Being forced to use call recording s/w

[Origin Unknown]

I work in a commercial role, managing alliance partnerships with MSPs and OEMs.

My company is forcing all in commercial roles; SDR's, direct sales, consulting, customer success, and alliances to use Chorus.ai. It's essentially a tool that records and transcribes meetings and allows anyone else in the commercial and leadership organisation to "listen in", on-demand and at any time. It's being marketed internally as never need to take notes again and the option for others to feedback as well as coach.

I, and many others, are very unhappy about this. It's too invasive and I have serious concerns about data protection and presumably, under GDPR and many other country specific laws, I need two-party consent, meaning I'll have to tell everyone the call is being recorded.

I am unhappy because:

• This will seriously impact my ability to build relationships over the phone
• This will invariably lead to questions on what we will do with the data, of which I frankly do not trust this business to properly protect data. I've been here more than 10 years, mostly in leadership roles so I know exactly what we do and don't do well.
• I don't need help making notes
• I don't need a reminder to talk about the next steps

More generally, this is a serious invasion into my work and I fear that increased scrutiny and inspection, and without the broader context of what's happened beyond that specifc call, will lead to poor decision making.

Do I have any say in whether I adopt this or can I be forced to use this?

[dundarach]

Given I expect any calls to any major business to be 'recorded for training purposes' I'm not sure why your customers would worry.

I'd rather my calls were recorded as avoiding replying to emails by ringing me, then denying they ever said it, is my bosses default response!

Sorry can't help legally.

[Richard-390a0]

+1 to what he said in the first reply. If you're always professional during your calls what have you got to worry about?

[RichTT]

Richard-390a0 said:

+1 to what he said in the first reply. If you're always professional during your calls what have you got to worry about?

There's a massive difference between someone phoning a call centre to renew an insurance product to a professional level person having to reel off some spiel about being recorded for whatever reason. I would be pushing back on this as hard as possible. What a crock. Same as that software that monitors your time on the computer when working from home. Complete invasion of privacy.

[bigandclever]

Assuming UK calls, that you know require 2 party consent, I'd imagine you can come up with a bit of spiel to influence the person you're calling to refuse consent?

[boombang]

Have they made it clear what the lawful basis for such processing is?

[deckster]

Richard-390a0 said:

+1 to what he said in the first reply. If you're always professional during your calls what have you got to worry about?

It's not about being professional. It's about being respected and trusted. I can think of no good reason for an organisation to want to record all calls and it sounds like exactly the kind of thing that a micro-managing leadership team might do to "improve quality" or some such rubbish rather than actually putting in place support structures which help people to do their job.

That aside, building peer-to-peer professional relationships is about establishing rapport and a personal relationship. Often you will be discussing the cricket, weekend plans, holidays, and family matters. As has been said this is a GDPR nightmare and having to get explicit consent at the start of each call will completely kill any chance you have of making that personal connection. Plus as a relationship develops you will want to move it to a level of "can I tell you this off the record", "...you didn't hear this from me but..." which is commercial gold dust, and again won't happen if your contacts know they are being recorded.

Fundamentally this is ridiculous idea thought up by people who have no idea how professional relationships work.

[deckster]

i4got said:

Consent is not required. Just make sure there is justification under Lawful Business Regulations of which there are plenty. My employer never announced to callers that a recording was taking place. Fell under the business's compliance requirements.

You'd better be damn careful that nobody ever found out that their calls with your company were being recorded without their consent. Even if it's legal, you can kiss goodbye to doing business with them ever again.

[bigandclever]

i4got said:

deckster said:

i4got said:

Consent is not required. Just make sure there is justification under Lawful Business Regulations of which there are plenty. My employer never announced to callers that a recording was taking place. Fell under the business's compliance requirements.

You'd better be damn careful that nobody ever found out that their calls with your company were being recorded without their consent. Even if it's legal, you can kiss goodbye to doing business with them ever again.

In that industry everyone was totally aware that all business calls were recorded - in most cases by both parties. In fact if someone became aware they were not on a recorded line it would be more likely to raise eyebrows.

And what about the OP's industry? I should probably add I know bugger all about GDPR and so on

[Munter]

boombang said:

Have they made it clear what the lawful basis for such processing is?

Presumably: It's taking the notes for them, storing them centrally (secure compared to what individuals might do) and making them accessible to the rest of the business, which has a number of benefits.

I'm actually starting at a company next week with a system like the one described. I'm looking forward to being able to review other peoples calls to get up to speed using them. And not calls from a year ago with everybody playing along. But real calls from yesterday. Not to mention being able to search a specific topic and see if anybody else get's that come up, and how they handle it etc.

[GibsonLP]

It's a pretty common practice in our industry (SaaS) with the likes of Gong, Chorus, et al.

I appreciate this is dependent on the management involved but once our team realised it wasn't being used in a Big Brother "are you working" type fashion but as a genuine tool for coaching, feedback, and nipping back to double-check what someone said it was widely welcomed.

We absolutely do not mandate it for every call. I completely agree that it should be a discretionary decision for anything sensitive or partnership-orientated.

The tool we use has an automated message for all parties as they join the call.

[Origin Unknown]

Lot's of great responses, thanks.

Deckster/RichTT is bang on, building strategic relationships is well beyond professionalism. I rely on key relationships from those on the ground doing delivery, through the client execs up to my exec sponsors. These relationships are based on absolute trust and cover a myriad of topics, many that nobody wants on a recording. More importantly, nobody NEEDS them on a recording.

Bigandclever - this was my understanding too, and CHorus' own website says the same; two-party consent is required in the UK and EU. https://www.chorus.ai/blog/call-recording-laws-a-p...

i4got - can you expand on your challenge on two-party consent, please?

boombang - not been tabled but I expect any olf nonsense will be given as justification

Munter & GibsonLP - both valid points. I see the value in onboarding; having access to recent and real conversations with prospects and customers is invaluable, particularly on-demand. This requirement could be serviced in different ways, maybe not as effectively, but shadowing is still valuable.

GibsonLP - When you say SaaS, are you selling B-C SME/midmarket SaaS delivered "somethings"? I ask as I live in the B-B enterprise space, although delivered via SaaS, my alliances are selling to 20k seats up to our biggest client which is 650k seats. I mention it as the sales motion will be very different and thus acceptance of recording is prob different?

GibsonLP - thanks for the insight in how, when delivered properly, people can see value from it.

Objectively, I am still unhappy at the prospect.

[boombang]

Munter said:

Presumably: It's taking the notes for them, storing them centrally (secure compared to what individuals might do) and making them accessible to the rest of the business, which has a number of benefits.

I'm actually starting at a company next week with a system like the one described. I'm looking forward to being able to review other peoples calls to get up to speed using them. And not calls from a year ago with everybody playing along. But real calls from yesterday. Not to mention being able to search a specific topic and see if anybody else get's that come up, and how they handle it etc.

That is not a lawful basis, that's a reason for having something.

All personal data processing requires a lawful basis such as compliance with a legal obligation or consent.

Then data subjects have rights over their data. Consent for example is a crap lawful basis for processing as it can be withdrawn at any time.

In this case a data subject would be allowed access to their data and if consent was used as lawful basis your could for example ask for it to be deleted or electronic copies be mae available to you. Using your rights can cause the data controller/processor a right headache if they haven't thought through and documented their lawful basis, and even if they have it's an overhead to administer.

[GibsonLP]

Origin Unknown said:

Munter & GibsonLP - both valid points. I see the value in onboarding; having access to recent and real conversations with prospects and customers is invaluable, particularly on-demand. This requirement could be serviced in different ways, maybe not as effectively, but shadowing is still valuable.

GibsonLP - When you say SaaS, are you selling B-C SME/midmarket SaaS delivered "somethings"? I ask as I live in the B-B enterprise space, although delivered via SaaS, my alliances are selling to 20k seats up to our biggest client which is 650k seats. I mention it as the sales motion will be very different and thus acceptance of recording is prob different?

GibsonLP - thanks for the insight in how, when delivered properly, people can see value from it.

I completely appreciate where you're coming from, I was abjectly opposed to us using it for exactly the same reasons as you. (I'd lose those "nudge nudge") type comments from partners who wouldn't want to divulge whilst being recorded.

I had a frank conversation with our senior leadership to explain how much value is derived from those types of conversations (Ones we'd typically have seen over a pint or G&T prior to covid) that simply wouldn't happen with it being recorded and the blanket response was that each IC could opt a call out of being recorded without question unless it was a first/second touch with a prospect.

To answer your question. We are B2B and SME with seats far lower than yours.

[Munter]

boombang said:

That is not a lawful basis, that's a reason for having something.

All personal data processing requires a lawful basis such as compliance with a legal obligation or consent.

.

So consent.

[CoolHands]

Welcome to the future. Sounds like a load of tosh, but all you can do is hang it out & wait for retirement

[Ozone]

OP do you have a company mobile that is added to the Chorus system? If it isn't, I would be using that a lot more for the 'relationship building ' calls.
If it is, your own mobile?

[Origin Unknown]

GibsonLP said:

Origin Unknown said:

Munter & GibsonLP - both valid points. I see the value in onboarding; having access to recent and real conversations with prospects and customers is invaluable, particularly on-demand. This requirement could be serviced in different ways, maybe not as effectively, but shadowing is still valuable.

GibsonLP - When you say SaaS, are you selling B-C SME/midmarket SaaS delivered "somethings"? I ask as I live in the B-B enterprise space, although delivered via SaaS, my alliances are selling to 20k seats up to our biggest client which is 650k seats. I mention it as the sales motion will be very different and thus acceptance of recording is prob different?

GibsonLP - thanks for the insight in how, when delivered properly, people can see value from it.

I completely appreciate where you're coming from, I was abjectly opposed to us using it for exactly the same reasons as you. (I'd lose those "nudge nudge") type comments from partners who wouldn't want to divulge whilst being recorded.

I had a frank conversation with our senior leadership to explain how much value is derived from those types of conversations (Ones we'd typically have seen over a pint or G&T prior to covid) that simply wouldn't happen with it being recorded and the blanket response was that each IC could opt a call out of being recorded without question unless it was a first/second touch with a prospect.

To answer your question. We are B2B and SME with seats far lower than yours.

Thank you, I am genuinely grateful for the insight.

[Origin Unknown]

Ozone said:

OP do you have a company mobile that is added to the Chorus system? If it isn't, I would be using that a lot more for the 'relationship building ' calls.
If it is, your own mobile?

This is certainly an avenue I could use. Mobiles are not today planned to be onboarded.

[boombang]

Origin Unknown said:

boombang - not been tabled but I expect any olf nonsense will be given as justification

My point is their business reason for recording can be nonsense but processing of personal data MUST have a lawful basis then abide the consequences of that lawful basis as well as complying with data protection legislation.

If it is consent, you or the other party as the data subjects can ask for that data to be deleted or have access to it and neither can be refused. Consent needs to be freely given and recorded, when gaining consent the data collector must inform on what data is processed and how it is treated. Consent also should expire and be refreshed periodically. Consent can be withdrawn at any time. Refusal to give consent should not detriment the data subject. The data itself must be treated in specified ways including locations and duration of processing.

What I am saying is if the firm relies on consent they cannot lawfully record and transcribe without consent, certainly not then do what they like with it. Tricky one in real life though as complaining to the firm and ICO won't sit well.

I would be asking for lawful basis of processing to be confirmed and for a 'privacy notice' or similar on the basis you expect people you deal with to ask about the call recording and are a concerned employee. That should be met with a reasonable response by the firm's Data Protection Officer, and if there isn't one it should be a wake up call if there is call recording on the agenda.

And yes I am immense fun at dinner parties / pub.

Edited by boombang on Friday 11th March 07:13