Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Twirrim 2304 days ago
Anecdotally, NTL (cable company) in the UK faced a similar issue, and took the worst way to resolve it.

Instead of looking at and understanding why customers were calling in, they decided to outsource management of support to a company that specialised in cutting down the costs.

The methods they employed had employees required to reduce the average support call duration, much like it suggests Expedia started out doing. Employees that didn't hit or beat their average call duration targets got put on a performance improvement plan, and then ultimately laid off.

That average call time was then steadily reduced in stages. It was a great success, the average call duration dropped rapidly. What was happening was employees would "accidentally" disconnect customers if they came close to the target call time. Or just randomly drop calls early on if they were worried their average was too high. Customer dissatisfaction was significantly higher. Call volume was higher (but not everyone bothered to call back). Average call duration was down though, so big success! Customer retention was getting worse, but that, of course, was tracked under a different silo by a different team who had nothing to do with the support org.

At one stage, they actually dropped the target average call duration to less time than it took to reboot a NTL router / set top box, which was the very first thing customers were advised to do by support agents. They did finally notice, then, but their only solution was to increase the time by 30 seconds or so.

Give the wrong people at the wrong level the goals, and you're going to get poor results.

4 comments

I worked in a large call center for a mature women’s clothing brand for a couple months. I seemed to collect a following for customers that would call in and ask to speak with me directly when they needed help with a problem, even if they didn’t originally order from me. My second month I had the record for shortest call times and that is when I realized the phones couldn’t transfer so I was spiking everyone’s call times by going to their desks to speak with whomever asked for me. They tried to promote me when I was leaving but I was young and wanted to work outdoors in the summer.
I remember NTL, they took a month (at least) to try and pull coax from the street to the house we moved in to, never actually did it. Ended up sticking with BT DSL and their slower speed. Sounds like we ended up dodging a bullet.
This is a good example of Goodhart's Law.
One big issue is that only easier things get handled.

Some metrics are plain wrong.

Speaking of wrong metrics, another anecdote:

I used to work for an ISP. Some genius high up in the support management chain decided that tickets were taking too long to resolve, and the touch rate was too high. So they implemented a way to measure how many times a ticket communicated on before it was resolved, and somehow turned that in to what they called a "conversion percentage". Percentage of what was never expressed.

The result, naturally, is that customers started talking to a void. Tickets took longer to resolve because the support engineers would waste time not asking clarifying questions because that would hurt their conversion percentage. Customer dissatisfaction soared.

A week or two after it went live, some engineers in the NOC team figured out that if you took a ticket, resolved it, and then re-opened it, you'd hit a 100% conversion rate, regardless of how you then communicated on it. Slowly but surely that started spreading through the company and things pretty much got back on track and customer satisfaction returned.

When I left, they were still tracking that conversion percentage, even though every support engineer was now taught during on-boarding that the way to handle a ticket was to resolve it and re-open it. Firmly on its way to becoming "it's just the way things are done"