Quality KPI Weighting for Contact Center Interaction Review

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing quality management systems rely on static filters that are not responsive to changes in team behavior, making it burdensome to identify interactions for evaluation and improve quality metrics in contact centers.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that dynamically weights quality targets based on deviations from desired values, automatically identifies quality issues using speech and text analysis engines, and ranks interactions for review.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If static filters are used to identify interactions for evaluation, then the system is simple to operate, but it is not responsive to changes in team behavior and requires manual updates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveresponsiveness to team behavior changesVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic filtering that automatically adapts to changes in team behavior by continuously monitoring quality metrics and adjusting interaction selection criteria in real-time, replacing static manual filters with an adaptive system that responds to performance deviations

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback loops where quality metric results from evaluated interactions are fed back into the filtering mechanism, allowing the system to learn from past evaluations and automatically adjust which interactions are selected for review based on current team performance patterns

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Productivity

If manual identification of interactions for evaluation is performed, then the system is easy to understand, but it is time-consuming and burdensome

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveevaluation efficiencyVSAvoidtime for identifying interactions

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces manual mechanical processes of identifying and selecting interactions with an automated computer-implemented system that uses algorithms to analyze quality metrics and automatically generate evaluation queues, eliminating manual time consumption

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs self-service by automatically monitoring its own performance data, identifying which interactions require evaluation, and prioritizing them without human intervention, allowing the quality management process to be self-regulating and time-efficient

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

3Measurement precision

If all interactions are reviewed to ensure quality, then measurement precision is high, but productivity decreases due to the large volume of work

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvequality assessment accuracyVSAvoidevaluation throughput

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by focusing evaluation resources on specific interactions that exhibit quality deviations or risks, rather than uniformly reviewing all interactions, thereby maintaining high quality assessment accuracy where needed while improving overall productivity through selective monitoring

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS12499404B2System and method for quality planning data evaluation using target KPIs

Publication Date: 2025.12.16 NICE LTD

AI summary

Systems and methods for monitoring a quality of interactions include: receiving one or more quality metrics relating to one or more quality targets; determining, on a periodic basis, a current quality value for each of the one or more quality targets; calculating a deviation of the current quality value from a desired value of the quality target; weighting the one or more quality targets according to the calculated deviation; and determining a set of one or more interactions for review based on one or more quality metric deviations and the weighted quality targets.