The future of federal call centers: Decoupling technology and operations

This is the second in a three-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 my career, I’ve had the opportunity to work closely with federal agencies that rely on contact centers to serve a variety of missions, including benefits administration, regulatory processes, and citizen services. 

One particularly memorable experience came when I was supporting field operations for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) following Hurricane Helene. Millions of people living inland needed FEMA’s help for the first time in their lives, so FEMA mobilized hundreds more call center agents than a typical hurricane season requires. It was an impressive effort, and it made a difference in the lives of many people.

That scale-up succeeded in part because FEMA had a well-configured commercial platform and a services contractor capable of that level of surge support. Unfortunately, many agencies struggle with routine call volumes, let alone seasonal or event-driven demands.

What’s holding agencies back?

Across many conversations with federal leaders, I’ve learned that agencies are eager to deliver a contact center with all the hallmarks of modern, commercial experiences. And in my work with industry groups that foster government collaboration, I’ve gained some insight into the barriers.

The good news is that it’s not a lack of proven technology or even security concerns that’s standing in the way. Commercial providers offer excellent FedRAMP-approved solutions. It’s also not service provider quality or experience. Many government contractors bring a wealth of experience delivering solutions for agencies as well as private-sector clients on a similar scale to federal needs.

What’s holding government back is how they buy. 

Currently the prevailing approach for procuring contact center solutions is a contract that bundles technology with customer service representative (CSR) labor. Let’s take a look at why this is a problem.

Five pitfalls of bundled contracts

As my colleague Maurine Fanguy saw at the Transportation Safety Administration, many federal leaders today didn’t choose to combine their call center platforms and staffing operations into a single contract. Most inherited the model – and their current vendor – under an existing contract that was negotiated years ago. 

But as the GSA’s 2020 Contact Center Playbook notes, these services shouldn’t typically be contracted together – and for good reason. While an incumbent vendor may present bundling as convenient, the model creates significant structural weaknesses that hamper an agency’s ability to deliver for the American people. 

When a call center’s platform and staffing operations are bundled, the contractor owns or controls the technology – leaving the agency dependent on that contractor for any mission-critical upgrades. As many federal leaders can attest, this hampers their ability to update workflows or take advantage of new capabilities.

Based on my experience, here are five major downsides that come with that loss of control:

1. Slow response to evolving mission needs

Because they own the platform, bundled vendors typically set their own technology priorities and release cycles. As a result, agencies can wait months for updates required by legislation, mandated by security directives, or recommended under customer experience initiatives.

2. Weakened incentives to innovate

When call center contracts are bundled, vendors tend to recommend only the tech they can deliver at the lowest cost. They may push enhancements that reduce their own operating costs, but they have little incentive to do more than that. If the government wants to improve service quality or modernize the platform, vendors often demand a costly contract modification. 

3. Increased – and inescapable – costs across the lifecycle 

Bundled contracts may appear cost-effective during the proposal review process, but lifecycle costs can escalate in ways agency leaders didn’t anticipate. Every enhancement or change they need to streamline workflows, meet changing regulatory requirements, or otherwise get more out of the platform triggers a contract modification for both technology and CSR labor components. And those modifications will be priced by a vendor who faces no competitive pressure.

4. Limited transparency into performance

When contractors control the system, agencies may not be able to access the analytics and insights they need to drive efficiencies. With reduced or zero independent oversight, agencies may struggle to enforce service level agreements (SLAs), identify root causes, and make data-driven decisions.

5. High transition risk

With bundled contracts, if an agency decides to transition staffing contractors, they may be forced to migrate platforms at the same time. Considering the heavy lift associated with complex integrations, testing, and Authority to Operate (ATO) approvals, it’s clear that not controlling the technology creates a significant increase in operational cost and risk and transition costs. And when transition risk goes up, agencies are more likely to get locked into one vendor.

A superior model for federal call center contracts

As agencies pursue efforts to modernize call centers, decoupling tech from operations is key to meeting the mandate for commercial-caliber experiences. This is the approach Thunder takes with all our commercial clients: The client owns the platform and our team makes sure it works the way they need it to. Operations and staffing are totally separate.

With separate contracts, federal agencies not only avoid the pitfalls above, they also gain additional benefits that our commercial clients enjoy.

Greater agility and better governance

When the agency owns the platform, federal leaders have direct oversight and full approval authority over configuration, integrations, AI capabilities, and security. This enables the agency to rely on its own change control board to manage mission-critical updates.

Scaled efficiency and insights across programs and components

An agency-owned platform can serve multiple call centers, each with its own independent operations. For example, the same system that supports citizen-facing inquiries can also support an HR service center or an IT service desk for internal staff. Not only does scale reuse lower costs, it also accelerates deployment, standardizes the customer experience, and strengthens enterprise-wide interoperability. As an added benefit, an integrated call center enables an agency to develop a full 360-degree picture of its constituents, while also providing greater continuity of service. 

Stronger oversight and clear accountability

By separating technology from operations, federal leaders create natural checks and balances across their call center programs. Agencies gain insight from both contractors, leading to more informed decisions and improved performance.

Protection against technology lock-in

As AI and other enabling technologies advance, agencies need to be able to adopt new capabilities without renegotiating an operations contract. A separate technology contract allows federal leaders to keep pace with the best in the industry, evolving their tech stacks as needed.

Accelerated productivity 

When agencies have the contractual latitude to modernize their tech stack at will, they reap all the benefits – including AI tools and guided workflows that reduce training time and support faster proficiency. 

Surge flexibility

Under separate contracts, agencies can bring in multiple operations vendors, including small businesses, to handle seasonal spikes or new service lines. And when surge staffing is needed, agencies can accelerate time to productivity with AI features as noted above. 

Greater mission continuity

When the government owns the platform, transitioning operations is straightforward. Agencies can onboard a new vendor without replacing the system or restarting ATO processes. This preserves institutional knowledge, prevents vendor lock-in, and minimizes downtime.

Answering the call for a modern procurement strategy

With notable drawbacks and clear upsides, decoupling contracts is crucial for federal agencies charged with consolidating and modernizing the contact centers that serve their many constituencies. 

Next up in this series, we’ll unpack five myths perpetuated by bundled vendors and outline which core services and Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) belong in contact center technology contracts vs. operations contracts.

Meanwhile, if your agency is ready to transform its call center operations, learn more about our lean approach to making Salesforce and Amazon Connect fit for federal. And if you have an RFI focused on commercial-caliber call center solutions, contact any member of the Thunder Federal team for a rapid response.