TimeDoc faced two critical challenges:
Partnering with HR, QA, and recruiting, I led two research initiatives. I interviewed and observed CCs, mapped their task flows, and uncovered patterns in both workplace setup and onboarding experiences. These insights revealed where breakdowns occurred—and why some CCs thrived while others left.
Qualitative Data Collection
Participants shared their level of confidence after training and what portions of training felt most relevant once they were on the job.
It was often revealed that employees from different departments worked at cross purposes. In addition, most interviewees (regardless of performance level) felt that Quality Assurance monitoring and grading felt unreasonable and deliberately punitive.
Specific users often developed ad-hoc practices to make their work more accurate and efficient without breaching security protocols. This knowledge, however, was not widely disseminated leading to overall inconsistencies.
User Observation
Cataloged the day to day practices of 5 high performing and 5 low performing Care Coordinators to isolate behaviors that could be consistently replicated across the team.
Identified personal history and previous employment trends of those people with the greatest longevity and highest performance rates.
data consolidation
User comments were categorized into themes using an affinity diagram
Stages of the overall process were isolated as swim lanes. Steps each role took in the overall process were organized into these swim lanes with breakdowns identified.
Lots of data
Our research revealed that candidates with the most healthcare training and experience were not always the top performers. In fact, standout CCs often had backgrounds in customer service or education—roles where fast context switching and communication are critical.
Some CCs were flagged as underperforming due to low call numbers—but a deeper look showed many were bilingual, supporting non-English-speaking patients. These calls took longer but provided crucial, culturally attuned care. We used this insight to adjust how performance was measured.
By reviewing session recordings, I could often identify top performers within seconds—just by how their desktops were arranged. High performers consistently:
These small behavioral details had measurable impacts on focus and call efficiency. turning qualitative research into organizational change—and you frame it with an ethical edge
Identify Personas
To improve hiring outcomes and reduce turnover, I created a library of personas rooted in actual testing and interview data. Because Care Coordinators spend their days talking with patients about sensitive health issues, personal qualities like empathy, clarity, and persistence mattered more than advanced clinical credentials.
Each persona was based on real user behaviors and attitudes observed during testing and interviews. Over time, we began to see patterns—certain personas consistently aligned with high performance and job satisfaction. Hiring managers began to reference these when assessing new candidates.
I also identified traits that raised red flags for system misuse or care quality concerns (e.g., disregard for protocol, lack of follow-through). These anti-personas helped hiring teams know what not to overlook.
A hiring practice that reflected the real demands of the role—not just a list of qualifications—and improved both team fit and retention.
Short-Term Solutions
What seemed like a minor personal preference—how employees arranged browser windows—turned out to have major effects on efficiency. User observation revealed clear patterns: high performers consistently used a clean, organized desktop with consistent zones of work, while lower performers showed visual clutter and disorganization. We retrained staff on:
We scheduled recurring sessions for high-performing Care Coordinators to share practical tips, tools, and shortcuts. These sessions helped spread effective work habits organically across teams.
Together, these small changes had a big impact—improving call efficiency, reducing stress, and building a culture of continuous improvement.
Long-Term Strategy
To accelerate productivity, the Care Coordinator (CC) training program had been shortened over time. But this led to unintended consequences: new hires felt underprepared, and early missteps resulted in demoralizing QA feedback. We advocated for a more robust onboarding process, extending the shadowing period with experienced CCs to build confidence and reduce early burnout.
We granted team leaders access to FullStory, enabling them to observe their direct reports' workflows in real time. This shift allowed for coaching in context—grounded in empathy rather than punishment.
It also improved fairness: in several cases, team leads were able to identify system errors that caused QA citations and successfully reversed them. This built trust between staff and leadership and helped reinforce a culture of accountability without blame.
Using the developed personas and anti-personas, we equipped hiring managers with clear behavioral markers to guide interviews—helping them prioritize candidates whose qualities aligned with successful, high-retention employees, while avoiding patterns associated with early turnover or compliance risks.