Recent searches
No recent searches
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/133dd/133ddaa813488765f6ce6cd2c979f0765c4b77c4" alt="Dan Glovier's Avatar"
Dan Glovier
Joined Jun 15, 2023
·
Last activity Aug 15, 2024
Following
0
Followers
0
Total activity
11
Votes
3
Subscriptions
4
ACTIVITY OVERVIEW
BADGES
ARTICLES
POSTS
COMMUNITY COMMENTS
ARTICLE COMMENTS
ACTIVITY OVERVIEW
Latest activity by Dan Glovier
Dan Glovier commented,
Tracking side conversation activity and participation is key - otherwise, the agents are not “getting credit” for their efforts, leaving my senior/helpful agents at a data disadvantage, and not uncovering either areas that need more training (this category of case creates more side conversations) or agents that could use more training (the weight of side conversations per case).
This lack or reporting/data is a non-starter.
View comment · Edited Aug 15, 2024 · Dan Glovier
0
Followers
1
Vote
0
Comments
Dan Glovier commented,
Is there a way to categorize the survey responses? It's great to understand if a client was satisfied, but also understanding what drove that (dis)satisfaction would allow us to understand what is working particularly well or what we need to address?
We call every client who submits a negative survey to determine what happened, express that we hear them, etc. I would love to be able to add a field to that completed survey that would then ascribe that dissatisfaction to a product shortcoming, a need for further training of the team, etc.
Thanks!
View comment · Posted Jan 10, 2024 · Dan Glovier
0
Followers
0
Votes
0
Comments
Dan Glovier commented,
We are currently surveying/collecting client reaction - which is very important. The reasons that clients choose for a negative survey - at times - do not align to the root cause (through no fault of the client). Assigning this root cause to the case/survey, for further data mining later, is important.
In our org, any negative survey is reviewed by the manager and the rep who received the negative feedback. They discuss what went well, and what we can do to help bridge any gaps (training, etc.). I think this is probably pretty standard.
However, in a previous product, we were then able to record a Manager's Reason for the negative survey, which would speak to internal mechanisms (training, product, timing of PD responses, an issue with process, etc.).These response could range from "PD response too slow" or "Proposed PD fix not acceptable" or "Training" or "Client upset with billing"... as you can see, many of these "true" reasons fall outside of the narrow vision of "support". But allowing us to ascribe a second, manager-discovered reason, we can better advance our entire organization rather than focus on an individual rep (which is important, but only part of building a highly effective team).
We can then run a report which would show our biggest drivers of those negative Surveys ... which very often did not align with the client-provided reason. This really, really helped us discover gaps that needed addressing in our previous product - and I honestly miss it very much. In ZD, we don't have that very important data point.
View comment · Posted Jun 29, 2023 · Dan Glovier
0
Followers
0
Votes
0
Comments
Dan Glovier commented,
Here's the workflow we would like to achieve.... a negative survey is submitted. We review the case and more than likely speak with the client to ensure their experience is rectified/good. We want that manager to be able to categorize the gap they discovered. This oftentimes does not align with the client-provided reason - if they provided one.
This will allow us to identify the root cause of the dissatisfaction more accurately as well as track improvement in that area.
Is that doable? If so, how? For this exercise, "add a tag" is not allowed.
View comment · Posted Jun 15, 2023 · Dan Glovier
0
Followers
0
Votes
0
Comments