Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 26
26 18 16 14 (out of 25 interviewed) Number of Agencies 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 ur t e e ed e d alls e d ll mp d n e e eu ca tim ne d eu ere ho st e tio im tim mo on ec tte qu do qu ne ura yt sw -up ue er d e ta n tak up n o sp the ad na Idl r eq an ll d ba a h ap irs b t re ap ap irie gi a is a to ca wr alls in ef on wr alls No itin dy qu up alls ge t th i ng at i fc all ea in / in wa fc era rm ick eo fc ec da lud nts r eo o ro p ts e alls Av l th t ag nc lve Inf l ge en to i t ag wh e ni fc nt i mb en so fa ag en en tio ro lay eu t re erc ro ak nu of erc ura be de tim e et dp no er ge mb dp um ll d tim ge mb an era lls ge nu an ca en era ca Nu era ge er Av ge ge er Th Av mb % era Av mb era era Nu Av Nu Av Av Figure 7. Call center metrics tracked by transit agencies. other measures and methods for tracking call center perfor- bilities. To better understand the impact of agency size on mance, including supervisory monitoring, customer feedback, issues related to telephone customer information, the results call monitoring (recorded audio), training, and reviewing of the transit agency telephone interviews have been sorted complaints and comments. and summarized by transit agency size (size was defined by the number of vehicles the agency operates with small < 50; medium = 51300; large = 300 +). 3.1.3 Implications of Agency Size and Type Table 9 compares the small, medium, and large transit Transit agencies across the United States vary tremen- agencies interviewed in terms of a number of factors that char- dously in terms of their size, characteristics, needs, and capa- acterize the level of complexity or rigor of telephone customer Table 9. Agency call center complexity versus agency size. Size of Transit Agency Measure of Call Center Complexity Large Medium Small % of agencies with advanced technologies 78% 50% 33% % of agencies tracking advanced metrics 100% 75% 22% % of agencies with advanced demand forecasting methods 33% 13% 0% % of agencies with advanced quality monitoring methods 44% 50% 22% % of agencies with advanced customer satisfaction 33% 25% 0% monitoring % of agencies with extended hours of operation 78% 75% 67% % of agencies with call center staff with advanced skills 78% 88% 44% % of agencies providing bilingual information 70% 88% 56% % of agencies providing real-time information* 30% 0% 33% = Small agencies less complex than medium and large agencies. * Does not necessarily imply information based on automatic vehicle-location technology. For example, includes vehicle status information as determined by dispatch-driver radio communication.
OCR for page 27
27 information activities. For each factor, the percentage of small, for the purposes of this exercise, they were categorized as medium, and large transit agencies interviewed demonstrat- "advanced" for that measure. ing "advanced" versus "basic" call center approaches has been The shaded rows in Table 9 highlight the results where the calculated. Table 10 provides supporting information that expected relationship between agency size and complexity was identifies the types of specific agency methods and practices strongly evident (i.e., where smaller agencies were less complex that were categorized as either advanced or basic for each fac- than larger agencies). For example, small agencies utilize less tor. For each factor, if a given agency demonstrated at least one complex call center methods than medium or large agencies. of the "advanced" attributes, it was classified as advanced. For This pattern was found for nearly all of the factors. For most example, if an agency utilized any of the four quality monitor- factors, there was no consistent difference found between ing techniques that the study team classified as "advanced" medium and large agencies, suggesting that some medium Table 10. Categorization of call center attributes as "advanced" versus "basic." Measure of Characterization of Agency's Self-Reported Methods Call Center Advanced Basic Complexity Technologies · IVR · ACD · Guided speech IVR · Voicemail · CTI · Voice recording · CRM · CIM · TTS · Speech analytics Metrics · Percent of calls not resolved at the first · Average call duration attempt · Average number of calls in · Not ready time the queue · Average number of agents in wrap-up · Number and percentage of mode calls abandoned · Average call duration including wrap-up · Number of calls/inquiries time per hour · Information requested · Number and percentage of · Idle time calls answered · Average time taken to pick up a phone · Average delay while call waiting in a queue · Average time until the call is abandoned · Number of agents ready to take calls Demand · Use of software · Manual review of reports Forecasting · Customized tool to review data · Subjective perceptions of Technique historic patterns and volumes Quality · Statistics from a software program · Informal supervisory Monitoring · Market research/survey observation Technique · Customer feedback · Non-real-time supervisory · Real-time supervisory monitoring of call monitoring (e.g., call calls recordings) · Manual review of complaints/comments Customer · Online surveying/comments · On-board surveying Satisfaction · Email surveying/comments · Telephone Monitoring surveying/comments Technique Hours of · Weekdays 15+ h · Weekdays 15 h Operation · Saturday 8+ h · Saturday 8 h · Available on Sunday · Not available on Sunday Call-Taker · Any of various skills above and beyond · Basic telephone and Skill basic telephone and communication communication skills (e.g., Requirements skills (e.g., prior work experience in patient, customer-friendly) mass transit, prior experience in customer service, bilingual skills, able to also perform dispatch duties) Bilingual · Offer English plus at least one other · Offer English only Capability language Real-Time · Real-time information available (e.g., · No real-time information Information next bus) available Provided