Coach & QA View

paolo.ebora@concentrix.com — Week of 2026-06-21 – 2026-06-27

Escalation-Heavy Week 2 Risk Flags

Coaching Summary

Performance trending downward with increasing accuracy and protocol gaps this week

Reliance on undocumented procedures and incomplete troubleshooting before escalation

Key calls: #TE00116070, #LTS00134518, #TE00134332

Risk Flags

Critical Dimension Below Threshold

Accuracy score <=1.0 and protocol score <=1.0 across 2 calls this week

ExampleCall #TE00116070: accuracy=1, protocol=1 with undocumented procedures and misinterpretation of device states

Correct behavior: Follow documented troubleshooting sequences and KB procedures for power cycles and resets

Impact: Increased risk of misdiagnosis, prolonged outages, and loss of trust

Related: #TE00116070, #LTS00134518

View ticket #TE00116070

Escalated But Unresolved

3 escalations this week with no confirmed resolution or follow-up path

ExampleCall #TE00134332: escalated to engineering but no L2 diagnostic steps documented or customer confirmation obtained

Correct behavior: Document clear escalation steps, obtain customer confirmation of next actions, and set explicit follow-up timelines

Impact: Leaves customers without clear path forward, increasing callback risk

Related: #TE00116070, #TE00134332, #TE00134632

View ticket #TE00134332

Week-over-Week Progress

Overall moved up 0.23 vs. last week.; Accuracy moved down 0.47 vs. last week.
Overall+0.23 ▲
Accuracy-0.47 ▼
Protocol+0.60 ▲
Comms+1.27 ▲
Handle time: +6m 31s longer avg
• MX handle time moved down by 19m 51s vs. last week.

Scorecard

DimensionWeek AverageCalls Reviewed
Overall2.15
Technical Accuracy2.25
Protocol1.65
Communication2.65

V2 Rubric (Shadow Grading)

V2 overall: 50.27% across 5 v2-scored calls this week1 auto-zero

CategoryWeek Average
Resolution1.88
Technical Accuracy2.38
Communication2.75
Customer Ownership3.71
Escalation Judgment3.5
Customer Experience2.5

Score Diagnostics

Based on 5 calls reviewed this week.

Accuracy
2.20
Protocol
1.60
Communication
2.60
Overall
2.10

Technical Findings

improvement
Invented and performed an undocumented 10-step power cycle recovery procedure not supported by any Linksys KB article for MX4200
#TE00116070  ·  call cbf5c79e-6e71-11f1-8624-42010a660053
improvement
Provided incorrect support URL 'links.xyz' instead of support.linksys.com, violating universal_support_contacts.md
#TE00134332  ·  call 154e424e-6e82-11f1-95fe-42010a660053
improvement
Misidentified company as 'Lennox' and provided fake URL 'links on.com' for MX2000 support
#LTS00134518  ·  call 8605080c-6f3f-11f1-9bae-42010a623f91
improvement
Failed to verify DHCP reservation IP falls within pool range or instruct client to reboot after changes on MX6200
call 71b96d08-71aa-11f1-aa68-42010a660053

Call Handling Findings

Calibration Notes

Callback Chains

No callback chains detected.

Documentation Mismatches

No HappyFox case number recorded despite escalation commitment; creates ambiguity for follow-up

Grader says: Escalated to Level 2 technical team; pending callback.
Agent documented: not documented

Suggested Coaching Conversation

1
I noticed you handled the MX4200 case with great empathy and patience - that ownership perspective really shines through in how you engaged Rene. How do you feel about balancing that customer focus with strict adherence to documented procedures?
2
When you encountered the MX6200 MAC address issue, what made you decide against attempting the 5-press method as a first escalation step? Let's walk through that decision process together.
3
The URLs you provided in two calls this week weren't valid Linksys resources. How can we build a checklist to verify support sites and product specs before sharing them?
4
Looking at your troubleshooting sequence for the E2500 speed issue, what additional diagnostics would you consider adding next time to validate hardware limitations before recommending upgrades?

Coaching Best Practices

Five Principles for Effective Coaching Conversations

  1. SBI feedback model — Describe the Situation, the Behavior you observed, and its Impact. Avoid labels (“you always…”) — describe the specific instance.
  2. Ask more than you tell — Start with “What did you notice on that call?” before offering your interpretation. Agents who self-diagnose retain more.
  3. Recognition before correction — Open with a genuine strength observation. Agents in a defensive posture can’t hear coaching.
  4. Psychological safety first — Frame mistakes as data, not character. “That call had a tricky wrinkle — let’s pull it apart” lands better than “you made an error here.”
  5. Close with a specific commitment — End every coaching conversation with one thing the agent will try on their next call, and a follow-up check-in within 48 hours.

Deep Evidence

CaseDateDurationOverallAccuracyProtocolCommsV2ProductIssue TypeOutcome
#TE00116070OUTBOUND2026-06-221.211340.0%
Needs Improvement
MX4200CONNECTIVITY
Agent requested the purchase receipt via email and will forward the case to the team for warranty/repair evaluation.
#TE00134332OUTBOUND2026-06-222.632383.0%
Developing
MX6200CONFIGURATION
Escalate to engineering with collected logs, screenshots, and topology details for analysis. Follow-up planned via email.
#LTS00134518INBOUND2026-06-231.31120.0%
Needs Improvement
MX2000CONNECTIVITY
Promised to email a self-help article (email not confirmed); no technical fix applied.
#TE00134632OUTBOUND2026-06-242.822376.4%
Developing
E2500CONNECTIVITY
Agent advised that the router cannot be forced to 100 Mbps due to hardware limitation, recommended purchasing a newer router, and offered to email a PDF spec sheet.
71b96d08-71aa-11f1-aa68-42010a660053OUTBOUND2026-06-262.642251.9%
Needs Improvement
MX6200SETUP
Agent suggested possible hardware fault but did not perform further troubleshooting or offer escalation. Issue remains unresolved; customer to follow up internally.