Operational Workflows

target audience qa analysts, supervisors, agents description the day to day guide for users actually interacting with the processed data, scoring calls, and managing disputes 5\ operational workflows this section outlines the daily tasks performed by qa analysts, supervisors, and agents to monitor performance, validate scores, and manage data 5 1 workflow a monitoring & reviewing analyzed calls context the analysis list acts as the central log for every call processed by the system supervisors use this view to monitor real time traffic and identify interactions requiring attention steps navigate click analysis list in the sidebar filter & search use the filter bar to isolate specific interactions you can filter by date, score, quality profile, metadata (e g , "show me calls from campaign a"), and interaction type interaction type lets you narrow the list to interactions that need attention disputed interactions interactions with open or relevant disputes (same pattern as before) critical kpi failures interactions where at least one critical kpi failed evaluation (per quality profile criticality settings) customize view click the columns icon to configure which data fields appear in the table you can show or hide fields like agent name , queue , or duration to create a view that suits your workflow this selection is saved for future sessions export data step 1 set up the job — job name, file format (csv / excel), destination connector (email) step 2 set a schedule — frequency options (one time, hourly, daily, weekly, monthly) with start/end dates for recurring schedules step 3 select data — quality profile, date range, saved filters, and column selection (base details, critical score details, kpis, metadata, etc ) note on language for tenants on higher tier plans, note that the analysis list always displays the english summary for every interaction, regardless of the original spoken language to view the transcript and summary in the speaker's native language, click on the interaction id to open the detailed view (see workflow b below) 5 2 workflow b deep dive interaction review context once a specific call is identified in the analysis list, supervisors can drill down to understand why a score was given steps open interaction click on any interaction id in the list to open the detailed interaction view multiple quality profiles when a call is routed via smart assignment (smarter assignment), it may be scored against more than one quality profile the analysis list and interaction detail show results for each profile that was applied to that call select a quality profile to get the detailed view for that interaction review media player use the embedded audio player to listen to the call recording transcript switch to the transcript tab to read the speech to text log of the conversation by default, the transcript is displayed in english language toggle (requires high tier plans) a toggle control appears on the interaction details page click it to switch between the english transcript and the detected native language transcript (e g , hindi, arabic) the toggle label dynamically updates to show the detected language — for example, \[ hindi ] or \[ arabic ] rtl support when viewing calls in right to left languages such as arabic, switching to the native language view automatically applies rtl text formatting for natural reading summary the interaction summary also switches language when the toggle is used, providing context in the selected language note the language toggle affects transcripts and summaries only ai reasoning remains in english analyze scores scorecard view the right panel displays the full scorecard category breakdown view scores aggregated by category (e g , "soft skills") and sub category kpi details expand any category to see individual kpi results ai reasoning click a specific kpi to see the ai reason , explaining the logic and evidence from the transcript used to determine the pass/fail result ai suggestions for every kpi that scores below the maximum, cqa automatically generates an actionable coaching tip derived from your uploaded reference document (sop) when no sop is available, the system provides generic best practice guidance this transforms cqa from a passive auditing tool into an active coaching platform that closes the feedback loop for agents disputes click on show disputes only to view only the kpis that have disputes 5 3 workflow c ad hoc testing (test evaluations) context use this workflow to test a new quality profile before going live, or to analyze a specific offline batch of recordings that weren't processed automatically steps navigate click test evaluation in the sidebar create new click the button to start a new test configuration name give your test a unique name (e g , "oct sales audit") select profile choose the quality profile you wish to test upload data excel upload upload an excel file containing the publicly accessible recording urls or text urls and any relevant metadata you want to associate with these calls audio upload upload mp3 or wav files directly for the audio analysis text upload upload txt, pdf files directly for the text analysis monitor progress the system processes files in real time you do not need to wait for the entire batch to finish; you can click into the evaluation immediately to see row by row results as they populate review outcomes completed all files processed successfully partial success some files failed (e g , invalid audio links) you can filter to view only the successful analyses export enter your email address to receive a full export of the test results, including scores and transcript insights 5 4 workflow d dispute resolution context cqa supports a feedback loop where agents can contest ai scores, and supervisors can review/overturn them 1\ raising a dispute (agent action) open the interaction view for your evaluated call locate the specific kpi you disagree with click the raise dispute icon form input suggested answer select what you believe the correct answer is (e g , change "no" to "yes") comment type your reasoning (e g , "i mentioned the tax at 02 14") pin audio pin the specific point in audio relevant to the kpi submit the dispute is logged and flagged for supervisor review 2\ resolving a dispute (supervisor action) in the analysis list , look for interactions flagged with "open disputes" open the interaction and toggle the "show disputes only" switch to filter the scorecard review read the agent's comment and compare it with the ai's reasoning/transcript action click on edit to then enable dispute resolution reject the score remains as is you can add a rebuttal comment accept & update the system automatically recalculates the score (e g , changing a 0 to a 10) and updates the total finalize click acknowledge to save the changes and close the dispute 5 5 workflow e manual review and edit context while cqa automates scoring, there are instances where a supervisor or qa lead needs to manually intervene to correct an ai evaluation or provide a human verified score this workflow allows you to override the system's output and document your reasoning prerequisite you must have supervisor access to perform this action select interaction navigate to the analysis list and click on the interaction id of the call you wish to review enable edit mode open the interaction and click the edit button to enable score modification modify answers scroll to the specific kpi you want to change change the ai generated answer to the correct option (e g , changing "no" to "yes") add justification upon changing an answer, you must add a comment justifying the reason for the manual update finalize click the acknowledge button to view a summary of the changes approve the changes to save the system will immediately update the kpi score and recalculate the total quality score for the interaction filter & search use the filter bar to isolate specific interactions you can filter by date, score, quality profile, metadata (e g , "show me calls from campaign a"), and interaction type interaction type lets you narrow the list to interactions that need attention value what you see disputed interactions interactions with open or relevant disputes (same pattern as before) critical kpi failures interactions where at least one critical kpi failed evaluation (per quality profile criticality settings)