Show Guidance

Centralised, independent QA of customer services and sales is a vital part of all regulated firms’ operating models, whether carried out by compliance specialists, operations, other technical teams or outsourced to third parties. Getting this right can stop Conduct problems before they occur and act as a driver for your management oversight, continuous improvement and training. However, QA can become a cost drain for the business and, poorly implemented, can damage head office relationships with other business areas and, at its worst, drive a ‘tick-box’ culture that does not prevent unsuitable customer outcomes.

Enterprise Learning can help you set up an effective QA team with processes and checklists that are streamlined and focused on the highest risks for your customers. We can develop your checklists, ensure your reporting and MI identifies root causes and wider trends. We can train your QA people and assess their competence and regulatory understanding. Where necessary we can provide technical specialists to help resource your QA team or provide independent reviews of the cases being checked to ensure that QA is being done correctly.

BackNext

Benchmarks

  • I have a clearly defined end to end QA process in our regulated operations (including sampling of customer outcomes and comprehensive root cause analysis).
  • My QA grades identify customer outcomes with sufficient granularity to distinguish any unsuitable outcomes.
  • I ensure that QA samples are selected via a risk-based analysis, which is regularly reviewed in light of QA findings, risk identification and Regulatory 'hotspots’.
  • I ensure my team and I regularly review the root cause analysis of QA findings, risk reviews, audits and other relevant data to ensure changes in policy or procedures are made where necessary.

Negative Indicators

  • QA is carried out without formal Checklists to ensure consistency of approach and process.
  • QA systems are semi-manual with ‘home grown’ spreadsheet solutions used in lieu of bespoke systems and databases.
  • QA grades lack clarity, making it difficult to differentiate between regulatory procedural failures where there is no customer detriment/re-work, and unsuitable customer outcomes.
  • Case selection centres on simplistic volume based approach without adequate risk based focus.
  • Senior managers do not meaningfully discuss and review QA and risk review information at their regular meetings.