Genesys Cloud - Main

 View Only
Discussion Thread View
Expand all | Collapse all

Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

  • 1.  Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-08-2021 10:47

    Hi,

     

    My org would like to introduce the Bullseye routing feature on a couple of our queues, to widen the pool of agents during busy time periods. We have no issues with the setup, the question I have been posed by the CC teams are how they can report on how many calls are overflowing to the widened pool of agents, how many interactions they are handling in these queues.

    As far as I can see, there is no such specific reporting in Genesys, I wasn't able to find anything online either.

    Any guidance would be appreciated.

    Thanks

    Daniel


    #Reporting/Analytics
    #Routing(ACD/IVR)

    ------------------------------
    Daniel Mooney

    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-08-2021 11:56
    We have the same issue with Bullseye reporting. Even if you use the skills performance, you can't easily tell if the queue was answered by the primary agent or the bullseye agent
    GC is "supposed" to be making the reporting better for this, but so far not.


    ------------------------------
    Monique
    System Administrator
    Messer LLC
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-09-2021 08:50

    I checked 'Participant Data' under the Interaction, but there is no reporting on what happened inside of the queue. The 'Timeline' doesn't have information to explain what ring someone was in either.  

    I know that isn't reporting, but it would be nice to have that information readily available to a Supervisor or Admin in those locations.



    ------------------------------
    Nathan Smith
    ConvergeOne, Inc.
    ndsmith@convergeone.com
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 09-09-2021 09:14
    All - we are working on this exact issue now and hope to release in the next 30-days.  We are going to be adding the following columns to make it easier to understand the cause and effect of routing methods:

    • RoutingRequested
    • RoutingUsed
    • Agent Bullseye Ring (tells the ring an agent is specifically assigned to if setup that way)
    • Bullseye Ring (tells what bullseye ring the interaction is answered in)
    • Preferred Rule (tells what rule the preferred agent was in)
    • Skills-active (skills remaining for used for routing)
    • Skills-removed (skills removed).
    Additionally:
    • If you also include 'Skills' - that will give you all the original skills that came from the flow.
    • There are also a couple preferred agent routing columns as well to show the list of scored agents, and the preferred agent who answers the call.

    In the future we're also hoping to add 'interaction priority' so that you can see and sort on that value for waiting interactions just to give another indicator of routing detail.

    Hope that helps.
    Chris

    ------------------------------
    Chris Bohlin
    Product Manager - PureCloud
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-09-2021 16:06
    Thank you @Chris Bohlin!  That's exciting news.​

    ------------------------------
    Nathan Smith
    ConvergeOne, Inc.
    ndsmith@convergeone.com
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-10-2021 07:46
    @Chris Bohlin
    Fantastic! Reporting on which skill answered the queue is so important from a call management perspective

    Will this be something I can also see on my performance dashboard, so I can easily see skill activity similar to queue? That way I can easily see if too many calls are being answered by other rings and quickly adjust my agents
    eg:
    ring 1 skill : offered, answered not responding, etc
    ring 2 skill: offered, answered not responding, etc

    ​​​

    ------------------------------
    Monique
    System Administrator
    Messer LLC
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 09-22-2021 11:45
    I don't have any updates planned for dashboards at this time, Monique but something we can look in to.  If you are using any sort of WEM services, I'd recommend reading @Cameron Smith's comments below....really important to understand the impact this could have on your organization.  (If you aren't concerned - carry on!!!)​​

    ------------------------------
    Chris Bohlin
    Product Manager - PureCloud
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-13-2021 12:24

    Hi Chris,

    Great & thanks for the update.

    Look forward to seeing this released!

    Regards,

    Daniel



    ------------------------------
    Daniel Mooney
    HelloFresh
    ------------------------------



  • 9.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-14-2021 16:14
    Hi Chris!  That is terrific.  Our largest customers love Bullseye routing.  Any idea if/when Genesys will be supporting WFM with Bullseye or Preferred Agent Routing?

    ------------------------------
    Bob Shappell
    Avtex Solutions, LLC
    ------------------------------



  • 10.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 09-21-2021 09:34
    Edited by Cameron Smith 09-21-2021 09:51
    Hi Bob, 

    Unfortunately due to the nature of the bullseye method. WFM support is mathematically not possible as bullseye is effectively moving the interaction target based on those rings from one forecast/schedule group to the next. Modelling that real world / environment behavior when its very much 'in the moment' creates some extremely large challenges that mathematically doesn't resolve. 

    How bullseye works..
    Routes interactions to a queue using the pre-attached skills from a flow. If no agents are available after a set period of time, skill requirements are relaxed, and the pool of evaluated agents is expanded. This effectively creates a new, sub-queue of agents, for which no forecast has been created.

    What is the purpose of WFM..
    Forecast Interaction Volume and Staffing requirements to match customer demand with employee skills and knowledge to provide superior customer experience.

    The bigger picture.. 

    Within Genesys Cloud Workforce Management we have the notion of a planning group. A planning group is a discrete combination of Queue, Media, Language and Skill(s). Planning groups are usually a 1:1 match with a routing path (the matching combination) however can be merged together to create larger groups if 100% of the employee population are matched. More info here

    The implication here is across the wider CX engagement strategy. 


    The net result is we end up with a disconnected experience when leveraging bullseye. While the initial target is fine, the subsequent rings themselves are also valid planning groups. As the interactions cascade from ring 1 to ring n the underlying target location is changing. 


    As such its recommended that our customers use ACD Routing with Best Skills Matching to get even more capability from the platform. This combination is a combination that is designed to work with Workforce Management. The notion is fairly straight forward. 

    Bullseye: Moves interactions to where employees are available
    ACD Routing: Moves interactions through ranks of preferences to find an available employee

    The net benefits of leveraging ACD routing outweigh Bullseye quite dramatically however to leverage this effectively there needs to be the correct support and operationalization of the overall employee structure to make real inroads into these benefits. 

    Bullseye Considerations
    • Harder to adopt Predictive Routing + WEM Suite
    • Ignores Employee Knowledge and Capability after Ring 1
    • Mathematically Impossible to Simulate for Forecasting
    • Ignores Schedule Coverage – WFM Team lose sight of interaction volume
    • May distribute interactions to untrained employees
    • High Transfer Scenarios are common
    ACD Considerations
    • Shows True Customer Outcome
    • Requires a robust Workforce Management Process across intraday and service level prediction - planning for outcomes is core
    • Predictive not Reactive. Works best with a Forecast and Schedule in place
    • Discreate Service Impacts on unplanned interactions will occur
    • On the day skill changes are detrimental to the outcome
    Bullseye Benefits
    • Set Design and Flexible Overflow
    • Allows Service Level to drive the outcome
    • Can be used as a 'safety net' or as a 'escape path' from a high queuing scenario
    • Perceived Easy to configure and maintain - however pushes complexity elsewhere
    • Allows for the traditional 'overflow' logic
    ACD Benefits
    • Route effectively based on actual skills, capability, and knowledge
    • Change Skills when Knowledge is achieved
    • Customer will always reach an employee who has the knowledge to service the customer
    • Allows training and development to focus on customer outcomes
    • Take advantage of the full WEM Suite from Gamification, Coaching and Workforce Management

    The end result is a much tighter ecosystem across Routing and WFM, with direct ties back to how employees are trained, coached and guided to improve their performance. It does require more upfront planning and does require organizations to think about the role of the employee however the upside is that the system can perform its duties without the traditional needs of managing load, moving skills around to support service levels and the like. 


    The net result also sets up the organization to be a consumer of Predictive Routing. This configuration looking at the overall customer and employee profile with links back to how the employee is onboard, trained, coached, developed and measured creates a much richer ecosystem of engagement and will drive improved CX. 

    Cheers

    ------------------------------
    Cameron Smith
    VP, Product Management - Workforce Engagement Management

    cameron.smith@genesys.com
    ------------------------------


  • 11.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 09-21-2021 09:46

    Thank you Cameron, this is an excellent explanation of routing options.  It's definitely going into the ACD Training folder!

     

    Thanks again!

     

    Bob

     

    Bob Shappell

    Business Applications Consultant | Avtex

    e. BShappell@avtex.com

    c. 317-258-0949 

    d. 713-554-9054 

    Subscribe to Avtex Thoughts

     

     

     

     






  • 12.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 03-21-2022 16:21
    Cameron,

    I know this is an old(er) thread, but I has a question and a comment...

    Firstly, the question! If I attempt to use Bullseye Queues, am I prevented from using WFM, or does it just not work properly?

    Now the comment. IMHO, Bullseye is essentially there for when WFM gets it wrong. Say we have the situation of If a call comes in for Sales, try Sales agents for 30 seconds, then consider Customer Service for another 30 and so on, then if WFM has staffed correctly (assuming we have a Service Level target of calls being answered within 30 seconds) then no calls should reach the outer rings - any that do will be those where there are insufficient agents (i.e. WFM got it wrong!) Assuming these are edge-cases, can we not just slightly over-staff?

    Bullseye is a feature that a lot of places are screaming out for, but the "it doesn't work with WFM" causes some crazy custom work-arounds to be created (which are essentially Bullseye.)

    Thoughts?


  • 13.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 03-21-2022 16:59
    Afternoon Paul

    Happy to take the questions :)

    If I attempt to use Bullseye Queues, am I prevented from using WFM, or does it just not work properly?
    It only works for the first ring, so if your 2nd ring is another forecasting group then you are effectively rerouting the call from Ring 1 to Ring 2, this could then in turn make the forecasts and staffing for Ring 2 incorrect, so forth and so on. This is why its not recommended for WFM operating teams.

    IMHO, Bullseye is essentially there for when WFM gets it wrong.
    That's certainly one way to look at it, however the complexity Bullseye brings in actually does more detrimental damage then just simply using ACD routing with Best Skills Matching. 

    In the scenario where WFM got it wrong your ability to recover from that error is still far more manageable with ACD Routing and Best Skills Matching. 

    Why Best Skills?
    Lets take this scenario:
    Bob has a skill value of 5, Paul has a value of 4, Cam has a value of 3. 

    In this circumstance Bob is always first choice, and when Bob is busy it goes to Paul, if Bob and Paul are busy it goes to Cam. If we are all busy the interaction queues and the first of any of us can take the call. 

    Lets introduce more complexity:
    Bob: Sales(5), Service (4)
    Paul: Sales(4), Service (5)
    Cam: Sales(3), Service (5)

    In the same circumstance as above the value drives the who, but the customer (either Sales or Service) is now routed by:

    A) The overarching priority of the call
    B) Who waited the longest

    Say we have the situation of If a call comes in for Sales, try Sales agents for 30 seconds, then consider Customer Service for another 30 and so on, then if WFM has staffed correctly (assuming we have a Service Level target of calls being answered within 30 seconds) then no calls should reach the outer rings - any that do will be those where there are insufficient agents (i.e. WFM got it wrong!) Assuming these are edge-cases, can we not just slightly over-staff?


    You could overstaff, but you could also just set the rings at the skill value level instead of building the actual rings. Keeping the customer in the sales queue instead of moving them over to customer service does a few things:

    A) Can all the customer service people take a sales call?
    B) If they don't, then what? Transfer back? (not ideal)
    C) What we also see is organizations moving agents in and out of queues to meet the demand, that's typically also not a best practice. 

    In this example above you could have all your primary agents as a value of 5, and all your secondary agents as a value of 4, the distribution logic will remain where the sales agents get the preference, but the customer service agents (with a sales skill value of 4) are still valid choices - can form part of the wider WFM plan, but only after primary sales resources have been consumed. This keeps everything (Analytics, WFM, QM, and Gamification to name a few) whole. 

    The overflow timer seems be to the thing that holds everyone back with bullseye. While its historically been a good idea to create rings its actually pretty bad for customer outcomes. Hope that helps. Thanks for the question!

















    ------------------------------
    Cameron Smith
    VP, Product Management - Workforce Engagement Management

    cameron.smith@genesys.com
    ------------------------------



  • 14.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 03-22-2022 13:10
    Thanks Cameron,

    I am fully aware of how ACD works, unfortunately, in your example, there is no way to put a delay in. We can argue all we want about what is "correct", but the reality is that many call centers want to be able to pause and wait for a primary agent to be available before progressing on to a backup. In our case, for example, one of our business units has a bunch of retail outlets. If someone calls the store, they want the call to alert at that store for a period of time before rolling over to a different store / set of stores.

    In your example if, at the instant an interaction arrives into the Sales queue, Bob is busy and Cam is available, Cam will get the call, even if Bob becomes available within a few seconds! The balancing act is really about how long to wait for Bob before "opening it up". The same with Preferred Agent (which is essentially the same thing, just where the "rings" vary on a call by call basis.) I even have one business unit at the moment who wants to wait for agents with a Proficiency of 5 to be considered exclusively for a short period, before considering Proficiency 4 and so on.

    All this can be done "out of the box" with Bullseye / Preferred Agent, however the business has been told that you CAN'T use Bullseye if you have any form of WFM in place. As I stated before, if Ring zero is the group of agents who "should" be taking the call (and all other rings are overflow of one type or another) then if WFM has got all it's predictions right, there will be enough agents in Ring zero to handle all calls. Additional rings are only there to handle unexpected peaks in demand.

    You mentioned that when calls go to Ring one+, from a WFM perspective these are unexpected and so could result in there being insufficient staff in another queue to do "their" work. That is true, but the same thing effectively happens using your methodology. Paul and Cam are both meant to be in the Service Queue, but are able to "help out" in Sales if demand requires it (taking them away from their primary responsibility.) I would go so far as to say the issue is worse in that calls effectively "Roll Over" immediately, rather than waiting for a short period.

    Anyway, my main query was to clarify if it was "WFM and Bullseye / Preferred Agent CANNOT be used together, or if it was a strong recommendation. I'm thinking the latter is the case. We are not looking to use it in all our queues, but there are some where it makes absolute sense and I'm running up against "But Genesys said it won't work" from the business.


  • 15.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 03-22-2022 19:02
    Thanks Paul, 

    You are correct around the timer and that's the tradeoff that needs to be had. @Chris Bohlin on the routing side of Product Management is working on bringing the 'timer' so that as the time expands, the skill values can be expanded however the skills remain the same.

    Here is a real world example of rings. Zero impact on the actual end goal = NPS. 

    NPS Promoters = Bands are rings
    There is 1.45m Survey results here. 
    NPS Detractors = Bands are rings

    The other piece continues to propagate is the focus on Predictive Routing as a forward looking routing tool. Not every employee is the same from a performance perspective. So using the skill values you can fundamentally drive towards a manual version of predictive routing. By creating distinct groups of performance you can leverage some of your goals and measurements to create a better resource model for your experience. 

    Example: 2300 Agents, Same Interaction, Ranked for outcomes (NPS and FCR)
    In this example you do want those agents in the top right taking as many of these interactions as possible because that will maximize the return 

    ​While you point out that these drop down values do not have a timer there is a piece that wasn't mentioned. In the ACD scenario WFM now has complete visibility of all the resources available, so the staffing requirement and the staffing coverage is not just looking at Skill = 5, its also looking at all the resources across Skill = 4, 3, 2, 1 and so forth. What this allows the WFM side of the business to match the overall staffing needs with the overall staffing available regardless of skill level. 

    In that above agent pool. Every resource listed is considered for WFM, we are making a routing skill value change to decide 'who goes first' but the overall staffing model still targets that resource requirement and service level. 

    Aggregated across many queues and planning groups and the wider resource pool becomes visible. Right now with Bullseye because we are relaxing the skill and effectively moving the interaction from "Billing + Gold + MVP" to "Billing + Gold" WFM loses sight that the secondary resources are even present, more importantly what was original forecasted for Billing + Gold + MVP has turned into a Billing + Gold interaction, this effectively changed the volume count and propagates the problem even further - you start to forecast bullseye behavior and not in a way that is a productive outcome.

    If there is enough interest in this topic I am happy to set up a call to discuss live.

    ------------------------------
    Cameron Smith
    VP, Product Management - Workforce Engagement Management

    cameron.smith@genesys.com
    ------------------------------



  • 16.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    Posted 10-26-2021 04:23
    Hi @Chris Bohlin,

    Do you have any news on when those specific Bullseye routing items will be available in reporting?

    Thanks for your answer!
    Pascal​

    ------------------------------
    Pascal Smet
    Telenet BVBA
    ------------------------------



  • 17.  RE: Query regarding the reporting capabilities of Bullseye routing

    GENESYS
    Posted 10-27-2021 11:42
    Pascal - we have this lined to for release 11/10!!!  So, its coming soon!

    ------------------------------
    Chris Bohlin
    Product Manager - PureCloud
    ------------------------------



Need Help finding something?

Check out the Genesys Knowledge Network - your all-in-one access point for Genesys resources