Use case · Production bot performance
A production scorecard
the client can open
Containment, resolutions by outcome and escalations, read per intent against the service levels you agreed, with drift named the week it starts and the fix visible to the client in the same place.
- Read per intent, not averaged
- Drift named the week it starts
- The client opens the same view
Delivery
Sample dataOpen
AnyCRM. Delivery.
Month 6
Seabright Telecom, month 6, the client view. Containment above plan, trend up for five months. Resolutions attributed, each one proven by its data. Escalations rising on billing intents this week. Service levels met, all SOW lines green.
By month
The total containment curve rises from month 1 to month 6. The billing intent rises with it, then turns down over the last two weeks.
Scorecard
Sent: the month 5 client scorecard with outcome attribution. Watch: billing intent containment down two weeks running, escalations up. Renewal: the window opens in 90 days and health feeds Renewal risk and expansion.
Risk
Billing containment has slipped two weeks running, and escalations are up to match. The change lines up with the client’s new billing policy from the month 5 QBR. The overall number still looks fine, which is why nobody noticed.
Your call
Update the billing intent with the new policy and re-test. Raise it in the month 6 scorecard with the cause named. Add a human review step on billing until the fix lands. The first is pressed.
Resolved
Task on the delivery lead, a note added to the scorecard, the billing curve recovers and the escalations tile turns green.
Into the renewal
The health flows into Renewal risk and expansion and the renewal row lights. The month 6 scorecard is sent and filed.
Close
Month six is where the relationship is decided.
Seabright Telecom in month six, where one intent started drifting the week their network release went out.
How it works
Four steps, and none of them is typing.
- 1
Outcomes, attributed.
Production · Month 6
SampleContainment
Above plan
Trend up, 5 months
Resolutions
Attributed
Proven by its data
The definitions and attribution agreed in the pilot become the scorecard's lines, so every resolution the bot claims is proven by the data behind it rather than asserted.
- 2
Monthly, on its own.
Production · Month 6
Sample- Sent
Monthly client scorecard, month 5
With outcome attribution
- Watch
Billing intent containment down two weeks running
Escalations up to match
- Renewal
Renewal window opens in 90 days
Health feeds Renewal risk and expansion
The client scorecard drafts itself from production data: containment, resolutions by outcome, escalations and service levels against the SOW, read per intent rather than averaged.
- 3
When a line dips.
Production · Month 6
SampleBilling containment has slipped two weeks running, and escalations are up to match.
One intent driftingBilling containment slips two weeks running under a healthy total, and the board names the likely cause, the client's new billing policy from the last QBR, before anyone is asked. Update the intent, raise it in the scorecard, or add a human review step. You choose.
- 4
Into the renewal.
Seabright Telecom
SampleMonth 6 scorecard
With the cause named
Task on the delivery lead
Update the billing intent and re-test
Sent to Seabright Telecom
Health, service levels and value delivered feed Renewal risk and expansion the moment the window opens, so the renewal conversation starts from six months of record.
The risk beat
When something turns, it tells you and shows you the moves.
Here the turn is: Billing containment has slipped two weeks running. Three moves were offered and a person took one: update the billing intent with the new policy and re-test.
Risk beat · AnyCRM AI
Sample data- 1
Detection
Billing containment has slipped two weeks running.
- 2
Explanation
Escalations are up to match. The change lines up with the client's new billing policy from the month 5 QBR. The overall number still looks fine, which is why nobody noticed.
One intent driftingCause traced to the month 5 QBR - 3
Options
- Update the billing intent with the new policy and re-test
- Raise it in the month 6 scorecard with the cause named
- Add a human review step on billing until the fix lands
- 4
Human choice
Update the billing intent with the new policy and re-testA person presses one. Nothing is sent or written until then.
- 5
Resolution
The client saw the dip and the fix in the same place.
Task on the delivery lead, a note added to the scorecard, the billing curve recovering and the escalations tile back to green, all on the board the client opens.
Escalations back in lineHealth on the renewal
Where the answers come from
The record you already have.
A production scorecard is only honest if it is broken out. Averaged, a healthy month hides the one queue that has been getting worse for four weeks.
Production resolutions
Counted by outcome, not by conversation
Escalation records
What was handed over, when, and with what context
Intent breakdown
So a single queue cannot hide inside the total
The output
The monthly report
Every line points back at one of these.
The agreed service levels
The lines every measure is read against
Change history
Yours and theirs, so drift can be traced to a week
The account record
The SOW, the pilot record and the contacts the scorecard reads against
What you receive
Documents, not a dashboard.
A monthly report in the shape of the service levels you agreed, a live view the client can open at any time, and an action on every intent that has started to drift.
See the full CS Teams pageThe monthly report
The monthly report
By intent, against the service levels agreed
A live scorecard
A live scorecard
Open to the client at any time, without asking
- Tasks
Drift actions
One per intent that has moved, owned and dated
The cause trace
The cause trace
What changed, on whose side, in which week
Why BPOs need this
What we heard, in their words.
The problem
The monthly pack is green and the client is unhappy.
An operations director
The problem
One queue got worse for five weeks and the average hid it.
A customer success lead
The problem
We argue about service levels because we report on different numbers.
A finance leader
Questions
The honest answers.
Why report per intent?
Because an aggregate scorecard hides the one queue going wrong. Reading each intent on its own is what makes drift visible in the week it starts.
Does the client get the same view?
Yes. A live read-only scorecard they can open at any time, on the same numbers, in the shape of the service levels you agreed.
Does anything change in production automatically?
No. Knowledge updates and routing changes are proposed with their evidence and applied by a person, after sampling.
What if the cause is on the client's side?
The trace says so, with the week and the change. Raising it is one of the offered moves, and it lands as a conversation rather than as a dispute.
Give your team the unfair advantage.
Full deal intelligence from day one. No credit card required.