The Largest Online Community for Contact Centre Professionals
The Largest Online Community for Contact Centre Professionals
Close
Published On: 5th Aug 2026 08:00
Creating schedules that work for everyone is a tough balancing act!
On one side, there’s the pressure to hit service levels, manage peaks, and keep costs under control. Whilst, on the other, there’s the very real human impact of schedules on agent wellbeing, engagement, and retention. Lean too far either way, and something gives.
So, to help you navigate these challenges, we’ve asked our reader panel for their real-life scheduling success stories to help you separate the theory from what actually works and drive real improvements.
One of our most persistent challenges stemmed from the unique volatility of our subscription billing model.
With more than two million members billed within a compact weekly window – the 6th through the 12th of each month – our contact centres faced extreme volume spikes, often three to four times higher than non-billing weeks.
As a result, agents were routinely required to work daily overtime and even give up rest days just to keep up. This model was operationally taxing and unsustainable for both our people and our performance.
To solve this, we implemented dynamic scheduling, a strategic shift from static, fixed weekly patterns to a monthly scheduling framework aligned to forecasted daily demand.
This required meaningful partnership with our teams, who agreed to adjust their off-days during the billing cycle to ensure staffing supply matched workload intensity.
Changing shift patterns can be stressful for everyone. For advice on managing shift changes, read our article: How to Change Your Shift Patterns – Without Losing Your Best Agents!
By organizing employees into defined shift pools, we preserved flexibility for time-off management and shift trading while still enabling precise coverage during peak periods.
The impact was transformative. Service levels stabilized, operational planning became frictionless, and the customer and employee experiences improved significantly.
Most notably, we achieved a 90% reduction in overtime, a 50-point lift in service level, a 20-point drop in abandonment, a full-star increase in CSAT, and a 30-point rise in eNPS.
These results reinforced a simple truth: when staffing strategies mirror true demand, everyone wins – from our agents to our customers to the broader business.
Contributed by: Damon Spurlock, Director, Workforce Management & Command Center, Fabletics
We’ve recently experimented with having a pool of non-scheduled agents.
A clear early win is how easily agents can now get shifts covered through trades. For non-scheduled agents, picking up traded shifts has become the main way they get their hours, and it’s noticeably easier for other agents to get that time covered.
A few scheduled agents even joked that there aren’t any trades left for them anymore.
Long-term, having multiple ways to get time off (trade, PTO, or unpaid) should help reduce unplanned call-outs and support lower attrition, though our overall attrition trend makes the pilot’s exact impact hard to isolate.
Unplanned call-outs for the non-scheduled agents has dropped in half. However, it’s a little tough to tell if the scheduled agent call-outs have dropped as well so far.
The model has also helped us reduce paid hours when staffing needs are lower, and it’s working well to ramp up a bit as we schedule for the holiday peaks.
We have learned that this model isn’t a fit for everyone. One agent with multiple jobs struggled with the responsibility of finding hours to pick up, which added more complexity than they expected.
Another is at risk of not meeting minimum requirements because they’ve delayed picking up hours. Meanwhile, others are easily meeting (and actually, exceeding) their minimums.
Overall, I think the programme can scale well with continued fine-tuning. As it grows, we may need to revisit the minimum-hours requirement and distribute the workload across a larger group.
Contributed by: Jeremy Hyde, Senior Director Customer Service, Sun Country Airlines
To uncover the underlying principles of great agent scheduling, read our article: The Dos and Don’ts of Agent Scheduling
An initiative that has had a significant impact on wellbeing is the introduction of “My Time” – a flexible scheduling model that gives agents genuine control over their working hours.
Under this approach, planners schedule 70% of an agent’s time, while the remaining 30% is self-scheduled by the agent. While this initially felt daunting for the planning team, clear boundaries and operational guardrails have helped to ensure the model remains workable.
Flexibility is offered within demand-led parameters. Agents can adjust start and finish times, or rebalance early and late shifts within their pattern, but only where coverage is required.
For a 24/7 operation, this balance between freedom and structure is critical. The result is meaningful flexibility without operational risk. The “My Time” model removes many of the everyday stressors that drive dissatisfaction and short-term absence.
Importantly, this isn’t a short-term experiment. This initiative has been running for over 18 months, giving planners the opportunity to build data, spot patterns, and proactively resource around expected uptake.
Over time, this flexibility has become just another planning input – forecasted, modelled, and continuously refined.
Contributed by: Paul Cooper, Indoor Planner, The AA
If you are looking for advice to improve your absence, read our article: Stop Making Your Absence Rates Go Up!
Scheduling for a company supporting 30+ languages across 15+ countries felt like solving a Rubik’s Cube blindfolded.
Every location had its own labour laws, break structures, consecutive working days, minimum rest, weekend limits.
In one country, agents got a 30-minute paid and 30-minute unpaid break; in another, it was a full unpaid hour. Some could legally work 10 days straight, others only five. The inconsistencies were endless.
And it didn’t just confuse people, it confused technology! Our WFM tool was suffering under the weight of all the exceptions.
The auto-scheduler kept producing inconsistent rosters, ignored preferences, and sometimes couldn’t generate a schedule at all. Add varied agent preferences and complex skill combinations, and the whole system became an everyday challenge.
We were stuck choosing between schedulers by country (great compliance, poor global visibility) or schedulers by language (great visibility, high compliance risk). Neither model truly worked.
If you are using WFM tools in your contact centre, and want to learn where they have the biggest impact, read our article: Where Do WFM Systems Have the Biggest Impact?
So, I did what I always do: simplified!
I reviewed every rule across every country and aligned everything to the most employee-favourable version, then applied it globally.
If one market allowed 10 consecutive days and another allowed 5, everyone got 5. Breaks became 30 minutes paid + 30 unpaid. Minimum rest: 12 hours. Maximum working weekends: 2 per month. No exceptions, no special cases.
Once we removed the noise, everything unlocked. The WFM tool finally behaved. Schedules became consistent. Preferences became easier to honour.
And we could move fully to language-based planning, improving coverage, employee engagement, and the overall customer experience.
Sometimes the smartest strategy isn’t adding more, it’s removing what’s getting in the way!
Contributed by: Pavlos Vasilakis, WFM & CX Consultant, WFM Geek
One of the most persistent challenges we faced was the retrospective editing of schedules to account for non-adherence.
Operational teams were adjusting schedules after the fact to reflect what had happened, rather than what was planned.
While this improved adherence metrics on paper, it distorted the reality – masking the true drivers behind service level dips and abandon rates.
To address this, we removed all retrospective adherence amendments for a full month. The impact was clear: adherence dropped from 94% to 88%, but this gave us a true picture of operational behaviour.
The key takeaway was that chasing the highest number possible isn’t always the best outcome. Adherence is a hygiene measure, not a performance target.
This exercise taught us three critical lessons:
We reframed the purpose of schedules and reinforced that the real value lies in understanding why deviations occur.
For example, when coaching sessions overran or agents handled complex calls, we used that data to inform future planning – rather than retroactively adjusting schedules.
We introduced the “power of one” – showing how every minute matters. We mapped where time was spent and aligned targets to be realistic and achievable, driving the right behaviours.
This helped teams see scheduling not as a control mechanism but as a tool for insight and improvement.
We also quantified the time spent administering these changes – often hours each week. By revising targets and shifting the mindset, we reinvested that time into colleague support, coaching capacity, and proactive planning.
One team used this reclaimed time to pilot a new coaching model, resulting in improved engagement and performance.
This wasn’t just a process fix – it was a cultural shift. We moved from chasing metrics to understanding impact!
I even coined phrases to help embed this mindset:
Ultimately, this approach helped us focus on behaviours and outcomes, not vanity metrics. And that’s made all the difference.
Contributed by: Gavin Rogerson, Senior Global Workforce Planning Consultant, Xplor Technologies
If your contact centre supports just one location and then decides to expand to multiple regions, it’s essential to understand and respect local labour laws when creating schedules.
I remember when we expanded to South Africa. Unlike our original location, agents there were entitled to two days off per week.
We scheduled those days as non-consecutive, thinking it made sense for coverage. It didn’t take long to see the problem: agents were exhausted, morale dipped, and performance started slipping.
I vividly remember our VP at the time saying, “We must become creative”. And that was the shift. Up until that point, we were prioritizing business needs and treating split days off as the only solution, but we hadn’t really considered how it impacted rest and wellbeing.
So, we experimented. We tested out rotational schedules with consecutive days off, and guess what? It worked.
We hit our business targets and saw a boost in employee satisfaction. It was a simple change with a big impact. All it took was being willing to challenge our assumptions!
Here’s the thing: if your employees are frustrated with their schedules, the odds of no-shows and disengagement go up. We didn’t want that, so for us, it was a mindset shift that changed everything.
And if you ever feel stuck, remember: “The people know the answer”. Ask your agents. Ask your scheduler.
The folks doing the work often have the insights you need, and when you co-create solutions with them, they’re more likely to get on board from day one!
Contributed by: Arlyne Pardo, Senior Workforce Manager at DASH BPO
Click here to join our NEW Readers Panel to share your experiences and feature in future Call Centre Helper articles.
If you want more information to improve your contact centre forecasting and scheduling, read these articles next:
Reviewed by: Jo Robinson
The Latest Customer Contact Research, Reports and White Papers straight to your inbox!
Get the latest insights from Call Centre Helper by signing up for our email content.
Close
