On April 19, 2018, AnswerOn held our webinar “Overcoming Call Center Obstacles” which featured our special guests Dave Gregory, CEO of Conatus3, and Joe Cox, Workforce Management Consultant and former Vice President of Workforce Management at Alorica. Both speakers spoke to issues that are still relevant two years later.
Hearing directly from agents related to their working conditions, scheduling, and company policies provides invaluable insights, that data collection alone will not. This blog highlights some of AnswerOn’s generational-focused research findings, which centered around comparing two age groups: 18-28 year-olds and agents 29 or older.
Employee attrition rates tend to soar in January. Why are workers more likely to leave at the beginning of the year? We identify some of the common reasons that cause employees to resign and look at some measures to help reduce rates of attrition.
Managers and executives know that call centers can be costly parts of business. Yet, many common call center practices thought to help reduce costs cause problems themselves. If your company wants to reduce costs funneling into contact centers, consider these two techniques and their pros and cons.
Here are several common reasons that agents leave after the onboarding process, and how AnswerOn’s solution can help call centers know which agents are at-risk and, most importantly, the proactive action that can prevent them from leaving.
Structured interactions are one of the key components in the AnswerOn System for retaining agents.Find high risk agents BEFORE they leave.
The TV crime show genre is very popular. Fighting agent attrition with AnswerOn is a lot more like your favorite “whodunit” than you’d expect it to be.
“One-Size fits all” solutions for improving call center moral might make happy agents happier, but could push at-risk agents out the door.
CEO Eric Johnson explains how managers trick themselves into thinking they know how their employees feel just by walking around.
Director of Project Management Chris Johnson explains how easily disciplinary measures can go wrong. Discipline should encourage agent improvement, not churn.