As we reach the end of the year and begin to plan our vision for 2017 I have put a lot of thought into changing how we view calls. Over the past 2+ years, we have created a lot of searches/categories looking for instances of what we expect to hear in a call. We have had quite a bit of other discussions on agent and consumer profiling, but as I think about it more, I wonder if approaching the problem differently would yield better results. Instead of trying to label the profile of the consumer or agent, what if we created categories for the different events in a call from both sides and discovered which categories paired together more frequently.
Surely in collections, as I expect in other verticals, we all imagine the ideal call flow, the consumer say this, you say something like that, and so on. But what if we built categories for the things we don't expect, you know the things that make the interaction go off track. Consumer says they are not working and the agent replies with a "I'll note the account". I'm thinking about categories such as:
- Agent bail out
- Lack of ownership
- Early discount offer
- Cookie cutter negotiations
- Consumer gatekeeper
I think it is a lot of work, but once you have enough of the events created, I think you can determine which event caused the interaction to derail. Did the agent get sidetracked by a promise of money, caught up in the emotions of a controlling consumer, or bail out on a call they judged as not valuable. I think the placement and different events during an interaction will create the profiles for you and present the coaching opportunity on how to detect the point of departure form what is expected and most importantly, the why.