Call Detail: 4cfa5134-70f7-11f1-b

← Back to comparison table

✓ Feedback submitted — thank you!

Call Start

2026-06-26 00:38

Duration

24m 42s

Contact

Trung Nguyen

Issue Type

Hardware Fault

V2 Outcome

Unresolved

V2 Band

Needs Improvement

Agent & Case Context

Agent

Eric Marbella

HappyFox Case

—

Support Country

Other / Unmapped

Product Family

MESH SYSTEMS

CSAT

—

Sentiment Trajectory

—

V1 Rubric Scores

Resolution2.00/5

Accuracy4.00/5

Communication3.00/5

Protocol2.00/5

Efficiency2.00/5

Overall2.7/5

V2 Rubric Scores

Resolution0.62/5

Technical2.50/5

Communication2.50/5

Ownership5.00/5

Escalation4.00/5

Customer Exp5.00/5

Overall54.2% (+0.2)

V2 Grader Summary

The interaction resulted in an Unresolved outcome because no resolution was achieved and no troubleshooting was performed. While the agent demonstrated ownership, empathy, and appropriate escalation judgment, the lack of technical diagnostics or resolution execution prevented progress. The case relied entirely on a promised callback, which did not constitute a resolution within this interaction.

V1 Case Analysis

Customer (MX4200) reports defective hardware and pending replacement. Agent verified case details and scheduled a callback within 15–30 min to discuss escalation with a supervisor.

Troubleshooting Steps

Verified customer name and phone number
Pulled up case record and confirmed device model (MX4200) and node count

Key Observations

Long hold periods and repeated hold requests without progress.
No warranty status check or serial number collection.
No technical troubleshooting performed despite the issue being a hardware fault.
Agent set a clear callback window, which provides a concrete next step.

Positive Highlights

Polite and professional tone throughout the call.
Confirmed customer's name and phone number accurately.
Set a specific callback window (9:15–9:30 AM Eastern) and explained the reason for escalation.

Agent Errors / Gaps

Failed to verify warranty status or collect device serial number.
Did not attempt any troubleshooting or diagnostics.
Provided only a callback promise without initiating an RMA or escalation ticket.
Excessive hold time and lack of concise call control.

V2 Indicator Ratings

Resolution

R1 Not Met Issue actually resolved conf 98%

Agent promised a callback but did not resolve the issue or provide a replacement, refund, or confirmed escalation outcome.

R2 Not Met Diagnostic thoroughness conf 97%

No troubleshooting, diagnostic steps, or symptom verification was performed; agent skipped directly to escalation without technical investigation.

R3 Partially Met Correct resolution path conf 85%

Agent pursued a hardware replacement path, which is appropriate for a confirmed defective unit, but did not verify warranty status or attempt any final troubleshooting before escalation.

Technical Accuracy

T1 Not Met Technically accurate info conf 96%

Agent did not identify symptoms, ask diagnostic questions, or determine root cause; assumed defectiveness based on prior notes without validation.

T2 Partially Met Appropriate tools / resources used conf 80%

Agent accessed CRM and referenced prior case history, but did not use technical tools (e.g., remote diagnostics, firmware check) to confirm hardware failure.

T3 Met No misinformation conf 94%

Information about replacement options, prorated refunds, and inventory availability was factually accurate and consistent with policy.

Communication

C1 Partially Met Clear & professional language conf 88%

Agent set expectations and managed hold/call-back timing, but long silences and disfluent speech ('wrong', 'فراوه') disrupted call control.

C2 Partially Met Confirmed understanding conf 85%

Agent used accessible language and repeated key details, but unclear phrasing (e.g., 'I may go beyond the 5-minute mark') reduced precision.

Customer Ownership

O1 Met Ownership & empathy conf 95%

Agent took ownership by committing to contact a supervisor and personally follow up via callback, without transferring the case.

O2 Met Proactive follow-through conf 96%

Agent clearly stated a specific callback window (9:15–9:30 ET) and confirmed the customer’s preference for hardware replacement.

O3 Met Closure confirmation conf 97%

Agent referenced prior troubleshooting, ticket history, and previous agent (Larry), demonstrating continuity and use of case notes.

Escalation Judgment

E1 Met Correct escalation decision conf 94%

Escalation to management was appropriate given the unresolved hardware defect and prior customer escalation attempts.

E2 Partially Met Escalation prep & handoff conf 82%

Agent informed the customer of the escalation intent and callback, but did not specify which team or provide internal details.

Customer Experience

X1 Met Customer effort minimised conf 96%

Agent acknowledged customer frustration ('I understand your concern'), expressed empathy, and remained professional.

X2 Met Tone & rapport conf 93%

Agent adapted to customer’s urgency, maintained engagement, and focused on the emotional need for resolution.

X3 Met Overall experience conf 94%

Agent avoided re-asking known information, used existing case data, and minimized customer effort by handling follow-up internally.

Call Transcript21 turns · 26 lines

Speaker 2

Welcome to Linksys support. To assure quality service, your call may be monitored. Please remain on the line for assistance. To assure quality service, your call may be monitored. Please remain on the line for assistance. [silence]