Call Centers Research 33
Call Centers Research 33
Call Centers Research 33
Efforts will be made to maintain the document complete and updated. We shall perhaps also create alternative versions (for example, alphabetical list), expand
the scope (e.g. accommodate contact centers, when enough research accumulates) or simply improve usefulness (e.g. add commentary). Indeed, readers may wish
to help with the creation of such alternative versions. In this case, a latex-source of the document can be obtained from the author, under a single condition—that
the outcome is publicly available (both source and postcript/pdf/...).
∗ Version 1: July 17, 2001; Version 2: September 16, 2001, Version 3: May 27, 2002; Version 4: March 3, 2003; Version 5: July 14, 2003
Acknowledgement: Ma jor contributions by Jody Bar-On and Lillian Bluestein are gratefully acknowledged. Jody is the reference librarian who first researched
the call center literature and assembled this document; Lillian then took over the typing and editorial work. Their professionalism and drive-for-perfection,
always cheerful and ready to go the extra step, have been for me a guiding source of support and inspiration.
Funding: This work has been supported by the ISF (Israeli Science Foundation) grant 388/99-02 (jointly with Nahum Shimkin, Technion EE), by the Technion
funds for the promotion of research and sponsored research, and by Whartons’ Financial Institutions Center.
Contents
Introduction 1
I Operations Research, Operations Management 2
II Statistics, Forecasting 55
III Consumer and Agent Psychology 64
IV Human Resource Management 76
V Information and Telecommunication Technology, Artificial Intelligence, Multi-agent Systems 103
VI Human Interface, Industrial Engineering 120
VII Management Models 131
VIII Simulation, Petri Nets, Genetic Algorithms 166
IX Cases 176
X Books and Reports 185
XI Call Center Journals and Magazines 196
XII Web Sites 198
Introduction †
Cal l center is the common term for a telephone-based human-service operation. A call center provides tele-services, namely services in which the customers and
the service agents are remote from each other. The agents, who sit in cubicles, constitute the physical embodiment of the call center. With numbers varying from
very few to many hundreds, they serve customers over the phone, while facing a computer terminal that outputs and inputs customer data. The customers,
possibly up to thousands at a given instant, are only virtually present: they are either being served or they are delayed in, what we call, tele-queues. Those waiting
to be served share a phantom queue, invisible to each other and the agents serving them, waiting and accumulating impatience until one of two things happens –
an agent is allocated to serve them (through a supporting software), or they abandon the tele-queue, plausibly due to impatience that has built up to exceed their
anticipated worth of the service.
Contact centers are the contemporary successors of call centers. In addition to phone services, they interface with customers via the internet, email, chat and fax.
Call or contact centers are the preferred and prevalent way for many companies to communicate with their customers. (Fortune-500 companies are estimated to
operate, on average, 30 call centers each.) The call center industry is thus vast, and rapidly expanding in terms of both workforce and economic scope. For
example, it is estimated that 70% of all customer-business interactions occur in call centers and that $700 billion in goods and services were sold through call
centers in 1997. These figures have been expanding 20% annually. Three percent of the U.S. working population is currently employed in call centers. This
amounts to 1.55 million agents, and some estimates actually go up to 6 million.
The modern call center is a complex socio-technical system. Some view call centers as the business frontiers but others as the sweat-shops of the 21st century.
Either way, within our service-driven economy, telephone services are now unparalleled in scope, service quality and operational efficiency. Indeed, in a large
best-practice call center, hundreds of agents can cater to thousands of phone callers per hour; agent utilization levels can average between 90% to 95%; no
customer encounters a busy signal and, in fact, about half of the customers are answered immediately; the waiting time of those delayed is measured in seconds,
and very few abandon while waiting.
The design of the modern call center, and the management of its performance, surely must be based on sound scientific principles. This is manifested by a
growing body of academic multi-disciplinary research, devoted to call centers, and ranging from Mathematics and Statistics, to Operations Research, Industrial
Engineering, Information Technology and Human Resource Management, all the way to Psychology and Sociology. My goal here is to “describe” this research
through a list of abstracts, as complete and updated a list as possible. The abstracts originate in papers that are either directly related to or have been judged
potentially helpful for academic research on call centers.
† The text is adapted from “Empirical Analysis of a Call Center”, by A. Mandelbaum, A. Sakov, S. Zeltyn, Technion
Technical Report, 2001; and from “Introduction to Mathematical Models of Call Centers”, preprint by G. Koole and A.
Mandelbaum, 2001.
Personnel in Call Centers around the world report being shocked as they perform their jobs. The
shocks typically are to the head area near the headsets they wear. Where else but call centers would one find several hundred people in an office environment
tethered to a grounded telephone system by headsets? The phenomena are real and so are the effects on the personnel.
The reported problems due to these shocks range from mild annoyance to loss of sight and hearing. Luckily the more drastic affects seem to be temporary.These
are electrostatic shocks primarily of the person to the phone system. Typically the electrical or telecommunication systems are not to blame as the source of the
electrostatic voltages which result in the painful shocks.
Sometimes the source may be atmospheric in nature. Lightning in the general area may cause what experts call a "ground plane rise" and give a shock to persons
wearing headsets. However, this is a more rare phenomenon if the system has proper surge protection. In this article I am addressing only the shocks caused by
electrostatic charges accumulated on the personnel and discharged to other persons, the equipment or through the headsets.
Causes:The primary causes of the electrostatic charge are personnel actions and clothing in relationship with the call center floors and chairs. In other words, the
personnel themselves charge up their bodies because they wear clothes and shoes, which generate electrostatic charges when they scoot in and stand up from their
chairs and when they walk on the floors. When this charge reaches enough potential (voltage) on the person to jump the gap between their ear and the headset, a
shock occurs. Most headsets have some sort of insulative piece that cushions the ear to the headset speaker. The distance of this will hold off and arc of
approximately 20,000 to 35,000 volts on the person. This means that by the time the electrostatic potential is great enough to jump, it is sufficient to cause
physical pain. Most call centers have normal office style chairs, which have no antistatic capabilities. Also most call centers have normal carpeted floors with
carpet that has little ability to keep static charges down against many shoe types.
Floors:When a carpet is sold as "antistatic", it means that it has been tested at 20% RH against a standard Neolite sole sandal and found to be below 3,000 volts.
This does not guarantee that the voltages on a person at any other humidity or wearing any other shoe will be less than 3,000 volts. In fact many shoes tested
against "antistatic" carpets have much higher results. Most people can not feel below 3,500 volts when they discharge from their fingers such as getting out of a
car or walking across a carpeted floor and touching a doorknob. However, when such a discharge is allowed to occur at the ear lobe area, the sensitivity is much
greater.
Better carpet from an antistatic point of view is needed when personnel are wearing telephone headsets. The application of antistatic chemicals to standard
"antistatic" carpet will keep personnel voltages down but it is a temporary fix that must be reapplied every few months. The best carpet for the reduction of
charges is conductive. This means that the carpet is made with conductive fibers allowing it to discharge static charges from the shoes of personnel. Companies
such as manufacture such carpets in a wide range of styles and colors. Our labs have tested Static Smart carpets in very low humidities with insulative shoes and
found that they provide a very low static generation for call center environments.
Shoes:Personnel add considerably to their electrostatic charging by the shoes they wear. Leather soled shoes are usually better than shoes with rubber soles.
However, when conductive carpet is used with conductive footwear such as heel grounders or ESD shoes, the voltage on a person is kept below 100 volts. ESD
Shoes may be acquired from Iron Age shoes. Conductive heel grounders may be obtained from several sources such as 3M and DESCO. When most normal
shoes are worn, conductive carpets generally keep the voltage on personnel below 1,500 volts which is well below the perception of pain during a discharge.
Chairs:Normal office style chairs have polyester upholstery and have no means of grounding the chair.
In the electronics industry where computer chips may be sensitive to a few volts, the chairs are conductive and have grounding mechanisms. In normal office
chairs, when a person sits in and scoots around in the chair then stands up, they accumulate a significant electrostatic charge which may then discharge through
the telephone headset or to another worker. If that other worker just stood up from their chair and walked over on non-conductive carpeting, the potential
difference or the total voltage between the two people may double because the voltages may add. In this case the shock would also be doubled in intensity and
also may cause two people discomfort. In call centers conductive chairs should be used. These chairs are usually very expensive and by the time the problem is
known the call center usually has already purchased several hundred chairs.
Chairs Covers:
One alternative to buying a conductive chair is to use a conductive cover, which has conductive threads woven into it. These covers are available through DESCO
in Miami, Florida. Patlon has filed a patent disclosure on this innovative system which may eliminate static shocks for all office works including those in call
centers. Our lab tested Desco's conductive covers and found that they keep the voltages on persons below about 1/5th that of the plain chair.
Clothes:Of course the clothes that a person wears are very important to how much electrostatic charges are generated by the person. Oddly enough, cotton
clothes, which are normally very good from an electrostatic point of view, may charge more against a polyester upholstered chair than blended fabrics. One
method of keeping the voltage due to clothing on a person down is to require the personnel to wear conductive lab coats. This in combination with the chairs
would disallow the kind of potentials now experienced in the call centers. Several companies provide conductive lab coats for use in office environments.
Conclusions:Every call center has a unique situation for electrostatic problems. A survey of the needs should be performed prior to any actions. However, if all
the main variables are controlled:Chairs, Floor, Clothes and Shoes the problem should go away painlessly.