ABSTARCT :
To investigate call centre management from the perspective of the managers, particularly what the key management responsibilities are in managing call centres and the key performance indicators (KPIs) used in managing call centres. A survey of call centre managers, followed by in-depth interviews. There is confusion over the strategic intent of call centres. Centres are primarily used by organisations as a means of reducing costs, with customer service delivery a secondary consideration. Call centre managers, however, declared customer service as their main management responsibility. The metrics employed in the call centres resulted in managers concentrating on the call itself rather than the outcome of the call from the perspective of the customer or the organisation. Some quantitative measures were used as proxies for customer service, but the achievement of the relevant KPI became a goal in its own right. There appears to be an insatiable appetite for quantitative performance measures, despite their limitations, almost to the exclusion of all other performance measures. The implication of the results for call centre managers, and their managers, is that call centres could be better managed if a wider range of means and measures were used.
EXISTING SYSTEM :
? Workforce management systems, when combined with simulation software, take existing or historical conditions and allow managers to adjust the parameters to conduct what-if scenarios.
? Several useful guidelines, discussed in the next section, for monitoring systems should be considered before selecting a system and installing it in a new or existing call center operation.
? The existence of virtual multisite centers, teleworking, or dispersed call/contact center operations does not mean that workforce management systems cannot be employed.
? Organizations of all types depend on the existence of shared meanings and interpretations of reality, which facilitate coordinated action among employees.
DISADVANTAGE :
? A lack of understanding by senior management was also described as a problem with three call centre managers explaining that their managers did not fully appreciate the pressures of the call centre and the impact that the call centre had on the entire organisation.
? The manager would look at the hot spots on the heat chart to determine at a glance, where problems were occurring.
? The problem is that the ease of measurement which leads to automatic reporting can create the belief that the attributes being measured are important.
? The survey revealed that call centre agent turnover was a problem (40 per cent of respondents reported annual turnover of agents was over 10 per cent), however little was being done to address the fundamental causes of the turnover.
PROPOSED SYSTEM :
• As telephone services matured, several solutions to resource management challenges were proposed.
• In a call center, most callers get connected to a CSR much quicker than the average, but some wait far beyond the average.
• It is important that service level be interpreted in the context of call blockage, that is, calls not getting through.
• Any time some portion of callers is getting busy signals, no matter whether generated by the system resulting from a limited number of staff and lines during a busy period, service level reports only report on the calls that are getting through.
ADVANTAGE :
? This particular research is interested in investigating what the key management responsibilities are in managing call centres and the key performance indicators (KPIs) used in managing call centres.
? An assessment of how well the reported performance measures fit with the strategic objectives of the centres will be attempted.
? The call centre employed performance standards including a service quality checklist, which aimed to promote consistency of service.
? They found that the performance objectives and performance management programs were weighted towards numerical quotas and targets for efficiency and speed.
? There was clear resentment in one case as it was only the areas where performance was adverse to agreed KPIs that ever received any attention.
|