Coach & QA View

josephmycko.balindres@concentrix.com — Week of 2026-06-28 – 2026-07-04

Hybrid Week 3 Risk Flags

Coaching Summary

Performance is declining with consistently low resolution rates and high unresolved call counts.

Agent frequently fails to engage live or follow structured troubleshooting protocols, leading to abandoned calls.

Key calls: #LTS00090465, #LTS00080392

Risk Flags

Critical Accuracy Score

Accuracy score of 1.0 in call #LTS00080392 due to no issue identification or troubleshooting

ExampleAgent failed to identify or confirm the customer's problem and provided no technical guidance

Correct behavior: Follow standard issue identification protocol: verify product model, serial number, and exact customer-reported symptoms before troubleshooting

Impact: Customer received no actionable support, leading to potential service disruption

Related: #LTS00080392

View ticket #LTS00080392

Critical Protocol Score

Protocol score of 1.0 in call #LTS00080392 due to no standard flow adherence

ExampleCall ended without issue verification, troubleshooting, or closure protocol

Correct behavior: Adhere to support protocol: greet → identify issue → troubleshoot → confirm resolution → close

Impact: Customer left without support path, increasing likelihood of repeat contact

Related: #LTS00080392

View ticket #LTS00080392

Pattern of Abandonment

Two calls (100%) ended with operational_closure_status: abandoned_or_vague

ExampleCall #LTS00090465: IVR loop with no live agent; Call #LTS00080392: unscripted ending without resolution

Correct behavior: Use scripted closure phrases and confirm next steps before ending calls

Impact: Customers may perceive support as unavailable or unhelpful

Related: #LTS00090465, #LTS00080392

Week-over-Week Progress

No prior-week comparison available yet.

Scorecard

DimensionWeek AverageCalls Reviewed
Overall1.452
Technical Accuracy3.02
Protocol1.02
Communication2.02

V2 Rubric (Shadow Grading)

V2 overall: 0.0% across 1 v2-scored calls this week

CategoryWeek Average
Resolution0.0
Technical Accuracy0.0
Communication
Customer Ownership
Escalation Judgment
Customer Experience

Score Diagnostics

Based on 2 calls reviewed this week.

Accuracy
3.00
Protocol
1.00
Communication
2.00
Overall
1.45

Technical Findings

strength
IVR prompts were technically accurate and aligned with Linksys KB guidance on warranty and support paths.
#LTS00090465  ·  call 54374398-7413-11f1-968e-42010a623f91
improvement
No attempt to identify customer issue or collect required device information — critical for any troubleshooting flow.
#LTS00090465  ·  call 54374398-7413-11f1-968e-42010a623f91
improvement
Failed to follow any standard support protocol or troubleshooting flow — led to call abandonment without actionable outcome.
#LTS00080392  ·  call 276cdf32-7443-11f1-bff2-42010a663f80
improvement
Provided no technical guidance or resolution path despite documented troubleshooting steps for child node reconnection.
#LTS00080392  ·  call 276cdf32-7443-11f1-bff2-42010a663f80

Call Handling Findings

Calibration Notes

None recorded this week.

Callback Chains

No callback chains detected.

Documentation Mismatches

Agent documented a resolution while grader assessed the call as unresolved with no troubleshooting performed.

Grader says: Unresolved — no troubleshooting performed, issue not confirmed fixed
Agent documented: Informed customer everything is good and working now; customer understood

Suggested Coaching Conversation

1
Your IVR prompts in #LTS00090465 were technically accurate — how can we leverage that precision when customers request live assistance?
2
In #LTS00080392, we ended without confirming the child's node issue. What steps could we take to validate connectivity before closing?
3
When calls reach L1 limits, what escalation criteria do you use to determine when a ticket should be created?
4
How can we ensure every call collects device details (model, serial number) early to improve troubleshooting accuracy?

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
#LTS00090465INBOUND2026-06-291.85120.0%
Needs Improvement
EA6350CONFIGURATION
None — call ended without agent interaction or actionable support.
#LTS000803922026-06-301.1112WHW01CONNECTIVITY
None – call ended without any actionable outcome.