ContactBabel research · 18th edition
Research sponsored by Enghouse Interactive

96% record every call. Far fewer learn anything from them.

Quality & Recording, from the 2026 US Contact Center Decision-Makers’ Guide. What 207 contact center leaders say is working, and what still isn’t.

96% of contact centers use call recording today
19% of those users want to replace or upgrade it
73% lack the time to analyze the quality data they hold
40% say their technology cannot do what they need
207 contact center managers & directors Fieldwork Nov 2025 – Feb 2026 Random sample of the US industry Chapter: Quality & Call Recording
The installed base

Recording is universal. Contentment is not.

Call recording is used by 96% of respondents, but 19% of them want to replace or upgrade what they have. Services, public sector, retail and finance are the most restless, almost certainly because they are adding AI-enabled speech analytics on top of the recording layer.

89% of recording users are already cloud-based; the rest plan to move within two years. Penetration among small operations sits at 97%, because cloud pricing has closed the gap.

89%
Cloud deployed
19%
Want to replace
1%
No intention to use
Insurance
Manufacturing
Transport & Travel
Finance
Retail & Distribution
Services
Medical
TMT
Public Sector
Outsourcing
Average
Use of call recording by vertical market
InsuranceUse now, no plans to change 100%
ManufacturingUse now, no plans to change 100%
Transport & TravelUse now, no plans to change 86%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 14%
FinanceUse now, no plans to change 76%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 24%
Retail & DistributionUse now, no plans to change 74%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 26%
ServicesUse now, no plans to change 50%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 50%
MedicalUse now, no plans to change 93%; Will implement within 12 months 7%
TMTUse now, no plans to change 80%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 13%; Will implement within 12 months 7%
Public SectorUse now, no plans to change 58%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 33%; Will implement within 12 months 8%; No plans to implement 1%
OutsourcingUse now, no plans to change 90%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 10%
AverageUse now, no plans to change 77%; Use now, want to replace/upgrade 21%; Will implement within 12 months 1%; No plans to implement 1%
Use now, no plans to change Use now, want to replace/upgrade Will implement within 12 months Will implement after 12 months

Source: ContactBabel, US Contact Center Decision-Makers’ Guide 2026, Figures 1–2.

Situational recording

Record everything, or record what matters

72% of recording users capture every call. The other 28% record selectively, and the rules they use say a lot about where compliance risk actually sits.

Mode 01

100% recording

Every second of every call, captured for compliance. The default for regulated operations, and the only mode that makes analytics complete.
Mode 02

Random & scheduled

Priority-based schedules built from business rules, with multiple criteria per schedule. Cheaper, but a small random sample rarely surfaces the best or worst calls.
Mode 03

On demand

Agent-initiated from the desktop, or triggered automatically by third-party software when a call meets a defined condition.

What triggers the decision to record

Call profile 67%
e.g. never record calls to HR; always record outbound calls into two-party-consent states.
Dialed number (DNIS) 38%
The number the customer called decides whether the interaction is captured.
Caller number (ANI) 30%
The inbound caller's own number sets the recording rule.
What triggers the decision to record
Call profileUsed by 67%
Dialed number (DNIS)Used by 38%
Caller number (ANI)Used by 30%
Where the audio lives
80%

store recordings offsite, inside a cloud recording platform or a dedicated backup facility within a wider DR plan. The figure grows every year.

Most operations of every size still keep dedicated secure on-site hardware too; a minority of smaller sites store recordings on general-purpose hardware, the weakest link in the chain.

From recording to intelligence

‘Call recording’ stopped describing what the technology does

Interaction recording synchronizes the agent’s screen with the audio channel, and extends to after-call work, email and web chat. Quality management runs as an iterative cycle, and every step in it is now a candidate for automation.

  1. 01

    Record the interaction

    Audio, screen, after-call work, email and chat, all captured and synchronized.

  2. 02

    Monitor and score

    Manual evaluation or automated analytical processes applied across every interaction.

  3. 03

    Feed back and coach

    Identify issues, then coach, train and route agents into targeted e-learning.

  4. 04

    Report at an integrated level

    Agent, team and center performance rolled up for supervisors, managers and executives.

  5. 05

    Act and measure

    Identify areas for improvement, act on them, and measure whether the change held.

A dashboard shows an agent closing calls fast. The recording shows the agent can’t help and is quietly passing customers to colleagues.

Why interaction analysis beats management information alone

It is impossible to listen to every call manually, so operations increasingly transcribe and analyze all of them, then listen only to the interactions with genuine coaching value. That moves the supervisor from monitoring to analysis: understanding not just what happened, but why.

Above the team, the same records feed compliance and dispute resolution, business-process optimization, Voice of the Customer programs, and recruitment and training decisions in HR.

Effectiveness of QA

QA is strong at fixing agents. It is weak at informing the business.

More respondents are lukewarm about their QA outcomes than enthusiastic. Only one purpose, evaluating agent performance and training needs, draws more ‘very effective’ than ‘fairly effective’ ratings. Insight leaks before it reaches the rest of the organization.

Evaluate agent performance and training needs
65%
35%
Enable regulatory compliance and auditing
42%
52%
Provide insight used in the contact center
38%
50%
12%
Provide insight to improve CX
35%
58%
Improve internal processes and metrics
25%
55%
20%
Provide insight used in the rest of the organization
12%
48%
40%
Very effective Fairly effective Ineffective
Effectiveness of quality assurance, by purpose
Evaluate agent performance and training needsVery effective 65%; Fairly effective 35%
Enable regulatory compliance and auditingVery effective 42%; Fairly effective 52%; Ineffective 6%
Provide insight used in the contact centerVery effective 38%; Fairly effective 50%; Ineffective 12%
Provide insight to improve CXVery effective 35%; Fairly effective 58%; Ineffective 7%
Improve internal processes and metricsVery effective 25%; Fairly effective 55%; Ineffective 20%
Provide insight used in the rest of the organizationVery effective 12%; Fairly effective 48%; Ineffective 40%

Digital channels are still a QA blind spot

Inbound telephony scores best, and even there only 40% call their evaluation very effective. Email, offered to customers for well over a decade, manages 15%. Social media is worse. Back-office work draws more than twice as many ‘ineffective’ verdicts as ‘very effective’.

Hover or focus a channel to read its split. Source: Figure 5.

Inbound calls 40%
Web chat 33%
Outbound calls 30%
Social media 20%
Emails 15%
Back-office work 15%
Effectiveness of quality evaluation, by channel
Inbound callsVery effective 40%; Fairly effective 45%; Ineffective 15%
Web chatVery effective 33%; Fairly effective 45%; Ineffective 22%
Outbound callsVery effective 30%; Fairly effective 35%; Ineffective 35%
Social mediaVery effective 20%; Fairly effective 22%; Ineffective 58%
EmailsVery effective 15%; Fairly effective 58%; Ineffective 27%
Back-office workVery effective 15%; Fairly effective 50%; Ineffective 35%
The bottleneck

It isn’t priority. It’s capacity.

73% of respondents lack the time to analyze and use their quality data, and 38% call it a major problem. Almost nobody says quality is a low priority: 80% report no problem there at all. The systems and the people simply can’t keep up.

Only 10% say their staff lack the skills. But 40% say, strongly, that their current technology does not support what they want to do. That is a tooling problem, not a talent problem.

For mid-sized operations the sharpest concern is having nobody available to deliver coaching, even once QA has identified exactly who needs it.

Challenges to managing performance and quality
Technology doesn't support quality & performance management
40%
30%
30%
Not enough time to analyze data
38%
35%
27%
Not enough time or resource to coach and train
38%
42%
20%
Staff do not have the skills to analyze data
25%
65%
Performance and quality are low on our priority list
20%
80%
Major problem Minor problem No problem
Challenges to managing performance and quality
Technology doesn't support quality & performance managementMajor problem 40%; Minor problem 30%; No problem 30%
Not enough time to analyze dataMajor problem 38%; Minor problem 35%; No problem 27%
Not enough time or resource to coach and trainMajor problem 38%; Minor problem 42%; No problem 20%
Staff do not have the skills to analyze dataMajor problem 10%; Minor problem 25%; No problem 65%
Performance and quality are low on our priority listMinor problem 20%; No problem 80%
What good looks like

Four moves the leading operations make

Operations driving quality forward tend to run the same four plays, and hold themselves to three success factors that keep QA honest.

  • Separate compliance from customer satisfaction. Process adherence is vital, but it does not by itself make customers happy.
  • Put the customer first. Customer feedback mechanisms are what drive success, not internal convenience.
  • Align QA to strategic goals. Measuring something that doesn’t move the strategy is a pointless exercise that steals focus.

Change the QA scorecard itself, not only in the contact center, but across back-office functions and for email and other contact types, so the framework matches the work being done.

Give advisors room to do what the customer actually needs, stepping away from the standard process where it does not fit, then feed those departures back as process improvements.

Build a coaching and development framework that changes the culture: evaluation feeds performance management, and advisors are able to make their own suggestions for improvement.

Link quality into a wider continuous-improvement framework, gaining insight into the drivers of satisfaction and loyalty and sharing it across the organization as a Voice of the Customer program.

What buyers want next

Three upgrades the market is asking for

01

Better data and reporting

The most frequent request: higher-quality data feeding management information, reporting and the wider analytical processes built on top of it.

02

Real multichannel capability

Recording has moved out of voice-only territory and needs the same richness across every channel, exactly where QA effectiveness is weakest today.

03

Ease of use for supervisors

Supervisors and trainers are the daily users. Time lost to the tool is time not spent coaching.

The major change to quality management will come from AI-enabled analytics that take 100% of interactions into account.

That surfaces the outliers, good and bad, and assesses every one of an agent’s calls rather than a sample. Today analytics still tells you where to look and relies on QM expertise to act; the next generation has to automate more of the manual work, and finally close the gap on non-voice channels as their share of interactions keeps growing.

CxEngage + EnghouseAI

Stop bolting AI onto broken CX platforms

CxEngage unifies voice, digital messaging and native video in a true cloud architecture built for enterprise control and scale. Transcription, call summarization, AI-powered quality assurance, Voice of the Customer insight and agent assistance cut manual effort while making interactions more consistent. Layered with certified call recording and automated quality management.

No AI theatre No platform sprawl No roadmap promises

If your contact center AI sits in a separate dashboard, if it needs weeks of tuning, if it can’t prove measurable operational impact, then it isn’t Practical AI.

Contact center agent wearing a headset, rendered as a duotone graphic 100% of interactions, analyzed
  • 100% interaction capture
  • Real-time sentiment and issue detection
  • Faster, defensible dispute resolution
  • Reduced repeat contacts and unnecessary escalations

Higher CSAT and FCR, lower costs, stronger compliance.

Prefer to see it on your own data first? Ask about a proof-of-value trial when you book.

About the research

ContactBabel is the contact center industry expert. The US Contact Center Decision-Makers’ Guide is the major annual study of performance, operations, technology and HR in US contact center operations, now in its 18th edition. This page presents the Quality & Call Recording chapter, sponsored by Enghouse Interactive.

Read the full chapter

Every figure on this page is drawn from the published white paper, including the vertical-market and operation-size breakdowns in full.

Download the PDF →

Extract from “The 2026 US Contact Center Decision-Makers’ Guide (18th edition)” © ContactBabel 2026, published March 2026. All information believed correct at time of publication.

Skip to content