Purpose
Turn raw BPO scorecard metrics into a ranked, root-cause-driven improvement plan that a CX manager can hand directly to a vendor — with corrective actions, owners, and a phased recovery timeline. Removes the guesswork of translating a missed SLA or CSAT dip into what the partner should actually change.
When to Use
Invoke this skill when the user asks to:
- Diagnose why an outsourced team is missing SLA, CSAT, or quality targets
- Build an improvement plan or corrective action plan (CAP) for a BPO vendor
- Prepare recommendations for a partner QBR or performance review
- Translate a monthly scorecard into specific actions the vendor must take
- Address a sudden dip in CSAT, quality score, AHT, or adherence
- Escalate persistent underperformance with a documented, defensible plan
Inputs Required
Before starting, collect:
- Service line: Channel and function (voice support, chat, email, back-office, sales, etc.)
- Metrics vs. targets: Current values and targets for each affected metric — SLA, CSAT, quality/QA score, AHT, FCR, adherence, occupancy
- Trend direction: How long the miss has persisted (spike vs. sustained decline) and any known trigger event
- Team size & tenure: Headcount and rough tenure mix (ramping vs. seasoned)
- Known context: Recent volume changes, product launches, policy changes, staffing events, or system issues
- Contract levers: What the SLA/SOW allows (penalties, staffing floors, calibration requirements)
- Timeline pressure: How urgent the recovery is (next QBR, contract review, executive escalation)
If contract levers or team tenure are unavailable, proceed with the metric analysis and flag the assumptions made.
Instructions
Step 1: Metric Triage — Rank the Gaps
For each metric provided, compute the gap to target and classify severity:
- Critical: SLA/CSAT/quality more than 10% below target OR any breach with contractual penalty exposure
- Moderate: 3–10% below target
- Watch: Within 3% but trending down for 2+ periods
Order the recommendation around critical gaps first. Do not treat all metrics as equal weight — a CSAT dip driven by a quality failure is one root cause, not two problems.
Step 2: Root-Cause Hypothesis by Metric
Map each gap to its most likely driver. Diagnose, don't just restate the number.
- SLA miss (speed/coverage): Staffing-to-forecast gap, adherence/shrinkage, occupancy too high, poor intraday management, or volume spike not forecasted
- CSAT dip: Isolate whether it tracks with a quality driver (agents solving wrong), a speed driver (long waits), an effort driver (transfers/repeats), or a policy driver (agents can't resolve within current authority)
- Quality/QA score decline: Onboarding gaps in ramping agents, calibration drift between vendor QA and client QA, knowledge base gaps, or coaching not closing recurring error patterns
- AHT drift: Tooling/latency, knowledge retrieval friction, over-servicing, or under-trained agents padding time
- Adherence/occupancy issues: Schedule design, breaks/shrinkage discipline, or forecast accuracy
For CSAT specifically, always name which underlying metric it correlates with — CSAT is a symptom, not a root cause.
Step 3: Corrective Actions per Root Cause
For each confirmed root cause, specify concrete actions. Every action must include an owner and a mechanism, not an aspiration.
Structure each action as:
- Action: The specific change (e.g., "Add targeted refresher on refund-authority workflow for agents with <90 days tenure")
- Owner: Client, BPO WFM, BPO Ops/Team Lead, BPO Training, or Joint
- Mechanism: How it happens (calibration session, staffing floor adjustment, coaching cadence, KB update, forecast rework)
- Leading indicator: The early signal that will show it's working before the lagging metric moves
Avoid generic prescriptions like "more coaching." Tie each action to the diagnosed driver.
Step 4: Prioritize with Impact/Effort
Rank all corrective actions into a priority list:
- Quick wins (high impact, low effort): Do first — staffing reallocation, calibration alignment, KB fix
- Foundational (high impact, higher effort): Ramp training redesign, forecast model rework, schedule redesign
- Monitor (lower impact): Nice-to-have refinements
Step 5: Build the 30/60/90 Recovery Timeline
Sequence the actions into phases with a measurable exit criterion per phase:
- Days 0–30 (Stabilize): Stop the bleeding on the critical metric — staffing, calibration, immediate coaching. Exit criterion = critical metric within 5% of target
- Days 31–60 (Correct): Structural fixes — training redesign, forecast accuracy, process changes. Exit criterion = all critical metrics at target, moderate gaps closing
- Days 61–90 (Sustain): Lock in gains — updated QA calibration cadence, documented playbooks, sustained performance. Exit criterion = 3 consecutive weeks at target
Step 6: Governance & Accountability Wrap
Specify the review cadence and escalation trigger:
- Weekly leading-indicator review during recovery, standing QBR agenda item until sustained
- Define the escalation trigger (e.g., "no improvement in critical metric by Day 30 → invoke contract remediation clause")
Output Format
- Structure: Executive summary → metric triage table → root-cause diagnosis → prioritized action list → 30/60/90 timeline → governance
- Length: 800–1,200 words
- Format: Structured document — triage and actions in tables, timeline as phased sections
- Sections: Executive Summary (3–4 sentences) → Metric Triage Table → Root-Cause Diagnosis (per critical metric) → Prioritized Corrective Actions Table → 30/60/90 Recovery Plan → Governance & Escalation
- Tone: CX operations lead — direct, defensible, partner-facing. Firm on accountability without being adversarial; every claim traceable to a metric
Quality Checklist
Before delivering output, verify:
- [ ] Every metric provided appears in the triage table with a computed gap and severity label
- [ ] CSAT (if included) is diagnosed by correlating it to an underlying driver — not treated as a standalone root cause
- [ ] Every corrective action has a named owner and a mechanism — no "improve X" without a how
- [ ] Actions are prioritized by impact/effort, not listed arbitrarily
- [ ] Each of the three timeline phases has a measurable exit criterion
- [ ] A specific escalation trigger is defined tied to a metric and date
Notes
- The most common misdiagnosis is treating a CSAT dip as a training problem when it's actually a policy/authority problem — agents scoring well on QA but unable to resolve within their granted authority. Check policy before prescribing coaching.
- Sudden dips (single-period spikes) usually trace to a trigger event (launch, outage, staffing loss); sustained declines usually trace to structural issues (forecast, ramp quality, calibration drift). Match the fix to the pattern.
- Calibration drift between vendor QA and client QA is silent but corrosive — if quality scores look fine to the vendor but customers are unhappy, calibration is the first thing to check.
- Keep the plan partner-facing: it should read as a joint recovery plan the BPO will accept, not a punitive audit.
How to use this skill
This file is a Claude Code skill in Anthropic's standard format — markdown with YAML frontmatter at the top.
Installing in Claude Code:
~/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md— auto-loads in every session anywhere on your machine (recommended for skills you'll use across multiple projects)<your-project>/.claude/skills/<folder-name>/SKILL.md— auto-loads only when working in that project (recommended for project-specific skills)
Restart Claude Code or open a new session to register.
Using in Claude.ai, ChatGPT, Gemini, or other AI tools:
- Drag this file into a new chat, or copy and paste its contents
- Send your task or request as your next message — the AI will apply the skill where it fits
For Claude Code skill details: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code/skills