Case Study: What's The Difference Between Using Branded Caller ID vs Non-Branded Caller ID In A Phone Recruitment Campaign?
Branded Caller ID can be a great way to let your blood donors know that it’s their local blood center calling and not another spam call. This case study compares the utilization of Branded Caller ID to a phone campaign that didn’t utilize this feature and analyzes two different blood centers to help determine the effectiveness of this feature.
If you’re wondering what Branded Caller ID is, check out this blog post we created defining it.
Definitions:
Dials – Represent the total number of calls made
Connects – Calls that connected to an live person or voicemail
Live Contacts – Refers to calls answered by a live person
RPC – Right Party Contact – A call with a live person who is determined to be the “decision maker”
Appointments – The goal of the call which is to schedule an appointment to donate blood while on the call
Test Case #1
This test utilized Branded Caller ID for regular recruitment calls for current apheresis (APH) blood donors at 2 different blood centers
Background:
Split test with 3 different scenarios
Group 1 – new caller IDs using a branded caller ID solution – only used for this APH test
Group 2 – new non-branded caller IDs – in order to take into account potential bias of using a new caller ID
Group 3 – control group – non-branded caller ID with no changes from previous calling
Solution
Incorporate a Branded Caller ID display that used “Platelet Team” after the full blood center name
Outcomes
Branded Caller ID had a higher Connect Rate
Center 1: 97.5% vs 89.4% for the Control group
Center 2: 98% vs 91.2% for the Control group
Branded Caller ID resulted in a lower Live Contact Rate
Center 1: 6.1% vs 14.2% for the Control group
Center 2: 8.2% vs 17.7% for the Control group
This is likely due to donors knowing exactly who is calling making informed decision to answer the call at that moment
Both RPC rate and Appointment Rate is higher for branded caller ID
While live contact rate is lower, the donors who answer the call know exactly who is calling, and in turn are answering as they would be interested in donating again
Test Case #2
Branded Caller ID test for regular recruitment calls during a blood emergency / blood donation appeal at 2 different blood centers
Background:
Split test with 2 different scenarios
Group 1 – New caller IDs using a branded caller ID solution
Center 1 – focused on all donation types and only donors who did not have a live contact in the 5 previous dials
Center 2 – focused on all red blood cell (RBC) donors
Group 2 – control group – non-branded caller ID with no changes from previous calling
Solution:
Used Branded Caller ID display that used the full blood center name
Outcomes:
Branded Caller ID had a higher Connect Rate for Center 1, but slightly lower for Center 2
Center 1:80.1% vs 76.6% for the Control group
Center 2: 86.9% vs 88.7% for the Control group
Branded Caller ID resulted in a lower Live Contact Rate for Center 1, but a slightly higher contact rate for Center 2
Center 1: 3.5% vs 6.7% for the Control group
Center 2: 5.6% vs 4.5% for the Control group
During a blood emergency with a large increase in overall marketing campaigns by the centers, branded caller ID potentially had a lesser impact on live contact rate
RPC Rate and Appointment Rate significantly higher for Center 1, but same or slightly decreased for Center 2
Conclusions
The effectiveness of the branded approach suggests substantial benefits in integrating branding elements more deeply into call center strategies. Branded caller ID will make it clear on every call, who is calling – which can lead to less live answers, but a more efficient close rate. Want to see how Branded Caller ID can improve your voice campaigns? Contact us today to learn more!