Plan requirement
| Subscription | Any plan |
| Also required | Quality Assurance or Workforce Engagement Management |
| Access | Admin |
Who is reviewed and who reviews. Keeping it current is what stops the reporting quietly lying.
Manage them
- Open the workspace.
- Add or remove members.
- Set who is a reviewer.
- Check the assignment rules still cover everybody.
Somebody left out gets no reviews
A new agent not added to a workspace is never reviewed, and nothing flags it. They notice after three months that colleagues get feedback and they do not.
Add this to whatever list covers a new starter's access.
Somebody who left skews the average
A former agent still in the workspace keeps their historical scores in the team average. Remove them so the current number describes the current team.
Reviewers need to be few and trained
Two or three per workspace. More than that and consistency falls apart, because each reviewer brings their own reading of the scorecard.
Calibration is what keeps them together, and it only works with a small group.
Reviewing your own team
A team lead reviewing their own people is normal and it mixes coaching with line management. Where that is uncomfortable, cross-reviewing between teams works well, provided the scorecard is the same.
Check after any reorganisation
People move teams in Support and stay in the old workspace here. Then they are reviewed against a standard for work they no longer do.
Comments
0 comments
Article is closed for comments.