Method and system for managing a quality process

• US 8,553,872 B2
• Filed: 07/08/2009
• Issued: 10/08/2013
• Est. Priority Date: 07/08/2009
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Nice Systems Limited (Nice Ltd)
• Original Assignee: Nice Systems Limited (Nice Ltd)
• Inventors: Geffen, David, Freiberger, Yoav, Goldenberg, Yoel
• Primary Examiner(s): DEANE JR, WILLIAM J
• Application Number:
  US12/499,210
• Publication Number:
  US 20110007889A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,553 Days
• Field of Search: 37926501-26514, 37926601-2661, 379/309
• US Class Current: 379/265.06
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5175 Call or contact centers supervision arrangements

Abstract

Embodiments of the invention are directed to a computer-implemented method of performing a quality evaluation. The method may include selecting from a plurality of interaction recordings at least one interaction recording according to at least one KPI. The method may include associating a selected interaction recording with a predefined evaluation form, presenting interactions selected for evaluation to an evaluator and performing a predefined action based on a result of the evaluation.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for performing a quality evaluation, the method comprising:

accepting a definition of a quality task associated with a predefined evaluation form, wherein the definition of the quality task is based on quality task parameters selected by a user on a graphical user interface;

activating the quality task upon detecting breaching of a predefined key performance indicator (KPI);

selecting from a plurality of interaction recordings one or more selected interaction recordings for evaluations, the one or more interactions recordings selected with relation to said quality task;

associating the selected interaction recordings with the predefined evaluation form;

displaying a graphical representation of the one or more interaction recordings and the evaluation form, wherein the evaluation form is used to evaluate the one or more interaction recordings;

receiving evaluation results of the one or more selected interaction recordings; and

performing at least one predefined action based on the results.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting is based on least one of:

an agent identification, an interaction duration, an interaction result, an average holding time (AHT), an audio analysis result, a customer satisfaction indicator, a time of the interaction, a metadata associated with an interaction, a KPI and a quality supervisor.

3. The method of claim 1 further comprising:

categorizing the plurality of interaction recordings into predefined categories; and

applying a predefined set of key performance indicators to at least one of the predefined categories.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the quality task defines at least one call type, at least one KPI and at least one agent.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more selected interaction recordings are selected according to a predefined quota, said quota related to a number of evaluations to be performed by a quality supervisor during a predefined period of time.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein said quota defines a maximum number of interaction recordings related to a specific agent in a call center.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting is based on a quality plan, said quality plan defining at least a quality plan name, an evaluation quota related to at least one quality manager, at least one agent to be evaluated and at least one quality task.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein said quality task defines a load of said quality task, said load is determined relative to a total load of a related quality plan, a time period related to selected interactions, a time for completing an evaluation of selected interactions, an association of at least one agent with at least one quality manager and an agent prioritization parameter.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein said prioritization parameter is at least one of an agent seniority prioritization parameter and an agent historical prioritization parameter.

10. The method of claim 7, wherein said quality task defines at least one event to cause at least one notification to a user, said event selected from the list consisting of:

an evaluation due date expiration, an evaluation result exceeding a predefined threshold and an initiation of a related quality task.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the quality task is to compensate for other quality task, if the other quality task failings to select its quota of interactions.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein a first interaction selected for evaluation is to be automatically replaced by a second interaction having a greater severity of breaching a KPI.

13. The method of claim 1, comprising automatically modifying a definition of a KPI according evaluation results.

14. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the one or more selected interaction recordings for evaluation is based on a seniority of associated agents.

15. The method of claim 7, wherein the quality plan is associated to a plurality of quality tasks.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein each of the plurality of the quality tasks is assigned a percentage of an overall load of the quality plan.