If you happened to pick up the paper, access the internet, or turn on your TV last week, chances are you heard about the epic matchup that took place on Jeopardy! And if you’re anything like me, you watched with increasing horror as IBM’s Watson supercomputer brutally dispensed with the best opponents mankind had to offer.

When the trivia bloodbath was all over, however, we were left thinking one thing: what does this technology mean for our future—and, in particular, the future of customer service?

It seems the folks at IBM have, not surprisingly, already put some thought into this—and one of the most promising applications they see for the future of this technology is in the call center.

The question certainly raised debate among the research staff here at CCC as to the potential for the technology that’s behind Watson to fundamentally change the role of the call center and the Customer Service Representative. The conversation in our office devolved into “a battle of the Matts”, and below are our brief thoughts:

Question: Does Watson signal a shift in the role of the CSR? Read More »

You may recall Nick’s post in May about a new threshold recently crossed in the United States: cell phones were, for the first time, being used more for data exchange than for voice services. At the time, Nick pondered what the role of service should be in the increasingly data-heavy mobile world—what exactly IS our opportunity here?  Nick’s hypothesis, in essence, was that although a few companies have launched innovative service apps, executives should be prudent in their strategies: 

“While many companies don’t interact with customers on a frequent enough basis to warrant a dedicated app, increasing consideration should be given to mobile-friendly versions of self-service portals. Yes, it’s time for a bare-boned version featuring the most frequent transaction types. Conventional sites are simply too slow to load and cumbersome to navigate via smartphone.”

The story picks up steam with the recently published results of a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Internet and American Life Project, which adds new clarity to Nick’s post.  Pew’s survey examined mobile app adoption among American adults, and based on the results, it seems that the recommendations Nick laid out in May were spot on.

How does this latest data confirm Nick’s advice to proceed with caution for service-dedicated apps?  I’d turn to two conclusions: Read More »

By Dan Clay

Here’s a common sight on courses around the world: a golfer with a $500 driver and a horrible swing.  The unfortunate reality that these club-connoisseurs confront is that the lightest titanium clubhead in Callaway’s line can’t fix a broken swing. 

It’s an expensive lesson to learn, and many contact center leaders make a similar discovery following a new technology purchase.  They put a new technology over a broken process or let a fancy vendor presentation define a process for them – and are then frustrated by lackluster returns.

That’s why, whenever a member asks me, “What’s the next great technology we should consider for our contact center?” I provide the most annoying answer known to mankind: another question.  “Well, what are you trying to accomplish?”  To be successful, technology purchases and implementations must clearly align with specific business objectives.   Read More »

What’s your favorite type of hold music?  Do you like some smooth jazz or light rock?  Or maybe you prefer silence while you wait?  Me personally, I like to listen to some classical music while I’m waiting to talk to a customer service rep.

Whether it’s the recommendation to use nature sounds instead of actual music, a ranking of the top worst hold music songs of all time, or the innovative use of your own staff to record hold music – seems like everyone has an opinion on the matter.  From everything about deciding on the music itself to inserting messaging throughout – I’ve even heard members talk about letting their customers choose which kind of hold music to listen to or let customers choose to wait in silence.

But, there may soon come a time when all of these questions are rendered irrelevant.

Meet LucyPhone. Read More »

Despite my background in sociology, I was always a skeptic of online dating. It just seems that using some personal data points to let an algorithm play matchmaker was missing something – the human element. But several of my closest friends have proven me wrong and are now happily married, and the track record for such services speaks for itself. It seems data can indeed broker the most human of interactions. 

Two weeks ago IBM announced the launch of the Real-time Analytics Matching Platform (RAMP) – essentially this is the next generation of skill-based routing systems. The basic idea is to route customers based on data such as purchase history, account information, even basic demographics, to representatives that have demonstrated the ability to best serve a given customer segment or type.

Yes, it’s kind of like a matchmaker for contact centers.

Read More »

Last week a company asked me how much more first contact resolution (FCR) improvement it has left.  The company knows its FCR rates—the ability to resolve an issue on a single contact—aren’t perfect, but at 84%, it finds it increasingly difficult to move the dial.

As I shared some of our benchmarks, I couldn’t help but comment how inflated some of the figures are—95% and above in some industries in the phone channel, and even higher rates in the e-mail channel.

This wide benchmark variance results from highly diverse definitions and measurements of issue resolution, most of which are not terribly accurate or beneficial.

Most FCR metrics have a vital flaw–they track assumed issue resolution.  Customers typically believe that upon interacting with the service organization, the issue has been resolved.  And so asking the customer via a survey or frontline rep, “Was your issue resolved?”, as conventional wisdom dictates, inevitably leads to a “yes.”  Yet unbeknownst to the customer, he may have to call back for a related issue or obtain clarification. Read More »