xiaoge.ji@concentrix.com — Coaching Report

Week of 2026-05-25 – 2026-05-31

At a Glance

Scorecard

3 calls reviewed. Score range: 1.00–3.00.

Where Time Goes

Models Supported

Key Pattern: The MX2000 call consumed significantly more time (15m 28s) and scored poorly across all dimensions (1.0 overall). This suggests the agent struggled with setup issues on this model, leading to extended handling time and lower satisfaction. The MR7500 call was shorter but still faced protocol challenges despite better accuracy.

Problem Categories

SETUP (drill-down): The single setup call (MX2000) was the most time-consuming and lowest-scoring, indicating a critical need for improved setup troubleshooting protocols. The agent misidentified the product and provided incorrect instructions, leading to poor outcomes.

HARDWARE (drill-down): Hardware cases averaged 4.24 out of 5 for accuracy but only 1.0 for protocol. While technical knowledge was strong, the agent missed basic troubleshooting steps (power-cycle, adapter check) and failed to collect essential case documentation (serial number, warranty verification).

Week-over-Week Movement

No prior-week comparison exists.

What Went Well

1. Product model identification

The agent correctly identified the MR7500 model during the hardware issue call, which is essential for accurate troubleshooting and case routing.

> "My Wi-Fi Router has a problem. On May 21st I submitted those sales numbers, phone numbers, and emailed them to your account. The problem is that after I plugged in this adapter The power on light, whether red or blue, is not lighting up."

#PR00130372

1. Email follow-up initiation

In the MX2000 setup case, the agent collected the customer's email address and promised to send setup instructions, showing awareness of post-call support needs.

1. Polite tone maintenance

Even in challenging situations (like the frustrated MR7500 customer), the agent maintained a cooperative tone without defensiveness.

Growth Opportunities

1. Protocol adherence for hardware troubleshooting

What good looks like: For non-responsive routers, always perform basic power-troubleshooting (power-cycle, adapter check, LED state verification) before escalating. Document findings and collect serial number/warranty details.

> "Currently we have updated the relevant process. Our product has already been Transferred to TagBeta to handle. You should contact TagBeta on that end."

#PR00130372

Next step: Before escalating hardware issues, complete these steps: 1) Verify power adapter connection and LED states, 2) Perform power-cycle (unplug 10s, replug), 3) Document serial number and warranty status.

1. Case documentation completeness

What good looks like: For RMA cases, always collect serial number, purchase date, and warranty verification upfront. Reference existing case numbers and provide clear next steps with tracking.

> "Advised customer to call PAT DATA (256-516-82) to follow up on replacement or refund status."

#PR00130372

Next step: When handling RMA requests, ask for serial number immediately, verify warranty eligibility, and provide a case reference number in all communications.

Next Week's Focus

• Practice hardware troubleshooting scripts: Memorize the 5-step power-verification process (adapter check, LED states, power-cycle, modem connection, network status) for non-responsive routers.
• Implement the "3D" documentation rule: For every RMA/case, capture Device (model), Details (serial/warranty), and Directions (next steps with tracking).
• Product model verification: Confirm the exact product model before providing any instructions—especially critical for setup calls where misidentification leads to failed guidance.
• Escalation preparation: When escalation is necessary, document all troubleshooting steps performed and provide the customer with a clear case reference number before transferring.

Technical Accuracy

Improvement

Agent repeatedly misidentified Velop MX2000 as a 'mouse' or 'loader' and provided incorrect factory reset duration (15 seconds instead of 10).

#LTS00130812

Improvement

Agent failed to perform any troubleshooting for a non-responsive router (MR7500) with power LED issues, missing basic steps like power-cycle or adapter check.

#PR00130372

Improvement

Agent did not collect serial number or verify warranty for RMA processing, violating case management protocol.

#PR00130372

Coaching Moments

Improvement

Transcript quote:

"[00:01] CHANNEL_LEFT: Hello, I want to ask about WOWTER. It says there is no Internet service. Is there actually something wrong with WOWTER?\n[00:01] CHANNEL_RIGHT: Yes. What is the model number of your account?\n[00:10] CHANNEL_LEFT: WOWTER is the module number. Wait a moment, let me check my notes. The module number is MX2000. What is WOWTER?\n[00:34] CHANNEL_RIGHT: How many units do you have? Mouse.\n[00:43] CHANNEL_LEFT: I see WOWTER listed. Yes, yes, it's standing there. Yes, it's standing there, standing there.\n[00:45] CHANNEL_RIGHT: Are you currently next to the product? Are you next to the mouse? Are you there? Okay."

Note: The agent consistently misidentified the MX2000 Velop router as a "mouse" or "loader" throughout the call, demonstrating severe product confusion that undermined effective troubleshooting. This misidentification led to inappropriate instructions and ultimately an unresolved case.

#LTS00130812

Escalation Lessons: What L2 Did

#PR00130372 — Updated

What L1 saw:

• Customer reported MR7500 power LED not lighting after adapter plug-in
• Device suddenly stopped working after previous functionality
• Customer claimed to have submitted sales numbers/phone numbers on May 21
• Customer frustrated about not receiving email replies

Why it escalated:

The case escalated due to repeated customer contacts about missing RMA documentation and lack of progress. L1 failed to collect essential hardware details (serial number, warranty verification) or perform basic troubleshooting before directing the customer to external support.

Related call chain:

This was a multi-contact case spanning 6 interactions across 4 agents. The initial L1 call (May 21) documented the hardware fault but missed critical documentation steps. Subsequent calls (May 26-28) involved multiple agents struggling with the same issues—missing serial numbers, unclear escalation paths, and inconsistent messaging—before final escalation.

What L2 did:

Level 2 appears to have focused on case consolidation and customer communication rather than technical resolution. The "Updated" status suggests case management actions (email resends, escalation to TagBeta for hardware replacement) rather than technical diagnosis. No technical resolution steps were documented in the available data.

Current state:

Case marked as "Updated"—likely awaiting customer response to replacement coordination.

L1 learning points:

1. Always collect serial number and warranty details on first contact for hardware issues—this prevents case reinvention later.
2. Perform basic power-troubleshooting (adapter check, power-cycle, LED verification) before declaring hardware failure.
3. Provide clear case references when directing customers to external teams—this reduces repeat contacts and speeds resolution.

Coach Appendix

Highest-signal weekly trend: The agent's most critical gap is protocol adherence in hardware troubleshooting, particularly the failure to execute basic power-verification steps before escalation. This pattern appeared in both the MX2000 setup call (misidentification leading to no troubleshooting) and MR7500 hardware call (skipping power-cycle checks).

Recurring pattern: Incomplete case documentation—serial numbers, warranty verification, and case references were consistently missing, forcing repeat contacts and ultimately leading to escalation. This suggests a need for structured checklists during hardware and RMA interactions.

All evidence referenced above comes directly from call transcripts, coaching moments, and HappyFox data provided in this report.