Great to see all the participation and inputs! I am not the person most qualified at my company to reply, but I got the following feedback from the team that is ....
I agree with a lot of the suggestions made below. I'll insist on some and add my own:
- One of our key pain points for evaluation monitoring has been the lack of export at question level - it prevents us from doing any meaningful reporting beyond who's been evaluated, how many times, and what their average score was, which doesn't give us a lot of actionable insights beyond telling people to do more QM.
- What we want to be able to do is link the QM score for specific items, with the same topics in S&T (Speech and Text trascription) and with specific business outcomes (for instance, the score obtained from the question "did the agent promote the survey effectively?" linked to the frequency of 'Promoting the survey" topic and to the Response Rate for that agent).
2) Not sure if I've seen this in the below, so adding it just in case - when we use Evaluation Assistance, it would be super helpful to have the dialect of the topic showing in the dropdown list from which we choose a topic as the Evaluation assistance trigger. We try to enforce a harmonized taxonomy across all regions, which means that we have, for instance, as many topics called "Error messages" as there are English dialect regions... without anything to differentiate them. It's a real pain when setting up QM forms!
3) In general, having S&T and QM work more hand in hand would be fantastic. Lots of wasted potential currently - we can't use S&T metrics such as "% silence" or "% overtalk" to help score the quality of call handling, which is a shame. And we can't leverage Categories either, when we've taken the pain to define a specific combination of criteria in the admin side.
4) Having forms without scoring too, and being able to complete them with AI, would help with our audits and the filtering of calls for further study. Topics can't do all of that, and we sometimes just need to understand what type of calls there were (particularly in Sales) before even delving into their quality.
As a side note - one key weakness we see with Genesys is the quality of reporting within Genesys itself - it would take multiple recommendations to bring it just to the level of our current BI reporting, before we even contemplate actual interactive, quick, intuitive reports that hit the mark.
- I'd rather they focus on offering the functionalities and the APIs needed, and we keep with our customized BI reports
- Genesys has got enough to do to break down the obvious silos between functionalities such as QM, S&T, and genAI
------------------------------
Kyle Horton
Services Manager, Contact Center
------------------------------