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
