EverNorth — Daily Callers Report

Tuesday, 11 August 2026

built 13 Aug 2026, 18:29 · America/Toronto
archive
Calls
138
119 out / 19 in
Leads
54
new today
Reached
38
112 answered − 30 vm, 44 short
Qualified
12
good status
Booked
0
moved to 1.4
Messages
55
SMS
Follow-up
86
18 reached, 23 vm, 33 short, 12 missed
Lead→Booked
0.0%
daily rate

Day timeline bar height = call length · grey = no answer

070911131517192123
Sara
2894661244
08:250:00
incoming no answer
Amrit Pal Singh
08:2711:01
outgoing answered
checklist20/26
Çağlar Babür Mirici
09:010:08
outgoing too short
Sarala Devi Radhakrishnan
09:090:08
outgoing too short
Vivek Kanani
09:110:04
outgoing too short
Harsh Thapar
09:150:44
outgoing voicemail
Milan Joseph jose
09:170:08
outgoing too short
Sakthi Ji
09:190:08
outgoing too short
मोहित शर्मा
09:210:00
outgoing no answer
Md Abu Sayed
09:220:03
outgoing too short
Ashimolowo Adedayo Akeem
09:290:23
outgoing voicemail
Raymond Balliram
09:310:00
outgoing no answer
Jaypee Julaton
09:320:50
outgoing voicemail
masum Ahmed
09:350:04
outgoing too short
Christopher Iklaki
09:360:00
outgoing no answer
Uchechukwu Uzoma
09:380:00
outgoing no answer
Amit Kumar
09:390:03
outgoing too short
SEMUYEH KANJO
09:400:06
outgoing too short
Raghav Sharma
09:420:03
outgoing too short
Rahul Maurya
09:430:46
outgoing voicemail
Arjun Jodhee
09:440:00
outgoing no answer
Nrupendra Kumar Chowdary Narisetty
09:450:02
outgoing too short
Edio Uti
09:460:07
outgoing too short
Haren
09:470:11
outgoing voicemail
Ayodeji Adesina
09:480:08
outgoing too short
Sahil Patial
09:490:03
outgoing too short
Dickson Wong
09:510:06
outgoing too short
lu.cose
09:520:54
outgoing answered
checklist6/24
Muhammed Musfik
09:550:01
outgoing too short
2894661244
09:5614:48
incoming answered
Sahil Patial
10:010:00
incoming no answer
Sahil Patial
10:010:00
incoming no answer
Sahil Patial
10:121:51
outgoing answered
checklist9/24
Amritpal Singh
10:151:03
outgoing answered
checklist4/26
Abraham jacob Tharakan
10:180:06
outgoing too short
Mostafa Esmaeilzadeh
10:190:04
outgoing too short
Jessie Deduro
10:190:48
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Aaron Felix Opoku Boateng
10:220:56
outgoing answered
checklist9/24
Gaurav Gautam
10:250:06
outgoing too short
Steve Sorhaindo
10:260:04
outgoing too short
River Castilla
10:260:00
outgoing no answer
River Castilla
10:270:00
outgoing no answer
Akil Selot
10:270:07
outgoing too short
Afthabul Ameen
10:290:03
outgoing too short
Samir
10:300:02
outgoing too short
Pujan Dahal
10:310:39
outgoing no speech
checklist4/26
Pujan Dahal
10:320:05
outgoing too short
Mathew Saguinsin
10:330:04
outgoing too short
2894661244
10:351:33
incoming answered
2894661244
10:441:19
incoming answered
Sanit Kumar
11:080:05
outgoing too short
+15198017868
11:100:06
outgoing too short
+14374402039
11:130:04
outgoing too short
+14372213367
11:160:49
outgoing voicemail
2894661244
11:221:00
incoming answered
2894661244
11:291:27
incoming answered
2894661244
11:471:26
incoming answered
Parveen
12:300:06
outgoing too short
Hassan
12:320:48
outgoing answered
checklist5/10
2894661244
12:430:00
incoming no answer
Mubashir Islam
12:450:00
incoming no answer
2894661244
12:450:00
incoming no answer
Mubashir Islam
12:502:44
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
Mubashir Islam
12:530:06
outgoing too short
masum Ahmed
12:580:09
outgoing too short
Aaron Felix Opoku Boateng
13:300:02
outgoing too short
Anshuman
+12892990235
09:550:00
incoming no answer
+12892990235
09:550:00
incoming no answer
Jovan Alexander George
16:371:01
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
sahil Desai
16:390:04
outgoing too short
Marvin Morgan
16:401:03
outgoing answered
checklist6/24
Al Haque
16:431:00
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
Gill
16:450:02
outgoing too short
Armani
16:460:03
outgoing too short
Sukh Badhan
16:480:03
outgoing too short
Biram Prasad Khatiwada
16:560:29
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Jessie Deduro
17:000:04
outgoing too short
Bunish Sharma
17:060:17
outgoing no speech
checklist0/26
Pramod Saini
17:500:00
outgoing no answer
Vivek Varatharajah
18:260:58
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Damion Green
18:290:06
outgoing too short
Sharan Dhesi
18:330:00
outgoing no answer
2894795739
18:353:30
incoming answered
Biram Prasad Khatiwada
19:310:02
outgoing too short
Marvin Morgan
19:320:01
outgoing too short
Reine
Prakash Dandhi
09:1910:11
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
+14379989607
09:390:24
outgoing voicemail
+13439879351
09:441:00
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Kamanjeet
09:481:17
outgoing voicemail
+12894795739
09:550:00
outgoing no answer
+12894795739
09:550:00
outgoing no answer
Olayinka Solano
09:570:41
outgoing voicemail
Sanjay Patel
10:020:14
outgoing voicemail
Harmanjot Singh
10:030:30
outgoing answered
Ibrahim Dauda
10:050:28
outgoing voicemail
Seun Oyewusi
10:071:01
outgoing voicemail
Solomon Koomson
10:092:30
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Ewere Monday
10:130:00
outgoing no answer
Saad Ahmed Salim
10:140:31
outgoing voicemail
Prince Prince
10:161:12
outgoing voicemail
Dhyan Patel
10:180:47
outgoing voicemail
Adil Hossain
10:191:35
outgoing answered
checklist5/26
Genious Gigla Muradzi
10:290:24
outgoing voicemail
Harpender
10:321:50
outgoing answered
checklist7/26
Dîpêñ Jâmkâtêl
10:370:24
outgoing voicemail
Roshan Karkee
10:380:24
outgoing voicemail
Christal Gem Fiesta
10:391:37
outgoing answered
checklist10/26
Ravinder Singh
10:436:30
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Adharsh Nk
11:010:29
outgoing voicemail
Abhinavu Sajeev
11:020:00
outgoing no answer
Abhinavu Sajeev
11:030:26
outgoing voicemail
Imran Mohammad
11:1112:31
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Arjay Navarro
11:260:33
outgoing voicemail
Amrit Pal Singh
11:299:02
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Christian Tello
11:450:25
outgoing voicemail
Anish Tiwari
11:461:05
outgoing answered
checklist4/26
Anmoldeep Singh
11:480:39
outgoing answered
checklist3/26
Gursimranjit Gill
11:510:33
outgoing voicemail
+14348187509
11:530:08
outgoing too short
Monir Hossain
11:540:00
outgoing no answer
Cristian Delgado Delgado
11:550:25
outgoing voicemail
Mr Chizzy
11:561:41
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
Faustino II Montoya
12:260:07
outgoing too short
Mr Chizzy
12:310:07
outgoing too short
Arafath
12:327:31
outgoing answered
checklist16/26
Haron Paul Reyes
12:480:47
outgoing voicemail
K D Nishantha Nishan
12:5310:10
outgoing answered
checklist18/26
Addo Baffour
13:161:18
outgoing voicemail
Rex Roger
13:223:23
outgoing answered
checklist17/26
Miracle
13:270:24
outgoing voicemail
Mr Chizzy
13:340:08
outgoing too short
Abijith Joseph
13:354:05
outgoing answered
checklist15/26
Rasel Sheakh
13:410:17
outgoing voicemail
Ishmael Afful
13:435:43
outgoing answered
checklist10/26
2892990235
13:480:00
incoming no answer
Miracle
14:470:00
incoming no answer
Miracle
14:470:00
incoming no answer
Gill
15:220:00
incoming no answer
Jonathan
no calls

Leads by source 54 total

Meta-Form-PGWP
46
Landing-PGWP
4
Web-Organic
2
SMM-Organic
1
— не указан —
1

Speed to lead working minutes · 34 of 54 leads called

Fastest
0 min
Anshuman Mishra 17:00–21:00
called outside shift · 252 min on the clock
Slowest
396 min
Sara Habchi 08:00–14:00
1476 min on the clock
median 75 min · 20 leads never called

Conversion by caller

CallerLeadsCallsReached ReachQualifiedBookedBook
Sara Habchi 17 66 14 21.2% 3 0 0.0%
Anshuman Mishra 14 19 6 31.6% 0 0 0.0%
Reine Francis 20 53 18 34.0% 9 0 0.0%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

Daily funnel

Leads
54
Contacted
49
Qualified
12
Consultations
0

Reach peaks when they pick up · last 14 days

16:00–18:00 best connect
5/12
41.7%
08:00–10:00
49/120
40.8%
12:00–14:00
28/69
40.6%
10:00–12:00
76/211
36.0%
18:00–20:00 worst
1/10
10.0%
average 37.7% over 422 outgoing calls

Lead statuses at end of day one bucket per lead

Consultation booked
0
Not qualified / lost
13
Qualified
12
In progress (contacted)
15
New / no activity
14

Caller activity

CallerCallsTalkSpan FirstLastNotes
Sara Habchi 66 41:38 5:04:59 08:25 13:30 89
Anshuman Mishra 19 8:01 9:37:25 09:55 19:32 35
Reine Francis 53 1:21:33 6:03:00 09:19 15:22 82
Jonathan Gutman 0 0:00 — — — 0

Leads and first call 19 never called · sorted by delay

LeadCreatedFirst call CallerDelayScore
Waqas Ahmad 08:14 — Reine Francis no call —
Tamkin YAQOOBI 08:14 — — no call —
Gaganpreet Singh 08:14 — Reine Francis no call —
Atul Nautna 10:23 — — no call —
Kumaril Bhatt 12:24 — Anshuman Mishra no call —
Owen Osward Addai 12:25 — Sara Habchi no call —
Carlito Cardona 12:25 — Sara Habchi no call —
deep sankar das 12:25 — — no call —
Prabhat Thapa 12:25 — Sara Habchi no call —
Ryan James 12:25 — Sara Habchi no call —
Mykyta Yesypenko 12:26 — Sara Habchi no call —
Rohtansh Mehta 12:26 — Sara Habchi no call —
Michael Adekahunsi-gold 12:26 — Anshuman Mishra no call —
Krishna Giri 12:26 — Sara Habchi no call —
Nuñez Miguel 12:49 — Anshuman Mishra no call —
Mahmoud Hatramsi 12:52 — Reine Francis no call —
KayAncy Kay 12:52 — Reine Francis no call —
Marvin Whitely 12:57 — Reine Francis no call —
Thinley Chedup 13:26 — Sara Habchi no call —
Jagadish Singh Dadal 12:25 13:01 (9:37) Sara Habchi 396 min —
Ashish Ashish 12:53 11:01 (0:57) Reine Francis 248 min —
Nerwin Alvarez 12:56 10:54 (0:00) Reine Francis 238 min —
Abdul Ahad 12:59 10:55 (1:21) Reine Francis 236 min —
William Li 12:50 10:37 (0:37) Reine Francis 227 min —
Sangat 12:51 10:34 (0:38) Reine Francis 223 min —
Gurpal Singh 12:58 10:39 (10:01) Reine Francis 221 min —
Antony Noel John 13:00 09:10 (7:10) Sara Habchi 130 min —
Ziad Jamal 13:00 09:06 (0:06) Sara Habchi 127 min —
Doeminic Surio Velasquez 20:56 09:54 (0:03) Sara Habchi 114 min —
Madhav Nepal 19:58 09:52 (0:09) Sara Habchi 112 min —
Mauricio Arocha 14:28 09:48 (0:41) Sara Habchi 108 min —
Sharan Dhesi 12:48 18:33 (0:00) Anshuman Mishra 93 min —
Damion Green 12:47 18:29 (0:06) Anshuman Mishra 90 min —
Vivek Varatharajah 12:46 18:26 (0:58) Anshuman Mishra 86 min 6/26
Ishmael Afful 12:26 13:43 (5:43) Reine Francis 78 min 10/26
Rasel Sheakh 12:25 13:41 (0:17) Reine Francis 75 min voicemail
Abijith Joseph 12:25 13:35 (4:05) Reine Francis 70 min 15/26
Tim Chin 15:58 09:03 (0:09) Sara Habchi 64 min —
Miracle 12:25 13:27 (0:24) Reine Francis 62 min voicemail
Rex Roger 12:25 13:22 (3:23) Reine Francis 57 min 17/26
Addo Baffour 12:25 13:16 (1:18) Reine Francis 51 min voicemail
Pramod Saini 12:45 17:50 (0:00) Anshuman Mishra 50 min —
K D Nishantha Nishan 12:25 12:53 (10:10) Reine Francis 28 min 18/26
Mubashir Islam 12:25 12:50 (2:44) Sara Habchi 24 min 8/26
Haron Paul Reyes 12:25 12:48 (0:47) Reine Francis 23 min voicemail
Arafath 12:24 12:32 (7:31) Reine Francis 8 min 16/26
Jovan Alexander George 12:25 16:37 (1:01) Anshuman Mishra off-shift 6/26
sahil Desai 12:25 16:39 (0:04) Anshuman Mishra off-shift —
Marvin Morgan 12:25 16:40 (1:03) Anshuman Mishra off-shift 6/24
Al Haque 12:25 16:43 (1:00) Anshuman Mishra off-shift 8/26
Gill 12:26 16:45 (0:02) Anshuman Mishra off-shift —
Armani 12:26 16:46 (0:03) Anshuman Mishra off-shift —
Sukh Badhan 12:26 16:48 (0:03) Anshuman Mishra off-shift —
Sanit Kumar 20:00 11:08 (0:05) Sara Habchi inbound first —

Booked consultations 0 today

no consultations booked on this day

SMS 45 sent · 10 received · 27 contacts

Reply rate
20.8%
5 of 24 conversations
Median reply
78 min
client's first answer
CallerSentReceived ContactsStartedRepliedReply
Sara Habchi 21 3 11 10 1 10.0%
Anshuman Mishra 0 2 1 0 0 0.0%
Reine Francis 24 5 15 14 4 28.6%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Waiting for a reply 3 conversations where the client wrote last

+12892990235 09:56 · Anshuman Mishra 843 min
reason. Let me know how I can reach you. Thank you
Pujan Dahal 10:34 · Sara Habchi 806 min
Hi I will contact later. I am in a noisy place right now
Miracle 14:47 · Reine Francis 552 min
Acct: 0249698201 Amt: NGN31,754.00 DR Desc: -- --PG-F -BERONE BROADBAND LIMI LANG Avail Bal: NGN99,537.61 Date: 14-Sep-2

Call reviews 60 of 38 live conversations

Sara Habchi Amrit 08:27 · 11:01 20/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation with Amrit, confirming detailed information such as education, work experience, and language scores. They clearly explained the PR pathways and next steps, including the paid consultation and the role of the RCIC license, which builds trust.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to handle common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself.' They also did not confirm contact details or lock in a specific date and time for the consultation, nor did they summarize the agreements at the end, which could improve clarity and commitment.
Sara Habchi — 09:15 · 0:44 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail stating their name and company, and referenced the lead's interest in PR services. This message was concise and polite, encouraging the lead to respond.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The voicemail did not include a direct call to action or next steps, which could improve callback rates.
Reine Francis Prakash Gandhi 09:19 · 10:11 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, and gathered important information such as the lead's name and immigration status. They provided a thorough explanation of the programs, steps, and timelines, and emphasized the RCIC license, which builds trust. The consultation offer was clearly presented with pricing and benefits, and contact details were confirmed.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the lead's age, education, and work experience, which are important for a full eligibility assessment. They also did not handle common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' nor did they lock a specific date and time for the consultation, which could improve conversion. Otherwise, the call was professional and informative without any compliance issues.
Sara Habchi — 09:29 · 0:23 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message referencing the lead's form submission and PR interest. The message was polite and invited the lead to call back at their convenience.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The caller did not leave contact details or propose a next step beyond asking for a callback.
Sara Habchi — 09:32 · 0:50 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail identifying herself and the company, and mentioned the service offered, which is helpful for the lead to understand the purpose of the call.

What went wrong

No opportunity to engage the lead in conversation or gather information since this was a voicemail. No next steps or consultation offer was made due to lack of live interaction.
Reine Francis — 09:39 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to push a conversation where none was possible. The message was clear and professional.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, missing an opportunity to briefly introduce the company and invite a callback.
Sara Habchi — 09:43 · 0:46 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly stated their name and company, "this is Sarah from Evernorth," which is professional and informative. The message was concise and mentioned the reason for the call, referencing the lead's form submission and interest in PR services.

What went wrong

This call was a voicemail with no live conversation, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. No message was left after the greeting, missing a chance to encourage a callback or provide more details.
Reine Francis — 09:44 · 1:00 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly as Ran from Evernorth and offered a next step by arranging to contact the lead via WhatsApp. They respected the lead's work situation and agreed on a communication method, showing flexibility.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or any qualifying information such as immigration status, goals, or background. No program was presented or eligibility assessed, and no specific appointment was locked. The call was very brief and did not advance the sales process significantly.
Sara Habchi — 09:47 · 0:11 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly identified that the call reached a voicemail box and did not attempt to force a conversation.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, which was a missed opportunity to engage the lead or provide contact information.
Reine Francis Kamanjeet 09:48 · 1:17 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact, which helps maintain engagement. The message also mentioned follow-up via WhatsApp, showing a multi-channel approach.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather information. The caller could have briefly mentioned the next steps or consultation offer to encourage a callback.
Sara Habchi Lucas 09:52 · 0:54 6/24

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, and addressed the lead by name, showing familiarity. She acknowledged the lead's prior form submission and interest in PR services, which is relevant and respectful of the lead's time.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any information about the lead's situation such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals beyond the initial form submission. No next steps were offered or scheduled, and no consultation was proposed. The call ended without confirming contact details or summarizing any agreements, missing opportunities to engage the lead further.
Reine Francis Elayinka 09:57 · 0:41 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message referencing the previous conversation and next steps, which helps maintain engagement.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no selling or qualification could take place. The message was brief but did not include a direct call to action beyond asking to get back when ready.
Reine Francis — 10:02 · 0:14 0/0

What was good

The call was correctly identified as voicemail with no live person to speak to.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, so the opportunity to engage the lead was missed.
Reine Francis Abraham 10:05 · 0:28 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail referencing prior WhatsApp communication and the next steps. The message was concise and encouraged the lead to respond to move forward.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead directly. No checklist items could be addressed in this call.
Reine Francis — 10:07 · 1:01 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message explaining the booking options and next steps.

What went wrong

There was no live conversation to assess, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead during this call.
Reine Francis Solomon 10:09 · 2:30 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and referenced prior contact, which helped establish rapport quickly. They offered the next step by proposing to book a consultation, showing intent to move forward with the lead.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any key client information such as immigration goals, status, or eligibility, missing a crucial opportunity to assess and tailor the service. They also failed to lock in a specific date and time for the consultation, leaving the next step vague and dependent on the lead's follow-up.
Sara Habchi Sahil 10:12 · 1:51 9/24

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, saying 'this is Sarah from Evernorth,' and confirmed the lead's name as Sahil. She successfully locked a specific date and time for the next call and summarized the agreement at the end, ensuring clarity on the next steps.

What went wrong

The caller missed several key qualification questions such as citizenship, immigration status, goals, and work experience, which are essential for assessing eligibility. There was no confirmation of contact details, and no discussion of programs or timelines, limiting the value of this call as a sales opportunity.
Reine Francis Todd 10:14 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message referencing a previous conversation and inviting the lead to respond via WhatsApp to book a consultation. The message was concise and professional.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualifying actions could be taken. No opportunity was missed in this context.
Sara Habchi Amrita 10:15 · 1:03 4/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, saying 'this is Sarah from Evernorth.' She confirmed the lead's name by asking 'Amrita, can you hear me?' and maintained polite communication throughout the call.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any information about the lead's immigration status, goals, or background, nor did she present any program or explain next steps. The call ended with a transfer rather than scheduling a specific appointment or confirming contact details, missing key sales opportunities.
Reine Francis Prince 10:16 · 1:12 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and reminding them about the previous WhatsApp conversation. The message invites the lead to respond when ready, which is appropriate for a follow-up.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather information, so no selling or qualification occurred. The caller could consider leaving a slightly more detailed message to encourage a response, but no errors were made given the circumstances.
Reine Francis — 10:18 · 0:47 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail stating their name and reason for calling, which is helpful for the lead to understand the purpose of the call.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The voicemail was brief and did not include a call to action or invitation to call back.
Reine Francis — 10:19 · 1:35 5/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and referred to prior WhatsApp contact, which helped establish context quickly. They successfully offered the next step by proposing a paid consultation and confirmed the client's interest in a virtual meeting.

What went wrong

The caller missed several key qualification questions such as the client's name, immigration status, and goals, which are essential for tailoring the service. They also failed to lock in a specific date and time for the consultation, leaving the booking uncertain. Additionally, no contact details were confirmed, and no summary of agreements was provided at the end.
Sara Habchi Jesse 10:19 · 0:48 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and identified the company, saying, 'my name is Sarah and I am a case manager with Evernorth.' She also confirmed the lead's name early on and acknowledged the PR application interest, which shows attentiveness to the lead's inquiry.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and lacked any meaningful qualification or presentation of services. The caller did not ask about the lead's background, eligibility, or goals beyond PR, nor did she offer a next step or lock a follow-up appointment. The call ended with a transfer promise but no concrete scheduling or contact confirmation, missing key sales opportunities.
Sara Habchi Erin 10:22 · 0:56 9/24

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing a polite and professional tone. She successfully scheduled a specific callback time, locking in 1:30 p.m., and confirmed the lead's email for follow-up.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and did not explore any details about the lead's situation, goals, or eligibility. There was no discussion of immigration status, programs, or next steps beyond scheduling a callback. The caller missed opportunities to gather important information or build rapport beyond setting the next appointment.
Reine Francis — 10:29 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The call was correctly identified as voicemail with no human interaction.

What went wrong

No message was left, so the opportunity to engage the lead was missed.
Sara Habchi — 10:31 · 0:39 4/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, saying 'This is Sarah from Evernorth' and attempted to confirm the lead's name by saying 'hi Poojan'.

What went wrong

The call had no response from the lead despite multiple attempts, resulting in no conversation. No information was gathered or offered, and no next steps were proposed. The caller did not confirm any details or handle objections because the lead did not speak.
Reine Francis Harpender 10:32 · 1:50 7/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and confirmed the lead's name, establishing a personal connection. They correctly identified the lead's goal as permanent residence and acknowledged the lead's upcoming language exams, showing attentiveness to the lead's situation.

What went wrong

The call lacked depth in gathering essential information such as citizenship, immigration status, age, education, and work experience. No eligibility assessment or program presentation was made, and no next steps or consultations were offered. The call ended without confirming contact details or summarizing agreements, missing opportunities to advance the sales process.
Reine Francis Fran 10:37 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact via WhatsApp. This shows good follow-up and personalization.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail with no live conversation, there was no opportunity to engage or advance the sale during this call.
Reine Francis Roshan 10:38 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and requesting a callback to schedule a call.

What went wrong

No conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have included a brief mention of the company name for clarity.
Reine Francis Crystal 10:39 · 1:37 10/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's identity early on, saying, 'This is Ren, team leader at Evernorth.' They successfully engaged the lead in a two-way conversation and secured a specific follow-up appointment time, 'I will ask my colleague to call you tomorrow at 5.'

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to gather important client information such as citizenship, immigration status, and eligibility assessment. They also did not confirm contact details or summarize the agreements at the end, which are important for clarity and next steps.
Reine Francis Rafender 10:43 · 6:30 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, and engaged the lead by referencing prior WhatsApp communication. They explained the consultation process well and presented relevant immigration programs, showing good knowledge and professionalism. The caller also handled the lead's hesitation by offering to send information and asking for availability, effectively moving towards booking a consultation.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to ask about the lead's citizenship, age, education, language skills, and detailed work experience, which are important for a thorough eligibility assessment. The call ended without a clear summary of agreements, which could help reinforce next steps. Also, the caller did not confirm the lead's full contact details explicitly beyond WhatsApp.
Reine Francis Edars 11:01 · 0:29 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact on WhatsApp. The message invites the lead to respond when ready and offers an easy way to decline interest.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualification was possible. The caller did not leave detailed information about next steps or consultation options, which could improve future voicemails.
Reine Francis Abdullah 11:03 · 0:26 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact via WhatsApp. The message invites the lead to return the call to discuss next steps, which is appropriate for a voicemail.

What went wrong

No issues with the voicemail; it was concise and professional. However, leaving a voicemail limits the ability to engage or clarify details immediately.
Reine Francis — 11:11 · 12:31 19/26

What was good

The caller provided a thorough explanation of the immigration options and clearly outlined the consultation process, including fees and next steps. They carefully confirmed the client's current status and spouse's situation, showing good attention to detail.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or age, and did not summarize the agreements at the end. Also, objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself' were not addressed during the call.
Sara Habchi — 11:16 · 0:49 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified themselves and the company in the voicemail, saying, "this is Sarah from Avery North."

What went wrong

This was a voicemail with no live conversation, so no opportunity to engage the lead or gather information. No message was left beyond the introduction, missing a chance to encourage a callback or provide more details.
Reine Francis RJ 11:26 · 0:33 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing prior contact via WhatsApp. The message invites the lead to respond to discuss next steps, which is appropriate for a voicemail.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather information, so no selling or qualification could occur. The caller did not leave detailed information about the service or next steps beyond requesting a callback, which might limit lead engagement.
Reine Francis Amrit 11:29 · 9:02 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirming the lead's name and immigration status early on. They provided detailed information about the PR options and addressed objections well, especially when the lead expressed reluctance about learning French and wanting to improve IELTS scores. The caller also offered a clear next step with a paid consultation and summarized the agreements at the end.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the lead's age and education, which are important for eligibility assessment. They did not confirm contact details during the call or lock a specific date and time for the consultation, relying instead on the lead to email, which could risk losing engagement. Also, there was no mention of the RCIC license or past successful cases to build trust.
Reine Francis Krishan 11:45 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message referencing prior WhatsApp contact, which helps maintain engagement.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to assess sales skills or follow the checklist.
Reine Francis Anas 11:46 · 1:05 4/26

What was good

The caller correctly identified himself and the company, and confirmed the lead's name early on. He was polite and respectful of the lead's situation, agreeing to follow up with a message as requested.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any immigration-related information or discuss the lead's goals or status. No next steps or consultations were offered or scheduled, and no summary or confirmation of details occurred. The call was very brief and did not advance the sales process beyond arranging a callback.
Reine Francis — 11:48 · 0:39 3/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly, saying "I'm Ren from EverNorth" and politely followed up on the WhatsApp conversation. They maintained professionalism and did not make any illegal promises during the call.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the client's name or any qualifying information such as immigration status or goals. They also failed to offer a next step or lock in a consultation, missing the opportunity to engage the lead further before the client said they found another lawyer.
Reine Francis — 11:51 · 0:33 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message explaining the purpose and next steps, which is helpful for the lead to understand the situation.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief but did not include a direct invitation to book a specific date and time.
Reine Francis — 11:55 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message addressing the lead by name, which is a good personal touch.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief and did not include a company introduction or next steps.
Reine Francis — 11:56 · 1:41 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's current immigration status. They successfully locked a specific date and time for a follow-up call, showing good control of scheduling.

What went wrong

The caller missed many key qualification questions such as the lead's name, immigration goals, and work experience. They also did not confirm contact details or summarize the call, which are important for a smooth next step.
Sara Habchi Hassan 12:32 · 0:48 5/10

What was good

The caller effectively followed up on the payment status and confirmed the lead's intention to pay soon, saying "Yes, I'll be making payment today or tomorrow by max." This shows good attention to the lead's timeline and keeps the process moving.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, missing a key professional step. There was no confirmation of contact details or a summary of agreements, which could help avoid confusion. Also, no specific date or time was locked for the payment follow-up, which would strengthen commitment.
Reine Francis — 12:32 · 7:31 16/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced himself and the company, and effectively explained the consultation process and program options, including mentioning the RCIC license. They handled the lead's hesitation well by offering to send the agreement and invoice for review and summarizing the next steps clearly.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to ask about the lead's age, education, language proficiency, and work experience, which are important for eligibility assessment. They also did not confirm contact details or lock a specific date and time for the consultation, which could improve conversion.
Reine Francis Haron Borreus 12:48 · 0:47 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and referencing previous contact attempts.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief but did not include a direct call to action beyond asking for a good time to discuss next steps.
Sara Habchi Mubashir 12:50 · 2:44 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing a polite and professional tone. The caller gathered important details about the lead's current immigration status and work experience, showing attentiveness to the lead's situation.

What went wrong

The caller did not clarify the lead's immigration goals or offer any specific programs or next steps, missing opportunities to advance the sale. There was no attempt to handle objections or confirm contact details, and the call ended without summarizing or locking in a follow-up, which weakens the potential for conversion.
Reine Francis — 12:53 · 10:10 18/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, and effectively explained the next steps including the consultation with the RCIC license consultant. They handled objections well, addressing the lead's concerns about eligibility and work permit restrictions, and offered alternative solutions such as making the spouse the primary applicant.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or confirm age, education, or language proficiency, which are important for a thorough assessment. They also failed to lock in a specific date and time for the consultation or confirm contact details, and did not summarize the agreements at the end of the call.
Reine Francis Adam 13:16 · 1:18 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail for Adam, mentioning the website and the purpose of the call. The message included a promise to follow up via WhatsApp, which is helpful for next contact.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualification could take place. The caller did not leave a detailed message beyond a request to call back, missing an opportunity to engage more deeply in the voicemail.
Reine Francis Rex 13:22 · 3:23 17/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing a personal connection. They effectively assessed eligibility by confirming the current immigration status and permit expiry, and offered a next step consultation while locking in a specific date and time for a follow-up call. The caller also offered to send contact details via WhatsApp, which is helpful for follow-up.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to gather more detailed information such as age, education, language proficiency, and work experience, which are important for a thorough assessment. They did not explain the steps or timelines involved in the process, nor did they mention their RCIC licence or past successful cases to build trust. The call ended without summarizing agreements, which could have reinforced the next steps clearly.
Reine Francis — 13:27 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The call was correctly connected to voicemail as indicated by the system message.

What went wrong

No message was left, so there was no opportunity to engage the lead or leave information.
Reine Francis Joseph 13:35 · 4:05 15/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirming the lead's name and immigration status. They handled objections well and explained the consultation process and fees transparently without making illegal promises.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to ask about age, education, and language proficiency, and did not confirm contact details or lock a specific consultation date. There was no mention of the RCIC license or past successful cases, which could build trust. The call ended without summarizing agreements or next steps clearly.
Reine Francis — 13:41 · 0:17 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to force a conversation. No errors were made since no human was on the line.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, so the lead was not engaged or given a reason to call back.
Reine Francis Shmaian 13:43 · 5:43 10/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's current immigration status, explaining next steps and the consultation process well. They also highlighted the RCIC license and avoided making any illegal promises while offering a paid consultation.

What went wrong

The caller missed several key qualification questions such as the lead's citizenship, goals, age, education, language skills, and work experience, which are essential for assessing eligibility. They also failed to lock a specific consultation date and did not summarize the agreements at the end, leaving the call somewhat incomplete.
Anshuman Mishra Jogan 16:37 · 1:01 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly and confirmed the lead's name. They successfully scheduled a specific callback time, locking in 5:30 tomorrow as agreed.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any immigration details or goals, nor did they attempt any assessment or offer a consultation. Contact details were not confirmed and no summary of the call was given, missing key selling opportunities.
Anshuman Mishra Marvin 16:40 · 1:03 6/24

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly and confirmed the lead's name by asking, "Am I speaking with Marvin?" They also successfully arranged a follow-up call time, saying, "I will give you a call after 7 p.m. then."

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any immigration details such as citizenship, status, or goals, nor did they assess eligibility or explain next steps. They also failed to confirm contact details or lock a specific appointment time, which would improve scheduling certainty.
Anshuman Mishra Pal 16:43 · 1:00 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed the lead's name, then successfully scheduled a specific follow-up call time, locking in '4 p.m. tomorrow.'

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to gather any client information or discuss the immigration goals and eligibility. They also did not confirm contact details or summarize the agreements at the end, which are important for a smooth next step.
Anshuman Mishra Abraham 16:56 · 0:29 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and confirmed a callback time, saying 'I'll give you a call at 7 p.m.' This shows good respect for the lead's schedule and sets a clear next step.

What went wrong

The caller missed the opportunity to gather any client information or discuss the immigration goals, as the call ended quickly with a request to call back later. No details were confirmed or offered, and no consultation was booked.
Anshuman Mishra — 17:06 · 0:17 0/26

What was good

The caller identified the company as Aeronaut Immigration and attempted to reach the lead.

What went wrong

The call was mostly silence with no response from the lead, and the caller did not manage to engage or gather any information during the 17 seconds.
Anshuman Mishra Vivek 18:26 · 0:58 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly, saying, "I'm calling from Evernorth Immigration." They also asked for the lead's name and confirmed the callback number, which is good practice.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and did not progress beyond initial introduction. The caller did not explore the lead's immigration status, goals, or other qualifying information, nor did they offer a next step or lock in a consultation. The lead was driving and asked to call back later, but the caller missed an opportunity to schedule a follow-up or gather more details.
data check · 24 calls not matched to a lead · 3 leads unassigned · reached counts every answered call, voicemail included