Every conversation reviewed. Every problem found sooner.

Score every interaction against your own form, so the 98% stops being a blind spot.
Consistent scoring across every reviewer. A pass in one room is a pass in another.
Patterns surface in weeks rather than quarters, while the problem is still small enough to fix quickly.
Evaluate your AI agents the same way you evaluate your people, against criteria you set.
Anyone accountable for how frontline conversations go. Training and development, quality and compliance, customer service and sales enablement, and the technology leaders who connect it all together.
No. Zenarate takes over the transcription and scoring, which frees your QA team for the work that needs judgment, such as deciding what the scores mean, handling disputes, calibrating the standard, and working out what to do about a pattern once it appears.
Yes, and most clients do. Your criteria, your weighting, your definitions. The advantage is applying them to everything rather than to what a team can get through.
A scorecard should be a living document in any operation. Disputes are tracked and reviewed, and the outcome feeds back into how the scoring is applied.
Yes. That is increasingly the reason QA leaders come to us. Your AI agents get scored against criteria you define alongside your people, so you can see the whole frontline against a single standard.
Speech analytics tells you what words appeared in a call.Quality evaluation tells you whether the conversation met your standard, and Zenarate goes further by building the coaching and training behind what it finds.