Skip to content

Quality

Categories

JUMP TO ANOTHER FORUM

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

285 results found

  1. 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)
  2. 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…

    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  ·  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)
  3. 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…

    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  ·  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)
  4. Have a N/A option in the dispute validity in addition to accept and reject. This option should apply when the dispute had to be nullified since it was a gray area and the dispute wasn't valid for either of the stakeholders involved.

    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  ·  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)
  5. Allow to filter via satisfaction data from Zendesk. We need this as we report based on satisfaction date for cSAT performance. Currently, we're only able to filter using created date, solved at or updated at date.

    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  ·  0 comments  ·  Filters  ·  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. Add a filter option to report the use case by ticket case reason with its rating to determine the top ones with opportunities.

    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  ·  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)
  7. Currently, we can't perform quality checks in Playvox without assigning scores. However, our quality process doesn't involve scoring agents; we focus on capturing criteria without emphasizing scores. It would be great if Playvox could support this by allowing assessments without associated scores, making it easier to align with our approach and minimizing disruptions.

    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  ·  Scorecards  ·  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 couldn't help but notice that any answered questions that don't have associated point values (we do this for tracking purposes) will end up skewing the report. It shows up as occurrences in the agent's coaching opportunities when they were answered. In this category, we just want to track if the agent offered the correct value of refund/credit or if they over-refunded or under-refunded (or N/A). We leave the question as a 0 point value since we already capture the adherence to the SOP in their Issue Resolution question. Thanks!

    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  ·  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. Hoping to add a function within evaluations to toggle an audit to be "un-scored". Essentially, the audit evaluation would still be completed and contain feedback for a specialist to understand how they can improve their QA score but it would not factor into their overall score report.

    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  ·  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)
  10. Add skipping option to "Evaluate the Analyst" workloads. Different use-cases where we would like to not include them in the workload.

    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  ·  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)
  11. Provide reports on fulfillment levels of workloads, be it workloads for (a) evaluating the analysts or (b) evaluating the agent.

    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  ·  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)
  12. Right now I have calibration categories I would like to delete as they are no longer relevant. I'm unable to because they are attached to calibrations. I am unable to delete calibrations unless I do it one by one. Being able to either archive or delete the category would be helpful for new calibrations.

    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  ·  0 comments  ·  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)
  13. Currently, you can only select ''Fail Section'', ''Fail All,'' and ''Notify'' options as ''Actions'' if a rule is met in Scorecards. Adding ''Set N/A Answer'' would be a neat addition because some criteria makes others redundant in certain scorecards. This would be great for efficiency.

    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  ·  Scorecards  ·  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. We need to be able to delete comments made in evaluations

    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)
  15. Monthly, the case reason data is necessary for reporting for the following reasons:

    (1) Determine which case reasons are Met and Not Met %.
    (2) Have visibility on the count and types of evaluated case reasons.
    (3) Know the specific areas for improvement by case reasons that our agents needed for a refresher/training, and coaching.

    **The custom field feature in Playvox does not generate the above-mentioned data report we needed. We are looking forward to the generation of this "feature" option so that we can eliminate manual tracking and report data seamlessly and quickly.

    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, it's only possible to disable the access of analysts to their own reviews in the reviews tab and to disable their email notifications for reviews. However, analysts are still notified about their reviews via the bell icon on the top right. The analysts don't have access to those reviews, but they know about us doing them.

    What we need is to be able to review our analysts' evaluations without them receiving any kind of notification about it. We want to be able to do audits with investigation purposes that don't have an impact on the performance of the analysts.…

    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  ·  0 comments  ·  Other  ·  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. We'd like to have the option for an automated "Workload Status Report" email that can be sent out daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, etc. that would provide insights into the current period's workload activity to see things like total time spent evaluating so far per analyst, individual and overall completion rate, number of skips, average scores by team and scorecard, as well as any trends perhaps tracked by AI. We'd also like to have the ability to export all workload data/reports which currently doesn't seem to exist on the Quality>Workloads>Reports pages.

    4 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  ·  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)
  18. The Scheduled Evaluations feature is great, but currently does not allow for any difference in how it's used in an organization.

    Please allow Scheduled Evaluations to be set-up on a user basis, so one evaluator can schedule their own evaluations without affecting anyone elses workflow.

    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  ·  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)
  19. For standalone workload, it's better to have detection of duplicate interaction ID to avoid reductant audit on the same sample.

    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  ·  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)
  20. Creating a workload on an analyst level provides tickets of the selected analyst on an agent level. Creating a workload for 2 or more analysts returns a list of agents (to know which analyst is being evaluated we need to open the evaluation window).
    What is being returned back is the correct number of cases that need to be checked (in this example, 10), but from the active workload, it is unclear which case belongs to which analyst. Cases selected only show agents who were evaluated in those cases (not relevant).
    As the workload is based on Analyst, it would…

    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  ·  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)
← Previous 1 3 4 5 14 15
  • Don't see your idea?