Effects of Workspace Design on Call
Center Agent Performance
Dr. Michael O’Neill, Herman Miller, Inc.
Patricia Bergquist, Herman Miller, Inc.
Jim Dolislager
10th Annual Applied Ergonomics Conference
Celebrating The Past..Shaping The Future
Location – South Carolina
• Houses 1150 employees
• 256 survey responses
• Implemented site in January 2002,
prior to Office Furniture Standards
program
• Frame and Tile system, workstation
clusters
• Station footprint – 6’X6’ rectilinear
(90 degree)
• 150 Square Feet per rep
• $2350 per rep station
• Very nice environment
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
2
Location - Tennessee
• Houses 948 employees
• 284 survey responses
• Implemented site in October 2003
using Office Furniture Standards
by Employment Bands
• Pole system, shell configuration
• Station footprint – 4’X4’
boomerang (120 degree)
• 119 Square Feet per rep
• $1750 per rep station
• Nice environment
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
3
Workplace/Behavioral
Assessment (Survey)
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
4
Workplace/Behavioral Assessment
(Survey)
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
5
Workplace/Behavioral Assessment Survey Averages
South Carolina
Tennessee
Blue highlights show
scales with statistically
significant differences
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
6
Workplace Predictors of ACW
(After Call Work) Scores
Pain/
Discomfort
Group
Cohesion
-.17
-.21
After-Call
Work Time
+.20
Sense of
Community
Comfort, Cohesion and Community predict 6% of ACW Scores
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
7
Workplace Predictors of
“First Call Resolution” Scores
Support for
Collaboration
+.16
First Call
Resolution
“Support for Collaboration” predicts 5% of
variance in First Call Resolution
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
8
Job Satisfaction
•
No significant difference in “intention to stay” responses between the
two locations (Question 1).
•
South Carolina employees are more likely to recommend a job at the
Company to a friend (Question 2).
•
Overall, Job Satisfaction is quite high (89-90%) at both locations.
― What workspace design features predict Job Satisfaction?
Tennessee
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
South Carolina
9
Workspace Predictors of Job
Satisfaction: Intention to Stay
Workstation
Features
Job/
Environmental
Control
-.24
+.19
+.21
Job
Satisfaction
(Intention to
Stay)
Sense of
Community
These 3 variables predict 9% of Job Satisfaction
(Intention to Stay)
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
10
Customer Service Satisfaction Scores
1.
First Call Resolution
― Percentage of customers whose service was resolved on the first call
2.
Entire Representative Performance (Entire Rep)
― Percentage of customers that gave a superior rating (8 – 10 rating on 10 point Likert
Scale) to Representative on various issues such as:
3.
◊
Did Rep Resolve Issue?
◊
Knowledge
◊
Willingness
◊
Understanding
◊
Responsibility
◊
Efficiency
◊
Confident Manner
Overall
― Percentage of customers that gave a superior rating on overall Representative
performance
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
11
Customer Satisfaction Scores
Comparison by Site
77%
73%
69%
Sept
Aug
Jul
Jun
May
Apr
Mar
65%
Feb
Tennessee
South Carolina
Jan
• Tennessee “First Call
Resolution” is significantly
better than South Carolina
(t=-2.15, p<.04).
• Tennessee “Entire Rep” is
significantly better than South
Carolina (t= -2.97, p<.009).
• Tennessee “Overall” is
significantly better than South
Carolina (t= -1.97, p<.06).
Average CS Score
81%
Month (2005)
• Do any workplace design
features influence Customer
Satisfaction scores?
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
12
Workplace Predictors of
Customer Satisfaction Scores
Adjustability/
Ergonomic
Features
Pain/
Discomfort
Job/
Environmental
Control
+.10
-.11
+.32
Customer
Satisfaction
Scores
(CSTS)
-.18
Sense of
Community
These 4 variables predict 16% of Customer Satisfaction Scores
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
13
Claims Data
South Carolina
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
Tennessee
14
Average Lost Workdays
by Job Type and Location
South Carolina
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
Tennessee
15
Observations
• We found that Workplace Design features have a
small but consistent, significant and real influence
over key business performance measures. Many
other things like technology, management practices,
job design, etc., also influence performance besides
the workplace design.
• We were able to relate survey data with separately
collected Agent performance, claims, and customer
satisfaction data.
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
16
Recommendations
• Consider Impact on Workplace Design Strategy:
― Enhance Adjustability of Ergonomic Features and Support
for Collaboration to improve some aspects of Agent
performance (ACW, First Call Resolution).
― Group Cohesion is related to improved ACD scores. Aside
from workspace design, can any management
practices/principles also be implemented to continue to
improve Group Cohesion?
― Research has shown powerful health benefits (and cost
avoidance) related to enhanced job control especially for
high-stress Agent jobs.
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
17
Recommendations / Observations
• Findings from Other Companies:
― Enhanced Job/Environmental Control finding with pole
system workspace is consistent with effects we found with
pole system environments at Call Centers for other
organizations.
― In other Call Centers we also found a relationship between
increased control and higher AHT and lower ACW scores. It
might be interesting to know the content of the longer calls.
Better help? More Sales?
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
18
Next Steps
• Enhance validity of data.
― Examine performance of other Call Center locations and
compare to this study data.
― Employ additional measures of Agent performance (such as
sales per Agent), absenteeism and other job performance
data, to drive financial analysis of impact of workspace
design.
March 12-15, 2007 Dallas, Texas
19