Communication and Engagement

Identify Effective Communication & Engagement in Sales Calls

In sales interactions, the representative’s communication style and engagement level can significantly influence outcomes. By evaluating whether the agenda is set clearly, alignment with the prospect’s needs is established, active listening cues are present, and the conversation flow remains balanced, teams gain insights into how effectively the sales representative fosters productive dialogue.

Who Benefits:

• Project Managers & Team Leads: Understand if representatives communicate clearly, engage prospects meaningfully, and maintain productive flows, guiding coaching and training.
• Sales & CX Teams: Identify if agents align with customers, actively listen, and avoid dominating the call, affecting customer satisfaction.
• Business Managers & Strategists: Spot communication trends and improve training materials or sales scripts, increasing conversion rates.
• Compliance Officers: Confirm representatives adhere to communication best practices and internal guidelines.

Value Proposition:

• Clarity & Engagement: Structured assessments highlight whether representatives facilitate understanding and rapport.
• Continuous Improvement: By pinpointing strengths and gaps, organizations can tailor coaching efforts.
• Operational Efficiency: Machine-readable, standardized JSON output integrates easily with analytics workflows and dashboards.

Data Dictionary

Objective:

Evaluate a call’s “Communication and Engagement” level by scoring predefined checklist items that reflect the representative’s ability to set agendas, align with needs, actively listen, and maintain a balanced conversation flow. Compute a final score, provide a summary, and optionally feedback for improvement.

Required JSON Schema:

{
  "criteria": [
    {
      "name": "Communication and Engagement",
      "score": <number>, 
      "summary": "<string>",
      "feedback": {
        // optional improvement suggestions or notes
      }
    }
  ]
}

Data Dictionary:

If Criterion Not Applicable or No Data:
The criteria array may still be returned, but score could be 0.0 and summary may note insufficient data. If no criteria are applicable at all, return an empty criteria array.

Determining Score & Thresholds

Confidence and Scoring:

• Checklists & Priorities:
  The criterion is defined with a set of checklist items, each having a priority level (high, medium, low).

  Example checklist (stored outside code in a config or library):

  JSON

  {
    "id": "Communication_And_Engagement",
    "name": "Communication and Engagement",
    "type": "managed",
    "checklist": [
      { "text": "Clear agenda setting?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Align with prospect’s needs?", "priority": "medium" },
      { "text": "Demonstrate active listening?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Maintain balanced conversation flow?", "priority": "low" }
    ]
  }

• Priority Weights (example):

  • High = 3
  • Medium = 2
  • Low = 1

• Scoring Method:

  1. Assign partial scores (0.0-1.0) to each checklist item based on transcript evidence.
  2. Compute weighted average:

     Weighted Score = (Σ(item_score * priority_weight)) / (Σ(priority_weights))

  3. Convert weighted score (0.0-1.0) into a percentage (0.0 to 100.0).
  4. Return this final score along with a summary and optional feedback.

Iterative Improvement & Calibration:

• Initial Testing: Validate on sample calls to ensure scoring reflects actual communication quality.
• Refine Priorities: Adjust priority weights as business needs evolve.
• Add/Remove Checklist Items: Easily update the criterion definition to capture new communication aspects.
• Stakeholder Feedback: Use input from team leads or compliance officers to refine definitions and improve relevance.

Prompt Construction & Instructions

Role Specification & Reiteration:

• Cast the system as a “highly experienced assistant” evaluating communication and engagement.
• Reiterate instructions on scoring methods, priority weights, and no extraneous commentary.

No Hallucination:

• Only score what can be derived from the transcript.
• If uncertain about meeting a checklist item, assign a moderate or low partial score.

Strict Formatting:

• Return only the JSON object.
• If no improvement needed, feedback can be empty or omitted.

Prompt for Implementation

System Message (Role: System):
"You are a highly experienced assistant specializing in scoring call transcripts on the 'Communication and Engagement' criterion. You have:

• A transcript
• A known criterion ('Communication_And_Engagement') with a defined checklist and priorities
• Instructions specifying scoringMethod and priorityWeights

Your task:

1. Assign a partial score (0.0-1.0) to each checklist item based on the transcript.
2. Calculate a weighted average using provided priorityWeights.
3. Convert to a 0.0-100.0 scale and return score.
4. Provide a summary and optional feedback.
5. Return only JSON, no extra commentary.

Instructions & Variables (example):

{
  "instructions": {
    "scoringMethod": "weighted_average",
    "priorityWeights": {
      "high": 3,
      "medium": 2,
      "low": 1
    }
  },
  "criterion": {
    "id": "Communication_And_Engagement",
    "name": "Communication and Engagement",
    "type": "managed",
    "checklist": [
      { "text": "Clear agenda setting?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Align with prospect’s needs?", "priority": "medium" },
      { "text": "Demonstrate active listening?", "priority": "high" },
      { "text": "Maintain balanced conversation flow?", "priority": "low" }
    ]
  }
}

User Message (Role: User):
"Analyze the following transcript and apply the 'Communication and Engagement' criterion:

[TRANSCRIPT_JSON][TRANSCRIPT_JSON]"

Expected Output Format:

{
  "criteria": [
    {
      "name": "Communication and Engagement",
      "score": <number>,
      "summary": "<string>",
      "feedback": {
        // optional suggestions
      }
    }
  ]
}