someone who is ONLY focused on the problem (e.g. rewired the entire car when there's just a cut wire)? If focus was on the reason why the customer made the initial contact, then resolving the issue by relying on the existing process/policy would address any longer calls (e.g. escalating to the next level). This so called NEW concept of focusing on the customer was never a new thing when I started nearly 15 years ago with AT&T's help-desk support group. It's all just a smoke & mirrors game for "so called call center experts" who want to make it look like they are trying to address valid complaints by customers. Welcome to the offshore challenge! Just remember this you new call center experts "Talk is cheap! Actions (in the eyes of the customer) speak louder than just words!" Note: I'm finally out of the contact center industry because of off-shoring services to save $ (misleading the shareholders trust - long term investment).
Replies (0)

The cost of business in a call center is call handling time. To assume that it is antiquated is a concern. An increase of 10 seconds across our system is equivalent to an increase of over 400 reps per year to handle the same call volume within our service standards. To ignore this is a poor decision. We coach to behaviors that drive CRT and no we do not ignore quality service. Looking systemically is not counter to coaching to behaviors that create profitability and service to the customer. It is an average not an absolute per call of course.
Replies (0)

AHT used as an agent performance standard can drive the wrong behaviors. The focus should be on areas over which they have direct control such as adherence and quality.
Replies (0)

Agree with a lot of what has been said and having the right staff. AHT should also be quality controlled by first call fufillment. One of the ways, I have found helpful in the past is to measure by tracking recalls from telephone numbers. On assessment, recalls are normally a further enquiry and can be linked to unaddressed needs. It is a primal way but can easily be followed up with random quality assurance enquiry calls to the customer, to ask whether they were handled adequately and their needs have been addressed.
Replies (0)

I think everyone has covered the many facets of AHT here, and what it comes down to is that everywhere does it their way and it seems to work for them. AHT is nothing more than a baseline which is relative to other KPI's tied to whichever goals your center is trying attain. Obviously, it is best to handle a customer issue the first time, every time, regardless of it being an internal or external customer. The less touches, the less resources used, the less cost is attributed to that action comparatively. AHT as a whole is only a navigational tool used to tweak staffing and training of the GROUP, and not indicative of an individual, except in rare disciplinary situations. Of course, nothing is 100% and there will be agents that for whatever reasons are able to deliver great results with less than stellar numbers at both ends of the spectrum and they are just as valuable in a well run organization. A better total performance algorithm would be best if anyone in an organization cared to really motivate a sales floor with real success rather than spiffs and daily bonuses which are very short lived and counter productive.
Replies (0)

I think AHT should be measured at application level and not at agent level. This to enablebuilding plans. It should however be just that! Just measuring to see what we are doing not targetting what could be! I think results on things like first call resolution and call monitoring results will encompass all the metrics that will eventually stabalise the AHT naturally in stead of doing it direct which is a dangerous shortcut resulting in hang-ups and poor customer service!
Replies (0)

We have an AHT but don't give it a priority. We are about giving the customer the time they need to resolve the issue. Surprisingly I have found that in not focussing on it we are actually achieving and sometimes exceeding the average we have set down. Very cool and the staff are happy because they don't feel pressured or worried if they end up on a long call. Win win I say!!!!
Replies (0)

Avg. Handle Time is a very important call center metric. Every center has their own way of catering it. In our center we focus on those resources who actively participate in publishing High number of call escalation count & handle time. We let our QA Department review their calls and identify the main reasons behind such results and help them provide the right information at the right point of time within the call to keep the calls short. Where as never push our agents to look at their "AHT" we tell them to focus on Customer Satisfaction, However the case is completely opposite with the supervisory team. We strictly work with them to identify and work with the similar resources. During feedback delivery we let them know that use the following verbiage to improve your customer satisfaction level. Where as in-directly we are focusing on their Avg. Handle Time. We also monitor the agents who put the customers "On-Hold" quite frequently. So in my humble opinion a balance always needs to be maintained though.
Replies (0)

I believe that AHT should not be completely thrown out the window but I do agree that it needs to be subjected to quality considerations. After all the quality of the service rendered has a much greater and more direct impact on success. It should be noted though, that in a system that is customer focused, AHT can become a tool to guide training and decision making. For example, if an agent's average handle times are much higher than the average of their department then a supervisor has the opportunity to review the situation. It may be simply the mix of calls the agent is receiving or it could be that he/she is struggling with a particular type of call and needs additional training. When used in this fashion AHT directs the attention of supervisors to discovering root causes instead of pushing agents to achieve an arbitrary metric. This can then guide the direction of training, system updates, and operational improvements that not only improve the service provided by individual agents but can improve the performance of the entire contact center.
Replies (0)

Nothing wrong if using AHT for staffing needs as long as it is not used for improvement. Productivity and financial measures have no place in improvement efforts as they focus us on costs and not the causes of costs. Regards, Tripp Babbitt www.newsystemsthinking.com
Replies (0)

AHT can clearly be very subjective as a call asking for a bill balance is clearly going to be shorter than a technical support call. I would agree that it should not be the only metric to measure agent productivity as I feel that FCR and a high quality of service is highly important with respect to client retention and future business. However, AHT is required in our operation in conjuction with Arrival patterns in order to enable us to forecast our staffing need. So as a metric it is not necessarily dead, it should maybe taken as a piece of the wider service proposition.
Replies (0)

I believe that AHT is a completely counterproductive performance/revenue metric; because it creates an inverse ratio of performance goals of quality and FCR goals to revenue goals of maximum CPC. I wrote a novel about the agent-side of the call center work experience called, HANDLE TiME http://www.amazon.com/HANDLE-TiME-LiNCOLN-PARK/dp/0615215181 It is a satire, but managers would do well to read it. Each call leaves an impression on the customer. First Call Resolution is even more important to a customer in a society where everything they do and purchase is niched and instantaneous. You may think you are saving $$ in the short term by whisking the clients off the line, but what you are actually doing is reinforcing a feeling of customer dissatisfaction with your product/ service — and opening a hole for a competitor to fill in the longer term. Look at what happened to Blockbuster Video. They are planning to close up to 900 stores this year because they ignored the way customers are consuming video. So, along came Netflix. it’s the same concept. if you force an agent to constantly choose between meeting their AHT requirements vs. trying to secure the FCR goal — AND you keep linking the AHT to the commission payout determination, what do you think the agent will do? He/she wants to get paid for all the sales they have made all month. You had better believe they will rush the client off the phone to meet that AHT goal. the customer will have to call whoever else is in queue to get their problem resolved. Managers always forget that the FLAs don’t make that much money to begin with — and the thought of building a month’s worth of commissions only to lose it all because their AHT levels might kill their quality goals is like a torturous hammer over their heads. In this recession, it is hardly possible under those terms for the agent to solely consider the customer’s needs when servicing a call. It’s bass ackwards, IMHO. In the end. I think call centers must decide if they want to sell their services to corporations strictly on the ‘we come really cheap on the front end’ approach, or the ‘we focus on your ROI; but we do it through an enhanced emphasis on FCR; which keeps your clients loyal, happy and repeaters.’ Anyway, that’s just my humble opinion. I hope you get a chance to read HANDLE TiME It’s been out for a year — and the agents are eating it up! Maybe the management should, too. Best Regards, LiNCOLN PARK
Replies (0)

Quality measurement with regards to customer delight and satisfaction can help to change this old order. But more call centers are changing into aligning AHT with other metrics like Quality scores and adherence. How good will it be if the customers can really assess the CCR.
Replies (0)

How good it is to finally have it confirmed that AHT is not the ultimate measure of an agents productivity. Instead of all these quantitave measures there is a real need to start looking at qualitative measures. If you get the quality right i.e. accuracy, consistancy, FCR, right training methods than the quantative measures will be achieved with ease.
Replies (0)

Charles: Long calls are produced by variation outside the agents control (like technology, customer, work rules, work design, structure, etc). The agent can't control these things. More importantly, whether AHT, calls/hr, etc focus us away from the system elements (the items discussed earlier structure, customer, etc) that make up 95% of the systems performance, 5% for the individual. Further, productivity measures (AHT, Calls/day) we find increase costs because if we don't understand the demand on the first call, we get more calls . . . called failure demand (demand caused by a failure to do something or do something right for a customer). Shortening calls is a slippery slope with knowledge of failure demand, it creates more calls which saves us nothing but increased failure demand, more costs and worse service. Thanks for the question. Tripp Babbitt www.newsystemsthinking.com
Replies (0)

I can agree that using AHT as a measuring stick for the agents most frequently provides long term bad results. AHT, like forecasting accuracy, is best measured across a span of time for the whole group not the individual. However, we still need agent productivity. Wouldn't measuring the agents by a calls per hour or calls per day, provide flexiblity on the AHT and reduce or eliminate agent worry concerning a long call?
Replies (0)

Wow. I have been saying this for years and now people are actually thinking about it. I have always felt that if all the other goals were being met or exceeded, ie. sales, custmer satisfaction, etc., then the AHT was just a number for workforce forcasting. Great article. Thanks
Replies (0)

Awesome post! Big shout out to you, Tripp, on my site. http://www.pkward.com/ideas-observations/2009/10/20/complexity-on-the-backend-variability-on-the-front.html
Replies (0)

Instead of using AHT as a metric of success for the agent, perhaps could be put to use as a trending metric. If it is found that when the agent is helping the customer replace widget GX9 it takes a long time. Once this is discovered a solution could be formulated. Maybe documentation on parts replacement for the customer needs to be improved. Maybe a better method of replacing the part could be found. Or the answer could be a change in design of the product. Instead of using AHT to ding the agent, it can be used to improve product, documentation, or methodology.
Replies (0)

very interesting commentary and I find myself sharing the philosophy. The big step here once you put down the command and control is getting the right folks on the bus. without the right people talking to your clients everything else fails...
Replies (0)