Average Speed of Answer (ASA)
10 min → 10 sec
▼ 98%
Case · 24/7 Contact Center
Improving the Efficiency of an ISP Call Center
We transitioned support to a multi-skilled operating model, set up a 24/7 schedule, and introduced incident prioritization — to dramatically reduce wait times, cut repeat contacts, and optimize payroll costs without expanding headcount.
Repeat contacts
40% → 13%
▼ 68%
Customer satisfaction (CSAT)
50% → 85%
▲ +35 p.p.
Payroll costs
100% → 16%
▼ 84%
Situation overview
A major internet provider in Baku faced growing dissatisfaction: wait times reached up to 10 minutes, 40% of requests resulted in repeat calls, customers complained about a language barrier (AZ/RU), and staffing costs were too high.
Project goals
- Reduce average wait time from 10 minutes to 10 seconds.
- Decrease repeat contact rate from 40% to 15%.
- Provide 24/7 coverage without increasing the staffing budget.
- Remove language barriers (AZ/RU) at the routing stage.
- Reduce total payroll costs by at least 50%.
Wilstream’s approach
- Multi-skilled agents with universal capabilities (support/sales/billing).
- 24/7 coverage via rotating shifts (day/night/weekends) without expanding headcount.
- Team-based handling: calls are answered by a team, not a single dedicated agent.
- Automatic call distribution based on real-time agent workload.
- Priority queue for incidents with fast escalation.
Challenges at launch
Before the handover, the client operated fragmented support lines, without proper language routing and without a separate priority for incidents. The staffing budget was frozen, and cost per contact exceeded the market — a systemic solution was required.
24/7
Unable to provide 24/7 coverage without overspending
- To run 24/7 in-house, the client would have needed to hire 3 additional agents (three full shifts).
- The staffing budget was frozen, and headcount expansion was deemed unprofitable.
Economics
High cost per contact
- Due to narrow specialization and idle time, the cost per handled call was 40% above market average.
- Finance issued an ultimatum: cut costs in half or outsource support.
Operations
Inflated headcount and idle time
- Three isolated lines: technical support, sales, billing.
- Overnight and early-morning idle time persisted, yet 24/7 coverage still had to be maintained.
- Cost per contact was above market due to specialization and idle time.
Languages
No language-based routing
- AZ/RU agents existed, but calls were distributed randomly.
- Around 30% of calls started with “please switch me to a Russian-speaking agent.”
- This increased actual wait time and worsened the customer experience.
Incidents
Critical incidents in the general queue
- “No internet” calls were handled together with tariff questions.
- Incident response time reached 5–7 minutes.
- This triggered churn and complaints.
What we did
We delivered the project in phases: built a multi-skill agent model, launched a 24/7 schedule, and implemented incident prioritization.
1
Multi-skill training
- Trained agents to work across multiple tracks (support/sales/billing).
- Enabled “multi-queue onboarding” — less time spent switching between task types.
- Balanced workload without adding headcount.
2
24/7 coverage with flexible shifts
- Introduced rotating shifts (day/night/weekends) for consistent coverage.
- Built a team of 10 multi-skilled agents — night coverage without hiring.
- Organized team-based call handling to reduce wait times.
3
Incident prioritization + language routing
- Separated incidents into a dedicated priority queue.
- Set up workload-based auto-routing and AZ/RU language routing.
- Reduced language handoffs and sped up response for critical incidents.
Results
Key “before/after” metrics — wait time, repeat contacts, satisfaction, and payroll costs.
Speed of answer (ASA)
10 min → 10 sec
▼ 98%
Repeat contacts
40% → 13%
▼ 68%
CSAT
50% → 85%
▲ +35 pp
Payroll costs
100% → 16%
▼ 84%
KPI comparison (before / after)
Before After
Note: the chart provides a visual “before/after” comparison for the project’s key metrics.
Metric
Before
After
Δ
Average speed of answer (ASA)
10 min
10 sec
▼ 98%
Repeat contact rate
40%
13%
▼ 68%
CSAT
50%
85%
▲ +35 pp
Contact center payroll costs
100%
16%
▼ 84%
Support availability
12 hrs/day
24/7
▲ +100%
Incident response speed
5–7 min
< 1 min
▼ 85%
Language handoffs
30%
3%
▼ 90%
How we measured success
Metrics were tracked using PBX/CRM data and quality control: speed of answer, repeat calls, satisfaction, the payroll cost model, and language QA.
ASA / ACD
Average time customers wait for an agent — automatically captured from the PBX by intervals.
Repeat contacts (FCR proxy)
A proxy metric based on repeat calls from the same number within 24 hours.
CSAT
Post-call satisfaction survey (rating 1–5, converted to %).
Payroll cost analysis
Comparison of actual costs versus a “run your own 24/7 line” model.
Incident response speed
Tracking response time for critical incident calls after the priority queue was introduced.
Language QA
Sample-based call review and tracking complaints about misunderstandings / language transfers.
Conclusion
The combination of a multi-skill operating model and a 24/7 schedule delivered a stronger impact than simply adding headcount — while keeping budget stable and improving service quality.
Project summary
24/7 support without overspending — with a tangible uplift in quality
Outsourcing support to a contact center with a multi-skill model solved chronic operational issues without increasing the budget: wait times dropped to seconds, incidents were handled with priority, language friction nearly disappeared, and staffing costs decreased significantly.
- Financial impact: 84% reduction in payroll costs.
- Operational impact: wait time from 10 minutes to 10 seconds; incident response under 1 minute.
- Customer impact: CSAT increased from 50% to 85%; language handoffs from 30% to 3%.
Want similar results for your business?
We’ll explain how to set up 24/7 support and reduce costs without sacrificing quality.