|
|
The Most Common IVR Design Error for Health
Plans
Nearly every
claim, member service, or health service project we do involves an
interactive voice response problem. So we have a lot of practical
experience with IVRs—the good, the bad, and the
ugly.
IVRs stand
between a health plan's clients and the plan's ability to provide
service. Usually, IVR helps callers get the service they need. But
let's be honest—in too many cases, IVR doesn't help. It's an
irritating speed bump or a road block to service. We all know the
symptoms of a bad IVR system: long menus, long delays, confusing
menus, mis-routings, and the need to call back.
Recently, I had
occasion to review Nolan's experience with IVR problems and design
issues. It was eye-opening. At the start of my research, I thought I
had a good intuitive sense of what I would find. I was right. What I
expected to find in terms of problems, symptoms, and corrective
actions was quite close to what I found.
But, when it
came to the underlying design issue, I was wrong. If forced to bet
on the most common design flaw, I would have put my money on having
the selections in the IVR menus in the wrong order. By "wrong order"
I'm referring to menus whose sequence doesn't reflect the frequency
of the types of incoming calls (most common call type first, second
most common next, and so on). But I would have lost my
money.
The most common
design flaw was even more fundamental. It was, as it turns out,
combining business-to-business calls with consumer-to-business
calls. We've all heard it: "Welcome to Slow Service Health Plan. If
you are a provider, press 1. If you are a member, press 2." In this
design, we are doing something that is stunningly silly. We mix
provider and member calls together by our routing, then force
callers to sort themselves out so we can talk to them! This deeply
flawed design error leads to long menus, long delays, confusing
menus, mis-routings, and abandoned calls.
Is your health
plan making this error? Test call your IVR. But before you do, make
a bet with yourself—you might be surprised. The good news is that an
advantage of betting with yourself is that you nearly always
win. |
|