Until such day, AMD is a non-starter in the UK and we are now waiting for Ofcom to make that very clear. You cannot dial predictively at 3%, account for false positives and generate meaningful predictive performance, under compliance.

Some clarification on what makes for a really world class responsible dialer:

It must be able to respond immediately to any change in dialling conditions, in real time, not simply close to it (that’s what you get from us Carl!)

And users mustn’t confuse compliance with performance. They are quite different things. You can get great compliance, but it’s meaningless if your performance line doesn’t move. Think you have a great dialer under compliance? Then try this test. Run your campaign in progressive and then in predictive mode and see how much productivity improvement you are really getting. If you are not sure how to do this we at Sytel would be happy to help out.

This is whether it is indeed possible to use Answer Machine Detect (AMD) and, if so, when. There is a developing view that Ofcom has effectively banned large scale AMD with the multiple whammy of false positives definition and 2 second measurement starting from off hook: hence using the equations in the Ofcom Statement (and if they and the assumptions are correct/reasonable – my experience indicates that the are), you need a 99% AMD success rate to get below the 3% disconnect rate (2.97, so only just below, and, believe me, it isn’t as simple as this as you consider the interaction of AMD and false positives). This is due to the interaction of the requirements that:

• ‘…the abandoned call formula shall include a reasoned estimate of Answer Machine Detection (AMD) false positives (when the dialler identifies a person as an answer machine)’.
• ‘…calls connected to live agent within 2 seconds/a very brief recorded information message is played no later than two seconds after the telephone has been picked up’.

Consequently, “Ofcom recognises that at present, and until accuracy rates improve, it will be very difficult to use AMD technology without breaching the three per cent guideline”.

The reason that this is important is due to the potential productivity impact of turning AMD off (although I do know of organisations that have had a positive experience).

Regarding “asking for proof” of compliance from dialler vendors, it should be noted that it is reported that “…Ofcom’s current view is that it is unlikely to accept a dialler manufacturer’s view about the accuracy of AMD equipment, rather the user should have come to its own, informed view, based on its testing”. Defining what form this testing comprises and actually performing it, is not trivial. So, when selecting a responsible outbound dialling solution (especially predictive) the purchasers should be sure of the resources available to them to provide any necessary assistance in the collection of materials to satisfy any Ofcom compliance audit.

This advice is appropriate to existing dialler users, not just new purchasers. Any existing dialler user needs to be able to prove its’ compliance now.