EverNorth — Daily Callers Report

Thursday, 17 September 2026

built 18 Sep 2026, 06:21 · America/Toronto
archive
Calls
105
91 out / 14 in
Leads
99
new today
Reached
29
93 answered − 39 vm, 25 short
Qualified
1
good status
Booked
3
moved to 1.4
Messages
190
SMS
Follow-up
57
16 reached, 33 vm, 7 short, 1 missed
Lead→Booked
3.0%
daily rate

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

070911131517192123
Sara
Herrschh Hershgod
09:250:06
outgoing too short
Heathcliffein
10:081:03
outgoing voicemail
Heathcliffein
10:101:02
outgoing answered
Abhinav Rawat
10:130:04
outgoing too short
Mohammed Razi Thettan
10:140:02
outgoing too short
Sai
10:150:04
outgoing too short
Chetan Khadka
10:170:06
outgoing too short
Kavindya Prasadi
10:190:01
outgoing too short
Priteshkumar Mishra
10:210:05
outgoing too short
Abishek Ramachandran
10:220:52
outgoing answered
checklist11/26
Ujjwal Uprety
10:230:52
outgoing voicemail
+4372204899
10:510:00
incoming no answer
+4372204899
10:522:28
incoming answered
Darpan Shah
11:050:10
outgoing no speech
Darpan Shah
11:060:00
incoming no answer
Heathcliffein
11:178:54
outgoing answered
checklist22/26
Ma Isabel Gumanid
11:3017:21
outgoing answered
checklist21/26
Viet Anh Chu
12:0011:28
outgoing answered
checklist21/26
Shon Shabu
12:300:03
outgoing too short
Avtar Gurung
12:578:23
outgoing answered
checklist20/26
Avtar Gurung
13:066:19
outgoing answered
checklist22/26
Fawaz Animashaun
13:250:42
outgoing voicemail
Reine
Scrundy
09:070:00
outgoing no answer
Scrundy
09:070:54
outgoing voicemail
Harnoor Singh
09:080:29
outgoing voicemail
Mohaned Mohamed
09:107:26
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Abhijith Jose
09:200:33
outgoing voicemail
Ashok Bhandari
09:210:28
outgoing voicemail
Imanisu
09:220:26
outgoing voicemail
Unknown Caller
09:231:00
outgoing voicemail
Bassam Yossef
09:251:10
outgoing answered
checklist9/26
Sagar Subedi
09:460:28
outgoing voicemail
Mohd Haris Khan
09:470:24
outgoing answered
checklist2/26
Luis Carlos Bermudez
09:490:19
outgoing voicemail
Nishan Gajurel
09:500:25
outgoing voicemail
Krishna Neupane
09:510:34
outgoing voicemail
Ravi Maharjan
09:520:24
outgoing voicemail
Sarin
09:570:30
outgoing voicemail
Darshan Bhagavath
10:140:08
outgoing too short
Darshan Bhagavath
10:202:28
incoming answered
Anubandh
10:280:24
outgoing voicemail
Inderjeet Singh
10:290:06
outgoing too short
Tulsi Rajbhandari
10:300:31
outgoing voicemail
Augustine Appiah Bamfo
10:310:25
outgoing voicemail
Florent Renaud Njoki Elame
10:320:51
outgoing voicemail
Rohit Grover
10:330:24
outgoing voicemail
Tanuj Verma
10:340:29
outgoing voicemail
Fayaz Ali Mohammad
10:350:51
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
+14376024988
10:388:18
outgoing answered
checklist11/26
+4372204899
10:510:00
incoming no answer
Sukhpreet Singh
10:550:25
outgoing voicemail
Olusoji Ogunleye
11:031:07
outgoing answered
checklist5/26
Anandu Rajesh
11:040:24
outgoing voicemail
Rishi Gupta
11:050:14
outgoing voicemail
Ranvijay Singh
11:060:14
outgoing voicemail
Darshan Kalpeshbhai Sompura
11:060:25
outgoing voicemail
Ruel Bumanlag
11:070:43
outgoing voicemail
Gurpal Singh
11:090:22
outgoing voicemail
Samad Dere
11:090:24
outgoing voicemail
Giovanni Geraldizo
11:101:33
outgoing answered
checklist5/26
Karan Savaliya
11:130:44
outgoing voicemail
Manavi Shetty
11:250:24
outgoing voicemail
Shrijal Kc
11:290:29
outgoing voicemail
Asif Jheel
12:270:44
outgoing voicemail
Asif Jheel
12:270:00
incoming no answer
Asif Jheel
12:286:25
incoming answered
Pradeep Raj Sathya Ram
13:520:17
outgoing voicemail
+13658892602
13:580:23
outgoing voicemail
Aizaz Mansuri
13:590:35
outgoing voicemail
Victor Orebanjo
14:000:58
outgoing voicemail
Solomon Koomson
14:043:06
outgoing answered
checklist5/26
2892990235
15:320:00
incoming no answer
Riya
+4372204899
10:400:00
incoming no answer
+4372204899
10:400:00
incoming no answer
+4372204899
10:450:00
incoming no answer
+4372204899
10:450:00
incoming no answer
+4372204899
10:500:00
incoming no answer
Arnavv
17:440:06
outgoing too short
Harsh singh
17:450:07
outgoing too short
Harsh singh
17:480:37
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Rahul Sharma
17:490:00
outgoing no answer
Anas Afridi
17:510:06
outgoing too short
Navin Rawat
17:590:28
outgoing answered
checklist4/26
Parth Patel
18:020:32
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Imrul Zidan
18:030:35
outgoing answered
checklist5/26
Sandesh Chhetri
18:050:04
outgoing too short
Jayasurya anilkumar
18:100:05
outgoing too short
Hasan
18:120:08
outgoing too short
Sahil Gagvani
18:140:49
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Moosa Ghalib
18:160:54
outgoing answered
checklist5/24
Ben Eze
18:200:55
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
Adedamola Julius
18:230:08
outgoing too short
Adedamola Julius
18:240:04
outgoing too short
Udit Garg
18:270:05
outgoing too short
Michael
18:340:07
outgoing too short
Deven
18:400:04
outgoing too short
Deven
18:581:48
outgoing answered
checklist7/26
Navin Rawat
19:430:08
outgoing too short
Karan Nagpal
19:470:07
outgoing too short
John
20:029:38
outgoing answered
checklist24/26
Mohammed Ali Faizan Syed
20:221:00
outgoing answered
checklist7/26
Rohin R
20:350:09
outgoing too short
Michael
20:4112:06
incoming answered
+14167997720
20:580:07
outgoing too short
+14167997720
20:590:43
outgoing voicemail
Jonathan
no calls

Leads by source 99 total

Landing-PGWP
31
Second Job Morocco
23
Second Job Tunisia
15
Second-Job
11
Secon Job Overseas
9
Meta-Form-PGWP
8
Web-Organic
1
— не указан —
1

Speed to lead working minutes · 27 of 99 leads called

Fastest
0 min
Sara Habchi 08:00–14:00
called outside shift · 107 min on the clock
Slowest
142 min
Sara Habchi 08:00–14:00
210 min on the clock
median 62 min · 72 leads never called

Conversion by caller

CallerLeadsCallsReached ReachQualifiedBookedBook
Sara Habchi 10 22 8 36.4% 0 0 0.0%
Reine Francis 7 50 10 20.0% 1 0 0.0%
Riya Kathuria 13 33 11 33.3% 0 3 23.1%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

Daily funnel

Leads
99
Contacted
69
Qualified
1
Consultations
3

Reach peaks when they pick up · last 14 days

18:00–20:00 best connect
40/94
42.6%
16:00–18:00
26/63
41.3%
12:00–14:00
32/78
41.0%
20:00–21:00
22/58
37.9%
10:00–12:00
60/257
23.3%
08:00–10:00 worst
29/131
22.1%
average 30.8% over 686 outgoing calls

Lead statuses at end of day one bucket per lead

Consultation booked
0
Not qualified / lost
4
Qualified
1
In progress (contacted)
33
New / no activity
61

Caller activity

CallerCallsTalkSpan FirstLastNotes
Sara Habchi 22 56:47 4:00:01 09:25 13:25 166
Reine Francis 50 32:48 6:25:34 09:07 15:32 174
Riya Kathuria 33 29:22 10:18:37 10:40 20:59 25
Jonathan Gutman 0 0:00 — — — 0

Leads and first call 72 never called · sorted by delay

LeadCreatedFirst call CallerDelayScore
Selim HAYDERI 02:32 — Constantine no call —
New item 02:42 — — no call —
Yahiaoui Amine 05:49 — Constantine no call —
Mohamed amine Derouiche 07:16 — Constantine no call —
yassmine ben ameur 07:42 — Constantine no call —
Dhia Benyounes 08:11 — — no call —
StellaMaris Madu 08:39 — Reine Francis no call —
Hakim Ben Houidi 10:35 — Constantine no call —
Mohamed Jlassi 10:55 — — no call —
Mohamed Sanser 10:57 — — no call —
Ayoub Mouchtak 11:01 — — no call —
MUSTAPHA DADOU 11:12 — Constantine no call —
Het Dholakiya 11:32 — Sara Habchi no call —
Nizar Aoukach 11:44 — Constantine no call —
Youssef Harrabi 12:39 — — no call —
Youssef Berrimas 12:58 — Constantine no call —
Omar Zawawi 13:29 — Constantine no call —
Lonkou Melchisedek SINKONDO 14:01 — — no call —
Amine Ajdid 14:36 — Constantine no call —
Islam ElAbidet 15:02 — Constantine no call —
Shaik Heena 000 15:08 — — no call —
Ahmed Hajji 15:17 — — no call —
Adil El hallaoui 15:19 — — no call —
Abith vijayakumaran 15:25 — — no call —
Lucero Gutierrez 15:25 — — no call —
Aya Hatafi 15:26 — — no call —
Rania Bakouch 15:27 — — no call —
Aymen Kouki 15:31 — — no call —
dua ibraham 15:33 — — no call —
iliass malki 15:36 — — no call —
abdelhakim bahba 15:37 — Constantine no call —
Richard Dwight KOUSSEMON 15:40 — — no call —
Omar Ait-Mlouk 15:41 — Constantine no call —
Rana Romdhane 15:46 — — no call —
Chihab eddine Sabiki 15:46 — — no call —
Elhoussaine AIT AICHTE 15:53 — — no call —
Arpon Kundu 15:57 — — no call —
AA AA 16:05 — Riya Kathuria no call —
Fadel Kassamba 16:05 — — no call —
Manal Jimi 16:13 — — no call —
Kamran Akhtar 16:36 — — no call —
hamza amoussa 16:37 — — no call —
Hiba Affane 16:47 — — no call —
Yahya Bouamer 16:48 — — no call —
Ashish Antony 16:59 — — no call —
Alain Dieudonné Sidemeho 17:02 — Constantine no call —
Alain Jude Aboubakary Tami 17:04 — Constantine no call —
Amine izougaghen 17:14 — — no call —
Ghaith Zouaghi 17:32 — — no call —
yosra jemaa 17:33 — — no call —
yasser latrech 17:42 — — no call —
Bahaa Eddine Sehab 18:38 — Constantine no call —
Eya Jandoubi 19:00 — — no call —
Pio Johann Pamintuan 19:28 — — no call —
Oussama El Hlou 19:35 — — no call —
Priyal Desai 21:01 — — no call —
Sidali Brahimi 21:04 — Constantine no call —
Shiva KC 21:05 — — no call —
Jihwan Baek 21:32 — — no call —
majeed hussain 21:36 — — no call —
Arshdeep Singh 21:39 — — no call —
Sujal Kapadiya 21:42 — — no call —
Pujan Gautam 21:58 — — no call —
Akash Sandhu 22:10 — — no call —
Chetan Ralhan 22:29 — — no call —
Phurba Sherpa 22:35 — — no call —
Sidharth Variyath 22:43 — — no call —
Johnson Nte'ne 22:50 — Constantine no call —
Cherni Mohamed Amine 22:57 — — no call —
Justine Yayon 23:26 — — no call —
Alak Patel 23:36 — — no call —
Othmane Chadli 23:48 — — no call —
Abishek Ramachandran 06:52 10:22 (0:52) Sara Habchi 142 min 11/26
Priteshkumar Mishra 04:20 10:21 (0:05) Sara Habchi 141 min —
Kavindya Prasadi 03:43 10:19 (0:01) Sara Habchi 139 min —
Chetan Khadka 02:26 10:17 (0:06) Sara Habchi 138 min —
Sai 01:18 10:15 (0:04) Sara Habchi 136 min —
Mohammed Razi Thettan 01:04 10:14 (0:02) Sara Habchi 134 min —
Darshan Bhagavath 07:46 10:14 (0:08) Reine Francis 134 min —
Abhinav Rawat 00:15 10:13 (0:04) Sara Habchi 133 min —
Ujjwal Uprety 08:33 10:23 (0:52) Sara Habchi 110 min voicemail
Hasan 16:56 18:12 (0:08) Riya Kathuria 73 min —
Jayasurya anilkumar 16:25 18:10 (0:05) Riya Kathuria 71 min —
Scrundy 06:55 09:07 (0:00) Reine Francis 67 min —
Imrul Zidan 16:13 18:03 (0:35) Riya Kathuria 64 min 5/26
Parth Patel 16:19 18:02 (0:32) Riya Kathuria 62 min 6/26
Moosa Ghalib 17:15 18:16 (0:54) Riya Kathuria 61 min 5/24
Sahil Gagvani 17:14 18:14 (0:49) Riya Kathuria 60 min 6/26
Navin Rawat 16:09 17:59 (0:28) Riya Kathuria 59 min 4/26
Adedamola Julius 17:28 18:23 (0:08) Riya Kathuria 55 min —
Anas Afridi 16:00 17:51 (0:06) Riya Kathuria 52 min —
Rahul Sharma 15:28 17:49 (0:00) Riya Kathuria 50 min —
Harsh singh 15:20 17:45 (0:07) Riya Kathuria 45 min —
Arnavv 15:00 17:44 (0:06) Riya Kathuria 44 min —
Asif Jheel 11:49 12:27 (0:44) Reine Francis 38 min voicemail
Karan Savaliya 10:51 11:13 (0:44) Reine Francis 22 min voicemail
Sandesh Chhetri 16:18 18:05 (0:04) Sara Habchi off-shift —
Ben Eze 17:24 18:20 (0:55) Reine Francis off-shift 8/26
Udit Garg 17:40 18:27 (0:05) Reine Francis off-shift —

Booked consultations 3 today

ClientSourceBooked by Lead createdBooked at
Wasim Hasan Web-Organic Riya Kathuria 16 Sep 12:47 09:25
Deven Meta-Form-PGWP Riya Kathuria 16 Sep 13:07 19:05
JOHN Joy Landing-PGWP Riya Kathuria 17 Sep 19:54 20:16

SMS 162 sent · 28 received · 60 contacts

Reply rate
23.7%
14 of 59 conversations
Median reply
2 min
client's first answer
CallerSentReceived ContactsStartedRepliedReply
Sara Habchi 36 10 12 3 2 66.7%
Reine Francis 106 11 56 56 12 21.4%
Riya Kathuria 20 7 9 0 0 0.0%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Waiting for a reply 11 conversations where the client wrote last

Darshan Bhagavath 08:04 · Reine Francis 955 min
I messaged you in WhatsApp
Alankrit Singh 08:36 · Sara Habchi 923 min
Please don't text without information thank you
Heathcliffein 08:48 · Sara Habchi 911 min
11pm today
Shariful 09:54 · Sara Habchi 846 min
Thanks for your time. I'm no longer wish to continue. Thanks
Het Dholakiya 12:54 · Sara Habchi 665 min
Thanks
Dhruv Sasani 14:48 · Reine Francis 552 min
For sure I'll give call next week
Harsh singh 15:22 · Riya Kathuria 518 min
5:00pm-9:00pm
Ben Eze 17:26 · Reine Francis 393 min
6am-2pm
Sandesh Chhetri 19:31 · Riya Kathuria 269 min
Sounds good
Arshdeep Singh 21:40 · Reine Francis 139 min
6:30 riya
Chetan Ralhan 22:31 · Reine Francis 89 min
6am-2pm

WhatsApp calls 14 calls · 6 out / 8 in · 20:59 talk

4 agents not reporting — WhatsApp calls from Reine, Riya, Sara, Jonathan are missing from this report
CallerCallsOutIn ReachedTalkMatched
Sara Habchi 7 2 5 7 12:13 1/7
Reine Francis 4 2 2 2 5:35 1/2
Riya Kathuria 3 2 1 3 3:11 3/3
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0 0:00 0/0
7 conversations not matched to a lead — the contact is saved in the phone book, so WhatsApp shows a name instead of a number

WhatsApp call reviews 7 of 12 conversations

Reine Francis Youssef 09:27 · 0:16 3/26

What was good

The caller confirmed the lead's name, Youssef, and checked audio quality by asking 'Can you hear me?'.

What went wrong

The call was very short and lacked any meaningful engagement or information gathering. There was no introduction, no discussion of the lead's situation or goals, and no attempt to move the conversation forward with next steps or contact confirmation.
Sara Habchi Reine GLC Team Leader 10:55 · 5:19 0/0

What was good

The call contained no actual conversation, only repeated phrases with no interaction. The caller did not engage with a lead or gather any information.

What went wrong

The call did not progress beyond repeated phrases and lacked any real dialogue or engagement with a lead. No attempt was made to introduce, ask questions, or move the call forward.
Sara Habchi Reine GLC Team Leader 10:55 · 5:20 0/0

What was good

The call did not contain a conversation with a lead, so no selling actions were possible. The transcript appears to be internal discussion or unrelated talk, not a client call.

What went wrong

There was no actual conversation with a lead, so no checklist items were addressed. The caller did not engage with a potential client or attempt to sell services.
Reine Francis Sara - EverNorth 10:55 · 5:19 0/0

What was good

The call did not contain a conversation with a lead, so no selling was attempted or needed.

What went wrong

The call transcript shows no actual conversation with a lead, only unclear or unrelated speech. No sales process was initiated or followed.
Sara Habchi Darpan 11:06 · 0:10 22/26

What was good

The caller thoroughly confirmed the lead's details and clearly explained the PR pathways and next steps, including the paid consultation. The conversation was professional and informative, with clear mention of the RCIC license and no illegal promises.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation, missing an opportunity to secure the appointment. Also, there was no handling of common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself.'
Riya Kathuria Irfan 16:46 · 1:18 5/26

What was good

The caller engaged with the lead and managed to agree on a specific date, saying 'next फ्राइडे रखेंगे.' The lead's name was used, showing some personal connection.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any relevant information about the lead's immigration status or goals. The call was hampered by poor connection and ended without offering a consultation or confirming contact details.
Riya Kathuria +17058160728 19:01 · 1:21 7/26

What was good

The caller successfully locked a specific date and time for the consultation and clearly explained the next steps involving the agreement and invoice. They also confirmed that the lead would receive information via email and WhatsApp, ensuring clear communication channels.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask any qualifying questions such as the client's name, immigration status, or goals. There was no summary of agreements at the end, which could have reinforced the lead's understanding and commitment.

Agents recording software on callers' machines

CallerLast seenStatus
Reine Francis 14:06 (975 min ago) offline
Riya Kathuria 21:01 (561 min ago) offline
Sara Habchi 15:32 (890 min ago) offline
Jonathan Gutman — offline

Call reviews 63 of 29 live conversations

Reine Francis — 09:07 · 0:54 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified themselves and the company, stating the reason for the call and referencing the lead's application on the official website. This is a professional approach to leaving a voicemail.

What went wrong

The call ended as a voicemail with no message left by the lead, so no opportunity to engage or advance the sales process occurred. The caller did not leave a message inviting a callback, which could have improved the chance of a response.
Reine Francis Henry 09:08 · 0:29 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and identifying themselves and the company. The message included a call to action, inviting the lead to respond with a preferred time for a call via message or WhatsApp.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead further. The voicemail was brief and did not provide additional information about services or next steps beyond requesting a callback.
Reine Francis — 09:10 · 7:26 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirmed the lead's current immigration status, and thoroughly explained the consultation process and options available. They successfully booked a specific appointment time and confirmed contact details, ensuring the lead understood the next steps.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or other personal details such as age, education, or work experience, which are important for a thorough assessment. Also, no objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself' were addressed, missing opportunities to build rapport and handle concerns.
Reine Francis — 09:20 · 0:33 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company, and inviting the lead to respond by message or WhatsApp with a preferred time for a call.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have included a brief mention of next steps or benefits to encourage a callback.
Reine Francis — 09:21 · 0:28 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message identifying themselves and the company, and requested a callback or WhatsApp message to schedule a call.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief and did not provide detailed information or next steps.
Reine Francis — 09:22 · 0:26 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company, and inviting the lead to respond by message or WhatsApp.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead was taken. The message was brief and did not attempt to secure a callback time or next step directly.
Reine Francis — 09:23 · 1:00 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message with their name and company, asking the lead to get back by message or WhatsApp with a preferred time for a call.

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 offer or next step beyond requesting a callback.
Reine Francis Basam 09:25 · 1:10 9/26

What was good

The caller quickly identified the lead and confirmed his current immigration status, showing good preparation by referencing information from Victoria. The caller also introduced the possibility of assisting with PR and planned to explain next steps, demonstrating a clear intent to help.

What went wrong

The call was hampered by poor audio quality, which the caller tried to resolve by suggesting a WhatsApp call but ended the call before continuing. Important qualifying questions like age, education, and language skills were not asked, and no next steps or appointments were secured. The call ended abruptly without confirming contact details or summarizing agreements.
Reine Francis Shagar 09:46 · 0:28 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and reminding them about the consultation booking. The message was concise and professional, encouraging the lead to respond when available.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather information. No mistakes were made in the voicemail itself, but no selling or qualification could occur.
Reine Francis — 09:47 · 0:24 2/26

What was good

The caller was polite and agreed to wait when the lead asked to talk later, showing patience and respect.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask any qualifying questions or attempt to engage the lead meaningfully. The call ended without any sales progress or next steps.
Reine Francis — 09:49 · 0:19 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message addressing the lead by name and mentioning the consultation booking.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company clearly in the voicemail, which could reduce the chance of a callback.
Reine Francis — 09:50 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message inviting the lead to get back about booking a consultation.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to engage or gather information from the lead, and no checklist items could be addressed.
Reine Francis — 09:51 · 0:34 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and referencing the previous discussion about booking a consultation. This message invites the lead to respond when ready, maintaining engagement.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead directly. The message could have included a callback number or email for easier response.
Reine Francis — 09:52 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message referencing a previous discussion and inviting the lead to respond if interested.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief and did not provide much detail about next steps or services.
Reine Francis — 09:57 · 0:30 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the reason for the call.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have included a callback number for easier response.
Sara Habchi — 10:08 · 1:03 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail identifying herself and the company, referencing a previous SMS, which helps the lead recognize the context.

What went wrong

The caller did not get to speak with the lead directly, and the voicemail did not include a clear call to action or invitation to call back, which could improve engagement.
Sara Habchi Abhishek 10:22 · 0:52 11/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name, saying "this is Sarah, and I'm a case manager with Ever North." She successfully scheduled a follow-up consultation call, locking in a specific date and time: "Call will be scheduled for Monday at 10 a.m." The caller also summarized the agreement well at the end.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any personal or immigration details such as citizenship, current status, age, education, or language skills. There was no discussion of eligibility or explanation of steps and timelines, nor mention of the RCIC licence or past cases. Contact details were not confirmed, and no objections were handled. The call was very brief and mostly focused on scheduling the next call rather than progressing the sales conversation.
Sara Habchi Joao 10:23 · 0:52 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified themselves and the company in the voicemail, stating, "My name is Sarah and I am a case manager with Evernorth." This provides a professional introduction even though the call was not answered live.

What went wrong

The call went to voicemail and ended abruptly without leaving a message for the lead. It would be better to leave a brief message explaining how we can assist and inviting a callback to increase engagement.
Reine Francis — 10:28 · 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 no opportunity to engage or leave information for the lead.
Reine Francis — 10:30 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message identifying themselves and the company.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead on this call.
Reine Francis Augustine 10:31 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message addressing Augustine and mentioning the consultation for permanent residence. The message was polite and concise, inviting a response if still interested.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have included a callback number for easier response.
Reine Francis Florent 10:32 · 0:51 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, stating the purpose and next steps. The message included instructions for the lead to respond if not interested, which is respectful of their time.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather any client information, so no selling or qualification occurred in this call.
Reine Francis — 10:33 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller reached the voicemail promptly and the message clearly indicated the customer's voicemail is not initialized.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, missing an opportunity to engage the lead or leave contact details.
Reine Francis — 10:34 · 0:29 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.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead directly. No specific details or next steps were locked in.
Reine Francis Prasnavar 10:35 · 0:51 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and referenced prior contact, which helped establish context quickly. They also handled objections professionally, acknowledging the lead's prior consultation and offering a next step by asking about moving forward with a consultation.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and lacked any detailed information gathering or needs assessment. The caller did not confirm any client details, immigration goals, or explain the process, missing opportunities to engage the lead further. There was no attempt to lock a date or confirm contact details, and no summary of the call was provided.
Reine Francis — 10:38 · 8:18 11/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves and the company clearly, and confirmed the lead's interest in a work permit. They explained the next steps involving a consultation with the director of services and mentioned the RCIC license and CEO evaluation, which helps build credibility.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or other important details like age, education, language skills, or work experience, missing an opportunity to assess eligibility. They also failed to lock a specific appointment time or confirm contact details, and did not summarize the call's agreements, which weakens follow-up chances.
Reine Francis — 10:55 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The call reached a voicemail service, so no conversation was possible.

What went wrong

No message was left, so no opportunity to engage or follow up with the lead was utilized.
Reine Francis Olusoji 11:03 · 1:07 5/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced himself and the company, saying 'This is Rand, team leader at Euronor.' He also offered the next step by discussing booking a consultation, which is important for moving the lead forward. The lead's name Olusoji was identified through the conversation.

What went wrong

The caller missed many key qualification questions such as asking for the client's name, immigration status, and goals. There was no attempt to lock a specific date and time or confirm contact details. The call was very brief and mostly involved the lead saying his brother would call instead, so the opportunity to engage was not fully utilized.
Reine Francis — 11:04 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company, and inviting the lead to respond when ready.

What went wrong

The call ended in voicemail, so no opportunity to engage or gather information was taken. Leaving a message was appropriate but no further action was possible in this call.
Sara Habchi — 11:05 · 0:10 0/0

What was good

The call was very brief and did not develop into a conversation, so no selling was attempted or needed.

What went wrong

The caller did not engage the lead or introduce themselves properly, ending the call almost immediately with 'Can you please drop me the voicemail?' which is unclear and unprofessional.
Reine Francis — 11:05 · 0:14 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to push the call further. No message was left, which is appropriate given the voicemail was uninitialized.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail; leaving a brief message could have improved lead engagement.
Reine Francis — 11:06 · 0:14 0/0

What was good

The caller reached voicemail quickly and did not waste time. No message was left, so no further action was taken.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, missing an opportunity to engage the lead or provide contact information.
Reine Francis Darshan 11:06 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and identifying themselves and the company. The message included a call to action, inviting the lead to get back in touch.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualification steps could be completed.
Reine Francis — 11:07 · 0:43 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message requesting a callback to book a consultation, which is appropriate for a missed connection.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have included a brief mention of the company's services to reinforce the reason for the callback.
Reine Francis — 11:09 · 0:22 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message identifying themselves and the company, and requested a response if the lead was no longer interested.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage the lead or gather any information since the call went to voicemail. No specific consultation details or next steps were locked in.
Reine Francis — 11:09 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller reached a voicemail and left a clear system message indicating the customer's voicemail is not initialized.

What went wrong

No message was left for the lead, so no opportunity to engage or leave information was taken.
Reine Francis — 11:10 · 1:33 5/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, saying 'This is Ren from other North.' They also offered a next step by discussing booking a consultation for the permanent residence application.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the client's name or any qualifying information such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals. There was no effort to assess eligibility or explain the process, and no specific appointment was locked. The call ended with the lead saying they need to arrange their schedule, but no follow-up date or contact details were confirmed.
Reine Francis Carol 11:13 · 0:44 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and explaining the reason for the call. The message included a call to action, inviting the lead to respond with a preferred time for a call.

What went wrong

No issues with the voicemail message. It was concise and professional. No opportunity to engage further since it was voicemail.
Sara Habchi Heathcliffe 11:17 · 8:54 22/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, confirming the lead's name early on. She thoroughly gathered detailed information about Heathcliffe's status, education, work experience, and goals, and explained the suitable immigration pathways and next steps clearly, including the paid consultation and payment details. The caller also confirmed contact details and summarized the agreements at the end, showing good control of the call.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to handle common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' which could have strengthened the lead's commitment. Also, no specific date and time for the consultation was locked during the call, which would have helped secure the next step more firmly.
Reine Francis — 11:25 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to engage further.

What went wrong

No message was left, so no opportunity to provide information or encourage a callback was taken.
Reine Francis — 11:29 · 0:29 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly left a concise voicemail identifying themselves and the company, stating the reason for the call, and referencing the lead's application. This is professional and informative for the recipient.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred, so no selling or qualification steps were possible. The message was brief but did not invite a callback or provide a direct call to action, which could improve engagement.
Sara Habchi Isabel 11:30 · 17:21 21/26

What was good

The caller engaged in a detailed and informative conversation, confirming key personal and immigration details and explaining eligibility clearly. She carefully outlined the pathways and next steps, including sending information via WhatsApp, which helped clarify the process for Isabel.

What went wrong

The caller did not mention the RCIC licence or past successful cases, which could build trust. Also, no specific next appointment was locked, and the call ended without a clear summary of agreements, missing an opportunity to reinforce commitment.
Sara Habchi Viet 12:00 · 11:28 21/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming Viet's details and explaining the PR pathways clearly. They carefully explained the trades and francophone streams and the importance of language and work experience, showing good knowledge and patience.

What went wrong

The caller did not handle any objections such as 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' which could have been opportunities to reassure the lead. Also, no specific consultation date or time was locked, and the call ended without a summary of agreements, missing a chance to reinforce commitment.
Reine Francis Asif 12:27 · 0:44 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message identifying the lead and the reason for the call, inviting a callback or message.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief but did not attempt to gather any information or lock a callback time.
Sara Habchi Aftar 12:57 · 8:23 20/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation with Aftar, confirming key details like immigration status and education, and clearly explaining the PR pathways and next steps. The caller also highlighted the RCIC license and offered a paid consultation, demonstrating good compliance and sales technique.

What went wrong

The caller missed opportunities to handle common objections such as 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself.' Additionally, they did not lock in a specific date and time for the consultation nor confirm contact details or summarize agreements at the end, which are important for closing the sale effectively.
Sara Habchi officer 13:06 · 6:19 22/26

What was good

The caller maintained a clear and informative conversation, explaining the client's current status and options thoroughly. They effectively handled objections about scams by reassuring the lead and providing licensing information, and they secured a next step with a consultation booking. The caller also confirmed contact details and summarized the agreements well.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the client's age, education, and language proficiency, which are important for a full eligibility assessment. There was no discussion about the client's English or French levels, which could affect program eligibility. Otherwise, the call was well managed with no compliance issues.
Sara Habchi — 13:25 · 0:42 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified themselves and the company in the voicemail message, which is professional and informative.

What went wrong

The call did not reach the lead, and no message was left for a callback. It would be better to leave a brief message to encourage the lead to return the call.
Reine Francis — 13:52 · 0:17 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached the voicemail system as the line was unavailable. No message could be left due to no recording space.

What went wrong

No message was left because the voicemail box was full, so no opportunity to engage the lead was missed.
Reine Francis — 13:58 · 0:23 0/0

What was good

The call reached a voicemail service, and the system message clearly explained the situation.

What went wrong

No message was left for the lead, missing an opportunity to engage or prompt a callback.
Reine Francis Issa 13:59 · 0:35 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and reminding them about their application status.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead during this call.
Reine Francis — 14:00 · 0:58 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message addressing the lead by name and asking for a response about continuing the application. The message was polite and concise, which is appropriate for a voicemail.

What went wrong

There was no live conversation to engage with the lead or gather information. The caller did not introduce themselves or the company in the voicemail, which could improve clarity for the recipient.
Reine Francis Solomon 14:04 · 3:06 5/26

What was good

The caller engaged the lead by addressing him by name and handled the objection about funds sensitively, showing understanding and willingness to follow up. The caller also confirmed WhatsApp as a contact method for future communication, maintaining connection.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, missing a key opportunity to build trust. There was no discussion about the lead's immigration goals, status, or eligibility, and no program or next steps were presented. The call lacked a summary or clear agreement on follow-up timing beyond a vague two-week check-in, and no paid consultation was offered.
Riya Kathuria Harsh 17:48 · 0:37 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, saying 'this is me, Priya, calling from Evernorth Immigration.' She also confirmed the lead's name and successfully locked in a specific callback time, 'I will give you a call around 4:30 tomorrow.'

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any information about the lead's immigration goals, status, or background, nor did she present any program details or offer a next step such as a paid consultation. Contact details were not confirmed, and no summary of the call was provided.
Riya Kathuria Naveen 17:59 · 0:28 4/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, and confirmed the lead's name. She respected the lead's request to call later and arranged a general time to reconnect.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and did not cover any qualifying questions or provide information about the process. No next steps or consultation offer was made, and no details were confirmed. The opportunity to engage the lead more fully was missed.
Riya Kathuria Parth 18:02 · 0:32 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly and confirmed the lead's name. She successfully scheduled a specific callback time, saying 'I'll call you at 5 o'clock.'

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any information about the lead's immigration situation or goals, nor did she present any program or explain next steps. There was no offer of a paid consultation or confirmation of contact details, missing key opportunities to advance the sale.
Riya Kathuria — 18:03 · 0:35 5/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, saying, "this is Ria from Evernorth Immigration." She successfully locked a specific callback time, confirming "I will call you tomorrow around 4:30 or 5:00."

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the client's name or any qualifying information such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals. No program was presented, no eligibility was assessed, and no next steps like a paid consultation were offered. The call was very brief and missed many opportunities to engage the lead further.
Riya Kathuria Sahil 18:14 · 0:49 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, and confirmed the lead's name early in the call. She successfully locked a specific date and time for the next call, ensuring a follow-up was arranged.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any information about the lead's immigration status, goals, or background, missing an opportunity to assess eligibility or present relevant programs. No next steps such as offering a paid consultation or confirming contact details were discussed, limiting the call's effectiveness.
Riya Kathuria — 18:16 · 0:54 5/24

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly and successfully arranged a callback time, saying 'I can call you then.'

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or any qualifying information, nor did she confirm contact details or offer a consultation. The call was very brief and missed opportunities to engage the lead further.
Riya Kathuria Ben 18:20 · 0:55 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, addressing the lead by name which helps build rapport. She successfully arranged a follow-up call time, locking in a specific window before 2pm tomorrow and offered to assign another agent to accommodate the lead's schedule.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any qualifying information such as the lead's immigration status, goals, or background, missing an opportunity to assess eligibility or present relevant programs. There was no confirmation of contact details or summary of the next steps, which could lead to confusion or missed appointments.
Riya Kathuria Vivian 18:58 · 1:48 7/26

What was good

The caller successfully booked an appointment with Vivian and locked a specific date and time, confirming the meeting details clearly.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any information about Vivian's immigration status, goals, or background. There was no discussion of eligibility, programs, or next steps beyond scheduling, and no confirmation of contact details or summary at the end.
Riya Kathuria John 20:02 · 9:38 24/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional consultation, confirming details and explaining the PR process clearly. They secured a consultation appointment promptly and confirmed contact details effectively, ensuring the lead understood the next steps.

What went wrong

The caller did not encounter or handle any objections such as 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' missing an opportunity to reinforce the value of the service. Otherwise, the call was well-managed with no compliance issues or misleading promises.
Riya Kathuria Fezan 20:22 · 1:00 7/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, and confirmed the lead's name early in the call. She effectively handled the lead's hesitation by acknowledging the need for a second opinion and successfully locked a specific follow-up date for Tuesday.

What went wrong

The call lacked any discussion of the lead's immigration details such as status, goals, or eligibility, missing key qualification and selling opportunities. No next steps like offering a paid consultation or confirming contact details were presented, which limits progress toward closing.
Riya Kathuria — 20:59 · 0:43 0/0

What was good

The caller reached voicemail promptly and identified themselves clearly as Rhea from Evernote.

What went wrong

No message was left after the voicemail greeting, missing an opportunity to engage the lead or provide contact information.
data check · 14 calls not matched to a lead · 6 leads without a phone number · 51 leads unassigned · reached counts every answered call, voicemail included