Redesigning support operations to achieve SLA consistency at scale
HealthTech / Clinical decision support · Redesigning support operations to achieve 100% SLA compliance · 2025 · via Hugo
A clinical decision-support platform needed reliable SLA performance from a very small contracted team, with no room to add cost.
Missed SLAs traced to how work arrived and was triaged rather than to volume — capacity was being lost between queues, not inside them.
Redesigned the support operating model: triage rules, ownership, prioritisation and reporting rebuilt around SLA risk.
100% SLA compliance across Q1–Q3 and roughly twice the billed capacity delivered on a 1 FTE contract.
Overview. The client is a clinical decision-support platform; Hugo provides its outsourced customer support and back-office operations. I owned quality standards, reporting infrastructure and process design for the account — directing a three-person support and research team through a high-risk billing-platform migration and turning a reactive, post-pilot support function into a proactive, metrics-driven operation with a documented calibration and quality-review model.
- Owned quality standards and support analytics — building the daily reporting system and weekly leadership summary tracking case volume, SLA and quality end to end.
- Directed the account's continuous-improvement roadmap, prioritising and sequencing work executed by the wider team.
- Managed a team of 3 against a single billed FTE contract through the RevenueCat/Stripe migration while keeping SLA at 100%.
- Set up the calibration and case-review cadence — daily status reporting, weekly Zoom check-ins — used to catch issues early.
The pilot closed out in December and the scope expanded at the start of 2025. Within weeks, the client migrated its billing infrastructure from Vindicia to RevenueCat and Stripe — a cutover that surfaced real customer harm almost immediately: double charges, abrupt cancellations, login and access failures.
Support volume and case complexity spiked at the exact moment the team had the least tooling to handle it: no reopened-case workflow, no standardised response content, and no reporting cadence to give leadership visibility into what was breaking.
Stabilising through the migration
I stood up dual coverage so the team could absorb the surge without missing SLA, while partnering directly with Engineering and the SSO implementation team on root-cause fixes for the billing and access errors customers were hitting.
Building the quality and workflow infrastructure
I directed the introduction of new Salesforce case states (“Reopened”, “Waiting for Support”) so client replies could never silently sit unhandled, alongside targeted macros and support content that cut response variance across agents.
I then built the daily case/activity reporting system and the weekly leadership summary that gave the client a recurring, structured view of volume, SSO progress, issue trends and productivity — the backbone of the account's calibration and review process.
The improvement roadmap — 12 initiatives directed
- 01Salesforce response-template system for standardised, faster replies
- 02Daily reporting system for case and activity status
- 03Weekly leadership summary of support activities
- 04Salesforce auto-reopen case status on client reply
- 05Salesforce auto-switch: Waiting for Response → Waiting for Support
- 06Outlook email-thread enhancements for status alerts
- 07Audible notifications for incoming priority cases
- 08Weekly CX check-ins for team alignment
- 09Stripe receipt format enhancement with full payment breakdowns
- 10Expansion of Salesforce case types and reasons
- 11Automated time-tracking report in Salesforce (proposed)
- 12Outlook–Salesforce case linkage plugin
Scaling into proactive operations
As ticket inflow stabilised, I redirected the team's freed-up capacity into institutional research and data validation — verifying NPI numbers, professions and user eligibility across enterprise contracts — and into lead-generation site tagging that mapped 1,800+ sites and 300+ group structures for future outreach.
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| SLA compliance | 100% every quarter (Q1–Q3 2025) |
| Client quality flags | Zero, across the full reporting period |
| Billed capacity delivered | ~2× contracted scope (1 billed FTE, team of 3) |
| Ticket volume, Q1 → Q3 | Down ~40% as post-migration systems stabilised |
| Receipt-related tickets | Down 60%+ after automated invoice delivery |
| Institutional records researched | 6,700+ across 57 research tasks, 100% on time |
| Sites mapped for lead generation | 1,800+ sites, 300+ group structures |
| SSO reminder emails sent | Up 60% Q1 → Q3 as rollout scaled |
- SLA compliance, Q1–Q3 2025100%
- Client quality flags0
- Ticket volume across the migration−40%
- Receipt-related tickets after automation−60%
- Held SLA at 100% through a billing migration that was actively harming customers, with zero client quality flags.
- Delivered roughly twice the contracted capacity by restructuring how a three-person team covered the day.
- Converted stabilised capacity into research and pipeline work instead of idle headcount.
More case studies
Full index- 01US digital pharmacy clientDiagnosing the root causes of customer and compliance failures, separating agent performance from systemic issues, and building the governance to improve both safely at scale93% CSAT vs 90% target
- 02EdTech learning marketplaceReducing recurring customer dissatisfaction through frontline capability84% drop in issue-recognition DSATs
- 03Conversational commerce SaaS platformDesigning and scaling a new customer-support channel90% onboarding pass rate vs 60% target