90% of customers rate an "immediate" response as important or very important, with "immediate" meaning 10 minutes or less.

At TimeKeeper, our goal is to make the support process as easy and seamless as possible for our customers, ensuring they get the help they need without unnecessary delays. By prioritising quick responses, we aim to remove the frustration and complexity from support interactions, making our customer's experience smooth and stress-free.

We are real people behind the screen. Every question, concern, and feedback you send our way via email or live chat is read and answered by either Sean, our founder, or our customer success team, Mandy and Claire.

In order to assess our position when it comes to replying promptly to support queries, we conducted an experiment to compare support response times from other companies in the employee time tracking and attendance space.

We set up a free trial with five different employee time tracking and attendance solution providers; Connecteam, HubStaff, PlanDay, Deputy, BreatheHR and ClockShark.

We asked each of these companies two sets of questions on two different days, noting the time we waited for a reply on each occasion and then calculating the average response time per provider.

In order to conduct a fair experiment, we established a couple of constants:

• The same questions would be asked across all platforms
• The same email address/name would be used across all platforms
• The questions asked would be sent within the support hours of each company

Curious to see who came out on top?

Service

Connecteam (https://connecteam.com/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ✅ 
Email  ✅ 

In Action

Connecteam responded at lightning speed on both occasions.

Service

HubStaff (https://hubstaff.com/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ✅ 
Email  ✅ 

In Action

HubStaff impressed with two swift responses.

Service

PlanDay (https://www.planday.com/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ✅ 
Email  ✅ 

In Action

While we waited slightly longer on responses from PlanDay, we received answers to our questions quickly.

Service

Deputy (https://www.deputy.com/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ✅ 
Email  ✅ 

In Action

The rapid momentum of Deputy's first response slowed with their second.

Service

BreatheHR (https://www.breathehr.com/en-gb/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ❌
Email  ✅ 

In Action

We sent our first query at 10.34am on a Friday morning. We received a response to this query at 8.39am on the following Monday. In round two, BreatheHR's response was significantly quicker.

Service

ClockShark (https://www.clockshark.com/)

Available Contact Methods

Live Chat  ✅ 
Email ✅ 

In Action

We reached out to ClockShark via email receiving a response to the first email within approximately 30 minutes.

Results

This experiment has provided us with valuable insights into the varying response times among our competitors. It's safe to say that for the most part, the companies we reached out to responded promptly to our queries - some more promptly than others.

The findings emphasise the importance of responding to customers in a timely manner with the solution to their query, as even slight delays can impact customer satisfaction. It also highlighted opportunities for us to refine our own customer support processes and see where we can improve. By learning from both the strengths and weaknesses observed, we can further optimise our response times and improve service quality.

In an era where immediacy is highly valued, at TimeKeeper, we are committed to providing timely, efficient and exceptional support to our customers.