4. FORECASTING ACCURACY
Forecasting accuracy – better described as forecasted interaction load vs. actual interaction load is a performance metric that reflects the percent variance between the number of inbound/outbound customer interactions forecasted for a particular time period and the number of said contacts actually received by the center during that time. It is a critical, high-level objective in all contact center environments.  In addition it is critical that the Average Handle Time (AHT) be accurately forecasted as well, because it has just as much of an impact on scheduling as the number of interactions.
 

Underestimating demand leads to understaffing. This, in turn, leads to long wait times in queues, frustrated customers, burned-out agents and high toll-free costs (due not only to the long hold times, but also to the longer call times that might result from dedicating a portion of the call to caller complaints about hold times). However, overestimating demand results in waste, overstaffing and increased idle time and increased cost per interaction.
 

Forecasted interaction load is available from the system used for forecasting (e.g., the center's workforce management system or spreadsheets); while actual call load is tracked by the ACD, workforce management system, email response management system, Web servers -- wherever data is available. Forecasting accuracy should not be reported as a summary of forecasted versus actual contacts across a day, week or month, but rather as an illustration of accuracy for each reporting interval, typically half-hours.
 

5. SELF-SERVICE KPI’s
It has become the quest of most contact centers to deflect from the agent queue as many basic interaction types as possible. These interactions can be offloaded to self-service systems which are based on IVR and interactive Web UI’s.  The result is to enhance service responsiveness for both customers who use the self-serve option and for those that don’t by freeing up agents to use their valuable skills to assist customers with the  complex issues, thus keeping agents engaged.
 

Some centers get so caught up trying to lure customers off the phones and into self-service that they forget to track something essential: how well the self-service systems actually "serve" customers.
 

Self-service accessibility has emerged as a critical metric in this age of automation and customer-centricity. Best Practices call for contact centers to track not only how many customers begin self-service transaction, but more importantly how many complete those transactions without live-agent assistance.  In the development process, it is also wise to build-in the tools to record IVR and Web interactions that will pinpoint any system glitches or snags that hinder the customer experience and that cause customers to "zero out" to email or chat with a live agent or simply abandon their online shopping cart.  This will save centers from needing to do expensive customer satisfaction surveys to determine how happy they are with the self-serve application.  The numbers don’t lie, if 100% who access the self serve application complete it then your C-Sat will be 100% as well.
 

6. CONTACT QUALITY
This is a very common and critical customer-centric performance metric in all contact centers, regardless of industry, function and size. Top centers track contact quality as a high-level, center-wide metric, as well as an individual agent performance measure.
Contact quality is typically assessed via the monitoring and recording of agent interactions with customers, with quality assurance specialists or supervisors rating the contact using a comprehensive evaluation form that features key criteria that the center feels contributes to a quality interaction from the customer's perspective. Each criterion is usually assigned a numeric value by those conducting monitoring and weighed based on its impact on customer satisfaction and the center's goals and requirements.

• Common quality criteria include such things as:
• Use of appropriate greetings and other call scripts
• Courtesy and professionalism
• Capturing key customer data
• Providing customers with correct and relevant information
• First-contact resolution
• Accuracy in data entry and coding
• Grammar and spelling in text communication (email and chat)

While monitoring and recording is by far the most common method used for assessing contact quality, some quality measurements may come from ACD-based call coding, from reports generated by customer information systems.

7. CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Customer satisfaction is one of the most critical metrics for any contact center. Studies have revealed, and common sense supports, a critical and direct correlation between customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, corporate revenues and employee morale and performance.
 

All companies are aware of the importance of securing high customer satisfaction, and all claim to have a strong focus on customer-centric practices. But, not all go about measuring customer satisfaction in the most precise and most consistent ways, nor do all have an effective process in place for analyzing and acting on the findings.
While there is no standard method for calculating customer satisfaction, there are certain common practices and processes that enable leading centers to not only effectively and efficiently keep tabs on just how much customers dislike them, but also to make key improvements before customers take their business elsewhere.
 

Customer satisfaction measurement has evolved beyond mail surveys (delivered by post) and phone interviews days after the customer's interaction transpired. The big trend now is to survey callers immediately after the interaction occurs, when the experience is fresh in the customer's mind and before problems can escalate. Top centers typically do this via IVR-based post-call surveys, similar to the type described in the previous section on first-contact resolution. Callers are asked a series of questions about their interaction with the agent, their feelings about the organization and their plans to continue doing business with the company. They are asked to rate each question on a numeric scale (often 1 to 5) for easy customer satisfaction calculation. Many surveys also feature a couple of open-ended questions for more detailed customer feedback.
 

Today's advanced IVR survey apps can be programmed to recognize when a customer gives an abnormally low overall rating and to send an alert to the center manager or quality assurance team. The system can capture (via CTI) the caller's identity and link it to the actual recording of the call in question for complete analysis of the interaction. After reviewing the survey responses and the call, the manager can quickly call the customer to "repair damage" and hopefully restore trust and loyalty.
 

Of course, not all customers contact the center via phone, thus IVR-based surveys alone are insufficient for holistic customer satisfaction measurement. Progressive centers also gauge how satisfied customers are who have chosen to interact with the company via email or chat. To do so, they send a survey like the IVR-based one to these customers via email or program the survey to pop up on the customer's screen upon completion of an online interaction.
Road to Success with Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s)
The metrics your center embraces have a direct impact on customer experience. Of course, not every metric can be completely customer-centric -- there are operations costs and business needs that must also be considered -- focusing strictly on straight productivity metrics and managing a contact center primarily as a cost center simply is no longer feasible.
 

Emphasizing and balancing the view of the metrics here will ensure that your company keeps customer satisfaction and loyalty high while enabling your center to be an efficient, high-performing, critical business entity.