Lost in translation: The importance of precise communication in a multi-vendor environment

One of the common problems with multi-vendor call center operations is that you run into different calculations for similar terms, or different definitions for the same term. It’s almost impossible to manage performance when you don’t have clearly defined, universally agreed-upon definitions, terms, and calculations.

For instance, one supplier’s definition of handle time may include talk time plus hold time; another may also add in wrap time. Along the same lines, I recently found myself trying to discuss pre- and post-route scenarios with a network vendor and realized that what they consider to be pre/post was starkly different from my definition. If you’re not comparing apples and apples when leveraging multiple vendor platforms, it’s incredibly difficult to accurately assess performance.

The source of the discrepancy can also be on the client side. Very often, businesses attempt to “tweak” a standard definition or term. The tendency to create custom definitions and calculations is understandable. Every business is different. But you need to resist this impulse because the price you will pay for introducing non-standard terms is just too high.

Minor differences create exponential problems
When it comes to definitions, terms and calculations, a little bit of creativity ultimately limits your ability to manage call centers and customer management tightly and effectively. The struggle you face when you deviate from standard definitions is that by doing something out of the ordinary you create a nuance that impacts procedures and reporting. This results in a ripple effect that can have serious implications. Why?

Because no matter how careful you are, everything will not get updated or changed to reflect the variation.

This will lead to inconsistencies in dialogue – either between the client and account management team, or between the account management team and operations. It will also affect reports and processes. When these kinds of variation are in play (assuming you are able to realize they are in play) you are always asking yourself: “Who am I talking to and what’s their definition?”

Allowing variations also opens up the door for red herrings from suppliers, who will use any “custom” definitions to claim they can’t really measure something or compare their results to other suppliers. This creates frustration and a lack of productivity in driving results.

Embrace and enforce consistency
It’s extremely important to level set common definitions. Here are some guidelines for making sure that you and your vendors are always on the same page:

• Whenever possible, leverage industry standard terms and definitions.
• If there isn’t a clear industry standard, try to use what is most typical.
• Be aware of any existing differences in your suppliers when you combine data from multiple sources – if there are unexamined variations, the results will never be accurate.
• Make definitions, terms, and calculations explicit in supplier contracts.
• Update this contractual information as things change, and manage it tightly.

Your goal is to have a central repository that supports one version of the truth.

Finally, you have to reinforce implementation with routine inspection. Just because you tell your suppliers what you want them to do doesn’t mean they are doing it that way. You always have to inspect what you expect.

–Bryan DiGiorgio