HISTORICAL BASELINE DATA

Month Number of Reps Number of Calls AHT First Calls Resolution

14-Jan 20 22,858 4.17 16,458
14-Feb 20 28,963 3.40 22,910
14-Mar 20 23,070 4.91 15,826
14-Apr 19 29,933 2.46 26,375
14-May 19 26,633 4.49 15,554
14-Jun 19 27,638 3.97 21,266
14-Jul 19 24,553 2.93 23,167
14-Aug 20 29,897 3.27 19,913
14-Sep 20 23,418 4.05 16,346
14-Oct 21 22,901 3.89 18,756
14-Nov 20 22,250 5.59 15,308
14-Dec 20 27,482 4.02 16,324
15-Jan 20 24,599 4.67 20,366
15-Feb 20 26,413 3.14 25,281
15-Mar 19 24,840 4.87 16,221
15-Apr 19 27,011 3.43 17,368
15-May 18 21,166 4.85 17,400
15-Jun 18 28,871 3.62 26,417
15-Jul 17 24,515 4.19 21,003
15-Aug 19 21,244 3.73 14,573
15-Sep 20 29,950 4.02 23,766
15-Oct 20 21,387 6.08 14,950
15-Nov 20 23,906 3.57 18,848
15-Dec 20 27,199 4.03 24,115
5 Day Resolution FCR % 5DR % 1A
15,822 72.0% 69.2%
22,092 79.1% 76.3% std dev = 0.108129
16,697 68.6% 72.4% mean= 76.5%
21,454 88.1% 71.7%
19,663 58.40% 73.80%
20,788 76.90% 75.20% 1B
20,136 94.40% 82.00%
22,544 66.60% 75.40% std dev = 0.068793
18,788 69.80% 80.20% mean= 73.5%
14,910 81.90% 65.10% 0.735
15,301 68.80% 68.80%
22,585 59.40% 82.20%
17,138 82.80% 69.70%
15,187 95.70% 57.50%
17,691 65.30% 71.20%
17,708 64.30% 65.60%
14,749 82.20% 69.70%
21,618 91.50% 74.90%
19,949 85.70% 81.40%
14,191 68.60% 66.80%
22,833 79.40% 76.20%
14,990 69.90% 70.10%
19,047 78.80% 79.70%
24,258 88.70% 89.20%
 Table 2
Voice Sample Master Appraiser John Trial 1 John Trial 2 Miranda Trial 1 Miranda Trial 2
1 3 3 2 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2
3 2 2 2 2 2
4 4 4 3 4 4
5 2 1 1 1 1
6 5 5 4 5 5
7 4 4 4 5 4
8 3 3 2 3 3
9 3 3 3 3 3
10 4 4 5 4 4
11 2 2 1 2 2
12 3 3 3 3 3
13 5 5 4 5 5
14 2 2 2 2 2
15 2 2 2 2 2
16 2 2 2 2 2
17 2 2 2 2 2
18 4 4 3 4 3
19 3 3 3 3 3
20 2 2 2 2 2
Cp=(USL-LSL)/(6*std dev)
USL=
LSL=
std dev =
Cp

Cpk=min(Cpkl,Cpku)
Cpu=(USL-mean)/(3*std dev)
mean=

Cpu=
Cpl=(mean-LSL)/(3*std dev)

Cpk=

The process is not capable with respect to Cp and Cpk va

 Performance Metrics

1
0.75
0.108129074439441
0.385341934005018

)/(3*std dev)
76.5%
0.765
0.723286810127419
/(3*std dev)
0.047397057882618
0.047397057882618

ot capable with respect to Cp and Cpk values

 Performance Metrics

Cp=(USL-LSL)/(6*std dev)
USL= 1
LSL= 0.9
std dev = 0.068792891758682
Cp 0.242273093056351

Cpk=min(Cpkl,Cpku)
Cpu=(USL-mean)/(3*std dev)
mean= 0.735

Cpu= 1.28344171046602
Cpl=(mean-LSL)/(3*std dev)

CpL= -0.79889552435332

Cpk= -0.79889552435332

The process is not capable with respect to Cp and Cpk values

The data shown is Attribute Data

Attribute gage R&R is used for MSA purpose

Table 2
Voice Sample Master Appraiser John Trial 1 John Trial 2 Repeatability Reproducability
1 3 3 2 0 0
2 2 2 2 1 1
3 2 2 2 1 1
4 4 4 3 0 0
5 2 1 1 1 0
6 5 5 4 0 0
7 4 4 4 1 1
8 3 3 2 0 0
9 3 3 3 1 1
10 4 4 5 0 0
11 2 2 1 0 0
12 3 3 3 1 1
13 5 5 4 0 0
14 2 2 2 1 1
15 2 2 2 1 1
16 2 2 2 1 1
17 2 2 2 1 1
18 4 4 3 0 0
19 3 3 3 1 1
20 2 2 2 1 1
12 11

John repeatability is 60
Miranda repeatability is 90
John reproducability is 55
Miranda reproducability is 85

Hence Miranda is more consisternt (repeatable) and accurate (reproducable) than John
Miranda Trial 1 Miranda Trial 2 Repeatability
3 3
2 2
2 2
4 4
1 1
5 5
5 4
3 3
3 3
4 4
2 2
3 3
5 5
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
4 3
3 3
2 2
18
Reproducability
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 0
1 1
0 0
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
0 0
1 1
1 1
17
Cause and Effect Dia
e and Effect Diagram
 Proposed solutions t

1 Update the software on timely basis

2 Train the manpower
3 Outsource recruitment procedure and include management workshops
4 Maintain Average Handle Time
5 Creation and regular updation of Standard Operating Procedure and kn
6 New ticketing system for IT Support and 8 hour resolution policy for the
7 Call routing to the right person and proper resolution to be provided in
osed solutions to meet FCR

ude management workshops and make strong ethical compliancepolicies for handling issues and conflict of interest

Operating Procedure and knowledge base should be available to all representatives

hour resolution policy for the same
resolution to be provided in the first call
No. Potential Failure Mode Potential Failure Effect Severity Occurrence
1 Incorrect Resolution provided Dis satisfied customer 8 4
2 Representatives not available Annoyed customer 9 3
3 More hold time Annoyed customer 7 4
4 Knowledge base/SOP not available Incorrect resolution provided 8 6
5 Rude attitude Annoyed customer 10 2
6 Improper network Call drop/audio quality 8 3
Detection Risk Priority Number(RPN)
5 160
6 162
7 196
8 384
5 100
7 168