Interactional Asymmetries and Call Centre Work
The modern society continues to experience exponential growth in the number of call center notwithstanding the adoption of online customer support services. Call centers have enabled organizations to reduce the costs of existing functions while extending customer service facilities (Bakker et al., 2010). A call center is a specialized work environment charged with the responsibility of receiving and distributing incoming calls to available staff through computer and telephone-based technologies (Holman, 2003). Individuals who shoulder the responsibility of attending to customers in their requests are referred to as call center agents. As of 2015, a significant percentage of those employed in UK work in contact centers at approximately 4% (ContactBabel, 2015). While previous research has been concentrated on the effects of call center work on agents suggesting it can lead to burnout and absenteeism, the interactional contexts in which these issues take place have not been thoroughly studied, leaving many details uncovered and challenges not met. In the course of interacting and attending to clients’ requests at the call center, asymmetries and differences in the levels of interaction will always arise and this calls for an in-depth understanding of the same by call center agents in order to be able to produce a competent call and improve their customers’ experience (Deery et al., 2002). This paper seeks to explain how a proper understanding of these institutional and interactional asymmetries is useful in informing our analyses of call center work.
Drew and Heritage (1992) insists that the conversation between an agent and a client tends to take an institutional form, which differs in several dimensions from the conventional ordinary talk. Heritage uses conversation analysis as the baseline for his study, which holds that through interactions, the context of the participants is built, enforced, and managed. In his exploration of communication within institutions, interactional asymmetries fall into four categories that include the asymmetries of participation, asymmetries in the rights of access of knowledge, asymmetries of institutional knowhow and asymmetries of knowledge (Stivers et al., 2011). Thus, a proper conversational analysis helps to define and understand key concepts of social interaction.
Deery et al. (2002) insist that unless call center agents understand the various forms of interactional asymmetries that exist between them and their customers, tension and stress at work become inevitable. They further note that customers’ perceptions of service quality will be influenced by the nature of communication with agents. Interactional asymmetries have an impact on both the organization’s image and the wellbeing of call center workers but can also influence the way encounters unfold (Llewellyn & Hindmarsh, 2010). Therefore, with a proper understanding of the communication relationship between customers and its agents, call centers stand a chance of improving service delivery based on information gathered from such interactions.
Whalen et al. (1988) present an account of how misunderstanding and lack of proper communication between callers and takers can lead to fatalities especially when the subject matter is an emergency. For instance, they record that interactional asymmetries over the phone between the caller and taker led to the death of woman who was critically ill owing to the fact that arguments between the agent and the caller delayed the ambulance. Misalignment and misunderstanding widened between the two parties as the caller refused to follow the typical line of questioning needed to rank calls in terms of medical priority. In turn, this altered how subsequent turns are heard and managed and have caused not simply conversational delay, but a real-time delay with fatal consequences (Llewellyn & Hindmarsh, 2010). The fact that the matter of urgency that prompted the caller to ring the call center can be overshadowed by disharmony in the way the two parties interact is reason enough to call for an understanding of the various forms of asymmetries (Whalen et al., 1988).
Asymmetry of knowledge is the most significant interactional asymmetries that characterizes the conversations between call center agents and callers. All interactions observed by Šuvaković and Lelićanin (2011) exhibited knowledge and information asymmetries that in all instances flow from the operators to the clients. This is logical as individuals resort to call centers when they seek assistance or an answer to a particular question and the operator who possess the knowledge needed by the caller. In most cases, such calls are mostly guided by urgency or seen as more convenient in terms of saving time and resources for the customers (Finegan & Rickford, 2004). Therefore, call center work requires that agents understand the existing asymmetry of knowledge in order to reduce burning out, boredom and stress caused by being asked the same question repeatedly and having to explain things that may seem simple to them (Wegge et al., 2006). An example of knowledge asymmetry can be found in the emergency case examined by Whalen et al. (1988). Call center work involves mastery of the commonly asked questions, patience when dealing with abusive and interruptive clients, and courtesy when answering questions (Drew, 1991).
An asymmetry of participation is also commonly documented in studies, with the individual who represents the organization taking greater initiative in conversation, compared to the customer (Linell et al., 1988). Furthermore, participation is also expected by call center agents who are required to produce seamless calls and display professional competence by avoiding pauses and ‘hold on while I check this’ moments. At the same time, call-takers are encouraged to maintain efficiency and high throughput of calls so that waiting time for customers is reduced (Whalen et al., 2002). However, the close monitoring of words and the limited deviation allowed from scripts further complicates service interactive work and limits the control agents have over the conversation (Deery et al., 2002). In this way, these dual concerns regarding efficiency and quality service make the task of maintaining the conversation and, at the same time, limiting the opportunity for the client to deviate from the scripted conversation extremely challenging for call-takers. Experienced agents would, therefore, understand the risk of bias in questions, arrange their desks in a way that facilitates easier computer-based information retrieval, and learn to search for information as they anticipate further requests for customers (Whalen et al., 2002).
Lastly, a proper understanding of asymmetries of institutional knowhow is important in order to understand and analyse the nature of call centre work (Šuvaković and Lelićanin, 2011). Operators at the call centre have an understanding of the institutions infrastructure while callers or clients have significantly little knowledge if not none. This asymmetric relationship puts the clients in a one down position, knowing little about the institutions operations as compared to the agents. During operations, the operator sees the clients as one of the possibly many customers who have the same problem or request (Heritage, 2013). Asymmetry of knowledge on the institution between the two divides can be too significant to allow for harmonious interaction because of the talkers being overwhelmed. Coming to terms with this asymmetry ensures that call centre agents accept their roles as ‘guides’ who are supposed to help clients on what should be done, how it should be done, and why it should be done the way it is being done (Deery, Iverson & Walsh, 2002). The fact that clients can be interested in knowing more about the institution in order to trust their investments or undertake business with them necessitates a call centre with a proper understanding of the organization’s operations.
Conclusion
Call centres play a significant role in helping ensure that customers get fast services in terms of advice and highlight their grievances in any company. Therefore, developing a good communication system between customers and agents working in call centres is an inevitable endeavour by any organization. Understanding interactional symmetries forms a basis of understanding the work at call centres. Moreover, as highlighted by previous research on the essence of asymmetry of knowledge, it is crucial that agents in call centres understand that customers not only associate them directly with their organizations but also expect that they are informed on most issues about their firms. An asymmetry of participation also defines the success of any conversation. A good agent will ensure that they lead the conversation and make a customer feel free and relaxed when seeking help, even when they called to express their dissatisfaction with the company. Acting professional directly relates with the quality of service delivery in most call centres, forming a key requirement for agents working in these departments. Lastly, understanding that communication starts with the time taken by customers on the waiting system, a fast and reliable call centre should ensure prompt assistance to customers by having enough, fast, and skilled agents.
References
ContactBabel. (2015). The UK Contact Centre HR & Operational Benchmarking Report 2015-16-5th edition. ContactBabel
Deery, S., Iverson, R., & Walsh, J. (2002). Work relationships in telephone call centres: Understanding emotional exhaustion and employee withdrawal. Journal of Management studies, 39(4), 471-496.
Drew, P. (1991). Asymmetries of knowledge in conversational interactions. Asymmetries in dialogue, 21-48.
Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Finegan, E., & Rickford, J. R. (2004). Language in the U.S.A: Themes for the 21st century. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (2013). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. John Wiley & Sons.
Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (Eds.). (2011). The morality of knowledge in conversation (Vol. 29). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Šuvaković, A., & Lelićanin, M. K. (2011). Linguistic aspects in asymmetrical institutional interaction–call center case. Гласник Етнографског института САНУ, 59(2), 198-206.
Wegge, J., Van Dick, R., Fisher, G. K., Wecking, C., & Moltzen, K. (2006). Work motivation, organisational identification, and well-being in call centre work. Work & Stress, 20(1), 60-83.
Whalen, J., Zimmerman, D. H., & Whalen, M. R. (1988). When words fail: A single case analysis. Social Problems, 35(4), 335-362.
