TL;DR
Sampling 5% of your calls audits 5% of your risk. The other 95% goes uncoached, uncaught, and unaccountable.
Today we're shipping Clarity AI Agent QA. It scores 100% of voice and text conversations within minutes of call end, against your existing rubric, with evidence linked to the exact moment that justified each score.
Live today across regulated GCC enterprises, the BPOs that run their contact centers, and multinationals with multilingual operations. Native Arabic across all major dialects. PDPL and in-region residency.
A QA lead at a Dubai-area government contact center recently walked us through their process. "They are doing call transcription, then requesting an employee, for example, from among their employees, to review, listen to the calls, and work on the calls."
This is the QA process at most regulated contact centers in the GCC today. Manual. Anecdotal. Late.
It is also, give or take, the QA process at most BPOs running those contact centers. Every BPO Head of Quality we have spoken with in the past quarter described some version of the same operation: a small team, listening to a fraction of the calls, scoring them by hand against a rubric that lives in a spreadsheet, and shipping the results to a coaching meeting that happens later in the week.
We do not think this is QA anymore. We think it is QA theatre.
The QA gap you already know
The QA gap is not a secret. Everyone running a contact center can tell you about it. We just stopped pretending it is acceptable.
Most QA teams listen to between 5% and 10% of their calls, days or weeks after they happened. The other 90% of the population is not just unscored. It is invisible. A compliance disclosure that was missed on a Tuesday in March is not going to surface in a Friday calibration meeting two months later.
Even on the 5% that does get scored, the scoring drifts. The same call, evaluated by two reviewers, lands on two different grades. Anyone who has run a QA team has seen this. Anyone who has paid for QA has had to defend a grade they could not actually justify.
Coaching, predictably, lands soft. If the only behaviors you can coach are the ones your QA reviewers happened to listen to, the rest of the agent's reality goes uncoached. Bad behaviors hide in the unsampled 90%. So do the good ones worth promoting.
And the cost of running this whole apparatus scales linearly with headcount and call volume. Adding agents means adding auditors. The math of sample-based QA assumes the universe of conversations is too large to fully review. We do not think that assumption holds anymore.
What we shipped
Clarity AI Agent QA evaluates 100% of voice and text engagements against your own evaluation matrix. Automatically. Consistently. At a fraction of the cost of manual review.
Every call. Every chat. Every email. Every WhatsApp thread. Scored within minutes of the conversation ending, against the same rubric your QA leads have spent years refining, with the evidence behind every score traceable down to the exact turn that justified it.
[Embed: 75-second launch video.]
How it works
Agent QA runs on a four-step loop.
Listen. Ingest 100% of voice and text interactions across every channel. Calls, chats, email, WhatsApp, social. Native transcription, native intent detection, native evidence linking, in English and across all major Arabic dialects.
Understand. Apply your scorecard to every conversation. Greeting and verification. Empathy on complaint. Compliance disclosure. Cross-sell language. Resolution confirmation. Whatever sits in your existing rubric, Clarity ingests and applies at full coverage.
Respond. Push scores, flags, and coaching prompts into the tools your team already lives in. Genesys, NICE, Avaya, Five9, Amazon Connect, Salesforce, Zendesk, Slack. The agent's coach sees the score where they already work, not in a separate dashboard nobody opens.
Act. Reviewers spend their time on coaching that compounds, not sampling that scales linearly with cost. Trends, gaps, and risks surface across the full population of calls. Coaching playlists pull from each agent's own conversations. The work that used to be auditing becomes the work of getting better.
Score against your standards, not ours
We do not ship a rubric. We ingest yours.
One of the BPO Heads of CX Strategy we work with put it this way in a recent call: "How easy is it for a client to be able to change their mind, change the weightings, make a new scorecard, whatever it might be? And also, any of this kind of configuration that we've been talking about, is it low-code, no-code? Can they do a lot of it themselves?"
This is the test. A QA system that forces your team to learn a new rubric is a QA system that fights your QA leads instead of multiplying them.
Clarity Agent QA takes the rubric you already have, the same rubric your QA leads have spent years refining, and applies it consistently across 100% of voice and text interactions. Tone, empathy, compliance, resolution, scripts, cross-sell, anything you score today. Custom criteria per team, channel, or product line. Weight criteria to match what your business actually values.
For the BPOs in our audience, this works at the tenant level. A single Clarity instance can score against multiple client scorecards in parallel, with each client's data and audit trail isolated. Your team stops maintaining a separate scoring workflow for every downstream client. The rubric library lives in one place.
Every score, linked to the moment
No black-box ratings. Each criterion in the scorecard cites the exact turn, word, or silence that justified the grade. QA decisions are reviewable, appealable, and ready for any compliance audit.
This is what we mean by evidence-linked. Timestamp-anchored evidence on every criterion. Side-by-side review for reviewer calibration. Export the full audit trail to your existing GRC stack.
The result is that a score is not a number a system handed down. It is a defensible position your QA lead can stand behind in front of an auditor, a regulator, or a customer.
Built for regulated industries
Compliance is the gating criterion in this market, not a feature you bolt on after the procurement conversation. A BPO CX leader put it in plain language: "There have always been regulations that you need to evaluate that Saudi volume should not go out of Saudi."
We built Clarity Agent QA to that posture from day one. PDPL-native. KSA and UAE in-region data residency. Full audit trail export to your existing GRC stack. The compliance work was the foundation, not a retrofit.
Who this is for
Three audiences are live with Agent QA today.
Regulated GCC enterprises. Banks, insurers, telecoms with internal contact centers, manual QA teams, and a compliance posture that auditors care about.
BPOs running regulated contact centers. Multi-tenant scorecards, per-client rubrics, GCC delivery centers covered. The cost-per-conversation economics shift the moment QA coverage stops scaling with headcount.
Multinationals with multilingual operations. Global enterprises whose CX runs in Arabic, English, and the mix in between, on the CCaaS they already operate.
Availability and pricing
Live today and available world-wide.
Request a demo at onclarity.com/agent-qa.
