Jo-Ann Farinha Consulting

Transcription

1 SA Contact centres Predictors of stress & early attrition July

2 Introduction Challenges of contact centres Churn / staff turnover / attrition rates Performance levels Stress and burnout High cost and diminishing ROI What is driving this high rate of churn?

3 This research study To establish whether there is a predictive relationship between specific personality traits and: Levels of stress Job performance Risk of early attrition

4 Study 1 Service agents In a medical aid company N = 73 Personality traits were correlated with performance ratings provided by the organisation

5 Study 1 - findings Statistically significant differences found between the group of high and low performers r=0.5 Elimination of 82% of identified low performers (concurrent validity) Reliability 0.85, data normally distributed, no ethnic or gender bias 2 nd version of the CSP questionnaire developed

6 Study contact centre agents service, sales & collections 6 different contact centres Gauteng & KZN Inclusion of 4 stress scales Statistical analysis do personality traits predict stress, i.e. risk?

7 Research findings N = top SA call centres GP, KZN Service, sales & collections Shifts and non-shift agents Reliability =0.75, no ethic bias, no gender bias, data normally distributed

8 Overall stress 70 N = 345, Mean = 52%, StdDv = 29% CC Agent Stress O verall % 14% 14% 13% 40 10% 10% 12% 12% No of obs % 13% 25% 38% 50% 63% 75% 88% 100% Overall stress is elevated in a significant proportion of the sample

9 Component #1: Overload % CC Agent Stress Component 1: O verload N = 345, Mean = 39%, StdDv = 37% % 80 No of obs % 18% % 25% 50% 75% 100% Work overload is not as dominant a stressor as might be imagined

10 Component #2: Understimulation CC Stress Component 2: Boredom N = 345, Mean = 61%, StdDv = 34% 29% 32% 80 22% 60 17% No of obs % 25% 50% 75% 100% In fact, boredom is a far greater challenge than overload

11 Component #3: Intrusive Control CC Agent Stress Component 3: Intrusive Control N = 345, Mean = 50%, StdDv = 45% 40% 41% No of obs % % 33% 67% 100% Intrusive control is also a greater stressor than overload

12 Inter-company comparison: Stress 7.0 Company; LS Means Current effect: F(5, 412)=7.9683, p= Effective hypothesis decomposition Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals Burnout DH Retail Bank 1 Retail Bank 2 Exclusive Retail Bank Mass Market Bank Collections Agency Company Certain companies are worse stress-creators than others!

13 Satisfaction 160 CC Agent Satisfaction No of obs Satisfaction levels are average

14 Inter-company comparison: Satisfaction 4.0 Company; LS Means Current effect: F(5, 365)=4.1092, p= Effective hypothesis decomposition Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals Satisfaction DH Retail Bank 1 Retail Bank 2 Exclusive Retail Bank Mass Market Bank Collections Agency Company Those companies that create more stress have less satisfied staff r xy =-0.48, p<0.000

15 So in a nutshell Elevated stress BUT widely variable between individuals and between companies; Average satisfaction BUT variable between individuals and between companies; Explanatory factors Between companies: resourcing, culture, management style, work design, ergonomics, etc BUT between individuals -? So?

16 Performance Attrition Satisfaction Stress Agent Fit Call Centre

17 Attrition risk A bad recruitment decision can cost in the order of R The cost of early attrition is astronomical 62% of this sample would quit their current job if they could NO DIFFERENCE between low and high performers No of obs "Wouldn't Quit" vs. "Would Quit" 38% 62% 0 Attrition Risk

18 Attrition risk Categorized Histogram: Company x Risk DH Retail Bank Retail Bank 80 No of obs Mass Market Bank Exclusiv e Retail Bank Risk Collections Agency Massive differences between companies NOT PAY

19 Attrition risk: The impact of stress and satisfaction Those reporting the desire to quit also report Box & Whisker Plot: Stress All -Total significantly higher stress levels, and - lower satisfaction levels. The value of job satisfaction can be thought of in terms of agent tenure Stress All -Total Turnover Risk Box & Whisker Plot: Satisfaction Median 25%-75% Min-Max Satisfaction Turnover Risk Median 25%-75% Min-Max

20 Agent work performance: The impact of stress and satisfaction Very inconsistent data supplied However - General direction as expected On the verge of statistical significance Stress All -Total l Perf - Company Rated h Low performers show Higher stress Lower satisfaction Satisfaction l h Perf - Company Rated

21 Performance Attrition Satisfaction Stress The impact of personality Agent Fit Call Centre

22 Personality and fit The overall correlation between personality and stress is 0.51 (p< !!!) Certain personality factors are extremely important in helping agents to perform effectively in call centres Selecting for these factors will enable centres to Decrease stress Improve satisfaction Reduce attrition Improve performance (statistically significant) Correlations (CPSData.CoXDerVarsOnlyXFactorsXStandardisation.3 75v*345c) Weighted Prof ile total Composite Risk Score

23 The secrets of success Factor Definition 1 Emotional command Sense of personal confidence and control 2 Context fit Comfortable working within rules, procedures and structure. 3 Motivational style Enjoys customer service, working to set targets, and completing tasks. 4 Customer engagement style Enjoys interacting with customers, using information to solve problems in a structured, methodical and systematic manner. 5 Reward motivation Motivated primarily by intrinsic aspects of the job 6 Career focus Motivated by career aspirations

24 What does this mean? Recruit for these characteristics and you will decrease the stress levels in your call centre by 25%. This could produce significant savings, by extending tenure, reducing stress, improving satisfaction, and improving work performance.