Philippines staffing research
How are shared-number opt-out requests resolved across linked records?
A prospective audit of stops, scope review, and later dialing.
Published: September 11, 2026. This protocol examines how are shared-number opt-out requests resolved across linked records? It reports no measured effect or promised result.
Methodology: use one opt-out request from a number linked to multiple records as the observation unit. Pre-register eligibility, exclusions, fields, missing-data codes, and comparisons.
Scope/population: eligible shared-number records with an opt-out request. Observation window: eight intake weeks plus fourteen days of monitoring. Do not generalize beyond these workflows, dates, and systems.
Data collection should preserve pseudonymous IDs, sources, timestamps, queue states, owner decisions, outcomes, exclusions, and missingness.
Analysis should report counts and denominators by workflow, case band, reviewer, action, and outcome. Use intervals only when supported.
Inference and causal boundaries: The audit cannot determine legal scope or prove causation. Case mix, source age, staffing, season, scripts, and workflow changes are competing explanations.
Quality control: pilot a codebook, blind a second reviewer, and report agreement, adjudications, exclusions, and rule changes.
Limitations: incomplete audio, late notes, inconsistent timestamps, small groups, selection, and unobserved actions can bias results. Quantify each.
Use findings narrowly to improve a field, queue rule, reviewer guide, or prospective test; never judge an individual from aggregates.
Sources/References: NIST Privacy Framework (https://www.nist.gov/privacy-framework); FTC Telemarketing Sales Rule (https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/rules/telemarketing-sales-rule); AAPOR Best Practices (https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/); Philippines National Privacy Commission (https://privacy.gov.ph/data-privacy-act/).