Inbound CS agents who hit AHT without sandbagging quality.

A scenario-based assessment with a deliberately ambiguous customer issue. We measure both resolution depth and total handle time, not just one or the other.

Across the last 12 months, our average is 3.2% — we run a 72-hour pre-start touchpoint and offer a replacement guarantee inside the first 30 days.

Yes — that is the default. We screen typing speed and written tone alongside voice in every assessment.

Yes. We pre-build a bench in August/September for clients with predictable Q4 surges, and run weekly cohort waves of 25–50.

Send the things your agents will be measured on: your AHT and FCR targets, your QA scorecard, and the channel mix across voice, chat and email. Add the shift pattern, the systems agents will work in, the length of your new-hire training, and whether the seats are remote or on-site. A few anonymized call recordings that your QA team rates as good are worth more than a long job description, because they show us the tone and call control you actually reward.

Match the model to how certain the demand is. Contract staffing suits seasonal peaks, launches and backlogs where the seats have an end date. Temp-to-perm lets you watch an agent through training, nesting and the first QA cycles before converting, which suits steady queues with uneven attrition. Direct hire makes sense when the seat is permanent, the product is complex and you want the agent on your payroll and in your culture from the first day. You can mix models inside one program, and the conversion terms are set in the engagement agreement.

Both work, and the answer usually comes down to supervision and security more than agent quality. Remote widens the candidate pool and helps with split shifts and extended hours, but it needs a quiet workspace, a stable connection, and a plan for side-by-side coaching over screen share. On-site makes nesting and real-time help easier, and your own security policy may require it where agents handle payment cards or health information. Tell us the model before sourcing starts, because candidates who thrive at home and candidates who thrive on a floor are often different people.

If you hire a handful of agents a year, have a referral program that fills seats, and your recruiters are not stretched, an agency adds cost without adding much. The same is true if the real problem is attrition caused by schedules, pay or supervision, because new hires will leave through the same door. An agency earns its place when volume outruns your recruiting team, when a ramp has a fixed date, or when your own screening is not predicting who is still performing once week-four QA scores come in.