Senses on Call is our web based selection tool for the call centre industry. It takes 15 minutes to complete and generates an instant report.
The development of Senses on Call is based on research results from my doctorate degree at the University of Cape Town (in progress) and my 20 years of clinical and training experience. The study correlates sensory profiles with performance, absenteeism and attrition within call centres.

My study sample included:
* 226 agents in a service inbound call centre, financial industry, Cape Town
* 53 agents in a service inbound call centre, financial industry, Johannesburg
* 78 agents in a sales outbound call centre, Cape Town
* 113 agents in a collections call centre, Johannesburg
* The total sample consisted of 470 agents.
Terminology explained:
Suitability or best-fit of agents for the call centre industry are measured against their genetic sensory thresholds. This is the unconscious process by which the brain and body respond to busy, overloaded environments in either a positive or stressed manner. Being in the industry you will agree to it being a highly stressed and overloaded environment with many management challenges. Sensory thresholds are part of our genetic wiring, cannot be changed much and are unknown to most of us. The test used to determine thresholds is a USA based tool, the Adult Sensory Profile, with solid validity and reliability.
People with low thresholds (high scores for quadrant 3 and 4) get distracted and stressed in busy environments and are not well suited to the industry. They are however very well suited to be accountants, lawyers, HR managers, to just name a few. They also work well in back office processes.
People with high thresholds (high scores for quadrant 1 and 2) have the unconscious ability to filter out excess information and work well in busy environments. They are well suited to the industry.
Some of the service inbound results (performance correlations):
* Unsuitable agents, identified by high scores on quadrant 3 and 4 on the Senses on Call test have lower quality assurance ratings:
* Correlations: Sensory Profile Quads with performance data
* Quad 3 & QA rating (n=59); Negative correlation, significantly related, p= 0.0049
* Quad 4 & QA rating (n=59); Negative correlation, significantly related, p= 0.0219
* It means as quadrant 3 and 4 increase (most unsuitable group), QA ratings decrease
* Unsuitable agents identified by Senses on Call have lower QA ratings
Unsuitable agents, especially identified by high scores on quadrant 4 on the Senses on Call test have longer ACW (after call work):
* Correlations: Sensory Profile Quads with Raw Performance data (average after call work in seconds)
* Quad 4 & Avg ACW in seconds (n=112); Positive correlation, significantly related, p=0.0074
* It means as quadrant 4 increase (most unsuitable group), ACW increase as well
* Unsuitable agents identified by Senses on Call have longer ACW (after call work)
Unsuitable agents, identified by high scores on quadrant 3 and 4 on the Senses on Call test have longer average hold times:
* Correlations: Sensory Profile Quads with Raw Performance data
* Quad 3 & Avg Hold time in sec (n=112); Positive correlation significantly related, p=0.0106
* Quad 4 & Avg Hold time in sec (n=112); Positive correlation significantly related, p=0.0383
* It means as quadrant 3 and 4 increase (unsuitable group), Avg hold time also increase
* Unsuitable agents identified by Senses on Call have longer average hold times
Unsuitable agents, identified by high scores on quadrant 3 and 4 on the Senses on Call test have longer average handle times:
* Correlations: Sensory Profile Quads with Raw Performance data
* Quad 3 & Avg handle time in hours(n=110); Positive correlation, significantly related, p=0.0210
* Quad 4 & Avg handle time in hours(n=110); Positive correlation significantly related, p=0.0036
* It means as quadrant 3 and 4 increase (unsuitable group), Avg handle time also increase
* Unsuitable agents identified by Senses on Call have longer handle times
These results are only the tip of the iceberg! Analysis of data continues…..

Comments

comments