zhiliang.chen@concentrix.com — Coaching Report

Week of 2026-05-25 – 2026-05-31

At a Glance

Scorecard

Where Time Goes

Product Families

Key Observations

• MBE is one of the slowest families at 6m 58s.

Problem Categories

Week-over-Week Movement

• Overall moved down 1.38 vs. last week.
• Accuracy moved down 1.67 vs. last week.
• Protocol moved down 0.50 vs. last week.
• Communication moved up 0.33 vs. last week.
• Average handle time moved down by 9m 00s.
• Family swing: MBE handle time moved down by 32m 32s vs. last week.

What Went Well

• Acknowledged need for advanced support

The agent recognized when an issue was beyond their scope and indicated a willingness to involve advanced technical support.

> "Hi Team,Here is a customer issue that needs to be escalated for further handling."

#TE00129512

Growth Opportunities

• Correct technical explanations and perform troubleshooting

What good looks like: Provide accurate technical explanations based on KB guidance, and follow standard troubleshooting steps for speed-performance issues.

Next step: Review KB articles universal_speed_performance.md and universal_speed_diagnosis.md and practice the listed steps before offering any technical explanations.

#TE00129512

• Collect critical product information upfront

What good looks like: Always collect and verify the router model, serial number, and warranty status early in the call, especially for high-value products and performance issues.

Next step: Add a quick checklist at the start of calls for connectivity/speed issues to ensure all essential product details are captured.

#TE00129512

Next Week's Focus

1. Practice structured troubleshooting for connectivity/speed issues — follow the KB steps in order, document each step, and only escalate when all steps are completed or the issue is clearly beyond L1 scope.
2. Verify product details before troubleshooting — confirm model, firmware version, and node topology for mesh systems; this information is critical for accurate diagnosis.
3. Use clear escalation language — when handing off to L2, state exactly what has been done, what information is needed from L2, and set clear expectations for follow-up.
4. Review escalation notes from L2 — study the L2 resolution steps for escalated cases to learn patterns and improve future L1 handling.

Technical Accuracy

Improvement

Agent provided factually incorrect technical explanations: mischaracterized Wi-Fi as half-duplex limiting speed to 600 Mbps (contradicted by KB universal_speed_performance.md); referenced non-existent 'connector' that could be 'reduced' to improve speed (no KB support).

Note: Wi-Fi is full-duplex, and speed limitations are not caused by a "half-duplex" characteristic. Always refer to KB articles for technical explanations.

#TE00129512

Improvement

Agent failed to perform any troubleshooting steps despite KB guidance for speed issues (universal_speed_performance.md, universal_speed_diagnosis.md).

Note: For speed-performance issues, always start with a wired baseline test, verify firmware, and check node placement before considering escalation.

#TE00129512

Improvement

Agent promised an 'upgrade' to advanced support but did not initiate escalation, confirm process, or set callback expectation (contradicts KB guidance on escalation and follow-up).

Note: When escalation is necessary, use the standard escalation procedure: document all steps taken, state the need for L2, and confirm next steps with the customer.

#TE00129512

Coaching Moments

No additional coaching moments were extracted after the technical review.

Escalation Lessons: What L2 Did

#TE00129512 — Pending with Level 2

• What L1 saw: Customer reported Wi-Fi speed fluctuations (60-300 Mbps) on an MBE7000 router advertised for 500+ Mbps. L1 attempted no troubleshooting, provided incorrect technical explanations, and promised an undefined "upgrade" without escalation.
• Why it escalated: The case was escalated due to unresolved performance issues and lack of proper L1 diagnostics. The escalation trigger was the need for advanced technical support after L1 failed to provide a valid resolution path.
• Related call chain: This was a repeat contact. The customer had previously been misdirected and received vague promises of an "upgrade" without concrete next steps.
• What L2 did: L2 requested detailed network topology, sysinfo logs, and additional client device testing. They advised the customer to delete preferred networks on the iPhone, test on the 6GHz band, and provided guidance for further isolation.
• Current state: The case is pending with Level 2, awaiting customer-provided diagnostic information and additional testing results.
• L1 learning points:

1. Always collect model, serial number, firmware version, and node topology for mesh systems before troubleshooting speed issues.

2. For speed-performance issues, start with a wired baseline test, verify firmware, and check node placement — only escalate after these steps.

3. When escalation is necessary, document all steps taken, clearly state the need for L2, and confirm next steps with the customer (e.g., callback time, required information).

Coach Appendix

• The week’s single call highlights a critical need for improved technical accuracy and escalation discipline, especially for high-end MBE products. Focus coaching on structured troubleshooting workflows, accurate product knowledge, and clear escalation language to prevent repeat issues.
• Key pattern: L1 provided factually incorrect explanations and skipped essential diagnostics, leading to an unresolved case and customer frustration. Reinforce KB adherence and escalation protocols in upcoming sessions.

This Week's Calls