World Wide Industry Report (Sample) Industry

Transcription

1 World Wide Industry Report (Sample) Industry February 2015

2 World Wide Industry Benchmark Report for Contact Centers in the (Sample) Industry Bruce Belfiore Senior Research Executive John Chatterley Senior Research Manager David Raia Jeff Grossman Helen Thomas Senior Research Technical Producer Copy Editor Analyst Current as of: February 19, 2015

3 Copyright 2015 BenchmarkPortal, LLC. Please send detailed questions to: This report may not be copied, scanned or reproduced without the written permission of BenchmarkPortal, LLC. Additional copies may be purchased by ing or by calling ++(800) , extension 1 or extension 5.. Revision: 2/19/2015 i Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

4 Table of Contents Acknowledgements CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 4 CHAPTER 3: CHAPTER 4: HIGHLIGHTS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE WORLDWIDE(SAMPLE) INDUSTRY KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPIS) 7 DETAILED BENCHMARK RESULTS FOR THE AMERICAS, EMEA, AND ASIA PACIFIC GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS 23 CHAPTER 5: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS 35 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS FOR CONTACT CENTERS 39 APPENDIX B: TONCHEV PERFORMANCE INDEX 57 APPENDIX C: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS 63 APPENDIX D: PARTIAL LIST OF BENCHMARK PARTICIPANTS 67 APPENDIX E: COMMUNITY RESOURCES & PRODUCT LISTING 75 iv ii Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

5 List of Figures Figure 1. Inbound Contact Types... 9 Figure 2. Reasons for Inbound Contacts Figure 3. Average Cost per Inbound Call Figure 4. Average Speed of Answer Figure 5. Average Call Handle Time Figure 6. Average Abandon Rate Figure 7. Percentage of Calls Closed on First Call Figure 8. Contact Centers That Have a Formal Mechanism to Gather Customer Feedback Figure 9. Percent of Perfect Customer Satisfaction Scores Figure 10. Percent of Lowest Customer Satisfaction Scores Figure 11. Annual Agent Turnover Rate Figure 12. Average Handle Time per Channel Figure 13. Average Cost per Transaction by Channel Figure 14. Average First-Contact Resolution by Channel iii Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

6 Acknowledgements We wish to extend our thanks to the many contact center managers who have kept our database current and growing over the years. We would also like to acknowledge the contribution of colleagues who have provided both inspiration and perspiration to make this effort useful to managers all over the world. In particular, we note the founding contributions of our former partners, Dr. Jon Anton and David Machin, and the constant support of Professor Richard Feinberg of Purdue University. Bruce L. Belfiore, Senior Research Executive John Chatterley, Senior Research Manager iv Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

8 Chapter 1: Introduction Every enterprise, in every sector, can benefit from comparing itself to other similar operations. This promotes a process of creative soul-searching regarding comparative strengths and weaknesses, which in turn leads to identification and adoption of best practice improvements. We have repeatedly seen the truly transformative power of systematic benchmarking. ~ Bruce Belfiore, BenchmarkPortal Benchmarking has proven to be an important management tool, especially since the late 1970 s. Comparing operating metrics and methodologies with other enterprises in the same industry has provided managers with useful insights that, in turn, result in a virtuous process of discovery, action and improvement that leads, in turn, to superior performance. Superior performance in customer contact is more important today than ever. As products become commoditized, it is the service aspect which determines loyalty and repeat sales in more and more industries. Knowing your competitive position on the customer service you provide is key. Contact centers are ideal operations for benchmarking for several reasons: They all have systems (such as Automatic Call Distributors, or ACDs) that automatically capture reams of data on key performance metrics. Unlike industries where gathering apples-to-apples data is a long and laborious process, gathering data for contact centers is easier - - and can now be largely automated. Senior managers look to contact centers to prove their value to the organization on a regular basis. Benchmarking the contact center provides management the performance-based information needed to make decisions on staffing, technology acquisition, and other budget-related matters Contact centers are one of the enterprise s keys to the customer experience, satisfaction and, ultimately, loyalty. The center s relative performance on quality metrics can reveal volumes about its competitive position against its industry. In addition, we have found that a rigorous methodology, which is based on balancing quality and costs, and which maps negative gaps in key metrics to specific processes and 2 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

9 Chapter 1: Introduction technologies in the contact center, can reveal much about what is going well - - and what is going poorly - - in a contact center. This, in turn, allows management to study and take actions that will build competitive strength for the center over time. BenchmarkPortal has developed a balanced scorecard process which is explained in Appendix B (The Tonchev Performance Index) and which lies at the heart of benchmark reports which are provided to individual centers that input their data into the BenchmarkPortal database. Our industry reports have evolved over time, and continue to do so. We have recently launched our Multi-Channel Benchmark Survey, which includes more data from the , chat, white mail and social media channels. It will take time to develop enough data to provide these metrics on an industry-specific basis. In the meantime, we include here metrics that are gathered from all industries. We hope that you find this report useful and a stimulant for improvement. If comparing your metrics to your industry causes you to take just one important action to improve your operations, we will feel we have done our job. If it causes you to consider benchmarking a valuable management tool in your continuous improvement toolbox, we will be even more pleased. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or requests for further assistance. Contact centers are our passion, and we are happy to share our insights with you. 3 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

11 Chapter 2: Methodology The BenchmarkPortal database, founded at Purdue University in 1995, is the world s first, largest and most respected database of contact center metrics. Data is gathered on a continuous basis using one of three means: Participants can go to the BenchmarkPortal website and input their metrics into the survey found there; Participants can download the benchmarking survey from the BenchmarkPortal Website. They can print and complete the survey by hand and then fax it to us for insertion into our database; or Participants can subscribe to ibenchmark, our automated process that receives the majority of metrics directly from the participants systems and enters them into our database. Data that does not come directly from systems (such as budget and agent turnover) is input manually once or twice a year via a survey portal. Data that are submitted by survey participants are subject to three levels of rigorous quality checking, to ensure that our database remains accurate. The first level involves static parameters, which are set by our statistical experts. The second level of quality assurance involves a series of cross-check formulae, which utilize data provided to validate key pieces of data. For example, if the sum of the average talk time plus the average after call work time multiplied by the average number of calls per agent per hour yields a number over 60 minutes, the anomaly will result in a red flag for our database department. We will then reach out and work with the participant to identify the proper metric from their management reports. The third level of scrutiny is provided directly by our Research team members, who review each survey report for coherence. This commitment to quality distinguishes BenchmarkPortal s database from other industry sources which simply take in metrics as entered by participants. While this level of scrutiny requires considerable effort, we are committed to providing the best data possible to our industry. We note that, as more centers adopt the patented ibenchmark automated benchmarking, the less impact there will be from human error. Automating the entry of data and provision of reports, utilizing our patent-protected system, ensures that the correct data are being entered at the source for the majority of metrics. All individual metrics are held as confidential and are never revealed with the name of the participant to third parties. Only aggregated data are published in our Industry Reports, such as the one you are reading now. 5 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

12 Chapter 2: Methodology The data sets are all tagged by industry sector, as well as by other characteristics, such as country of origin. This allows us to create reports that are drawn entirely from one industry sector. In addition, we can create our World-Wide Industry Reports by gathering data sets by geographical region. Custom reports can be generated by using parameters agreed with the client. The data sets are selected and downloaded from the database. The report generator accesses the data and calculates the industry average. It also segregates the top quartile (25%) of the data sets and shows the average for these top-performing centers under the Best of Industry column. To determine which centers to include in the Best of Industry calculation, we do the following: We separate the performance metrics into two categories: efficiency metrics that correspond to costs (these are metrics such as cost per call, talk time, after-call work time, etc.) and effectiveness metrics, which correspond to quality (caller satisfaction, first contact resolution, etc.). In this way we place balanced emphasis on the elements that reflect quality of customer service and elements that indicate careful use of company resources. The two groupings of metrics are put through separate expert formulas to calculate two coefficients: the cost index (indicating efficiency) and the quality index (indicating relative effectiveness). The two indices are added together for each center, and the centers are stack ranked by their combined scores. The top quartile of the centers is selected out. The averages for each metric are calculated from this upper quartile of centers and presented as "Best of Industry Averages". Note that use of this methodology means that not every Best of Industry average will be better than the overall industry average. Centers that perform better overall may be less strong (compared with the industry) for specific metrics. Thank you for acquiring this report. Please let us know if you have any questions or comments. If you would like to consider benchmarking your own metrics through an individualized report, please feel free to contact us for a chat.. 6 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

14 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of the (Sample) Industry Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) In this chapter, we graphically highlight benchmark comparisons of the averaged responses that call center managers from three global regions The Americas, EMEA (Europe, Middle East, Africa), and Asia Pacific** - offered to selected questions related to their call centers. The metrics are grouped according to the following categories: Section One: Section Two: Section Three: Section Four: Section Five: Section Six: Contact Center Classification Contact Center Costs Contact Center Performance Customer Satisfaction Human Resource Management Multi-Channel Metrics 8 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

15 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators Section One: Contact Center Classification In this section we graphically depict the answers that contact center managers gave to questions related to their contact center classification. Inbound Calls by Type Business to Business Consumer to Business 100% 80% 89.22% 83.16% 78.79% 60% 40% 20% 12.13% 16.84% 21.21% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific ` Figure 1. Inbound Contact Types Question: Interpretation: How do your inbound contacts break down in the following two categories? Business to Business (B2B), and Consumer to Business (C2B). Consumer to business calls constitute the majority of all inbound calls for all geographical regions. These calls are most often for customer service questions and inquiries, which represent the major reason for inbound calls as shown in the next figure.. 9 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

16 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry Reasons for Inbound Calls Americas EMEA Asia Pacific 90% 80% 70% 79.8% 74.9% 75.1% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 14.4% 20.2% 10% 0% Customer Service (questions and inquiries) 6.8% 5.3% 5.4% 6.6% 4.0% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% 0.0% Order taking and tracking Technical support to external customers Complaints Re-directing Inbound Calls 4.1% 3.4% Other Figure 2. Reasons for Inbound Contacts Question: Interpretation: Which functions do your agents provide regarding inbound contacts? Between75% and 80% percent of all inbound calls are for customer service questions and inquiries, as illustrated in the chart above. Worth noting is that call centers in the EMEA geographical region average a higher incidence of order taking/tracking than the centers in the other two regions, and call centers in the Americas geographical region average the highest incidence of complaints Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

17 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators Section Two: Contact Center Costs In this section, we graphically depict the answers that contact center managers gave to questions related to their contact center performance. $3.00 Average Cost per Inbound Call $2.50 $2.00 $1.50 $1.30 $1.13 $1.00 $0.70 $0.50 $0.00 Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 3. Average Cost per Inbound Call Question: Interpretation: What is your average cost per inbound call? Of the three geographical regions, Asia Pacific reports the lowest average cost per call, which is primarily due to the lower labor costs in that region. Across all industries, IVR self-service containment has a particularly large impact (see tables in Chapter 4), and has a significant positive impact on cost per call. Our research shows cost per call as the one of the most closely watched performance measures that contact center managers use to determine their contact center performance, with IVR self-service accounting for the largest proportion of reduction in cost per call. 11 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

18 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry Section Three: Contact Center Operational Performance In this section, we graphically depict the answers that contact center managers gave to questions related to their contact center performance. Seconds 50 Average Speed of Answer Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 4. Average Speed of Answer Question: Interpretation: What is your average speed of answer (ASA) in seconds? The Americas geographical region s ASA is between two and four percentage points longer than the other two regions ASA, as noted above. ASA is equal to the total time in queue divided by the total number of calls answered. This includes technology-handled calls as well as live agent calls. As indicated previously, agent availability is positively impacted by deflecting simple calls to efficient and available self-service channels. Improved speed of answer can be an important factor in improving customer satisfaction.. 12 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

19 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators Minutes 9 8 Average Call Handle Time Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 5. Average Call Handle Time Question: Interpretation: What is your average call handle time (AHT) in minutes? Technology can have a major impact on handle time. Best in class centers tend to have better knowledge management systems, as well as cobrowsing capabilities and well-oiled expert hub systems to help speed call resolution. They also put a premium on training and retention of top agents. Average call handle time, a key performance indicator (KPI), is an internal metric that is the sum of talk time, hold time and after call work time and, as such, has a number of opportunities for improvement. AHT is one of the most closely watched metrics in a contact center as an indicator of an agent s skill and productivity. Of the three geographical regions, the EMEA call centers reported the shortest average call handle time. 13 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

20 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry 7.00% Average Abandon Rate 6.00% 5.95% 5.00% 4.88% 4.00% 3.73% 3.00% 2.00% 1.00% 0.00% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 6. Average Abandon Rate Question: Interpretation: What is your average abandon rate in percent? Abandon rate is an internal metric of all calls that get connected to the call center but are disconnected by the caller before reaching an agent, automated self-service system, or information announcement. The traditionally accepted goal for abandon rate across the contact center industry is 4% or less. A high abandon rate is symptomatic of call centers without an effective workforce scheduling and management approach to maintain appropriate staffing levels, and is a contributing factor to customer dissatisfaction.. 14 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

21 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators Calls Closed on First Call 100% 80% 88.28% 83.76% 81.12% 60% 40% 20% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 7. Percentage of Calls Closed on First Call Question: Interpretation: What is your percentage of calls closed on first call? The Americas geographical region s percentage of calls closed on the first call is 4 ½ percentage points better the EMEA region s first call resolution rate, and exceeds the Asia Pacific s first call resolution rate by 7 percentage points. The traditionally accepted All Industry best practice objective is to achieve and maintain an average of 85% or higher for calls closed on first call. Our research indicates a very high correlation between calls closed on first call and caller satisfaction. 15 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

22 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry Section Four: Customer Satisfaction In this section, we graphically depict the answers that contact center managers gave to questions related to customer satisfaction. 100% Percent of Call Centers With a Formal Mechanism to Gather Customer Feedback on their Performance 80% 81.61% 71.05% 60% 51.25% 40% 20% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 8. Contact Centers That Have a Formal Mechanism to Gather Customer Feedback Question: Interpretation: Does your contact center have a formal mechanism for gathering customer feedback on contact center performance? The inverse of the percentages above is the percentage of call centers that answered NO to this question; notice that three outof-every seven of the call centers in the EMEA geographical region lack a formal mechanism for gathering customer satisfaction, compared to one out-of-every five centers in the Americas Region and nearly one-half of the centers in the Asia Pacific region. Internal key performance indicators can only tell management part of the story of how well they are serving their customers. In today s competitive world, customer satisfaction is a more significant market differentiator and competitive advantage than product features or price.. 16 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

23 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators 100% Percent of Callers giving a Perfect Score for Customer Satisfaction within the past 90 days 80% 60% 61.96% 47.91% 58.75% 40% 20% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 9. Percent of Perfect Customer Satisfaction Scores Question: Interpretation: On average, in the past 90 days, what percentage of your customers gave you a perfect score on the question, Overall, how satisfied were you with the service you received during your call to our center? The best metric to be used for measuring the true level of customer satisfaction is the percentage of customers/callers who give a perfect score, meaning that they awarded a 5 on a scale of 1 to 5, provided that a valid statistical sample is taken. Of the call centers that have a formal mechanism for gathering customer satisfaction, the Americas geographical region fared highest among the three geographical regions, with three out-of-every five callers awarding them a perfect score for customer satisfaction delivered within the past 90 days. 17 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

24 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry 10% Percentage of Callers that gave the Lowest Score for Customer Satisfaction within the past 90 days 8.30% 8% 6% 5.96% 4.34% 4% 2% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 10. Percent of Lowest Customer Satisfaction Scores Question: Interpretation: On average, in the past 90 days, what percentage of your customers gave you the lowest score on the question, "Overall, how satisfied were you with the service you received during your contact with our center? Tracking lowest scores is the flip side of collecting perfect customer satisfaction scores and perhaps a better barometer of customer sentiment. This metric is essential to the quality monitoring process of a contact center since dissatisfied customers tend to be more vocal in their ratings. This may be a more valid metric since it tends to represent customer complaints and defection. A review of associated verbatim comments can provide some relevant facts for improvement programs. The next step is to classify the dissatisfied contacts by category/agent, and feed the results into the agent coaching and training process to remedy the root causes.. 18 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

25 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators Section Five: Human Resource Management In this section, we graphically depict the answers that contact center managers gave to questions related to human resource management. 35% 30% Annual Turnover of Agent Staff 32.23% 25% 20% 19.88% 15% 13.75% 10% 5% 0% Americas EMEA Asia Pacific Figure 11. Annual Agent Turnover Rate Question: Interpretation: What is the annual turnover percentage of your full-time agents? Turnover is the number of agents who left in the course of a year as a percentage of the total number of agents working during that same period, and is a major cost and quality factor. Best in industry performers tend to be good places to work as well. Using exit interviews to determine the causes of voluntary turnover, and thereby gaining insight into controllable factors that can result in reduced turnover, is a best practice process that all contact centers should use. Aside from the obvious cost impacts of agent turnover, the notion that a happy agent has happy customers is generally appropriate. 19 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

26 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry Section Six: Multi-Channel Metrics In this section, the following charts graphically depict key performance metrics (KPIs) for alternate contact channels in a multi-channel contact centers Handle Time (in Minutes) by Channel Web Chat FAX/White Mail Social Media Outbound Phone Inbound Phone Americas Inbound Phone EMA Inbound Phone Asia Figure 12. Average Handle Time per Channel Question: Interpretation: What is your average handle time per channel in percent? The figure above shows the distribution of the average agent s time allocated to support the array of contact channel alternatives available in the contact center industry worldwide. In this view of average handle time across multiple channels, we can begin to see the impact of the various channels on resource requirements. Clearly, Web Chat interactions require less of an agent s costly support time and positively impact the cost per contact. Naturally, self-service channels have an even greater impact on the reduction of agent time and cost. Interestingly, the greatest drain on a contact center s time is in the handling FAX/White Mail, with E- mail running a close second.. 20 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

27 Chapter 3: Highlights and Interpretation of Key Performance Indicators $12.00 Cost Per Transaction $10.00 $8.00 $7.95 $7.74 $6.58 $6.00 $4.00 $4.28 $2.44 $2.00 $1.30 $1.13 $0.70 $- Web Chat FAX/White Mail Social Media Outbound Phone Inbound Phone Americas Inbound Phone EMA Inbound Phone Asia Figure 13. Average Cost per Transaction by Channel Question: Interpretation: What is your Average Cost per Transaction by Channel? As channel of choice, the phone is not only the most used but the least costly of channels in terms of cost per transaction. The cost per contact (green) shows that the average cost per alternate contact channel for all industry contact centers worldwide. The blue columns depict the average cost per inbound call across the three geographical industry categories worldwide. 21 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

28 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry 100% First-Contact Resolution 80% 80.74% 88.28% 83.76% 81.12% 67.21% 60% 40% 20% 0% Web Chat Voice Americas Voice EMEA Voice Asia Figure 14. Average First-Contact Resolution by Channel Question: Interpretation: What is your average first-contact resolution percentage by Channel? Our research shows first-contact resolution percentage as one of the most closely watched performance measures that contact center managers use to determine their contact center performance. FCR statistics are gathered by surveys and/or are self-reported by the contact handling agents using a statistically valid sample. The green bars shows the average FCR for E- mail and Web Chat contact channels worldwide, and the blue bars depict the FCR average for the voice channels worldwide.. 22 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

30 Classification Questions - Americas (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Calls Offered * * * * * * * * * * Calls Handled Annually * * * * * * * * * * Annual Call Volume Handled by Agents * * * * * * * * * * Annual Call Volume Handled by IVR * * * * * * * * * * Business to Business * * * * * * * * * * Business to Consumer * * * * * * * * * * Full Time Agents * * * * * * * * * * Part Time Agents * * * * * * * * * * Full Time Equivalents (FTE's) * * * * * * * * * * Labor Union (Yes) * * * * * * * * * * Labor Union (No) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Question & Inquiries) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Order Taking / Tracking) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Technical Support) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Complaints) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Re-directing Inbound Calls) * * * * * * * * * * Call Type (Other) * * * * * * * * * * 0.00% 0.00% Financial (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Annual Budget * * * * * * * * * * Agents Base Salary * * * * * * * * * * Average Hourly Wage Front Line Agents * * * * * * * * * * Average Starting Hourly Wage Front Line Agents * * * * * * * * * * Average Cost Per Call * * * * * * * * * * 24 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.

31 Chapter 4: Detailed Benchmark Results Agent Time Per Channel (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Inbound Phone * * * * * * * * * * Outbound Phone * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Web Chat * * * * * * * * * * Other * * * * * * * * * * 0.00% 0.00% Voice Channel Performance Metrics (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Average Speed of Answer in Seconds * * * * * * * * * * Average Talk Time in Minutes * * * * * * * * * * Average After Call Work Time in Minutes * * * * * * * * * * Average Queue Time in Seconds * * * * * * * * * * Average Caller Hold Time in Seconds * * * * * * * * * * Average Abandoned Rate in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Calls Resolved on First Call In Percent (FCR) * * * * * * * * * * Agent Occupancy in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Adherence to Schedule in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Average Attendance in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Average Calls Transferred in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Average Auxiliary (AUX) Time in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Average Utilization in Percent * * * * * * * * * * Calls Per Agent Per Hour * * * * * * * * * * 25 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC..

32 Worldwide Industry Benchmark Report (Sample) Industry Human Resources Metrics (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Span of Control (Agent:Supervisor Ratio) * * * * * * * * * * Annual Turnover * * * * * * * * * * Promotional Turnover * * * * * * * * * * All Other Turnover * * * * * * * * * * Number of Shifts (Full Time) * * * * * * * * * * Number of Shifts (Part Time) * * * * * * * * * * Shift Length in Minutes (Full Time) * * * * * * * * * * Shift Length in Minutes (Part Time) * * * * * * * * * * Formal Method Collect Agent Satisfaction (Yes) * * * * * * * * * * Formal Method Collect Agent Satisfaction (No) * * * * * * * * * * Top Box Agent Satisfaction * * * * * * * * * * Bottom Box Agent Satisfaction * * * * * * * * * * Caller Satisfaction Metrics (Sample) - Americas Best of (Sample) - Americas Formal Method Collect Caller Satisfaction (Yes) * * * * * * * * * * Formal Method Collect Caller Satisfaction (No) * * * * * * * * * * Top Box Caller Satisfaction * * * * * * * * * * Bottom Box Caller Satisfaction * * * * * * * * * *. 26 Copyright 2015, BenchmarkPortal, LLC.