EverNorth — Daily Callers Report

Friday, 18 September 2026

built 19 Sep 2026, 06:14 · America/Toronto
archive
Calls
60
53 out / 7 in
Leads
136
new today
Reached
26
47 answered − 13 vm, 8 short
Qualified
3
good status
Booked
2
moved to 1.4
Messages
229
SMS
Follow-up
36
14 reached, 10 vm, 5 short, 7 missed
Lead→Booked
1.5%
daily rate

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

070911131517192123
Sara
Sandesh Chhetri
08:522:32
outgoing answered
checklist9/26
Sandesh Chhetri
08:551:55
outgoing answered
checklist4/26
Sandesh Chhetri
08:570:34
incoming answered
Janak Bhatta
09:190:24
outgoing voicemail
Andres Molano
09:261:04
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
2894661244
09:260:00
incoming no answer
Janak Bhatta
09:275:20
outgoing answered
checklist19/24
Janak Bhatta
09:330:29
outgoing answered
checklist3/26
Chetan Ralhan
09:460:48
outgoing voicemail
Phurba Sherpa
09:521:10
outgoing answered
checklist10/24
Sidharth Variyath
09:540:50
outgoing voicemail
Alak Patel
09:569:02
outgoing answered
checklist22/26
Shoeb Mansuri
10:080:06
outgoing too short
Pooja Rani
10:111:20
outgoing answered
checklist9/26
Kavindya Prasadi
10:300:03
outgoing too short
Het Dholakiya
11:0211:38
outgoing answered
checklist22/26
Samuel Robert Antony Flay
11:1710:30
outgoing answered
checklist22/24
Abhinav Rawat
11:309:46
outgoing answered
checklist23/26
Siddhanth
13:0514:51
outgoing answered
checklist22/25
Andres Molano
13:2112:46
outgoing answered
checklist21/26
𝓐𝓷𝓼𝓱
13:380:05
outgoing too short
Reine
Ben Eze
09:187:00
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Udit Garg
09:340:37
outgoing voicemail
Frank Essel Amoah
09:390:08
outgoing too short
Frank Essel Amoah
09:390:11
outgoing voicemail
Frank Essel Amoah
09:400:09
outgoing too short
Frank Essel Amoah
09:410:00
outgoing no answer
Frank Essel Amoah
09:426:39
incoming answered
+14376024988
09:530:47
outgoing answered
checklist8/26
Bassam Yossef
09:547:48
outgoing answered
checklist19/26
Mohammad Syful Islam Islam
10:112:11
outgoing answered
checklist16/23
Shiva KC
10:140:00
outgoing no answer
Majeed Hussain
10:150:00
outgoing no answer
Majeed Hussain
10:150:37
outgoing voicemail
Shiva KC
10:160:00
outgoing no answer
Arshdeep Singh
10:170:31
outgoing voicemail
Sujal Kapadiya
10:180:44
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Pujan Gautam
10:410:24
outgoing voicemail
Govind Girish Kumar
10:450:24
outgoing voicemail
Udit Garg
11:010:23
outgoing voicemail
Mohd Haris Khan
11:060:22
outgoing voicemail
Edmond Sarpong
11:072:07
outgoing voicemail
Miguel
11:110:25
outgoing voicemail
+4375664225
12:380:00
incoming no answer
+4375664225
13:300:00
incoming no answer
+4375664225
13:310:00
incoming no answer
Riya
Jay Soni
16:361:25
outgoing answered
checklist7/26
Jay Soni
16:375:43
outgoing answered
checklist17/26
Harsh singh
17:310:38
outgoing answered
checklist3/26
Imrul Zidan
17:440:06
outgoing too short
Parth Patel
17:467:00
outgoing answered
checklist22/26
Sahil Gagvani
17:550:05
outgoing too short
Sandra
18:322:57
outgoing answered
checklist10/26
Sandra
19:342:10
outgoing answered
checklist6/26
Moosa Ghalib
19:540:00
outgoing no answer
Moosa Ghalib
19:550:00
outgoing no answer
Moosa Ghalib
19:560:00
outgoing no answer
Rahul Sharma
20:100:00
outgoing no answer
Arnavv
20:110:05
outgoing too short
Jonathan
no calls

Leads by source 136 total

Second Job Tunisia
54
Second Job Morocco
43
Secon Job Overseas
17
Landing-PGWP
9
Second-Job
8
Web-Organic
2
Client-Referall
1
Meta-Form-PGWP
1
SMM-Organic
1

Speed to lead working minutes · 8 of 136 leads called

Fastest
0 min
Riya Kathuria 17:00–21:00
called outside shift · 83 min on the clock
Slowest
142 min
Reine Francis 08:00–14:00
median 99 min · 128 leads never called

Conversion by caller

CallerLeadsCallsReached ReachQualifiedBookedBook
Sara Habchi 5 21 14 66.7% 2 1 20.0%
Reine Francis 4 26 6 23.1% 1 1 25.0%
Riya Kathuria 1 13 6 46.2% 0 0 0.0%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0 0.0%

Daily funnel

Leads
136
Contacted
69
Qualified
3
Consultations
2

Reach peaks when they pick up · last 14 days

18:00–20:00 best connect
41/88
46.6%
12:00–14:00
33/79
41.8%
16:00–18:00
24/63
38.1%
20:00–21:00
20/57
35.1%
08:00–10:00
39/149
26.2%
10:00–12:00 worst
64/269
23.8%
average 31.4% over 710 outgoing calls

Lead statuses at end of day one bucket per lead

Consultation booked
0
Not qualified / lost
2
Qualified
3
In progress (contacted)
8
New / no activity
123

Caller activity

CallerCallsTalkSpan FirstLastNotes
Sara Habchi 21 1:22:57 4:45:57 08:52 13:38 73
Reine Francis 26 25:09 13:00:10 00:30 13:31 122
Riya Kathuria 13 19:53 3:35:23 16:36 20:11 8
Jonathan Gutman 0 0:00 — — — 4

Leads and first call 128 never called · sorted by delay

LeadCreatedFirst call CallerDelayScore
Chaima Menouar 02:30 — — no call —
Mohamed Oussama Ben Azzouz 03:34 — Constantine no call —
Youcef Chougrani 03:46 — — no call —
Issam Tbatou 03:52 — Constantine no call —
Temiotan Orente 03:56 — Constantine no call —
Malek Kadri 04:06 — — no call —
Nihel Boujelben 04:13 — — no call —
Jassim Laamari 05:09 — Constantine no call —
Ayoub Rebhi 05:19 — — no call —
Hela Kastalli 05:21 — — no call —
riadh bougaalech 05:39 — — no call —
ISMAIL DRIEF 06:09 — — no call —
Anfel Bourahla 06:19 — — no call —
Fatma Kchaou 07:51 — — no call —
Rania Batnini 08:28 — — no call —
Govind Pradeep 08:33 — — no call —
Amine El Hend 08:35 — — no call —
Soukaina Eloihli 08:36 — — no call —
Chaimaa Ezzaam 08:36 — — no call —
Abderrahmane Benaamar 08:39 — — no call —
Issam ELMACHEHOUR 08:39 — — no call —
Jin Ma 08:40 — — no call —
Sorelle Kenko 08:41 — Constantine no call —
Abdellah Lahboub 08:42 — — no call —
Sirine Gharbi 08:43 — — no call —
Wahiba Razgui 08:44 — — no call —
Ines Ayari 08:46 — — no call —
youssef mastoura 08:46 — — no call —
samar ghodban 08:47 — — no call —
Saif Ben Massouda 08:48 — — no call —
Asma Boubaker 08:51 — — no call —
Jasser Cherif 08:52 — — no call —
Mayssa Bouharb 08:55 — — no call —
Khalid Moutatahir 08:56 — Constantine no call —
Tajeddine Bourhim 08:57 — — no call —
Yosra Hammoudi 08:57 — — no call —
Aous Ben Taher 09:00 — Constantine no call —
Lotfi Aroudj 09:00 — — no call —
El Mahdi Id Lahcen 09:04 — — no call —
KONE Souleymane 09:06 — Constantine no call —
Melek Hajri 09:08 — — no call —
ACHRAF BOUYALLOUL 09:10 — — no call —
Dulce Huerta 09:12 — — no call —
Mahir EL mehdi 09:13 — — no call —
Yassine Beltaief 09:21 — — no call —
zineb bellefkih 09:24 — — no call —
Achraf Allali 09:25 — — no call —
Yosra BACCAR 09:26 — — no call —
Sahar Kharrat 09:37 — — no call —
Othmane El houmairi 09:44 — — no call —
Anass ANBADI 09:47 — — no call —
Eya Chaar 09:50 — — no call —
hicham talha 09:50 — — no call —
Ben Hassine Dhia Eddine 09:55 — — no call —
Lionel Eric BIABINO 10:04 — — no call —
Yasmine ben ameur 10:13 — — no call —
Akram Hamdi 10:13 — — no call —
MOUNIA EL MALYH 10:19 — — no call —
Sammari Omar 10:20 — — no call —
Oumaima HANDI 10:23 — — no call —
Hassan Halfi 10:24 — — no call —
Zakaria Nouisser 10:26 — — no call —
Noe Olobe 10:29 — — no call —
Nesrine GHRIBI 10:31 — — no call —
Khaoula El Bandeqy 10:43 — — no call —
Mohamed Mokhtari 10:43 — — no call —
Mohamed Houssain LAOUINI 10:44 — — no call —
JATIN MUNJAL 10:56 — — no call —
Archana PR 10:59 — — no call —
Youssef RESSAISSI 11:04 — — no call —
Kexin Liang 11:09 — — no call —
khaled ben ahmed 11:14 — — no call —
Omar Bouhlal 11:23 — — no call —
Jihen FENNANI 11:27 — — no call —
Ashish Xavier 11:44 — Sara Habchi no call —
derouich hadil 11:50 — — no call —
Mohammed Chaaraoui 11:58 — — no call —
Sabri Kaddour 12:07 — — no call —
Boulaares Montassar 12:07 — — no call —
Faisal Sharif 12:18 — Reine Francis no call —
Khalil Khammari 12:27 — — no call —
Wala Bejaoui 12:28 — — no call —
khalafa Hicham 12:28 — — no call —
Houssem Guesmi 12:29 — — no call —
SAAD SAIDI 12:30 — — no call —
Ayoub Dhahri 12:36 — — no call —
Nihad Ezziat 12:56 — — no call —
otman mouhib 13:01 — — no call —
Sameh Saka 13:01 — — no call —
HAFIDA EL-MOUDEN 13:16 — — no call —
Jean Calvin Jr BOUMSONG YOMANG 13:30 — — no call —
kamal khazri 13:31 — — no call —
Salah Eddine Ouirra 13:40 — — no call —
Younes El yagouby 13:42 — — no call —
Youssef Berrima 13:48 — — no call —
Tachfine Bouachrine 13:55 — — no call —
Achraf sghiouar 13:59 — — no call —
NIKOLAY VINOKUROV 14:04 — — no call —
Gaurav Gaurav 14:10 — — no call —
mouna kharrat 14:29 — — no call —
Achref Jouini 14:41 — — no call —
Madhur Mujral 14:53 — — no call —
chaima mtir 14:54 — — no call —
YASSIR ET-TAHERI 15:12 — — no call —
Amine Bouallegue 15:27 — — no call —
Mariam Rabah 15:38 — — no call —
ABDELLATIF TAYEBI 15:49 — — no call —
Ikram Nabin 15:52 — — no call —
Nouha Khuildi 16:17 — — no call —
Prabhakaran TAMILSELVAN 16:50 — — no call —
Raouf Moussa embarek 17:19 — — no call —
Mohamed Amine Abdrrazek 17:32 — — no call —
Imen Mhiri 17:33 — — no call —
Tahiry Emmanuel Irie Bi 17:52 — — no call —
Tahiry Emmanuel Irie Bi 18:03 — — no call —
Abdessamad Jaouad 18:31 — — no call —
Bassem Rabeh 18:33 — — no call —
haifa zeddini 18:47 — — no call —
Abdessamad Jaouad 18:58 — — no call —
HALHAZ Ramzi 19:06 — — no call —
CHANCELVIE FELICIEN MATSIONA 19:19 — — no call —
Raphael Abini 20:40 — — no call —
Fairouz Karim 20:41 — — no call —
VEYSEL OZGUR 21:03 — — no call —
Adam Drissi 21:04 — — no call —
Ishaat Rahman 21:22 — — no call —
khalil turki 21:39 — — no call —
Aishwariya Santhosh 23:19 — — no call —
Govind Girish Kumar 08:23 10:45 (0:24) Reine Francis 142 min voicemail
Pooja Rani 02:41 10:11 (1:20) Sara Habchi 131 min 9/26
Shoeb Mansuri 00:42 10:08 (0:06) Sara Habchi 129 min —
Frank Essel Amoah 06:46 09:38 (0:01) Reine Francis 98 min —
Andres Molano 08:22 09:26 (1:04) Sara Habchi 63 min 8/26
Janak Bhatta 08:33 09:19 (0:24) Sara Habchi 46 min voicemail
Mohammad Syful Islam Islam 10:07 10:11 (2:11) Reine Francis 3 min 16/23
Jay Soni 15:13 16:36 (1:25) Riya Kathuria off-shift 7/26

Booked consultations 2 today

ClientSourceBooked by Lead createdBooked at
Nishan Gajurel Meta-Form-PGWP Reine Francis 15 Aug 15:02 12:47
Siddhanth Bhargava Meta-Form-PGWP Sara Habchi 13 Sep 09:40 13:28

SMS 216 sent · 13 received · 63 contacts

Reply rate
19.0%
12 of 63 conversations
Median reply
66 min
client's first answer
CallerSentReceived ContactsStartedRepliedReply
Sara Habchi 24 2 8 4 0 0.0%
Reine Francis 188 11 57 57 12 21.1%
Riya Kathuria 4 0 2 2 0 0.0%
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0 0 0.0%

Waiting for a reply 11 conversations where the client wrote last

Ben Eze 07:58 · Reine Francis 961 min
You can call me anytime this morning
Janak Bhatta 09:08 · Sara Habchi 892 min
Call me
Andres Molano 09:29 · Reine Francis 871 min
Hello, can I inquire what's this about?
Abhishek Macwan 12:21 · Reine Francis 699 min
I am still interested through WhatsApp
Shrijal Kc 12:22 · Reine Francis 698 min
Hello there! Apologies for the late response. I will be available for a call after 5pm on weekdays next week or anytime
Sharanjit 12:29 · Reine Francis 691 min
Hi Actually I applied through other consultant. Sorry my bad.
Joselito Usi 13:36 · Reine Francis 624 min
Not interested
Khushal Singh 16:40 · Reine Francis 439 min
WhatsApp plz
Prabhakaran TAMILSELVAN 16:51 · Reine Francis 428 min
I'm available anytime
Karan Savaliya 18:28 · Reine Francis 332 min
Hi. Sorry for that . Can we discuss this tomorrow? Somewhere between 12 to 1pm
Ishaat Rahman 21:24 · Reine Francis 155 min
Eve after 5

WhatsApp calls 30 calls · 11 out / 19 in · 44:42 talk

4 agents not reporting — WhatsApp calls from Reine, Riya, Sara, Jonathan are missing from this report
CallerCallsOutIn ReachedTalkMatched
Sara Habchi 12 3 9 11 29:06 7/11
Reine Francis 11 3 8 4 1:11 1/4
Riya Kathuria 7 5 2 7 14:25 4/7
Jonathan Gutman 0 0 0 0 0:00 0/0
10 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 14 of 22 conversations

Sara Habchi Ashmit 08:10 · 0:22 19/26

What was good

The caller engaged in a real conversation, confirming Ashmit's details like IELTS and work experience, and successfully locked a consultation for 1 p.m. They handled the lead's concern about carpentry jobs well by explaining alternative trades and next steps.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company clearly, which is important for professionalism. They also missed summarizing the agreements at the end and did not explain the full process or timelines, which could leave the lead unclear about what to expect next.
Reine Francis — 08:51 · 0:35 0/0

What was good

The call was extremely brief and did not contain any meaningful interaction or information exchange.

What went wrong

The call lasted only 35 seconds with almost no speech, making it impossible to engage the lead or gather any information.
Sara Habchi Sandesh 08:58 · 6:22 19/26

What was good

The caller maintained a clear and informative dialogue with Sandesh, explaining the immigration pathways and next steps thoroughly, including details about the consultation and payment process. They confirmed the lead's name and language ability, and ensured the lead understood the services offered, which shows good engagement and clarity.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the lead's age, education, and work experience, which are important for a full eligibility assessment. Also, they did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation, which could reduce conversion chances. No objections were handled, but none were raised by the lead either.
Sara Habchi +15485776444 09:20 · 2:08 7/26

What was good

The caller successfully arranged a specific appointment date and time, confirming Monday at 6:30 for an in-person consultation. They clearly explained that the consultation is only for the lead and that certain information will be clarified during the consultation itself.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask for the lead's name or any personal details such as citizenship, immigration status, or goals. There was no effort to assess eligibility or present relevant programs, and contact details were not confirmed. The call lacked a summary of agreements at the end, missing opportunities to build rapport and gather essential information.
Sara Habchi +15485776444 09:20 · 2:07 6/26

What was good

The caller successfully arranged a specific appointment date and time, confirming Monday at 6:30 for an in-person consultation. They clearly explained that the consultation is only for the lead and not for their friend, maintaining clarity about the service scope.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask for the lead's name or any personal details such as immigration status or goals. There was no discussion of eligibility, programs, or next steps beyond booking the appointment, and no confirmation of contact details or summary at the end. This call lacked key qualification and rapport-building elements.
Reine Francis Sara - EverNorth 09:42 · 0:20 0/0

What was good

The call was initiated but no meaningful conversation occurred.

What went wrong

The call lasted only 20 seconds with no clear communication or engagement from the lead.
Sara Habchi Reine GLC Team Leader 09:42 · 0:21 0/0

What was good

The caller attempted to reach the lead but encountered technical issues preventing communication.

What went wrong

The call ended without any audible conversation or information exchange, so no selling or engagement occurred.
Sara Habchi Moktar 12:31 · 17:18 21/26

What was good

The caller clearly explained the client's immigration options and recalculated eligibility based on updated information, stating "the calculation is different now" and offering two clear pathways. They secured a commitment for a language test retake in October and summarized the plan well at the end.

What went wrong

The caller did not confirm the client's contact details or mention the RCIC license or past successful cases, which could build trust. Also, there was no handling of common objections like "I'll think about it" or "I'll do it myself."
Reine Francis — 12:40 · 0:15 0/0

What was good

The call was too short to evaluate any sales activity or engagement.

What went wrong

The call lasted only 15 seconds with no meaningful speech or interaction, so no sales process could take place.
Riya Kathuria +16478945296 16:44 · 4:42 7/26

What was good

The caller clearly explained the consultation process and fees, including the follow-up meeting and retainer agreement. They also offered the next step of a paid consultation and confirmed contact details for follow-up, summarizing the agreements at the end.

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 assessment of eligibility or presentation of a suitable program, which are important for a meaningful consultation.
Riya Kathuria — 17:22 · 0:23 0/0

What was good

The call was too short to evaluate any sales skills or compliance. No opportunity to engage the lead was missed because the call ended immediately.

What went wrong

There was no meaningful interaction; the caller did not engage or introduce themselves, resulting in a wasted call attempt.
Riya Kathuria Rudy 17:23 · 4:26 9/24

What was good

The caller successfully booked a specific appointment slot and confirmed contact details clearly, saying, "I will send you the booking ID and everything." They also explained the process of signing the agreement and paying the invoice before the meeting link is sent.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any information about the lead's immigration status, goals, or background. This call was purely transactional without any needs assessment or program presentation, missing key sales opportunities.
Riya Kathuria रिया कथूरिया 19:37 · 0:10 5/26

What was good

The caller engaged in a friendly conversation and obtained the lead's name clearly as 'रिया कथूरिया'. The lead's interest in PR was briefly mentioned, showing some connection to the service.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any relevant immigration details or explain the process. No consultation was offered or next steps discussed, missing the opportunity to advance the sale.
Riya Kathuria Sandra 20:31 · 3:22 8/26

What was good

The caller successfully scheduled a specific consultation date and time, confirming Sandra's availability for the 28th at 12. They also ensured the lead received the agreement and invoice via email, moving the process forward effectively.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any immigration-related information such as goals, status, or eligibility. There was no explanation of the process or handling of common objections, which are important for building trust and clarity with the lead.

Agents recording software on callers' machines

CallerLast seenStatus
Reine Francis 12:54 (1041 min ago) offline
Riya Kathuria 04:16 (118 min ago) offline
Sara Habchi 13:57 (977 min ago) offline
Jonathan Gutman — offline

Call reviews 37 of 26 live conversations

Sara Habchi Sandesh 08:52 · 2:32 9/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed key personal details such as age, education, and work status with Sandesh. She maintained a polite and professional tone throughout the call and verified information from the lead's form.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask about the lead's immigration goals or language proficiency, nor did she assess eligibility or present any program options. There was no offer of a next step or consultation, and the call ended abruptly without confirming contact details or summarizing agreements.
Sara Habchi — 08:55 · 1:55 4/26

What was good

The caller engaged the lead in discussing their prior work experience and language test scores, showing some effort to gather relevant information. The lead shared detailed CELPIP scores, indicating some rapport was established.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask for the lead's name or immigration goals. There was no assessment of eligibility, no presentation of programs, no explanation of next steps, and no attempt to secure a consultation or confirm contact details. The call lacked structure and missed many key sales opportunities.
Reine Francis Ben 09:18 · 7:00 19/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced themselves and the company, confirming the lead's name early on. They thoroughly explained the consultation process, eligibility assessment, and program options, and successfully scheduled a follow-up call for Tuesday morning. The caller also avoided making any illegal promises and emphasized the RCIC license and expertise.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the lead's age, education, language proficiency, and work experience, which are important for a full eligibility assessment. They also did not confirm contact details explicitly, which could cause follow-up issues. Additionally, the caller did not handle any objections since the lead only said they would think about it.
Sara Habchi Jean-Luc 09:19 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing the prior SMS, which is professional and appropriate.

What went wrong

No conversation took place, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead was missed. The voicemail was brief but sufficient; nothing went wrong given the circumstances.
Sara Habchi Andres 09:26 · 1:04 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name, establishing a polite and professional tone. She successfully scheduled a specific date and time for a follow-up call, securing the next step effectively.

What went wrong

The caller missed several key qualification questions such as citizenship, immigration status, and goals, which are crucial for tailoring the service. There was no discussion of eligibility, programs, or RCIC credentials, and contact details were not confirmed, leaving the call incomplete in terms of information gathering and closing.
Sara Habchi Janak 09:27 · 5:20 19/24

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing a good rapport. She gathered detailed information about Janak's status, education, and work experience, and explained important eligibility criteria such as the non-counting of study permit work experience. She also offered a clear next step by proposing a consultation with the director and mentioned the involvement of an RCIC licensed consultant.

What went wrong

The caller did not explain the steps and timelines of the PR process, which could leave the lead unclear about what to expect. She also failed to lock in a specific date and time for the consultation or confirm contact details, missing an opportunity to secure the lead's commitment. The call ended abruptly without summarizing agreements or next steps, which weakens the close.
Sara Habchi — 09:33 · 0:29 3/26

What was good

The caller quickly identified the poor call quality and proposed switching to WhatsApp, confirming the contact number was active there.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any client information or discuss immigration goals. The call ended before any meaningful engagement or sales steps could occur.
Reine Francis Adas 09:34 · 0:37 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 continuity.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, there was no opportunity to engage or advance the sales process beyond leaving a message. No next steps were locked in during this call.
Reine Francis — 09:39 · 0:11 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to force a conversation. No inappropriate actions were taken.

What went wrong

No message was left on the voicemail, missing an opportunity to engage the lead or provide contact information.
Sara Habchi — 09:46 · 0:48 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly identified herself and the company in the voicemail, stating, "This is Sarah from Evernorth." This provides a professional introduction even though the call was not answered live.

What went wrong

The call went to voicemail and no message was left beyond the introduction, so no opportunity to engage or progress the lead was taken. Leaving a brief message inviting a callback or offering next steps would improve lead engagement.
Sara Habchi Furba 09:52 · 1:10 10/24

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly, saying, 'my name is Sarah, and I am a case manager with Evernorth.' She confirmed the lead's name and interest in PR, and successfully scheduled a specific follow-up call time, locking in Monday at 6:15 a.m. as agreed.

What went wrong

The caller did not gather any detailed information about the lead's background such as citizenship, immigration status, age, education, or language skills. There was no discussion of eligibility, program options, or next steps beyond scheduling, and no confirmation of contact details or summary of agreements at the end.
Reine Francis — 09:53 · 0:47 8/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and handled the lead's objection by acknowledging their workload and willingness to proceed later. They also provided contact options by offering to send an email address and asked the lead to fill out the form, which is a good next step.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's name or gather any immigration-related information such as status, goals, or eligibility. There was no attempt to explain programs, timelines, or lock in a specific appointment time. The call was very brief and lacked depth in qualifying or advancing the lead effectively.
Sara Habchi — 09:54 · 0:50 0/0

What was good

The caller clearly stated their name and company in the message left. The message was polite and concise, indicating the reason for the call and inviting the lead to stay on the line.

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 information.
Reine Francis Youssef 09:54 · 7:48 19/26

What was good

The caller engaged well with Youssef, confirming his status and explaining the consultation process clearly, including the $99 fee and what it covers. They also provided detailed program options and next steps, showing professionalism and knowledge.

What went wrong

The caller missed asking about the lead's age and did not lock in a specific consultation date and time, only leaving it open for the lead to confirm later. There was also no summary of agreements at the end to reinforce the next steps.
Sara Habchi Patel 09:56 · 9:02 22/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming all relevant client details and clearly explaining the immigration pathways and next steps. The explanation of the consultation process and payment was clear, and the caller ensured the lead understood the services offered, mentioning the RCIC license and realistic expectations.

What went wrong

The caller did not explicitly handle common objections like 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' which could have strengthened the engagement. Also, no specific date and time for the consultation was locked during the call, missing an opportunity to secure the appointment immediately.
Reine Francis Samad 10:11 · 2:11 16/23

What was good

The caller clearly introduced himself and the company, and confirmed the lead's name early on. He accurately assessed the lead's current immigration status and eligibility, explaining that it is too early to apply for PR and outlining the next steps regarding the postgraduate work permit.

What went wrong

The caller did not confirm the lead's age or language proficiency, nor did he ask about work experience. There was no mention of the RCIC licence or past successful cases to build trust. The caller missed opportunities to confirm contact details, lock a follow-up appointment, or summarize the call's agreements at the end.
Sara Habchi Pooja 10:11 · 1:20 9/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on. She successfully scheduled a specific appointment time, locking in Monday at 12:30, and summarized the agreement before ending the call.

What went wrong

The caller missed many key qualification questions such as citizenship, immigration status, and goals. There was no discussion of eligibility, programs, or RCIC credentials, which are important for building trust and moving the sale forward.
Reine Francis Majid Hussein 10:15 · 0:37 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, stating their name and company and referencing the lead's application. The message included a call to action, asking the lead to respond with a preferred time for a call.

What went wrong

There was no opportunity to engage in a live conversation or gather information, but the voicemail was professional and appropriate. No issues with compliance or approach were evident.
Reine Francis — 10:17 · 0:31 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company, and requesting a callback with a preferred time.

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 convenience.
Reine Francis Sutan 10:18 · 0:44 6/26

What was good

The caller introduced themselves clearly and identified the company, saying, "This is Ren, I'm the team leader at EverNorth." They also confirmed the lead's name early on and arranged a specific callback time at 1pm, showing respect for the lead's schedule.

What went wrong

The call was very brief and did not progress beyond scheduling a callback. The caller missed opportunities to gather important information such as the lead's immigration goals, status, or eligibility. No next steps or consultation offers were made, and no contact details were confirmed. The call ended abruptly without summarizing agreements.
Reine Francis — 10:41 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The caller correctly reached voicemail and did not attempt to force a conversation. The message clearly informed about the mailbox status.

What went wrong

No message was left for the lead, missing an opportunity to engage or request a callback.
Reine Francis — 10:45 · 0:24 0/0

What was good

The call was correctly identified as voicemail with no human on the line. The message clearly indicated the customer's voicemail was not initialized.

What went wrong

No message was left for the lead, missing an opportunity to engage or leave contact details for a callback.
Reine Francis — 11:01 · 0:23 0/0

What was good

The caller left a polite and clear voicemail message, identifying themselves and the company. They expressed willingness to assist and indicated they are awaiting availability to discuss further.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message was brief and did not provide specific next steps or contact details for the lead to respond.
Sara Habchi Had 11:02 · 11:38 22/26

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming all relevant client details and clearly explaining eligibility and program options. They handled objections well and offered a clear next step with a paid consultation, mentioning the RCIC license to build trust.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation nor summarize the agreements at the end of the call. Also, the 'I'll do it myself' objection was not addressed, though it may not have arisen.
Reine Francis — 11:06 · 0:22 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear and polite voicemail message inviting the lead to book a consultation for Monday.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead was taken.
Reine Francis Asman 11:07 · 2:07 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message identifying themselves and the purpose, mentioning the consultation booking as requested.

What went wrong

No live conversation occurred, so no opportunity to engage or qualify the lead. The message could have been more concise and included a call to action for the lead to respond promptly.
Reine Francis Miguel 11:11 · 0:25 0/0

What was good

The caller left a clear voicemail message addressing the lead by name and referencing a previous discussion, which is helpful for context.

What went wrong

Since this was a voicemail, no live interaction occurred and no selling or qualification steps were possible. The message could be improved by clearly stating the company name and purpose of the call for better professionalism.
Sara Habchi Samuel 11:17 · 10:30 22/24

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough and professional conversation, confirming key details such as Samuel's immigration status, education, and language scores. They clearly explained the eligibility criteria and next steps, including the paid consultation and collaboration with employers, providing realistic expectations without making illegal promises.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation, which could have helped secure the lead more effectively. Additionally, no objections were handled, but this was because none were raised by the lead during the call.
Sara Habchi Abhinav 11:30 · 9:46 23/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on, establishing a good rapport. She thoroughly confirmed the lead's immigration status, education, and work experience, and presented tailored program options including in-demand trades and French language pathways. The caller handled the lead's hesitation well by explaining the consultation process and next steps clearly, and avoided making any illegal promises.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation, missing an opportunity to secure a firm commitment. Also, the 'I'll do it myself' objection was not addressed, though this did not arise explicitly in the call. Overall, the call was well handled with only minor areas for improvement.
Sara Habchi Sedans 13:05 · 14:51 22/25

What was good

The caller conducted a thorough needs assessment and clearly explained the client's current status and options, including the importance of French language learning and job offers. They handled objections well and offered a paid consultation with clear instructions and contact details.

What went wrong

The caller did not lock a specific date and time for the consultation nor summarize the agreements at the end of the call, which could improve client commitment and clarity.
Sara Habchi Andres 13:21 · 12:46 21/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, confirmed the lead's name and details, and thoroughly assessed the lead's eligibility and options. She explained the steps, timelines, and pricing transparently, including the consultation fee and installment payments, and mentioned the RCIC license to build trust.

What went wrong

The caller did not handle any objections such as 'I'll think about it' or 'I'll do it myself,' nor did she lock in a specific date and time for the consultation or summarize the agreements at the end of the call. These missed opportunities could improve conversion.
Riya Kathuria Jay 16:36 · 1:25 7/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly and confirmed the lead's identity. She also confirmed the lead's current immigration status and mentioned the PR goal, showing some engagement with the lead's profile.

What went wrong

The call was very short and ended abruptly without covering most checklist items. There was no discussion of eligibility, programs, steps, or next steps, and no objections were handled. The caller did not confirm contact details or lock a follow-up appointment, missing key sales opportunities.
Riya Kathuria — 16:37 · 5:43 17/26

What was good

The caller gathered detailed information about the lead's age, education, language skills, and work experience, and clearly explained the services and next steps including the consultation with the licensed CEO. The caller also carefully clarified the work permit timing and eligibility assessment, showing good knowledge and professionalism.

What went wrong

The caller did not ask for the lead's citizenship or country of residence, nor did they confirm the lead's goals explicitly. The call ended abruptly without locking a consultation date or confirming contact details, and no objections were handled during the call.
Riya Kathuria — 17:31 · 0:38 3/26

What was good

The caller maintained polite communication and confirmed WhatsApp as a contact method, ensuring a way to follow up.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they gather any client information or discuss immigration goals. The call was very brief and lacked any sales or qualification effort, missing multiple checklist items.
Riya Kathuria Fart 17:46 · 7:00 22/26

What was good

The caller clearly introduced herself and the company, and gathered detailed information about the lead's profile, including age, education, and work experience. She thoroughly explained the services, the consultation process, and addressed the lead's hesitation by saying, "I will send you the summary and everything on WhatsApp."

What went wrong

The caller did not lock in a specific date and time for the consultation despite offering to book an appointment. Also, the call ended without summarizing the agreements or confirming next steps explicitly, which could have strengthened the close.
Riya Kathuria Sandra 18:32 · 2:57 10/26

What was good

The caller introduced herself and the company clearly and confirmed the lead's name early on. She carefully clarified the lead's current location and immigration goal, showing attentiveness by planning to consult her manager before proceeding.

What went wrong

The caller missed many key qualification questions such as age, education, language skills, and work experience, and did not explain any steps or present programs. No specific consultation date or contact details were confirmed, leaving the call incomplete for closing.
Riya Kathuria Sandra 19:34 · 2:10 6/26

What was good

The caller engaged the lead by addressing her by name and clearly explained the need to fill out the assessment form to proceed. They also offered a paid consultation as the next step and confirmed contact details like email and WhatsApp.

What went wrong

The caller did not introduce themselves or the company, nor did they ask any qualifying questions about the lead's situation such as citizenship, status, goals, or experience. No eligibility assessment or program presentation was done, and no specific appointment date was locked. The call lacked a summary of agreements at the end, missing opportunities to build rapport and clarify next steps.
data check · 8 calls not matched to a lead · 2 leads without a phone number · 118 leads unassigned · reached counts every answered call, voicemail included