Scoring Human Communication

The key is to develop a reliable and objective measurement method and/or scoring tool. For some things, like technology, the task is relatively straightforward (not without its flaws - but generally easy to develop). On the other hand, attempting to create a mechanism to measure or score human communication is a difficult task at the best of times, and never truly reliable due to the inescapable subjective nature of communication.

While I understand the need to measure things for the purposes of predicting the future with some accuracy, and for an ability to know how, when, and where, to spend money on training initiatives, I also believe that if not built and conducted properly and with great care, this sort of scoring mechanism can do an enormous amount of damage to individuals, the culture, and the customers.

What makes sense...?

• It makes sense to apply a score to things that are tangible and measurable in an objective way. (Examples include: amount of tasks accomplished and time taken to accomplish tasks.)
  
  
• It makes sense to apply a score to things that are attached to policy and can be answered with a yes/no. (Examples include: Policy = be on time for work, Policy = lists of words that will not be used in communication with customers, Policy = dress codes that are specific.)
  
  
• It makes sense to look at the entire scope of what a person does and apply scores to those things that can be measured accurately and reliably in the proportions these tasks are used.
  
  

What doesn’t make sense...?

• It doesn’t make sense to attempt to apply a score to elements of a person’s job over which they have no control.
  
  
• It doesn’t make sense to attempt to apply rules for human communication that force a person to say specific words in every circumstance - and then score the person in a yes/no fashion. (Example: You must say, “Is there anything else I can help you with”, at the end of every contact. There ARE times when this is either not possible or not appropriate!)
  
  
• It doesn’t make sense to attempt to apply a score to an entire subjective concept - unless that score can be thoroughly discussed and agreed to by the person being scored. (Examples: I think the customer would’ve responded better if you said XXX instead. Or, I am rating the customer’s satisfaction level at a 6 for that contact)
  
  
• It doesn’t make sense to create a complete score for an individual using only objectively measured items - as that is generally not the entire scope of the work they do.
  
  

Most environments rely on representatives having conversations with customers that are not planned or scripted (as sometimes happens with many outbound sales calls). In this case, it is impossible to predict exactly what a customer will say at any given time.

The best job that a customer service representative, sales person or telephonist can do is to have the flexibility of behaviour to choose appropriate words, physical actions and tone of voice for each individual conversation. If used well, these tools and choices will assist the representative in managing the expectations and perceptions of the customer. No two conversations should ever sound or look alike. A third party listening in to these conversations is left to make judgements about whether or not the telephonist made the “right” choices.

If your organisation is one that requires a score for human communication, then there are a few rules of thumb that should be applied when building a tool designed to score or measure this sort of subjective performance.

• First and foremost, a communication model should be applied for the entire environment. Everyone should be trained in the same set of skills, knowledge base and philosophy of communication (everyone singing from the same song book). This will reduce the incidence of people blaming team leaders, managers or whoever is conducting the scoring process, of favouritism or having personality conflicts.
  
  
• Whatever the top score is on the device, it should be absolutely achievable. You should provide a list of behaviours and outcomes to each representative and state that if these things are accomplished, then the top score will be awarded. So if a “10” is the top score, then here are the things that must occur and must not occur in order to achieve that score.
  
  
• The scoring tool should be flexible enough to accommodate different styles, different personalities, and different word choice.
  
  
• The scoring tool should always have a component that forces the scorer to explain all the reasons why and why not to the representative - and give the representative an opportunity to debate the score. If the representative can give a positive and reasonable explanation, that is in-line with the accepted communication process, for why he/she made a specific communication choice, then the score should be altered.
  
  
• The scoring tool should be built by a cross-section of people including managers, team leaders and, most importantly, the staff who will be scored under the system!

Author Credits