ayman.elamin@sutherlandglobal.com — Coaching Report

Week of 2026-05-25 – 2026-05-31

At a Glance

Scorecard

Scores reflect the average of all calls reviewed this week (lowest: 1.2, highest: 2.8).

This Week's Coverage

Models Supported

Pattern Note: Lower scores on MX6200 calls suggest a need for deeper familiarity with Velop MX troubleshooting flows, especially around wired backhaul diagnostics.

Problem Categories

ACCESS Category: The average score of 1.93 reflects challenges in balancing technical accuracy with clear operational closure—most calls involved account ownership or setup prerequisites where next-step clarity was missing.

CONNECTIVITY Category: The lower average of 1.50 points to inconsistent technical guidance (e.g., incorrect reset instructions, LED misinterpretation) and a lack of structured troubleshooting. Focus on model-specific diagnostics and verification steps.

What Went Well

Accurate Technical Identification

Collected complete customer contact information including full name, phone, and email (spelled phonetically). Correctly identified the issue as a cloud account ownership conflict.

#LTS00130698

This call demonstrates strong upfront data collection and a clear diagnosis of the core problem (device registered to another account). The agent correctly initiated an internal ticket to resolve the ownership conflict and provided a concrete next step for the customer (submit invoice and photos).

Growth Opportunities

Protocol Adherence and Operational Closure

Failed to provide a case or ticket number for customer reference. Gave no concrete timeline or expected resolution date.

#LTS00130698

What “good” looks like:

• Always share a reference number (e.g., “Your case #12345”) immediately after creating an internal ticket.
• Set clear expectations: “We’ll review your documents and update you within 24 hours.”
• Confirm next steps with the customer before ending the call: “Once we process this, we’ll call you back with the outcome.”

Technical Accuracy and Troubleshooting

Incorrect reset instruction (30 seconds vs. 15 seconds for LN series). Mis-stated LED meanings (white was described as bad when solid white indicates online).

#LTS00130700

What “good” looks like:

• Reference the exact reset procedure for each model (e.g., LN series: 15 seconds, no moving parts).
• Use model-specific LED guides: solid white = online, blinking = connecting, solid red = error.
• Verify connectivity after each step (e.g., “Can you confirm the internet is now working on the booster?”).

Next Week's Focus

1. Ticket Reference Discipline: Before ending any call that requires backend work, generate and read back a case/ticket number to the customer.
2. Model-Specific Reset Scripts: Keep a quick-reference sheet for reset times and LED meanings for LN, MX, and Velop series. Practice delivering these steps verbatim.
3. Verification Habit: After any troubleshooting step, ask the customer to confirm the observed result (“Is the light now solid white?” or “Do you have internet?”).
4. Empathy + Closure: Pair every technical instruction with a brief acknowledgment (“I understand this is frustrating”) and a clear next-step summary.

Technical Accuracy

Improvement

Agent failed to provide a case or ticket number for customer reference and gave no concrete timeline or expected resolution date.

#LTS00130698

Improvement

Incorrect reset instruction (30 seconds vs. 15 seconds for LN series). Mis-stated LED meanings (white was described as bad when solid white indicates online).

#LTS00130700

Improvement

Agent provided inaccurate admin-page URLs and IP addresses, failed to follow structured troubleshooting flow, and did not confirm the correct model number.

#LTS00130706

Coaching Moments

Improvement

“Your device is added to another account. So what we can do is delete your device from the old account. Okay? And then you can add it to your new account.”

Note: While the technical direction was correct, the agent did not explain how the deletion would happen, omitted a case number, and gave no timeline. The customer was left without a reference or expectation.

#LTS00130698

Improvement

“The Internet is not working? Okay, no problem, I'll follow up with you.”

Note: This response came after the customer described a serious issue but before any troubleshooting began. The agent cut off the customer’s explanation and offered no diagnostic steps, leaving the problem unaddressed.

#LTS00130700

Improvement

“You connected it to the laptop, meaning it worked for you, it didn't work on the extender, but on the second device, the second device is what worked for you?”

Note: The agent misidentified the customer’s test (“second device” confusion) and failed to isolate the problem. This led to ineffective troubleshooting and a dead-end suggestion to contact the ISP without confirming basic connectivity.

#LTS00130706

Escalation Lessons: What L2 Did

No escalations were logged this week. All cases remained at Level 1. For future reference, ensure any unresolved technical issues are escalated with a concise summary of L1 diagnostics and a clear “why escalation is needed” note.

Coach Appendix

• Top trend: Consistent gaps in operational closure (missing ticket numbers, vague timelines) and technical accuracy (model-specific steps, LED interpretation).
• Next coaching focus: Reinforce the “reference + timeline + verification” triad for every handoff and build confidence with model-specific troubleshooting scripts.
• Evidence: All improvement quotes above map directly to scored protocol/communication gaps and technical inaccuracies identified in the scorecard and technical coaching moments. No new quotes introduced.