Ditch the 0-10 Scale: Why a 3-Point System Saves Support Teams

I recently heard from a former direct report that since I left the company, every single CRR they’ve received from their new manager has scored a 100% rating.

Don’t get me wrong: this person is indeed a standout performer, and consistently scored well on my reviews. But I can count on one hand the number of times (out of multiple dozens of reviews spanning years at the company) that they scored perfectly across the board.

It’s illustrative of a much deeper problem: the way most supervisors track and score metrics is broken and demotivating.

Here’s how most supervisors (and literally every piece of software I’ve tested) scores the metrics:

0 is bad, 10 is good. We expect you to get 10s every time, and pile all metrics into one overall score and give you a percentage.

Not only is that the unspoken assumption, all of the software out there for handling CRRs reinforces it with un-dismissable color-coded badges. Score a 60%, and that’s either bright orange or red, and has a frowny face to rub it in. No compassionate manager wants to hand out 60s.

The Sustainable Support framework? A simple 3-point scale broken down by individual metric. *

1 is bad. Keep getting 1s, and we have to have uncomfortable conversations.
2 is fine. Keep getting 2s, and nobody in the company will bat an eye. You’re meeting expectations.
3 is exemplary. Keep getting 3s, and you’re well on your way to becoming a supervisor.

If every review you give scores 100%, what you are creating is resentment. You’re telling an agent that they are perfect, and unless you can back that up with a significant raise, a promotion, or something else… you’re going to lose them.

If the system you use can clearly communicate a more broad range of feedback and break it down by metric, you get engaged agents who understand where they rank, AND how to get to where they want to be.

I don’t expect 3s on every metric every time. Heck, I don’t give a promotion-worthy set of replies on every ticket.

But without a system that tracks the metrics correctly, you either have to feel like dirt giving otherwise great team members a 60% all the time, or you just give them 100s and hope they don’t leave.

*By breaking down the scoring to the individual metric, you can actually coach to the numbers. An agent consistently scoring a 1 on Expertise but a 3 on all other metrics would be scored somewhere in the 80% range, and it’s hard to tell an agent “keep getting an 80%, and there’s going to be problems.” When you can say instead “You’ve averaged a 1.2 on Expertise over the last 10 reviews” that communicates way more effectively the urgency of their need for change.