Free call center templates
Working documents rather than lead magnets. Each one is published in full on its own page, downloadable without a signup or an email wall, and built from something we measured instead of something we think. Where a line rests on a number, the number and its measurement are printed next to it, so you can disagree with a line on the evidence instead of on our say-so.
This section is new and it is honest about its size: what is listed below is what exists, and the list it belongs to is longer. We would rather ship a small number of sheets that are genuinely backed than a folder of templates retyped from whatever the rest of the industry publishes. One is written for the floor reviewing its own calls and one for the buyer sitting across the table from a floor.
Or bring us a week of your own recordings and we will run the scorecard across them.
-
Outbound roofing call QA scorecard
A one-page Yes / No / N-A sheet for reviewing an outbound roofing appointment-setting call, with the measurement behind every line printed underneath it.
Open the outbound roofing call qa scorecard -
Call center vendor questions
A buyer-side due-diligence sheet for hiring an outsourced calling floor, where every question is bound either to the federal document that governs the answer or to a measurement from our own floor.
Open the call center vendor questions
How to run call QA without it becoming theatre
Most call review dies for one of three reasons, and all three are avoidable. The first is that the sheet is too long. A reviewer who has to answer two dozen questions per call reviews four calls and stops, and four calls a week tells you nothing about a floor. Keep the sheet to one page, review more calls, and accept that you are sampling rather than auditing.
The second is weighting. A weighted sheet produces a single score that feels comparable between reviewers and is not, because two people mark different lines as not applicable and the denominators quietly diverge. Score in whole lines, write the pair down rather than the percentage, and the comparison stays honest.
The third, and the one that actually kills it, is that the sheet arrives without any reason to believe its lines. Somebody wrote them, somebody else fills them in, and neither party can say why that particular list of behaviours and not another. That is the problem this section exists to solve: every line in the scorecard below is printed with what it was measured on, so a setter who disagrees with a line can argue with the evidence rather than with their manager.
Two habits make the rest of it work. Review the same calls the setter would have chosen and calls they would not, because a floor that only ever reviews its own submissions is running a highlight reel. And review the outcome as well as the conversation: a booked appointment nobody was home for is not a win, and no call sheet can see that on its own.
Where to go next
If you are earlier than call review and still sizing the problem, the free calculators answer the arithmetic questions that come first: what the unanswered phone is costing, how fast a first response has to be, and what the same campaign prices at across the common models.
If you would rather see the measurements themselves, the outbound call center page publishes what the calls behind these documents actually did, with the caveats attached, and the blog carries the longer arguments each document came out of.