Peer-to-peer reviews in Zendesk involve agents reviewing each other's work, fostering a collaborative culture. This method is effective for smaller teams and open cultures.
Agents can learn from their peers by observing how others handle similar issues and sharing tips. While it provides new perspectives, it can be challenging to compare performance with multiple reviewers. Training and calibration are essential to align evaluation standards, but the benefits of collaboration and support are significant.
The manager reviewing agents' conversations method involves a CS Manager or Team Lead reviewing agents' work and providing feedback. This traditional approach is ideal for structured teams and ensures consistent feedback. In larger teams, a…
Self-review in Zendesk allows agents to critically evaluate their own conversations, promoting self-improvement. This method trusts agents to assess their work. By investing in hiring the right people, self-review empowers agents to reflect on…
Reactive review in Zendesk focuses on providing feedback for conversations where issues are known, such as poor CSAT ratings or long response times. It's a practical approach for large volumes of conversations. While it can introduce bias into…