FEATURE
ARE YOU SEEING ANY CHANGES IN THE USE OF OUTBOUND TO CONNECT WITH CUSTOMERS ? BY LIVE AGENT VERSUS AUTOMATED CHANNELS ?
CF : We are seeing more organizations utilize proactive engagement to connect with their consumers . AI has enabled organizations to be more personable in this outreach , monitoring interactions in real-time and historically pinpointing when an organization should reach out proactively .
For example , proactive communication can be used to let a consumer know about a contract renewal or when an upcoming power outage is scheduled to happen . When proactive engagement is done right , it can reduce the number of inbound inquiries as consumers ’ issues are solved before they have to call in .
JL : Absolutely . There is a change in the usage of outbound communications with an increased emphasis on proactivity : getting ahead of problems before they escalate .
Businesses are leveraging automation to initiate outbound contacts efficiently , aiming for proactive and personalized CXs that can prevent issues from becoming more serious , thereby increasing customer satisfaction .
However , there is a clear distinction in the role that automated systems and live agents play in outbound communication .
Automated systems are being employed to handle the scale of outbound contacts due to their efficiency . Rather than having a live agent call hundreds of people , automated messages can reach out en masse .
When a customer responds or engages with the automated contact , a live agent can then take over to provide a more personalized and nuanced service . This strategy allows for a better allocation of live agent resources , using them where they are most needed and effective .
Nonetheless , challenges such as fraud detection and customer reluctance to respond to automated contacts pose significant issues . Customers may be hesitant to engage with automated outreach due to concerns over legitimacy .
While outbound automation is increasing and can initiate conversations , complex issues like fraud are still better managed by human agents . Many interactions initiated by automation are ultimately redirected to humans for resolution .
This balance ensures that the efficiency of automation is paired with the critical thinking and problem-solving capabilities of live agents .
" WE ARE SEEING MORE ORGANIZATIONS UTILIZE PROACTIVE ENGAGEMENT TO CONNECT WITH THEIR CONSUMERS . AI HAS ENABLED ORGANIZATIONS TO BE MORE PERSONABLE IN THIS OUTREACH ..."
--CATHERINE FORINO
SHOULD CONTACT CENTERS DEFLECT CUSTOMERS ?
Contact centers have long deflected live customer contacts to automated self-service to lower costs and manage workloads and continue to do so . But should they ? And if so , what types of contacts and in which channels ?
Jono Luk : Contact centers can and should indeed strive to increase inbound deflection rates for routine and simple inquiries through automation , allowing human agents to concentrate on complex , nuanced , or new issues that require a more personalized approach .
Automated channels are well-suited for standardized processes with high conformity across interactions , such as rescheduling appointments . In contrast , live agents should handle interactions that are highly variable and require real-time thinking , such as medical triage or new product concerns .
The key is to continuously monitor the effectiveness of deflection in enhancing customer satisfaction , ensuring that automation does not compromise the quality of the CX .
Crystal Miceli : Contact centers can increase inbound deflection rates with the help of GenAI technologies , but this is not , and should not be , the primary goal for contact centers .
In fact , there are many situations where call deflection as a metric would impede the effectiveness of the contact center entirely .
For example , a 911 operator or healthcare provider will not want to deflect inbound contacts at the same rates as a retailer . Even within retail , luxury brands who provide a higher level of service may not have call deflection as a top goal .
In those cases , the most effective contact center technologies aim to route the customer to the right agent , with the right skills and insights , at the right time , instead of deflecting them to a virtual agent or self-service .
This is where we are seeing the rise in importance of agent effectiveness tools like copilots , which can use GenAI to sift through vast quantities of data and context about the customers and the situations , both historical and in real time . These tools surface guidance to ensure that agents make the best use of the time spent in the interactions .
Low-hanging , easy-to-manage , or repetitive customer calls should be handled by autonomous virtual agents . [ But only ] if they are implemented intelligently in a way that doesn ’ t detract from the CX while the more complex interactions should be handled by a live agent .
Success should not be measured by the number of deflections , but instead by the satisfaction customers have with their customer experience whether that be with a virtual or a live agent .
WHAT ARE YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN CHOOSING , DEPLOYING , AND USING INBOUND AND OUTBOUND CUSTOMER CONTACT APPLICATIONS ?
CF : Organizations need an effective strategy for both inbound and outbound interactions . They need to be able to effectively manage every interaction across every channel .
This is possible with a unified cloud platform leveraging purpose-built AI for CX . When organizations have this , they can not only handle the volume of inbound interactions but also be strategic about generating personalized proactive outreach .
JULY 2024 9