Aligning On Quality, And Staying Consistent While team leads do grade occasionally, the majority of the grading comes from agents looking over each others’ work. To do this, we developed a peer review program using MaestroQA. The last thing we wanted was a top down system for quality management – we wanted the team to continue learning from one another and helping each other both up and down the hierarchical structure. ![]() This is their story: The “Why” Of Peer Review They just needed a more robust framework and process to create the feedback culture that they wanted to have – a culture in which feedback moves both up and down the hierarchical ladder, and in which feedback is constructive, actionable, and ultimately improves the customer experience. They felt like giving feedback was a cultural value of their company – but the feedback was often vaguely positive and non-actionable, and wasn’t actually helping anyone improve their skills.Īdditionally, one of Illuminate Education’s core values is continuous improvement, and they knew that they could improve the program. Matt Dale, VP of Support, and Kallen Bakas, Director of Support, didn’t feel like they fully knew what was going on in agent-customer interactions, and they didn’t have a strategy or process for team improvement unless an issue was escalated (in which case they’d give the agent feedback). And, like many companies in this phase, they were managing the process in spreadsheets. ![]() Before MaestroQA, the support team at Illuminate Education was doing what many companies in the early phases of a quality assurance program do – they were spot checking tickets reactively, particularly when they were made aware of an issue (a bad CSAT score or a customer complaint).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |