calvin.goh
/ projects / cx-analytics
← All projects
Portfolio showcaseContact-center analytics50,000 interactions · 5 channels$49.2K annual savings opportunity

Six months of stable unit economics. The next $49.2K is a routing problem.

A six-month cost-to-serve study held the per-contact baseline flat at $5.18 while FCR ran around 82.3% — a stable platform, not a regression. The lever with the most leverage isn't training; it's routing. Phone runs at $8.50 per contact; chat at $2.80. I sized a 20% phone-to-chat migration plus a 5pt FCR lift against the derived cost-to-serve model and turned an incremental dashboard into a $49.2K annual savings thesis at 63% ROI.

Cost / contact
$5.18
stable · 6-mo baseline
FCR avg
82.3%
held steady
ROI on initiatives
63%
01
DATA ANALYSIS & STRATEGIC INSIGHTS

Three insights that reframed the program.

COST-TO-SERVE GAP

Phone costs 3× more than chat

Phone sits at $8.50 per contact, chat at $2.80 — a $5.70 gap on every interaction. Volume is currently split roughly evenly across channels.

annual opportunity$49.2K
FLAT INTENT DISTRIBUTION

7 intents, each around 14.4%

Retention Discussion, Complaint Resolution, and Product Information are within a point of each other. No single dominant intent — which means automation needs to target the simple-tail of multiple intents, not a silver bullet.

top 5 share72%
PERFORMANCE DISPERSION

Bimodal FCR — top quartile saturated, bottom tail drags

Median FCR is 89.3% — most of 75 agents are at ceiling. Bottom quartile sits at ≤ 78.9%, with the floor at 48.5%. The opportunity is the tail, not training the average agent.

top–bottom gap50pt
02
REAL-TIME PERFORMANCE DASHBOARD

Today's operating picture.

Live KPIs, channel mix, and team coverage — the view ops checks every morning.
Avg handle time
15.6 min
vs 15.6m 6-mo avg
FCR rate
82.1%
vs 82.3% avg
CSAT score
3.67 / 5
Steady
Current queue
6
Normal load
Interactions today
268
88% service level
Active agents
75 / 75
100% online
CHANNEL DISTRIBUTION · TODAY
Web form
6423.9%
Email
5420.1%
Phone
5219.4%
Chat
5119.0%
Social
4717.5%
TEAM CAPACITY · 75 AGENTS · 10 TEAMS
Largest: Technical Support (22). Coverage spans 10 functional teams across the floor.
today: 268 interactions · $4.89 avg cost
03
CHANNEL PERFORMANCE

Chat is 3× cheaper than phone — and resolves at higher efficiency.

Efficiency score blends FCR, AHT, and cost-per-contact into a single number. Social and chat lead; web form trails.
ChannelEfficiency score (0–5)FCRAHT$ / contactMix
Social
4.79
81.8%9.4m$4.2020.1%
Chat
4.06
82.5%11.2m$2.8020.0%
Phone
3.21
82.5%14.2m$8.5019.6%
Email
2.38
81.8%18.9m$3.2020.0%
Web form
1.86
82.0%24.4m$5.8020.2%
COST / INTERACTION
FCR BY CHANNEL
AVG HANDLE TIME (MIN)
04
ISSUE CATEGORY ANALYSIS

Top 5 categories = 71.9% of volume.

Volume is spread relatively evenly across intent categories — automation needs to target the simple-tail of multiple intents, not a single dominant one.
CategoryVolume shareCases%Avg res.
01Retention Discussion
7,21814.4%15.4m
02Complaint Resolution
7,20414.4%15.6m
03Product Information
7,18214.4%15.8m
04Sales Inquiry
7,17814.4%15.7m
05Billing Inquiry
7,14714.3%15.6m
06Account Management
7,10014.2%15.6m
07Technical Support
6,97113.9%15.7m
RESOLUTION TIME · BY CATEGORY (MIN)
INSIGHT · AUTOMATABLE TAIL

Billing Inquiry: 14.3% of volume (7,147 cases) at 15.6m each. Account-balance and payment-history queries are 60–70% automatable — roughly 7,944+ cases off the floor annualised.

05
MONTHLY PERFORMANCE TRENDS

7 months of operating data.

FCR steady at 82.3%, AHT at 15.6m, CSAT holding 3.63 → 3.67, 50,000 interactions across the window.
FCR · MONTHLY %
-1.5pt
AHT · MONTHLY MEDIAN (MIN)
0%
CSAT · MONTHLY /5.0
Steady
INTERACTION VOLUME · MONTHLY
50,000
06
TOP AGENT PERFORMANCE · 75 ACTIVE

Top 5 all resolve at 98% FCR. The bottom sits at 48.5%.

Median FCR is 89.3% — the team is mostly at ceiling, with a bottom-quartile tail (≤ 78.9%) doing the damage. Closing the tail is the single biggest lever after channel mix.
Active agents
75
Top performer FCR
98%
Bottom agent FCR
48.5%
Performance gap
50pt
RankAgentFCRCSATAHTVol
01
Jason Robinson
Product Support
98%5.009.3m321
02
Sandra Sanchez
Product Support
98%5.006.8m279
03
Gary White
Technical Support
98%5.008.4m269
04
Timothy Harris
Billing Support
98%5.008.8m268
05
Chloe Johnson
Technical Support
98%5.0013.3m260
FCR DISTRIBUTION · 75 AGENTS
TOP QUARTILE → 98%+MEDIAN → 89.3%BOTTOM → ≤ 78.9%
BUDDY SYSTEM · TARGET

Pair top 5 with bottom 10. +15–20% FCR in the bottom quartile within 90 days ≈ $325K avoided repeat contacts.

07
RECOMMENDATIONS · DERIVED FROM PATTERNS

Four strategic proposals, each with sized impact.

Each recommendation is paired with the diagnostic pattern that surfaced it.
01 · WEB FORM CHANNEL

Progressive validation + pre-population

Diagnosis. Web form: 24.4min AHT (56% above the 15.6m global avg), efficiency 1.86 (lowest of all channels).
Recommendation. Implement progressive form validation and pre-populated fields for repeat customers — close the gap to email-style turnaround.
current spread18.9–24.4m
02 · AGENT GAP CLOSURE

Buddy system for bottom quartile

Diagnosis. Top performers: 98% FCR. Bottom: 48.5% — a 50pt gap. Bottom-quartile ceiling is 78.9% FCR.
Recommendation. Pair top 5 performers with bottom 10 via structured mentorship; standardise call flow on the top quartile playbook.
FCR target, 90 days+15–20%
03 · EMAIL EFFICIENCY

Template library for top categories

Diagnosis. Email: 18.9min AHT (3.3m above avg), efficiency 2.38.
Recommendation. Deploy email templates for the 5 categories covering 71.9% of volume.
handle time−20 to −25%
04 · BILLING AUTOMATION

Chatbot for balance + payment history

Diagnosis. Billing Inquiry: 14.3% of volume (7,147 cases), 15.6min avg resolution.
Recommendation. Automated chatbot for account balance and payment history inquiries.
cases automated / year7,944
08
COST-TO-SERVE ANALYSIS & ROI

A stable cost baseline — and the next lever is routing.

Cost-per-contact held flat at $5.18 across the window ($259.1K operational spend). The $49.2K savings thesis stacks a 20% phone-to-chat migration with a 5pt FCR lift against the derived unit economics.
Total operational cost
$259.1K
Window total · derived
Avg cost / interaction
$5.18
Held steady · 6 months
Savings opportunity
$49.2K
Annual · scenario-derived
ROI score
63%
vs 15% program investment
CHANNEL COST COMPARISON
CURRENT STATE · OPTIMIZATION OPPORTUNITIES
Phone costs 3× chat — a $5.70 gap on every interaction.
COST / CONTACT · MONTHLY
6-MONTH WINDOW · DERIVED FROM CHANNEL MIX
Cost/contact · stable at ~$5.18FCR 82% → 82%
09
NEXT PHASE · SCALING PROVEN METHODOLOGIES

Two cash levers stack to $49.2K annual savings.

Cards 01 and 02 carry dollar values derived from the unit economics above. Cards 03 and 04 deliver productivity and query-deflection gains that compound on top but aren't in the cash thesis. The waterfall shows how each dollar lever lands against the baseline.
01 · CHANNEL MIGRATION STRATEGY

Shift 20% of phone to chat & email

Validated by the $5.70/contact cost gap and chat's 82.5% FCR.

annual savings$23.1K
02 · FIRST CONTACT RESOLUTION

Improve FCR by 5pt via training + KB

Buddy system + template library across the top categories (71.9% of volume). 5pt lift avoids ~5% of annual cost via fewer repeat contacts.

from fewer repeat contacts$26.1K
03 · AGENT UTILIZATION

Skills-based routing + WFM

Route by intent, not availability. Compresses the 50pt performance gap toward the median (89.3%).

productivity · not in $ thesis+15%
04 · SELF-SERVICE ENHANCEMENT

AI chatbot for top repetitive queries

Billing balance, payment history, order status — the simple tail.

simple queries · not in $ thesis−30%
// SAVINGS WATERFALL · HOW WE GET TO $49.2K