The Future of Federal Call Centers: 5 Myths and a Modern Model to Dispel Them

This is the third in a four-part series for federal agencies facing pressure to consolidate and modernize call center operations. We ask experts who have worked within and alongside government programs to navigate the promises and pitfalls of commercial platforms – and share their best advice for maximizing the benefits. 

Across the federal government, call centers connect citizens directly to government services and provide crucial support for federal employees, military service members, and many others. When done right, modernizing call centers is integral to the government’s ability to build and maintain trust. 

‍In a prior post, I outlined the factors propelling agencies to seek Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions capable of consolidating their contact centers – while also elevating the customer experience. As agencies seek to migrate away from over-customized legacy platforms, procurement leaders have some important choices to make. It may seem like an administrative detail, but the structure of future contracts will have an outsized influence on agencies’ ability to realize the promised value of SaaS solutions, as well as breakthrough technology like agentic AI.

I know because I’ve been in their position. 

As Director of Maritime and Surface Credentialing for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), I faced the challenge of consolidating two fragmented call centers to better serve our constituents. My experience echoed the analysis by Thunder Federal’s Eric Ritz, who demonstrated in our last post that it’s not just outdated platforms that need modernizing, it’s also an outdated – but all too common – procurement model. 

Busting the myths perpetuated by legacy service providers 

Despite the fact that the GSA’s own Contact Center Playbook recommends against it, many agencies have bundled call center technology and operations into a single contract. The purported benefits of doing this are, not surprisingly, touted by the service providers who hold those contracts.

But in my experience, these so-called benefits are myths. Let’s review five common claims – and I’ll counter them with the realities I and other federal leaders have experienced.

Myth 1: Bundling gives your agency the best price

Legacy contact center service providers often point to bundling as a way of reducing costs. But in reality, agencies with tech and operations combined in a single contract have found the opposite. 

Over the life of the contract, enhancements needed to support evolving mission requirements trigger expensive – and non-competitive – change orders. Agencies must either forego the features and capabilities they need or pay the added price.

Myth 2: Operations providers must own the platform to operate efficiently.

Service providers with bundled contracts will argue that the government gains efficiencies when the same organization that staffs the contract also owns the platform.They claim that this is key to tying agent-level metrics to workflows as well as building quality monitoring, AI-assisted guidance, and other performance tools into the operating model.

In reality, SaaS contact center platforms like Amazon Connect and Salesforce Agentforce Service (formerly Salesforce Service Cloud) can provide the government with full access to real-time dashboards and performance tools. And the government agency can still grant the call center operations provider access to the platform and even allow them to make enhancements to the government-owned system.

Myth 3: Only the service provider’s proprietary system can deliver optimal performance.

Incumbent service providers with proprietary technology stacks often claim that federal missions demand high levels of customization. When they own the platform, they can optimize every layer of the agent experience to maximize agent productivity.

But as Smartsheet and other satisfied Thunder customers can attest, agents can be trained quickly on any well-structured, well-documented system. And because commercial solutions benefit from continuous innovation and UX investment that no proprietary system can match, clients see dramatic time-to-productivity acceleration and better performance overall.

Myth 4: Government control slows down technology updates.

Bundled service providers make several claims about their ability to innovate that, in my experience, often prove to be overstated. The topline argument is that the service provider can deliver innovation faster if they control the release cadence for updates, bug fixes, and workflow changes. 

Unfortunately, the service provider’s update/maintenance cycle often becomes a hindrance. As they are not incentivized to adopt the latest technology capabilities, they rarely introduce enhancements that will improve service quality without additional cost to the government. On the flip side, with a strong governance model, agencies that employ commercial solutions can typically push updates faster than service providers bound by rigid update cycles. They also have the flexibility to “hand over the keys” to their service provider to make updates should they choose to do so.

Myth 5: Having a single provider for technology and operations reduces complexity.

Traditional systems integrators like to talk about unifying systems and staffing, arguing that this simplifies call center operations overall. 

Here again, these claims just don’t hold up. What I and other federal leaders have found is that when the government relies on one service provider across technology and operations, accountability becomes obscured. With lower transparency, it becomes difficult to diagnose issues and manage performance – actually increasing the level of complexity the agency must navigate to meet the mission.

Federal realities call for separation of responsibilities and meaningful metrics

Federal contact centers operate at a massive scale and the pressure to modernize is urgent.

By unbundling call center contracts, agencies gain the control, flexibility, and transparency needed to modernize continuously – while ensuring that service providers are held accountable for their distinct roles in delivering high-quality customer experience.

A successful modernization strategy hinges on clear separation of responsibilities – meaning independent procurement of the technology (cloud software and related configuration and services) and contact center operations. And both contracts need to build in metrics that truly matter to create the right incentives for each service provider. 

The two-contract model for successful modernization

Modernization starts with contract structure

Modernizing federal call centers isn’t just about upgrading technology, it’s about empowering agencies to serve the American people effectively. 

Bundled contracts may have been the norm in the past, but federal leaders have learned that they lock agencies into outdated systems, slow innovation, create unnecessary operational risk, and drive up taxpayer costs. By adopting the model used across the commercial sector, agencies can direct their own technology roadmap and achieve stronger oversight, continuous modernization, and a far better experience for leaders, operators, and citizens. 

As agencies look ahead, unbundling is a strategic shift that positions the government to keep pace with evolving mission needs and deliver the high‑quality service the American people deserve.

If your agency is ready to modernize its call center operations, the Thunder Federal team has the skills and experience to deliver. Learn more about our lean approach to making Salesforce and Amazon Connect fit for federal.