Birdie.so

A few days ago, Giovanni Lepori from Hunter.io shared this message with his support team: 𝘉𝘪𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘢𝘷𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺𝘰𝘯𝘦. Their reaction? 🙌💃😀 These small moments matter to us. Yes — Birdie.so is built to improve workflows, reduce the back-and-forth, and help teams resolve issues faster. But there’s something even more meaningful: Tools that feel good to use. Tools that make support work smoother. Tools that spark a moment of “finally… this makes my day easier.” If we can deliver both joyful reactions and operational impact, then we’re building Birdie the right way.

This is how LinkedIn guides customers to collect a HAR file. And I bet your team does the exact same thing. You copy-paste this wall of instructions. Nine steps. Zero chance the customer follows all of them. In my experience, less than 20% ever send the file back. That means 4 out of 5 tickets never include the logs your team actually needs to debug. And if your users aren’t technical? Forget it. They drop off halfway through step one. So you end up doing what every support rep dreads: - Scheduling a Zoom call. - Walking the customer through Developer Tools. - Hoping it doesn’t take 30 minutes to get one file. The customer’s frustrated. The agent’s frustrated. And everyone wonders why ticket resolution takes forever. That’s one of the reasons we built Birdie.so. When a customer records their screen, Birdie automatically collects the HAR file in the background. No instructions. No Zoom calls. No drop-offs. Just the context you need — instantly. If your team has ever sent that HAR file guide and thought, “𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘢𝘺…” You’re not alone.

8% of your tickets are running your entire support operation. Most teams treat every ticket as equal. But they’re not. Some tickets are solved in two replies. Others take 12 messages, 3 handoffs, and hours of troubleshooting. When we looked at 20 large support teams using Birdie.so, one pattern was clear: 📊 On average, 8% of tickets account for over 63% of total handling time. That 8% is where the real work lives — not in the ticket count, but in the complexity behind it. These are the tickets that: Span multiple tools or integrations Require reproduction and debugging Demand collaboration across product, engineering, or QA Yet most dashboards still treat them like any other case. Leaders who understand this shift how they manage. They don’t ask, “How many tickets did we close?” They ask, “Which tickets are draining our team’s time — and why?” That’s how you uncover process gaps, knowledge gaps, and product issues before they scale. Because 50% of tickets isn’t 50% of the work. And the sooner you start managing effort — not volume — the stronger your team becomes.

Your agents aren’t solving tickets. They’re solving mysteries. If you run a support team, you know the drill: - A wall of text that’s more confusing than helpful. - A screenshot that captures one frame, but not the sequence. - Agents forced into hours of back-and-forth just to understand the problem. Without full context, resolution isn’t support. It’s detective work. 🕵🏼♀️ That’s the gap most teams live in every day. And that’s why we built Birdie.so: to give support teams the full picture, not fragments. - Screen recordings that show every step. - Device and environment metadata. - Console logs and network requests. - Automatic reproduction steps. The result? Less back-and-forth. Faster resolutions. Better experiences for your customers and your agents. TAKEAWAY Context isn’t optional. It’s the difference between a mystery… and a solved ticket.

Everyone thinks Zoom calls = better support. The reality? They downgrade it. Here’s why 👇 1️⃣ Most agents aren’t trained for live calls. Most frontline reps are hired to handle chat and email. Over time, some are asked to jump on Zoom for certain tickets — even though it was never part of their job spec. No surprise it feels uncomfortable and unnatural. 2️⃣ Most agents don’t enjoy it. Even if they can do it, most agents would rather not. It’s stressful and doesn’t play to their strengths. 3️⃣ It steals time from customers. Scheduling is a headache. You’re asking them to carve time out of their day for something that might not even help them. 4️⃣ Timing is off. Customers give the best context at the exact moment they run into the issue. Hours (or days) later, on a scheduled call, they’ve moved on — and it’s hard for them to bring their mind back to the problem. 5️⃣ Smaller teams can’t cover time zones. If you’re not running 24/7 coverage, just finding a slot can be frustrating. 6️⃣ Expectation vs. reality. When customers join a live call, they expect a fix on the spot. But most of the time? The agent can’t resolve it immediately. They’re just gathering context… which could have been done asynchronously, with less effort for both sides. The irony is this: We think going live feels like a premium experience. But often, it’s the opposite. The alternative? Birdie.so Birdie lets support teams request screen recordings directly from customers inside their helpdesk (Intercom, Zendesk, Salesforce,…). Instead of scheduling a Zoom, agents receive a recording of the issue so they can see exactly what’s going on. And when support can’t solve it right away? Birdie auto-generates a full bug report ready to escalate: video, console logs, HAR files, repro steps, device + session data No training. No scheduling. No disappointed customers. Just context, captured better than any Zoom call. TAKEAWAY: Live calls feel premium. But async done right is better support.

Some reviews give us bugs to fix. This one gave us butterflies. 💌

5 stars? I’m framing this review.

Good teams ask for recordings when there’s a bug. Great teams know there are 10+ other moments where it changes the game. One support team went further than just listing scenarios when adding Birdie.so to Fin They actually scored them — based on three dimensions: ▪️ How often does this scenario happen (frequency)? ▪️ How painful is it when it does (impact)? ▪️ How much back-and-forth does a recording save (effort saved)? Each was rated 1–3, with a total score out of 9. The result? A clear playbook showing which scenarios are “must-trigger” and which are “nice-to-have.” 👇 I’ve shared their scoring table in the image below.

Everyone in support obsesses over 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. But the real bottleneck isn’t resolution. It’s 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘹𝘵 . Before you can fix anything, the customer spends most of their time just waiting for us to understand the problem. That’s why I started tracking something different: 𝐀𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. Not how fast the ticket was closed. Not how fast we eventually replied. But how long the customer was left hanging between each step in the conversation. The tricky part: it’s surprisingly hard to calculate. ▪️ Count every gap between messages → you’re mostly measuring customer delays, not ours. ▪️Count only customer → agent gaps → closer. Now you’re isolating the wait they actually feel. ▪️Make it SLA-aware → best signal. Under SLA = 0. Over SLA = only the extra hours count. Here’s how we calculate it: 1️⃣ Look at every gap between a customer message and the next agent reply. 2️⃣ If the gap is under SLA → count it as 0. 3️⃣ If it’s over SLA → count only the extra hours (in business hours). 4️⃣ Average those numbers across the ticket. This metric doesn’t tell you how good your agents are at solving problems. It tells you how good your system is at not leaving people hanging. And that’s what customers remember. Because solving the problem is expected. But the waiting? That’s the part that feels like friction. Takeaway: Stop asking “How long until the ticket was closed?” Start asking “How long did the customer wait at every step along the way?” That’s where trust is either built — or lost.