> Any company anywhere always has to look for the best talent at the best price. Surely you understand the difference between wanting to hire superstars but th

> Any company anywhere always has to look for the best talent at the best price. Surely you understand the difference between wanting to hire superstars but then adjusting your targets downward based on what salaries you can offer versus wanting to pay as little as possible for call center agents and then adjusting your targets upward based on what you can get away with. "I want the best I can get but I need to be able to afford it" vs "I want to pay nothing but I need to spend enough to get something that works". Expectations for customer service tend towards rock bottom for many businesses. It's something they have to provide or their customers will get very upset (or they might even get them into legal trouble) but it only has to be good enough to be serviceable. And for call centers this usually means you end up having people closely follow a script anyway so you're literally just paying people to be human dialog trees. It's a nuisance but you can't get away with not having it, so you want to pay as little as possible. You're talking about cut-offs for price ranges - that's indeed a given which is why I thought it doesn't bear mentioning. I'm talking about whether you go over the resulting list sorting from lowest to highest ("best of the cheapest") or highest to lowest ("cheapest of the best").