2. Key Focus Points:
Planning Cycle Vision
2015 / 2016 Objectives
Key Achievements....Q1!
Key Achievements....Q2!
Key Achievements....Q3!
Key Achievements....Q4!
Focus and Challenges
Adherence is a measure of how closely a colleague sticks or “adheres” to their shift patterns.
It measures both how long colleagues spend in “on-phone / off-phone” activities and when they spend
that time.
It does this by comparing the information from the shift schedules with the information from the
Automated Call Distribution System (ACD).
When we accurately predict the volume of calls coming in and prepare shift patterns to meet that volume
then adherence can have a huge effect on our ability to service our customer needs and meet our
Performance Targets.
In the Resource Planning Hub we forecast the number of calls that we expect to receive in every 15
minute period of the day.
We add in the average call handling time of the call and forecast the number of colleagues required to
service our Customers needs.
But how does this translate to what actually happens on the day?
The following simulation will show what happens when adherence goes wrong………………
Lets Talk About Adherence!
3. Key Focus Points:
Planning Cycle Vision
2015 / 2016 Objectives
Key Achievements....Q1!
Key Achievements....Q2!
Key Achievements....Q3!
Key Achievements....Q4!
Focus and Challenges
We are going to focus on just 1 hour within our Contact Centre…..10am to 11am
Our colleagues have been issued with their schedules which include breaks, lunches, team
meetings etc …..this plan leaves 37 colleagues on the phones across the hour.
Lets look at each 15min interval in turn to look at the effect adherence has on our ability to
service our Customer needs.
For each 15 min period we predicted that we
need 37 colleagues to achieve our
Performance target of 90/20….this reflects our
ambition to connect with 90% of our
customers within 20secs.
Let me set the scenario….
4. • Each interval is identical in that we receive 90 customer calls
• The average handling time of these calls is 300 secs (5mins)
• Our Performance Target is to answer 90% of the calls within 20 secs
Interval 1 – 10:00 to 10:15
Average calls in Queue = less than 1
Average wait time = 6.7 secs
We have 37 colleagues on shift
On average 30 colleagues will be speaking with customers
On average 7 colleagues are available to take a call
All colleagues will spend 18.9% of the interval in an available
state
Our Service Level
Performance is
90.3%
How did we do? . . . . . . . . . .
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
Available
On Call
Available Available Available AvailableAvailable Available
5. This is an example of what should happen.
• Our customer are happy as their call is being answered in a
reasonable time
• Our colleagues are happy as they are not under severe pressure
• Our business is happy as this scenario puts us in the best place
to achieve our service levels and greater Customer Satisfaction
Overall we answered 90.3% of calls in 20 seconds
Let’s see what happened in the next 15-min interval...
6. • One of our colleagues has taken an extra 15mins on their break so that they can
chat with a friend.
• They didn’t imagine that it would matter much as it didn’t look too busy.
Interval 2 – 10:15 to 10:30
Average calls in Queue = 1.1
Average wait time = 10.6 secs
We have 37 colleagues on shift
On average 30 colleagues will be speaking with customers
On average 6 colleagues are available to take a call
All colleagues will spend 16.7% of the interval in an available
state
Our Service Level
Performance is
85.8%
Lets look at the impact . . . . . . .
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
Available
Unavailable
Available Available Available AvailableAvailable Available
7. The removal of just one Agent can have a huge
effect on our service levels
• Our Customers have to wait longer to have their call answered
• Our remaining colleagues are under more pressure as they work
harder to make up for the absence of their colleague
Only 85.8% of calls were answered in 20
seconds in this period.
Overall so far in the hour the service level is
now 87.8%
Lets look at the third 15 min interval…
8. • At this point, one of our Team Leaders decides to bring forward their planned 30
min meeting to 10:30 (the meeting was originally planned for 10:45 to coincide
with the arrival of 6 further colleagues starting their shift)
Interval 3 – 10:30 to 10:45
Average calls in Queue = 24
Average wait time = 239.7 secs
We now only have 31 colleagues
On average 30 colleagues will be speaking with customers
On average only 1 colleague is available to take a call
All colleagues will spend 3.2% of the interval in an available state
Our Service Level
Performance is
25.3%
What does this show us?. . . . . .
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
Unavailable
Available
Unavailable Unavailable Unavailable Unavailable UnavailableUnavailable
9. The effect is devastating
• Our Customers are now waiting almost 4 minutes to be answered
• This will actually increase the number of incoming calls as our
customers try to get through, abandon and then try again later
• Our colleagues are taking one call after another almost constantly
• This is not an environment to achieve greater Customer
Satisfaction
25.3% of calls were answered in 20 secs.
Overall so far in the hour the service level is
now 67%
And now the final 15-min period
10. • The Team Leader realises that his colleagues are under pressure and quickly
concludes the meeting.
• They assume that as they now have the colleagues back on the phones, plus
the additional 6 people that started their shift that the Service would be
recovered….
Interval 4 – 10:45 to 11:00
Average calls in Queue = 0
Average wait time = less than a sec
We now only have 43 colleagues
On average 30 colleagues will be speaking with customers
On average 13 colleagues are available to take a call
All colleagues will spend 30% of the interval in an available state
Our Service Level
Performance is
99.3%
Were they right?. . . . . .
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
On Call On Call On Call On Call On CallOn Call On Call
Available Available Available Available Available Available
Available Available Available Available Available Available Available
On Call
11. Being 6 Agents overstaffed adds only 9.3% to the
service level where taking 6 away loses 65%!
• Our Customers calls are being answered quicker but this is
virtually undetectable to them
• 30% availability looks attractive but this often produces the “drag”
factor as our colleagues don’t feel busy enough, call times increase
and we can actually be providing an inferior service
• This is wasted resource as we could hit our service levels with 37
Agents
Although the Service level in this period is 99.3%,
the overall service level for the hour is 75%.
12. • Overall in this hour we achieved 75% Service Level when we
predicted that 90% was attainable
• In overall adherence terms we had only 15-mins extra off-phone
activity than was planned (the Agent who went over on their break)
• Though the last 15-minute period helped improve the service level
we would need to repeat this performance for the next 2 hours to
get back to 90% in 20 secs overall!
• This shows the importance, not only of overall adherence (taking the
correct amount of time) but accuracy as well (sticking to the time of
the day)
In Summary
13. • We try to match the number of Colleagues required to the number
of available for every 15-min interval
• Even the removal of 1 person has an effect on service levels
• The removal of more than 1 person can have a potentially
devastating effect
• It is not possible to “fix” it by putting our colleagues back or by
overstaffing, the damage may have been already done
• Lack of adherence damages the service to our customers and the
work of our colleagues
Things to Consider
