call work flow
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
If I recall correctly, you said your operator will run around the building physically looking for someone, is that correct?
Not typically, but yeah, if they can't find someone by calling around first, then they will get up and try to locate someone.
And the caller is just.... abandoned for a while?
I suppose that's one way to look at it.. but that's pretty rare, and would only be in an emergent, yet not needing 911, type of case.
But even in an emergent situation, leaving that caller on the phone, could cause more harm.
Getting the details of the call are the critical part, as those can be passed directly to a doctor who can investigate from there.
Playing the waiting game is just delaying that information from being received.
I can see this making sense, have them wait for a doctor. I'm just wondering how they handle making sure that the next emergency has a good workflow if the phones shut down from one. Maybe someone else jumps in the hot seat?
the operator isn't the one holding the call if they need to talk to a doctor. The call is transferred to a medical staffer first.. that person then holds the call for the doc.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
The workflow from a quick look reads like this to me....
- Make it easy to have no one to answer the phone.
- Make the caller wait around a lot.
- Voicemail
It seems like just stalling before voicemail rather than avoiding it.
Yeah, that is what it does, it delay's the caller from passing the question/information along to the practice.
If the doctor is busy, do they really have time to sit down and take what could be an hour long call (rather than seeing patients) when all that is a brief description or tidbit of info?
Where is the magical stall come from you guys are seeing? who'd delaying what?
the doctor almost never gets the call direct - it goes to a medical staffer first, who then decides if they actually need to talk to a doctor, which is a rare thing. The medical staffer is who is needed in most cases.
The stall is from your operator(s) literally walking the building looking for a person to take a call.
Let me explain it like this.
At one time, we had to send people with a message on a piece of stone, then we trained pigeons, then we learned to ride horse back, then we create telegrams so on and so on.
Going back to walking is the least efficient means of delivering a message.
If it's not a 911 call, leave a message.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
If I recall correctly, you said your operator will run around the building physically looking for someone, is that correct?
Not typically, but yeah, if they can't find someone by calling around first, then they will get up and try to locate someone.
And the caller is just.... abandoned for a while?
I suppose that's one way to look at it.. but that's pretty rare, and would only be in an emergent, yet not needing 911, type of case.
But even in an emergent situation, leaving that caller on the phone, could cause more harm.
Getting the details of the call are the critical part, as those can be passed directly to a doctor who can investigate from there.
Playing the waiting game is just delaying that information from being received.
I can see this making sense, have them wait for a doctor. I'm just wondering how they handle making sure that the next emergency has a good workflow if the phones shut down from one. Maybe someone else jumps in the hot seat?
the operator isn't the one holding the call if they need to talk to a doctor. The call is transferred to a medical staffer first.. that person then holds the call for the doc.
So they are talking to the staffer while someone else runs around trying to get the right doctor?
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap guys.. wow !
what?
I wasn't really involved in the last conversation. This conversation is about call work flow.
The most prudent work flow is to direct the caller to VM immediately after the operator is unable to find someone to take the call.
Anything else is just spent time.
That's what it feels like to me. Lots of stalling that could be used to find doctors, get responses, answer other calls, etc. What's the value in the "being on hold"?
Where would you rather the caller be? forced to voicemail?
that's be great if when we called back we had a 90% success rate in reaching the caller.. Instead there is an insane amount of call tag going on. -
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap - who died and made you king? Patients rarely leave the desired information on voicemail, taking a message ensures that when we call them back we are more prepared to help them.
But it does shift the responsibility and speed the process.
Now we're going to look at the cost of an operator versus the cost of a medical staffer..
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap guys.. wow !
what?
I wasn't really involved in the last conversation. This conversation is about call work flow.
The most prudent work flow is to direct the caller to VM immediately after the operator is unable to find someone to take the call.
Anything else is just spent time.
That's what it feels like to me. Lots of stalling that could be used to find doctors, get responses, answer other calls, etc. What's the value in the "being on hold"?
Where would you rather the caller be? forced to voicemail?
that's be great if when we called back we had a 90% success rate in reaching the caller.. Instead there is an insane amount of call tag going on.I guess that makes sense. But seems like this is a perfect thing for a secretary.... call the people to call back when the doctor is available. Those that answer get to talk, those that don't wait for another round.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap - who died and made you king? Patients rarely leave the desired information on voicemail, taking a message ensures that when we call them back we are more prepared to help them.
But it does shift the responsibility and speed the process.
Now we're going to look at the cost of an operator versus the cost of a medical staffer..
No, the cost of no one versus the cost of anyone
-
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender I'd quote your previous post but I don't think there'd be enough room for me to reply.
-
What are you wanting from discussing the call flow process here?
-
Are you trying to find possible improvements?
The call work flow as described makes it look as though the operators are getting their 16,000 steps in every day, rather than being at their desk taking calls and doing other work.
why - let me ask that again WHY? why do you think they are getting even 1 step in a day? the getting out of their seat hasn't happened in the last year or longer. So long ago I couldn't tell you when it happened last.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
The workflow from a quick look reads like this to me....
- Make it easy to have no one to answer the phone.
- Make the caller wait around a lot.
- Voicemail
It seems like just stalling before voicemail rather than avoiding it.
Stalling? where do you see stalling? Two operators answering the phones. They could be looking up appt times, or making appts in the system or sending a medical question off to a medical staffer. Of course if more people call while they are doing the above, then they just wait in queue. Just like any other business.
Stalling while running around or whatever, when they could just get the call back info and send that on to the right person immediately (if the right person isn't available to take the call.)
So you'd rather just hang up with everyone ASAP - that's it, sorry we have no one immediately available, so give me info and get off my phone.
Frankly I have asked why they have this need to constantly find a warm body - and the answer I frequently get back is - to many of our patients are playing phone tag.. so we are preventing another phone tag situation.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender I'd quote your previous post but I don't think there'd be enough room for me to reply.
-
What are you wanting from discussing the call flow process here?
-
Are you trying to find possible improvements?
The call work flow as described makes it look as though the operators are getting their 16,000 steps in every day, rather than being at their desk taking calls and doing other work.
why - let me ask that again WHY? why do you think they are getting even 1 step in a day? the getting out of their seat hasn't happened in the last year or longer. So long ago I couldn't tell you when it happened last.
I think that because of the way you described it in your flow chart above!
Only because of the flow chart.
-
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
The workflow from a quick look reads like this to me....
- Make it easy to have no one to answer the phone.
- Make the caller wait around a lot.
- Voicemail
It seems like just stalling before voicemail rather than avoiding it.
Yeah, that is what it does, it delay's the caller from passing the question/information along to the practice.
If the doctor is busy, do they really have time to sit down and take what could be an hour long call (rather than seeing patients) when all that is a brief description or tidbit of info?
Where is the magical stall come from you guys are seeing? who'd delaying what?
the doctor almost never gets the call direct - it goes to a medical staffer first, who then decides if they actually need to talk to a doctor, which is a rare thing. The medical staffer is who is needed in most cases.
It's the "send the operator out looking for someone" step. That can't be fast.
It's also rare - so a true non issue.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
So you'd rather just hang up with everyone ASAP - that's it, sorry we have no one immediately available, so give me info and get off my phone.
Yes. Last thing I want to do is be put on hold, especially if there is something wrong. I want to be free to deal with it. And, of course, get called back as quickly as the doctor can be found and pull up my file. Definitely don't want to be on hold, what benefit is there to that?
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Frankly I have asked why they have this need to constantly find a warm body - and the answer I frequently get back is - to many of our patients are playing phone tag.. so we are preventing another phone tag situation.
I can see this making sense. Seems weird to me, they call back a few minutes later and the patients don't answer? That's actually a problem? Or were they not really calling back right away?
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
If I recall correctly, you said your operator will run around the building physically looking for someone, is that correct?
Not typically, but yeah, if they can't find someone by calling around first, then they will get up and try to locate someone.
And the caller is just.... abandoned for a while?
I suppose that's one way to look at it.. but that's pretty rare, and would only be in an emergent, yet not needing 911, type of case.
But even in an emergent situation, leaving that caller on the phone, could cause more harm.
Getting the details of the call are the critical part, as those can be passed directly to a doctor who can investigate from there.
Playing the waiting game is just delaying that information from being received.
I can see this making sense, have them wait for a doctor. I'm just wondering how they handle making sure that the next emergency has a good workflow if the phones shut down from one. Maybe someone else jumps in the hot seat?
the operator isn't the one holding the call if they need to talk to a doctor. The call is transferred to a medical staffer first.. that person then holds the call for the doc.
So they are talking to the staffer while someone else runs around trying to get the right doctor?
NOOOOOO ------ 99.999% of the time they NEVER need to talk to the doc. they need to only speak to a medical personal who gives them some shit from their chart.. etc.
I guess what you want me to say is that we are 1000% understaffed to handle phone calls! but we aren't. We're understaffed to handle phone calls at peak times - which most companies are, because bringing in temp medical help is to costly and volatile.
We take hundreds of messages a day - people get pissed when they play phone tag for 6 hours.
The only fully whatever solution is to hire more staff to be there to answer the phones, which will cost 10's of it not more thousands of dollars, mostly because of PR.
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
So you'd rather just hang up with everyone ASAP - that's it, sorry we have no one immediately available, so give me info and get off my phone.
Yes. Last thing I want to do is be put on hold, especially if there is something wrong. I want to be free to deal with it. And, of course, get called back as quickly as the doctor can be found and pull up my file. Definitely don't want to be on hold, what benefit is there to that?
I agree here, I'd rather say it's an emergency I need someone to call ASAP. And deal with it by driving to the hospital or whatever.
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap guys.. wow !
what?
I wasn't really involved in the last conversation. This conversation is about call work flow.
The most prudent work flow is to direct the caller to VM immediately after the operator is unable to find someone to take the call.
Anything else is just spent time.
That's what it feels like to me. Lots of stalling that could be used to find doctors, get responses, answer other calls, etc. What's the value in the "being on hold"?
Where would you rather the caller be? forced to voicemail?
that's be great if when we called back we had a 90% success rate in reaching the caller.. Instead there is an insane amount of call tag going on.I guess that makes sense. But seems like this is a perfect thing for a secretary.... call the people to call back when the doctor is available. Those that answer get to talk, those that don't wait for another round.
But when you called them back, you leave a message for them.. and before that second round of calls happens from our end, the caller has called us back. See the problem?
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
We take hundreds of messages a day - people get pissed when they play phone tag for 6 hours.
What causes that to happen? Why is it not going to email?
-
@Dashrender People not listening to voicemail is the issue then.
-
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@DustinB3403 said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
Holy crap guys.. wow !
what?
I wasn't really involved in the last conversation. This conversation is about call work flow.
The most prudent work flow is to direct the caller to VM immediately after the operator is unable to find someone to take the call.
Anything else is just spent time.
That's what it feels like to me. Lots of stalling that could be used to find doctors, get responses, answer other calls, etc. What's the value in the "being on hold"?
Where would you rather the caller be? forced to voicemail?
that's be great if when we called back we had a 90% success rate in reaching the caller.. Instead there is an insane amount of call tag going on.I guess that makes sense. But seems like this is a perfect thing for a secretary.... call the people to call back when the doctor is available. Those that answer get to talk, those that don't wait for another round.
But when you called them back, you leave a message for them.. and before that second round of calls happens from our end, the caller has called us back. See the problem?
That makes sense. The issue is then... that customers rarely answer their phones?
-
@scottalanmiller said in call work flow:
@Dashrender said in call work flow:
So you'd rather just hang up with everyone ASAP - that's it, sorry we have no one immediately available, so give me info and get off my phone.
Yes. Last thing I want to do is be put on hold, especially if there is something wrong. I want to be free to deal with it. And, of course, get called back as quickly as the doctor can be found and pull up my file. Definitely don't want to be on hold, what benefit is there to that?
Because being on hold is an active link to the doctor's office - otherwise you're just sitting around with your thumb up you rectum waiting on a call - I think most would rather wait on hold.
