This invention relates generally to communications systems and specifically to selection of communication type in such system.
Electronic communications between parties can take a variety of forms (a.k.a. types or media) such as real-time voice communications over a wired, wireless or Voice over Internet Protocol system, voicemail, text messaging, instant messaging, on-line chat, email, etc. Unless a party that is initiating a communication (the “calling party”) to another party (the “called party”) is relying upon remembrance of its past experiences with the called party, the calling party usually does not know what type of communication with the called party is likely to be most effective (e.g., is most likely to succeed at any time).
It is known to provide the calling party with presence information about the called party. But the presence information generally indicates whether and where the calling party may currently be reached, and not by what type of communication the calling party is currently best reached.
According to an aspect of the invention, a called party's communications habits are used together with current information to determine a preferable mode of communicating with the called party, and the preference is indicated to the calling party. The communications habits are illustratively determined from the called party's behavior with respect to prior communications involving the called party, such as whether the prior communication was answered, redirected to a mailbox, etc., and the then-current state of the called party. The current information illustratively includes parameters of the current communication desired by the calling party and the current state of the called party. The parameters illustratively include things like the type, importance, urgency, sensitively, and anticipated length of the communication. The state illustratively includes presence. The mode of communicating illustratively includes the preferable communications method and/or user terminal (e.g., voice, text, real-time call via desk-phone or mobile phone, voicemail, email, instant messaging, etc.) and/or the preferable time for the communication. The preference is illustratively based on which mode of communication is most effective and/or most likely to succeed at a particular time.
The analysis, at step 312, may be as simple as pattern-matching the calling party's communications needs against the historical data and current state of the called party to find the historically-best method and/or time for having the desired type of communication with the called party. Or, the analysis may be as sophisticated as applying artificial intelligence to the data in order to make the determination. Or, the analysis may be in-between these levels of complexity, such as applying series of “if-then-else” rules to the data to make the determination. The following are a few illustrative examples of results that the analysis may produce:
1. At 12:00 P.M., a calling party indicates that it needs an extensive call with a called party. Behavior monitoring system 110 determines from historical data that the called party sends all voice calls to voicemail between 12:00 and 1:00 P.M., but responds promptly to IM messages. Behavior monitoring system 110 recommends that the calling party wait until after 1:00 P.M. to call the called party on the phone.
2. At 10:00 A.M., a calling party indicates that it needs an in-person voice call with a called party. Behavior monitoring system 110 determines that the called party is currently on a phone call, and determines from historical data and personal scheduling system 118 that the called party spends 2-3 hours in conference calls each morning but occasionally IMs during the conference calls, and that the called party picks up a large percentage of its mobile phone calls between 1:00 and 2:00 P.M. and a smaller percentage at other times. Behavior monitoring system 110 recommends that the calling party either IM the called party now, or call the called party on the called party's mobile phone between 1:00 and 2:00 P.M.
3. At 11:00 A.M., a calling party indicates that it needs to urgently communicate with a called party. Behavior monitoring system 110 determines that it has little communications history for the called party, other than that calls to the called party's desk phone get diverted to voicemail and that the called party picks up its voicemail and email in the evenings, and that the called party is not present in the building. From personnel system 116, behavior monitoring system 110 determines that the called party is a field technician. Behavior modification system 110 recommends that the calling party call the called party on the called party's cell phone.
Of course, various changes and modifications to the illustrative embodiment described above will be apparent to those skilled in the art. For example, although the examples given above were e mainly time-based, could use parameters that are behavior-based. E.g., when in meetings, a called party normally answers text/SMS messages but no other forms of communication. So if the system detects that the called party is in a meeting, it may advise the caller to use cell phone text messaging. The type of response needed by either party could also determine the preferred communication method. For example, a complex contract negotiation may require both parties to have access to online resources. Therefore, informal communication methods such as IM would not be appropriate in this instance. These changes and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit and the scope of the invention and without diminishing its attendant advantages. It is therefore intended that such changes and modifications be covered by the following claims except insofar as limited by the prior art.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
7443283 | Schmandt et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7571249 | Wu | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7675411 | Michaelis et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7706785 | Lei et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
8046454 | Song et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
20020085701 | Parsons et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20040267887 | Berger et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050068166 | Baker | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050165891 | Moody et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060069686 | Beyda et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060239424 | Walter | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070081640 | Jachner | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070239428 | Milstein et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080130860 | Mullis et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20090022297 | Jackson et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20100002859 | Hepworth et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1542430 | Jun 2005 | EP |
1675371 | Jun 2006 | EP |
1696647 | Aug 2006 | EP |
2422231 | Jul 2006 | GB |
2007113516 | Oct 2007 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100002859 A1 | Jan 2010 | US |