Team Name: ROC Q&T

Idea: Call Hold Adherence Report

Idea submitter: Tushit Modak

Date:08.10.2023 Location: Virtual

PROBLEM SATEMENT:

• The ROC AF team associates are missing the call hold

protocol, leading to a significant number of calls not
adhering to the required hold duration.
• From May 1st to July 24th, 2023, around 18% of the total
calls missed the hold protocol, despite of a hold time of 300
seconds. This situation calls for immediate attention to
improve call quality and ensure that every associate adheres
to the protocol.
Impact Statement:
• Failure in call hold adherence
• Long waiting time for customers
• Decrease customer satisfaction.
• Damage to Brand
• Loss of loyal customers
STANDARD WORK FOR ROC CALL HOLD:

• Each hold should not exceed 5mins. If the issue is taking more time
and Stakeholder insists on staying on the call, Agent should follow the
same hold procedure, refreshing every 5mins until issue is resolved
• Link:
https://start.wwops.amazon.dev/stableLink/lms/ELEMENTS-283468-li
-283468-10-li-283468-10?version=2
PROPOSED SOLUTION:

• To address this issue, I have developed a query using the

Hubble analytics platform. The query, accessible at:
https://hubble.amazon.dev/?queryId=ca53ef81-5b62-4675-a
aa7-fae0bc101b19
, provides raw data containing call details such as contact ID,
hold duration, agent alias, and date. By analyzing this data,
we can identify non-adherent calls, categorize them by
agent, and include them in a report for further action by the
leadership team.
OBJECTIVES/SUCCESS CRITERIA:

We are doing this because of following objectives:

•Increase adherence to the call hold protocol among ROC AF team

associates.
•Improve call quality by ensuring that every associate adheres to
the hold protocol.
•Identify non-adherent calls and categorize them by agent for
further analysis.
•Decrease the percentage of calls missing the hold protocol from
18% to 0-5% bracket by the end of Q3.
STATISTICS: From May 1st to July 24th 2023.
2500 60%

50%
2000

40%

1500

30%

1000

20%

500
10%

0 0%
m pu dh sh u ju m tx m vz ai an na va no sh ne ar m luj od ad oy ov m eu en js as pk di an at an ub kd sh ik ha ke ep ol na us
ba ara dra edi mm vija uq diya dku ed ukys din ehe tee dsa jniti cbe um ahs ssa ess een ubr em kka nde ayv esh lara rzn ana agh lnpr ekb oos rivi vak elan et san dde deb nso ohh
m d n o de em sa an hm h a m a l y k v s se b ush be mo sa d n u sh th dig le hsw ho od jan fer zm
ku sm ya mm b e s a b ob pr man jo opa bsi a ha du ga ba ka j na
y ye re ad
p m
ni m al w m p b g b n

No Hold < 5 Min >= 5 Min Total Call >=5 Min hold Contri
HYD- B&M vs HYD-VROC
HYD - B&M HYD - VROC
Agent < 5 Min >= 5 Min No Hold Total Call % > 5 min Shift Agent < 5 Min >= 5 Min No Hold Total Call % > 5 min Shift
nikumbam 124 150 27 301 50% S1 smdarapu 299 513 338 1150 45% S3
erramg 102 126 32 260 48% S3 ssundarv 26 22 8 56 39% S3
yandradh 8 24 30 62 39% S1 havthars 351 556 725 1632 34% S1
srinikea 249 617 818 1684 37% S1 devijaju 44 60 104 208 29% S1
mmmedish 69 64 48 181 35% S3 sadiyatx 82 68 96 246 28% S1
bommu 170 136 107 413 33% S1 kpadhmoh 81 74 126 281 26% S3
ahmedgva 164 153 192 509 30% S1 wsandkum 15 18 36 69 26% S1
shahwara 338 343 512 1193 29% S1 amuddin 115 112 251 478 23% S1
aleemuqm 576 451 551 1578 29% S1 obadinan 12 10 21 43 23% S1
trivapar 80 117 223 420 28% S3 bhargyad 260 110 118 488 23% S1
raghaada 325 272 471 1068 25% S3 mandsano 324 232 523 1079 22% S3
mahmedvz 128 108 195 431 25% S3 ljnitish 176 259 811 1246 21% S3
danisarc 211 88 61 360 24% S1 opakumar 493 365 1037 1895 19% S1
bhukysai 199 160 312 671 24% S1 avaarunk 624 417 1261 2302 18% S1
sumanxba 175 73 69 317 23% S3 kumrhuf 57 28 79 164 17% S3
mehena 120 63 96 279 23% S3 maydutta 115 60 259 434 14% S3
prateeva 593 386 738 1717 22% S1 ushubroy 58 20 79 157 13% S1
rakesvar 79 45 85 209 22% S3 saikdont 869 181 405 1455 12% S3
saiyesbo 43 25 51 119 21% S3 mokkam 83 27 131 241 11% S1
doddlea 62 69 205 336 21% S1 jaldepol 613 134 919 1666 8% S1
joycbene 643 287 493 1423 20% S3 ganeshjs 86 14 80 180 8% S3
gapunend 939 465 909 2313 20% S3 khandaw 160 42 433 635 7% S3
bsivahsm 49 35 112 196 18% S3 pssimha 118 27 328 473 6% S3
sssaluj 24 31 131 186 17% S1 bhajannu 953 63 918 1934 3% S3
jkhadamo 180 91 318 589 15% S1 madoosub 37 8 236 281 3% S1
aseessod 176 110 438 724 15% S3 garapatu 3 2 82 87 2% S3
rishavss 207 54 113 374 14% S3 thrivikd 13 4 158 175 2% S3
beenad 5 2 7 14 14% S1 mohiudsa 137 7 167 311 2% S3
habeemov 511 238 1201 1950 12% S3 digvaksh 17 3 134 154 2% S1
harxchin 390 120 557 1067 11% S1 leelanik 21 2 152 175 1% S1
maraboir 244 76 371 691 11% S1 rohgeetl 2 1 293 296 0% S3
psandeeu 183 53 247 483 11% S3 bodddeep 2 65 67 0% S3
dbashash 129 60 410 599 10% S3 ghosanke 8 199 207 0% S1
dudayven 332 50 191 573 9% S1 jandebol 1 45 46 0% S1
shayeri 193 54 559 806 7% S1 nethakan 40 40 0% S3
balaraas 441 73 583 1097 7% S3 nzmohhus 1 8 9 0% S1
kaurznpk 70 32 413 515 6% S3 sunifrap 3 69 72 0% S1
bidlanpa 30 4 32 66 6% S3 Total Call 6259 3439 10734 20432 17%
jshanadi 7 4 56 67 6% S3
nayaghan 11 10 171 192 5% S1
ashambat 247 21 174 442 5% S3
yelnprat 160 32 577 769 4% S1
pajkumar 145 10 100 255 4% S1
preekban 25 5 100 130 4% S3
nandagik 251 9 362 622 1% S3
affathio 21 1 67 89 1% S3
bhswetha 4 1 156 161 1% S1
bvanda 20 20 0% S1
fernsona 3 33 36 0% S3
rmyazr 7 53 60 0% S3
Total Call 9442 5398 13777 28617 19%
MANAGER LEVEL TAKEAWAYS
L4 Manager Level View:

As an L4 manager, you can take away the following from this report proposal:

•- Gain insight into the extent of the call hold protocol non-adherence issue.
•- Understand the proposed solution, which involves utilizing a query to extract
raw data for analysis.
•- Recognize the importance of addressing this issue promptly to improve call
quality.
•- Note the target adherence rate of 0-5% for each associate in Q3.
•- Understand the need to monitor and take appropriate action based on the
analysis presented in the report.
L5 Manager Level View:

As an L5 manager, in addition to the L4 manager's perspective, you can take away

the following:

•- Recognize the impact of this issue on the ROC AF operations team and the quality
team.
•- Understand the proposed solution's ability to identify associates who have not
adhered to the hold timing protocol.
•- Acknowledge the importance of collaboration between the ROC AF operations
team and the quality team to improve call quality.
•- Understand the need for further automation of this report through the BI team's
involvement to create a dashboard for easy data retrieval and report generation.
L6 Manager Level View:

•As an L6 manager, you can take away the following from this report proposal:
•- Gain a broader understanding of the issue's impact on customer experience and
satisfaction.
•- Recognize the importance of addressing non-adherence comprehensively across
all teams.
•- Acknowledge the need to allocate resources to automate the report generation
process for increased efficiency.
•- Understand the proposal's potential to serve as a blueprint for implementing
adherence improvement strategies in other teams.
TARGET PLAN OF ACTION:

• Proposal acceptance by leadership

• Data Extraction and Analysis
• Review and Action
• Implementation of measures
• Performance Evaluation
• Continuous Improvement
BENEFITS VS. COSTS:

Benefits
 Customer call quality Improvement.
 Identification of Non-Adherent Calls
 Actionable report for leadership

Cost
 Time and Resource Investment
CONCLUSION:

• Overall, this report proposal aims to highlight the call hold

protocol non-adherence issue, suggest a solution, and
identify the benefits for managers across different levels to
take appropriate actions and drive improvements in call
quality and adherence.