The present invention relates generally to the field of Contact Centers. More specifically, the present invention relates to the field of call queue management and priority designation.
In Contact Centers, oftentimes the incoming contact will be required to hold for excessively long periods of time, leading to customer dissatisfaction. Generally, there are limits to the amount of time a person will remain on hold without becoming upset about the opportunity cost of their time spent holding. When they are subsequently connected to an agent, the frustration of being on hold will often taint the whole customer experience and is very wearing on the agents as well. Also, if the contact is accessing the Contact Center by a toll free call, there is significant telephony expense to support that contact while on hold. While the contact is on hold, they must remain on the telephone. If the telephone is a corded model, their ability to do other tasks is restricted. Additionally, regular announcements to the effect of “please continue holding, we will be with you soon,” become a distraction to other work the contact is attempting to do while on hold. The contact on hold may also be irritated by the choice of music or advertising that is played to indicate that the connection to the Contact Center is still present.
Furthermore, contacts tend to initiate calls to Contact Centers at times that will cause “peaks” in the daily contact load. Depending on the application, these peaks will likely be realized at the beginning of the business day, at lunch time, and late in the afternoon. Staffing to meet these peaks will often leave agents idle during off peak times, and reducing the number of agents to match the average load for the Contact Center will increase contact hold times at these peaks.
Some Contact Centers provide a feature where a contact may leave a call back number so that when an agent is available, the contact will receive a return call. This is an improvement over holding for long periods, but it still means that the contact has no idea when they will be called, causing them to remain near the telephone and interfering with their involvement in normal daily activities while they wait for the return call. Further, the phone must be monitored and kept clear for the return call, lest they miss the important call back from the Contact Center. If the contact needs to run an errand, such as picking up children from school, there is a high likelihood they will miss the callback and have to start all over, unless the contact has a cell phone to give as the callback number. All of these tend to create the impression that somehow the Contact Center is “more important” than the contact.
What is needed is a Contact Center with a system that allows a contact calling into a Contact Center to receive service without unreasonable delay. What is also needed is a Contact Center that can accommodate contacts who call during “peak” hours by allowing the contact to choose a convenient time to call into the Contact Center, thereby conveniently scheduling a callback time into the contact's daily schedule.
A system and method of distributing contact volume in a contact center when the volume of incoming calls greatly exceeds the number of agents currently answering calls. In an embodiment of the invention, the caller calling in at such a peak time is notified of the relatively long wait time to speak to an agent. The caller is then prompted as to whether he or she wishes to hold or accept a later callback time to receive immediate service. By accepting a later callback, the caller may access the contact center at a later time by dialing a unique telephone number or by entering a unique code when dialing the main line. This scheduled return to queue with priority system and method seeks to essentially eliminate high call volume times by redistributing those calls to times when the agent volume exceeds the incoming call volume, thus ultimately decreasing call center staffing costs.
An embodiment of the present invention includes a method of distributing contact volume in a contact center comprising the steps of notifying a contact of a significant hold time when the contact enters the contact center having the significant hold time, calculating a callback time with a distribution algorithm in the event the contact does not wish to hold for the significant hold time, verifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact, assigning a callback code to the contact, disconnecting the contact from the contact center and providing priority service to the contact when the contact enters the callback code at the verified callback time.
In this embodiment, when the contact does not wish to be assigned the callback code, the contact will hold for the significant hold time until service is provided. The verifying step also includes receiving a suggested callback time from the contact when the calculating step provides an unacceptable callback time, recalculating the callback time with the distribution algorithm and the suggested callback time and reverifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact.
Also in this embodiment, the contact re-enters the contact center using the callback code. The distribution algorithm assigns the contact the callback time based on a set of predicted call volume data.
A further embodiment of the present invention includes a system for managing a queue and distributing contact volume in a contact center comprising means for notifying a contact of a significant hold time when the contact enters the contact center having the significant hold time, means for calculating a callback time with a distribution algorithm in the event the contact does not wish to hold for the significant hold time, means for verifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact, means for assigning a callback code to the contact, means for disconnecting the contact from the contact center and means for providing priority service to the contact when the contact enters the callback code at the verified callback time.
In this further embodiment, when the contact does not wish to be assigned the callback code, the contact will hold for the significant hold time until service is provided. The verifying means also includes means for receiving a suggested callback time from the contact when the calculating means provides an unacceptable callback time, means for recalculating the callback time with the distribution algorithm and the suggested callback time and means for reverifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact.
Also in this further embodiment, the contact re-enters the contact center using the callback code. The distribution algorithm assigns the contact the callback time based on a set of predicted call volume data.
A further embodiment of the present invention includes an article of manufacture comprising a computer readable medium bearing program code embodied therein for use with a computer, the computer program code including means for notifying a contact of a significant hold time when the contact enters a contact center having the significant hold time, means for calculating a callback time with a distribution algorithm in the event the contact does not wish to hold for the significant hold time, means for verifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact, means for assigning a callback code to the contact, means for disconnecting the contact from the contact center and means for providing priority service to the contact when the contact enters the callback code at the verified callback time.
In this further embodiment, when the contact does not wish to be assigned the callback code, the contact will hold for the significant hold time until service is provided. The verifying means also includes means for receiving a suggested callback time from the contact when the calculating means provides an unacceptable callback time, means for recalculating the callback time with the distribution algorithm and the suggested callback time and means for reverifying that the callback time is acceptable to the contact.
Also in this further embodiment, the contact re-enters the contact center using the callback code. The distribution algorithm assigns the contact the callback time based on a set of predicted call volume data.
a illustrates a graphical representation of a typical Contact load.
b illustrates a graphical representation of a Contact Capacity of an embodiment of the present invention.
a illustrates a graphical representation of a typical Contact load and capacity of an embodiment of the present invention.
b illustrates a graphical representation of a Contact Distribution of an embodiment of the present invention.
The present invention is a system and method for a scheduled return to a Contact Center 100 queue with priority. The details concerning the Contact Center 100 are disclosed in a co-filed, co-owned and co-pending United States Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/435,974, entitled “YOSEMITE ARCHITECTURE SPECIFICATION II.” The United States Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/435,974, entitled “YOSEMITE ARCHITECTURE SPECIFICATION II” is also incorporated by reference in its entirety. Of course, it will be readily apparent to one skilled in the art that in alternative embodiments of the present invention disclosed in the following specification can and will be utilized in contact centers other than the Contact Center 100 incorporated by reference above.
The Contact Center 100 depicted in
The present invention is an advanced queuing system and method that is used when the number of incoming Contacts 101 exceeds the number of Agents 150, resulting in perceived long hold times for the Contact 101. When the Contact 101 first enters the queue and the contact router can see a significant delay is likely, the Contact 101 is advised that the hold time is long and is offered the opportunity to continue to hold, or to call back at a later time and be put at the head of queue. This allows more efficient operation of the Contact Center 100 and allows the Contact 101 to plan their time without being “trapped” holding on a line for long periods.
The solution is to offer the Contact 101 an opportunity to call back in to the Contact Center 100 at a pre-arranged time and receive almost immediate service. The present invention will free the Contact 101 to do other things, it will help to balance the Agent 150 load in the Contact Center 100, and it will substantially reduce network access costs, both of which save the Contact Center 100 operator money while raising Contact 101 satisfaction. The Contact 101 no longer has to wait, listen to unwanted messages, nor sit by the phone waiting for the Contact Center 100 to call back. The Contact 101 feels more in control and the implied feeling that the Contact Center 100 is “more important and too busy to service me” is gone.
The present invention may be implemented in several embodiments. One embodiment includes a Contact 101 dialing the Contact Center 100 and selecting a function, e.g., customer service for widgets, that has a long hold time. The Contact Center 100 analyzes the estimated hold time and after seeing it would exceed 4 minutes (a human would view anything over 4 minutes as a “long time” for this specific application) informs the Contact 101 what the estimated hold time is and offers them the option to keep holding, or for the Contact 101 to call back for almost immediate service at the first available time that it knows the capacity exists to move the Contact 101 to the status of the next party to be handled. This time is given as a suggestion and if not acceptable to the Contact 101, they can negotiate for later times. The Contact 101 is given an identification number to use when they call back, and in alternative embodiments, a new telephone number to call. This identifies the contact to the system when they call at the new time and the system then moves them to the status of the next caller to be handled.
While it is easy to see how the Contact 101 would interact with this system, the actual implementation can be fairly complex. The following are a few of many implementation examples for calculating an immediate callback time and should not limit the present invention to these specific examples. The difficult part is to predict the workload of the Contact Center 100 over the next 6-12 hours of operation, by looking at the scheduled staffing and finding dips where excess capacity exists. Implementation of the present invention will operate to smooth out dips and crests in call traffic volume by predicting the traffic volume and assigning calls in a crest to a dip in volume. Software currently exists to make such predictions. Implementation of such software includes consulting the outputs created by the software, the output being based on historical behavior. This concept shall be explained further later in this document.
Another approach to creating capacity for this system would be to reserve a maximum number of allowed system starts per time slot for reassigned calls. The work shifts could be broken up into 15 minute time intervals, and depending on the predicted arrival of non system traffic that typically arrives in one of these time intervals, and considering the Agent 150 staff available, each time slot is allowed a certain amount of system call starts. Note that as the ratio of system Contacts 101 in a time slot approaches the number of actual Agents 150, random Contacts 101 that are not part of the system and choose to “just keep waiting” will need to wait longer and longer for service. Over time, the Contact Center 100 will be able to predict better how many Contacts 101 will “just keep waiting”, as opposed to those who will use the SRQP system. Then, depending on the performance statistics for each group, the “waiters” and the system Contacts 101, the Contact Center 100 can tune its staffing level and what percentage of capacity should be reserved for the system. The means for calculating an immediate callback time may incorporate several different methods and algorithms, and should not be limited to those disclosed herein.
Most Contact Centers 100 measure their performance with a system that works like this: “X percent of the calls were answered in Y seconds.” Commonly, these values are: “80% of the calls were answered in 20 seconds.” These values can be very misleading because if an average wait report is generated for the span of an 8 hour work day, the aforementioned “80/20” goal can be met while still having a significant number of Contacts 101 waiting 10 or more minutes. This is an unwanted scenario. Since the typical Agent 150 work shift is 8 hours, and peak loads are often 3 times that of off peak loads, there is considerable capacity in the Contact Center 100 that is wasted to meet the performance criteria at peak load, or it is likely that if the numbers are averaged over the shift that a number of Contacts 101 are experiencing long waits at peak times. Also, many Contact Center 100 applications have call arrivals in peaks that are driven by unpredictable events (such as a new virus outbreak, or perhaps a new product release). In this case the staffing of the Contact Center 100 cannot keep up with the calling requirements without seriously overstaffing which leads to great expense. The system and method of the present invention can leave the Contact 101 in control, and allow performance of each of the groups to be measured separately where the standards for each group are purposely set appropriately.
Note that many Contact Centers 100 use an application called “Workforce Management” that is designed to help predict needed staffing. This application looks at common historical call patterns from similar time intervals (i.e. what happened on the same day last week), the available Agent 150 staff, available work hours and allowable work times (some employees might be hired to only work a 4 hour shift) and it will schedule each employee's start time, end time, lunch time, and break times. It would be possible to feed the system data into such an application, or to enhance the workforce management system to predict the amount of system capacity that should be offered during any time interval, based on call load and staffing.
If in step 202, the queue does have a significant hold time, the Contact Center 100 will notify the contact of this significant hold time in step 206. In step 208, the contact will then be asked whether the contact would like to continue holding for a significant amount of time. If the contact responds affirmatively to the step 208 inquiry, the contact will hold until the call is answered in step 204, again completing the call. However, if at step 208, the contact does not wish to hold for a significant amount of time, the Contact Center 100 will calculate the earliest immediate call back time and suggest this time to the contact in step 210. In step 210, the Contact Center 100 will use a model of the number of Contacts accessing the Contact Center 100 throughout the day, and compare this model to the customer contact capacity of the Contact Center 100. Through this comparison, the Contact Center 100 can utilize an algorithm to calculate the earliest immediate callback for the contact in step 210.
After suggesting this earliest immediate callback time to the contact in step 210, the Contact Center 100 will ask the contact whether the suggested immediate callback time is acceptable in step 212. If the suggested immediate callback time is not acceptable to the contact, the contact may suggest a later immediate call back time in step 214 or choose from the other times offered by the Contact Center 100, after which, the Contact Center 100 will again calculate an earliest immediate callback time in step 210 based on the contact's suggestion from step 214. If the original suggested immediate callback time is acceptable to the contact in step 212, the contact is assigned an identification number or given a new callback number in step 216.
Still referring to
Still referring to
After re-entering the Contact Center 100 with the callback code in step 220, in the step 222 the Contact Center 100 will determine whether the contact re-entered in the pre-assigned time slot. If the contact did not, a contact calling late, i.e., after his assigned time window, will return to step 202 and the Contact Center 100 will then determine whether the queue has a significant hold time. If the contact called in early, i.e., before his assigned time slot, the contact will be notified in step 240 of the appropriate time to call giving the contact an opportunity to hang before being returned to step 202. If the contact did re-enter the Contact Center 100 at the appropriate time, then the Contact Center 100 moves the contact to “next call handled” status in step 224. The contact will then hold for a relatively short time (again, depending on the particular Contact Center 100) before his or her call is answered in order in step 226.
Referring now to
Referring now to
a combines the Contacts Graph 300 with the Capacity Graph 320 to create a Comparative Graph 400 that demonstrates the Contact Surplus 405 as well as Agent Surplus 410 that occurs due to normal Contact Center 100 (
Conversely, when the Agent Capacity 425 is much greater than the Contact load, an Agent Surplus 410 is realized. An Agent Surplus 410 is economically inefficient as agents are being paid to essentially sit and do nothing. Oftentimes, an Agent Surplus 410 may also affect the productivity of an agent as more down time allows for breaks in concentration. Because the Agent Surplus 410 in any given Contact Center 100 is ordinarily much greater than the Contact Surplus 405, the present invention should operate in relative ease to redistribute the Agent Surplus 410 to the Contact Surplus 405, as will be shown in
The outcome of implementing the present invention is depicted in
It is also important to note that the graphical representations in
Still referring to
The present invention has been described in terms of specific embodiments incorporating details to facilitate the understanding of the principles of construction and operation of the invention. Such reference herein to specific embodiments and details thereof is not intended to limit the scope of the claims appended hereto. For example, the system and method of the present invention may be implemented in a Contact Center other than the one incorporated by reference and described in this document. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that modifications can be made in the embodiment chosen for illustration without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
This patent application claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) of the co-pending, co-owned U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/404,076, filed Aug. 16, 2002, and entitled “YOSEMITE ARCHITECTURE SPECIFICATION.” The U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/404,076, filed Aug. 16, 2002, and entitled “YOSEMITE ARCHITECTURE SPECIFICATION” is also hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. The co-pending, co-owned and co-filed United States patent application Ser. No. 10/327,360, filed Dec. 20, 2002, and entitled “REMOTE AGENT ACCESS METHOD TO A VOIP CONTACT CENTER WHERE HIGH QOS IS NOT SUPPORTED” is also hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5282243 | Dabbaghi et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5325423 | Lewis | Jun 1994 | A |
5390295 | Bates et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5459780 | Sand | Oct 1995 | A |
5488411 | Lewis | Jan 1996 | A |
5491795 | Beaudet et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5530744 | Charalambous et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5612730 | Lewis | Mar 1997 | A |
5613068 | Gregg et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5835126 | Lewis | Nov 1998 | A |
5848143 | Andrews et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5903642 | Schwartz et al. | May 1999 | A |
6046741 | Hochmuth | Apr 2000 | A |
6046762 | Sonesh et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6049603 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6094479 | Lindeberg et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6122364 | Petrunka et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6141341 | Jones et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144667 | Doshi et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6188673 | Bauer et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6188761 | Dickerman et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6201804 | Kikinis | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6212565 | Gupta | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6219648 | Jones et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6225998 | Okita et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6266058 | Meyer | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6289001 | Smyk | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6298383 | Gutman et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6301480 | Kennedy, III et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6330326 | Whitt | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6337858 | Petty et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6366577 | Donovan | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6377568 | Kelly | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6400804 | Bilder | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6434143 | Donovan | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445695 | Christie, IV | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463148 | Brady | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6493695 | Pickering et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6529499 | Doshi et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6542475 | Bala et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6574218 | Cooklev | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6577726 | Huang et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6584191 | McPartlan et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6590596 | Rector | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6600735 | Iwama et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6611590 | Lu et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6614902 | Rizzetto | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6615235 | Copeland et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6639982 | Stuart et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6665395 | Busey et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6674713 | Berg et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6678265 | Kung et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6678718 | Khouri et al. | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6687251 | Mousseau et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6697858 | Ezerzer et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6704409 | Dilip et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6704412 | Harris et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6724884 | Jensen et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6741698 | Jensen | May 2004 | B1 |
6766377 | Grabelsky et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6771765 | Crowther et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778494 | Mauger | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6781959 | Garakani et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6823382 | Stone | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6850599 | Yoshitani | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6850613 | McPartlan et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6868059 | Jones et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6937715 | Delaney | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7035252 | Cave et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7085263 | Fitzgerald | Aug 2006 | B1 |
20010024997 | Sugano et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20020071541 | Cheung et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030018702 | Broughton et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030133558 | Kung et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030195753 | Homuth | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040054743 | McPartlan et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040066923 | Robinson | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040141508 | Schoeneberger et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040221053 | Codella et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1 016 998 | May 2000 | EP |
WO9965214 | Dec 1999 | WO |
WO 0135601 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0161529 | Aug 2001 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60404076 | Aug 2002 | US |