Skip to content
Supportman
AI Quality

Build an AI Support Response Review Process

Deploying AI in support is not a set-and-forget decision. AI responses drift over time as your product changes, your pricing evolves, and your customers' questions shift. A lightweight review process keeps Fin accurate without requiring manual transcript review of every conversation.

Without Supportman

The ad hoc review approach

  1. 1Review Fin transcripts periodically when someone has time.
  2. 2Update knowledge sources when you notice a specific gap.
  3. 3Check CSAT periodically to see if Fin quality is slipping.

The problem: Ad hoc reviews find what you happen to look for. Systematic degradation — Fin giving outdated pricing, referencing discontinued features — goes undetected until customers start complaining.

With Supportman

With Supportman

Supportman builds a review signal into the CSAT workflow. Every low CSAT rating on a Fin-handled conversation is a candidate for the review queue — no proactive sampling required.

  1. Low CSAT ratings on Fin conversations fire Slack alerts.
  2. Team lead reviews the transcript and identifies the root cause.
  3. Content fix is prioritized and applied in Intercom.
  4. Process repeats — signal-driven, not sampling-driven.
Common questions

How many conversations should I review per week for quality?

Focus on signal-driven review rather than volume-based sampling. Review every Fin conversation with a CSAT rating below 3 — this is typically 10–30 conversations per week for a mid-size team.

Should humans review Fin conversations before they are sent?

Fin AI operates synchronously — the response is sent in real time, so pre-send human review is not practical. Post-send quality monitoring (CSAT, escalations) is the standard approach.

Five minutes to live, no IT ticket required.