327 results found
-
Rejected Dispute Reasons
Can we include rejection reasons when denying a dispute? This can help leadership identify trends for why analysts are rejecting disputes. For example, if a support specialist does not include documentation in their dispute the QA team will auto-deny those disputes. We do not have a way to know how many disputes were auto-denied without manually visiting each audit to figure this information out.
1 vote -
Remove all Users to Notify from an evaluation
Can we have a button that allow us to remove all the users that appear on "Users to notify"? This will help us to keep a list of Team Leaders that are part of a specific team, that might need to be notified for specific audits.
1 vote -
Ability to dispute the feedback options selected in the audit
We can currently dispute scores, which is great, but we rely heavily on the Feedback Options for our reporting to understand what went wrong.
We also report on this level of error per advisor in many markets, and this means we get disputes that don't necessarily impact the score, but impact the feedback options selected.
Currently we can't accept a dispute to change only the feedback options, we have to change the score.
So this means we currently 'reject' the dispute - which is misleading, and then manually edit the original audit so the reporting data is correct.
Ideally we…
9 votes -
Reports feedback option per agent
We recommend adding a feature to extract all feedback options related to an agent within a single scorecard. This will provide deeper insights and help us pinpoint where to focus our feedback efforts
1 vote -
Feedback options with points
Playvox currently offers various ways to collect feedback—such as “Points”-based questions but it does not allow certain feedback items to automatically deduct weighted points from the final score. . This feature would enhance the accuracy and actionability of quality reports by reflecting the relative impact of each type of incident
We recommend incorporating weighted feedback options within each question:
This allows each feedback option to be assigned a negative weight (for example, –1, –2, –5).
Automatically subtracts that value from the total points awarded on each question
1 vote -
Feedback options with points
Playvox currently offers various ways to collect feedback—such as “Points”-based questions but it does not allow certain feedback items to automatically deduct weighted points from the final score. . This feature would enhance the accuracy and actionability of quality reports by reflecting the relative impact of each type of incident
We recommend incorporating weighted feedback options within each question:
This allows each feedback option to be assigned a negative weight (for example, –1, –2, –5).
Automatically subtracts that value from the total points awarded on each question
1 vote -
Topics - Auto QA
Please allow the importing/exporting of Topics within Auto QA. It is incredibly time-consuming to have to manually upload 100+ topics one by one. The provided topics are industry-specific and do not line up with the work our company does.
1 vote -
Auto QA Interaction ID Link
Within Auto QA when you get an overview of interactions, you are not able to click into the interaction #'s nor can you Copy/Paste them from the screen. The only way to get access to the ticket is by starting an evaluation. The quick view icon does not allow you to see the Metrics tab and does not contain a link to the interaction. Additionally, the comments section in the quick view of the interaction do not match up with the comments section when you open the interaction for evaluation, these screens need to be identical. It is a massive…
1 vote -
New Report Tab update missing some of the basics
We think the new insights are helpful and love the new graphics, tables, and figures we get out of this new set up on the Reporting tab in Playvox.
We have noticed that it is missing some of the basic insights like:
• Seeing the individual evaluations rather than just the amount of evaluations and being able to click on them to open up and review them.
• Being able to select more than one Agent, Team, and ScorecardsWe also noticed that our Team Lead role doesn't have access to the Scorecard report option. I couldn't see anything under…
8 votes -
Users to Notify
I just need your support regarding the "users to notify" option as I used to select 23 users for each evaluation. if we can make it easier t
2 votesHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
Karina from Product
-
Improve Usability of Quality Reporting Feature
Currently, when navigating to Quality > Reports > Quality Overview > Evaluations Performance widget, there’s no option to see the percentage of evaluations signed.
Having the signed percentage displayed alongside Agents evaluated and Evaluations completed would provide a clearer and more actionable view of the data, especially when analyzing trends or comparing across teams.
It is possible to see the percentage of evaluations signed when hovering over the graph on the Performance over time widget. But it's only possible to see this at a weekly interval, without the option to change this to another timeframe, regardless of the date filters…
1 voteHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
Karina from Product
-
Add "Select team" option for Interaction filters.
Currently, when viewing interactions for a filter created, there's an option for "Select user" to pull interactions from the filter for a specific user in Playvox. It would make sense to also have one for teams set up in Playvox as well.
1 voteHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
Karina from Product
-
Skipped Evaluation Reporting and Exporting
It would be highly beneficial to introduce a feature that allows the identification, reporting, and exporting of skipped evaluations. Currently, if an evaluation is skipped, there is no straightforward way to track or understand the reasons behind it.
By implementing a system that records when an evaluation is skipped and allows managers and analysts to generate reports or export this data, they can gain valuable insights into patterns or issues that may be causing evaluations to be skipped. This feature would enhance the overall evaluation process by providing transparency and enabling better decision-making.
4 votes -
Option to Skip interaction in Workloads using multiple filters
As an analyst, I want to have access to the option to Skip interactions when a workload is created using multiple filters.
2 votesHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
-
Edit Labeling
Unable to archive or delete Skip Categories, Calibration categories, Dispute categories. It has the option to delete, but that's only if you've never used the category before. If you can please provide a way where it's no longer visible that would be beneficial for the organization.
Also being able to either delete or edit "lists" for calibrations
1 vote -
Filter OR segments should have prioritized percentages for audit
When developing a filter, while we want to audit all of those potential interactions, we want a variety of interaction types. To do so, we'd want to apply desired percentage of the interactions for each segment of the filter (or multiple filters for one audit) with a priority. Filter conditions 1: 30% of interaction, Conditions 2: 25%, Conditions 3: 25%, All other conditions: the rest. From those filter condition segments, we'd want to prioritize Conditions 2, Conditions 1, Conditions 3, all others. So if a percentage of a higher priority segment is not met, then the next segment would fulfill…
1 vote -
Improve Reviews function under Quality: Format feedback and comments
Reviews functions under Quality (Review the reviewer/analyst):
2. When composing reviews, there is no option to edit font, highlight, add links, ... even it doesn't have any paragraph break, the review looks messy/untidy. It would be better to have similar format as Evaluations for better organizing and following up.1 vote -
Share dispute results with the analyst when a dispute is accepted
As the QA manager, I want to share the outcome of accepted disputes with the analyst whose evaluation was disputed so that the analyst can receive information that will enable him/her to improve his/her personal evaluation process.
The method by which the results are shared could be:
- An email
- A coaching session that is triggered by an automatically accepted dispute
- A coaching session associated with the dispute that is created manuallyIf you see this idea and feel an affinity with it, please leave in the comments how you would like to share the dispute results with…
5 votes -
Ability to update super admin roles without support tickets
The ability to update a Super Admin role directly within the platform without needing to raise a support ticket. This enhancement would allow for quicker and more efficient management of Super Admin roles.
To ensure security, a check should be implemented to confirm that there is at least one active Super Admin before allowing any changes. This is particularly important when the site owner, who might also be a Super Admin, needs their role updated. Enabling this feature would streamline the process and reduce reliance on support for role management.
2 votesHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
Karina from Product
-
Allow Workloads to contain specific rule conditions when allocating audits
Is it possible to set a rule where one analyst does not get any sampled interactions for one particular agent? Everything should be randomly allocated among all of the QA Analysts however I want to prevent one analyst from rating a specific agent.
1 voteHi there!
Thank you for sharing your idea with us!
We will thoroughly evaluate it, and if it gains traction, it could greatly impact our roadmap.
We appreciate your contribution to our community.
- Don't see your idea?