Skip to content

Quality

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback

346 results found

  1. There should be the ability for our evaluators to challenge evaluation reviews, similar to how agents can dispute evaluations.

    11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Hi there!

    Thank you for sharing your ideas with us! 

    Your idea will be carefully evaluated. If it gains traction, it could significantly influence our development roadmap.

    Thanks for being a valuable part of our community. 

    Karina from Product

  2. 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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  0 comments  ·  Disputes  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  3. 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 Scorecards

    We also noticed that our Team Lead role doesn't have access to the Scorecard report option. I couldn't see anything under…

    6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  0 comments  ·  Reports  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  4. 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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  2 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  5. 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 manually

    If 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

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  0 comments  ·  Disputes  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  6. When you set up your Evaluate the Analyst Workload (Reviews workload) to select, say, 20% of evaluated interactions, it's going to be randomized. For example, if Analyst A evaluates 10 cases and Analyst B evaluates 20 cases, the review process involves selecting 6 cases at random from the total 30 cases.

    We would like to have a percentage per analyst, indicating it is proportionally divided among individual analysts based on their caseloads. From the above example, Playvox should calculate and fetch 2 cases from Analyst A and 4 cases from Analyst B to make it fair and square distribution.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Workloads  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  7. We need to be able to evaluate agents, and hide only some evaluations from theor view (to be able to select which evaluations to make visible for agents and which not). Therefore, if they check their profile, they wont be able to see the evaluations that we don´t want to. For example: we want to do audits with investigation purpose, but we don´t want to give visibility to the agents so these audits wont have any impact on them.

    I know we have the option when doing an evaluation to mark if we want to send the notification to agent…

    6 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  1 comment  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  8. I'd like to select multiple agents in the new agent report and multiple teams in the team report.
    I'd like to compare the selected items whenever I need to.

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  0 comments  ·  Reports  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  9. There needs to be an option to hide/omit the evaluation results colors on questions and sections, hide/omit the evaluation section percentage score, hide/omit the question answer number score. See attached screenshot for the items referenced.

    The colors, section percentage score, question number score are distracting and confusing to the end users.

    The staff person receiving the results fails to look at the actual rating focusing instead on the colors, percentage or the numbers which can be misleading. If you aren't using a binary answer option then you have the high possibility of running into this situation.

    Our business use case…

    3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  2 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  10. We are looking to implement a peer calibration process where analysts evaluate each other's completed evaluations/reviews to assess scoring consistency and alignment with quality standards.

    The process should involve:

    Selection: Choose a completed evaluation for each evaluator.
    Assignment: Assign other team members to evaluate the same case.
    Comparison: Compare the results to identify scoring misalignments across quality standards.

    Currently, this process is manual and requires significant effort to manage and analyze. We request a dedicated feature in Playvox that allows us to:

    Select and assign evaluations for peer review.
    Facilitate the comparison of results among evaluators.
    Identify and address scoring…

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  11. 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. By enabling this feature, it would streamline the process and reduce reliance on support for role management.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Settings  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  12. Currently, in the interactions tab and workloads tab within Salesforce, the default reference ID displayed is the Case ID. However, our team primarily uses the Case Number as our reference across all other reporting tools, including Tableau. This mismatch creates additional work on the backend as we have to manually match the Case ID with the Case Number for accurate reporting.

    We are requesting the ability to change the default reference ID from Case ID to Case Number in these tabs. This change would align with our reporting needs, streamline our workflow, and reduce the time spent on manual data…

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  13. In the evaluation tab, it would be incredibly useful to have a feature that identifies whether a completed evaluation originated from an assigned workload or from the interaction tab. Currently, there is no clear way to determine where the evaluation was initially triggered, which can lead to confusion and difficulty in tracking the source of evaluations.

    Implementing a feature that tags or highlights the origin of the evaluation—whether it came from a workload or directly from the interaction tab—would enhance clarity and improve the management of evaluations. This would provide evaluators and managers with better insights and allow for more…

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Workloads  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  14. The addition of an additional permission tier that will allow the amalgamation of multiple instances into one. This will allow reporting at an enterprise level, as we do not utilize any of the current reporting because it is site/instance-specific.

    Brief specifications on how we would like the multi-site functionality to work -

    Permission Tier:
    Sits above the current "Team" level, consolidating multiple Teams.
    Users with Group-level access can manage and compare data across all Teams within the Group.

    Consolidated Reporting:
    Enables reporting across different instances/sites, allowing enterprise-level analytics.
    Group-level users can generate reports that compare performance across Teams and instances.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Reports  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  15. We don't want to show the questions marked with N/A to agents on the Evaluations results page. So there's less noise on the page.

    2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  0 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  16. Currently, once the first evaluation is finished, it goes to Review and we have to go back to the Workload tab and start the next evaluation, which impacts the workflow and creates an additional step.
    It will help us if we have a feature that automatically starts the next evaluation in the workload once the first evaluation is completed without returning to the Workload tab.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Workloads  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  17. When in Quality->evaluation tab we have default filters such as team/scorecard. in these we are able to do multiple selections e.g. selecting multiple teams. However if we want to filter by scorecard custom field we can select only one item. Currently if team needs a quick way how to export specific evaluations based on that field they need to perform multiple selections and then merge the documents.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  18. Advisors work on different Helpshift instances and switch between queues or titles based on business needs. Playvox, however, has a limitation where each advisor can be linked to only one Helpshift integration flag. This means an advisor can only have their data pulled from one Helpshift instance in Playvox. If advisors switch from Helpshift A to Helpshift B midweek, Playvox will only pull data from the instance they are flagged with, preventing the evaluation of their cases on Helpshift B. An option to have multiple Helpshift integration or a workaround to have cases to be pulled up for the same…

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Workloads  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  19. It would be great to add a second confirmation button that must be acknowledged/clicked before any calibration is officially submitted, rather than just clicking "Send Evaluation" and it is sent right away.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Acknowleged  ·  1 comment  ·  Calibrations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
  20. I have a follow-up question regarding the way our phone recordings display within interactions. Is there a way for an analyst to be able to click into the recording within Playvox without having to click on a link to be taken to a different site?

    Our previous tool allowed us to be able to click "play" on a call recording from the QM tool without having to change between tabs. Attached is what the analyst sees when reviewing tickets to audit within a workload assignment.

    1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Evaluations  ·  Admin →
    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
← Previous 1 3 4 5 17 18
  • Don't see your idea?