Plan requirement
| Subscription | Any plan |
| Also required | Quality Assurance or Workforce Engagement Management |
| Access | Admin |
Enough to see a pattern, few enough to sustain: two to four conversations per agent per month, which for twenty agents is two days of somebody's month.
A workable starting point
Two to four conversations per agent per month. Enough to have a real conversation with somebody, few enough that reviewers keep doing it.
Do the arithmetic first
Twenty agents at four reviews a month, at twelve minutes each, is sixteen hours. That is two days of somebody's month, and it has to come from somewhere.
Programmes fail because nobody did this calculation, not because the target was wrong.
Sustainable beats statistical
A sample large enough to be statistically representative is beyond most teams doing this by hand. Reviewing is a coaching mechanism, not an audit, and a few well-considered reviews beat many rushed ones.
AutoQA is what makes that division honest. It scores 100 per cent of your ticket volume on its own categories, so the broad coverage exists whether or not your reviewers achieve it. That frees the manual numbers above to be what they are good for: a conversation with a person, not a sample size.
Vary it by situation
- New agents: more, weekly, for their first month or two.
- After a process change: a short burst on the affected work.
- Established agents: the baseline is enough.
Watch whether it is happening
The number that matters is reviews completed, not reviews targeted. If completion is drifting below target, reduce the target rather than let the programme quietly stop.
Quality over quantity, genuinely
A review with a specific, useful comment changes behaviour. Three reviews with a score and no comment change nothing and cost more time.
Review the volume after a quarter
Ask reviewers whether it is sustainable and agents whether it is useful. Those two answers set the right number better than any benchmark.
Comments
0 comments
Article is closed for comments.