We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Slade - routing and utilization work hand-in-hand so that interactions are distributed across the contact center floor.  Typically this is done based on agent availability and as such if you have some agents taking longer than others on their interactions you could see an uneven distribution with agents who are finishing up their work more quickly.  

In your example - if utilization is set to 4 for chat for each agent - and assuming you have chats set to interrupt other media - i would expect the first chat in to go to agent A, the second to agent B, and so on and on the 5th chat - it would go back to agent A again...assuming all chats came in quickly and those that were connected ran for a while, once all the agents had 4 chats - the next chat would queue up.  As soon as one chat was finished (by any of those agents), the waiting chat would be connected.  We wouldn't wait for agent A to come back around to be 'first' again - its not round robin in that way.

How are your interrupt settings currently defined?  Can a chat interrupt a call or an email?  (If the agent were connected to one of those and chats were not set to interrupt, the chat may not make it to the agent until they are completely free from other interactions.)

Take a look through the resource center on our utilization info - it should help clarifiy.

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Hi @Chris Bohlin

We notice this behaviour for web messaging as well where it doesn't distribute evenly.

For example, we have 5 agents in the message queue and they all have their utilisation set to 3 messages at a time.

As messages come through,  what we experience is that Agent A will get the first 3 messages whilst Agent B through E don't get anything until the 4 message.

When we raised this behaviour through Genesys support thinking this wasn't working properly - they told us the system is working as designed and the only way to stop this behaviour was to reduce the amount of concurrent messages.

It would be great if the workload could be more evenly distributed.

Slade - routing and utilization work hand-in-hand so that interactions are distributed across the contact center floor.  Typically this is done based on agent availability and as such if you have some agents taking longer than others on their interactions you could see an uneven distribution with agents who are finishing up their work more quickly.  

In your example - if utilization is set to 4 for chat for each agent - and assuming you have chats set to interrupt other media - i would expect the first chat in to go to agent A, the second to agent B, and so on and on the 5th chat - it would go back to agent A again...assuming all chats came in quickly and those that were connected ran for a while, once all the agents had 4 chats - the next chat would queue up.  As soon as one chat was finished (by any of those agents), the waiting chat would be connected.  We wouldn't wait for agent A to come back around to be 'first' again - its not round robin in that way.

How are your interrupt settings currently defined?  Can a chat interrupt a call or an email?  (If the agent were connected to one of those and chats were not set to interrupt, the chat may not make it to the agent until they are completely free from other interactions.)

Take a look through the resource center on our utilization info - it should help clarifiy.

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Thanks, Jeff - this is news to me but let me check with the Web Messaging PM.

Hi @Chris Bohlin

We notice this behaviour for web messaging as well where it doesn't distribute evenly.

For example, we have 5 agents in the message queue and they all have their utilisation set to 3 messages at a time.

As messages come through,  what we experience is that Agent A will get the first 3 messages whilst Agent B through E don't get anything until the 4 message.

When we raised this behaviour through Genesys support thinking this wasn't working properly - they told us the system is working as designed and the only way to stop this behaviour was to reduce the amount of concurrent messages.

It would be great if the workload could be more evenly distributed.

Slade - routing and utilization work hand-in-hand so that interactions are distributed across the contact center floor.  Typically this is done based on agent availability and as such if you have some agents taking longer than others on their interactions you could see an uneven distribution with agents who are finishing up their work more quickly.  

In your example - if utilization is set to 4 for chat for each agent - and assuming you have chats set to interrupt other media - i would expect the first chat in to go to agent A, the second to agent B, and so on and on the 5th chat - it would go back to agent A again...assuming all chats came in quickly and those that were connected ran for a while, once all the agents had 4 chats - the next chat would queue up.  As soon as one chat was finished (by any of those agents), the waiting chat would be connected.  We wouldn't wait for agent A to come back around to be 'first' again - its not round robin in that way.

How are your interrupt settings currently defined?  Can a chat interrupt a call or an email?  (If the agent were connected to one of those and chats were not set to interrupt, the chat may not make it to the agent until they are completely free from other interactions.)

Take a look through the resource center on our utilization info - it should help clarifiy.

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Slade - routing and utilization work hand-in-hand so that interactions are distributed across the contact center floor.  Typically this is done based on agent availability and as such if you have some agents taking longer than others on their interactions you could see an uneven distribution with agents who are finishing up their work more quickly.  

In your example - if utilization is set to 4 for chat for each agent - and assuming you have chats set to interrupt other media - i would expect the first chat in to go to agent A, the second to agent B, and so on and on the 5th chat - it would go back to agent A again...assuming all chats came in quickly and those that were connected ran for a while, once all the agents had 4 chats - the next chat would queue up.  As soon as one chat was finished (by any of those agents), the waiting chat would be connected.  We wouldn't wait for agent A to come back around to be 'first' again - its not round robin in that way.

How are your interrupt settings currently defined?  Can a chat interrupt a call or an email?  (If the agent were connected to one of those and chats were not set to interrupt, the chat may not make it to the agent until they are completely free from other interactions.)

Take a look through the resource center on our utilization info - it should help clarifiy.

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Slade - routing and utilization work hand-in-hand so that interactions are distributed across the contact center floor.  Typically this is done based on agent availability and as such if you have some agents taking longer than others on their interactions you could see an uneven distribution with agents who are finishing up their work more quickly.  

In your example - if utilization is set to 4 for chat for each agent - and assuming you have chats set to interrupt other media - i would expect the first chat in to go to agent A, the second to agent B, and so on and on the 5th chat - it would go back to agent A again...assuming all chats came in quickly and those that were connected ran for a while, once all the agents had 4 chats - the next chat would queue up.  As soon as one chat was finished (by any of those agents), the waiting chat would be connected.  We wouldn't wait for agent A to come back around to be 'first' again - its not round robin in that way.

How are your interrupt settings currently defined?  Can a chat interrupt a call or an email?  (If the agent were connected to one of those and chats were not set to interrupt, the chat may not make it to the agent until they are completely free from other interactions.)

Take a look through the resource center on our utilization info - it should help clarifiy.

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Hi Vaun,

We were eventually able to discern the routing discrepency in our web messages was due to 'last agent routing':

https://help.mypurecloud.com/faqs/why-is-an-email-routed-from-a-queue-to-an-agent-no-longer-in-that-queue/

Despite having a team of staff available, it will keep hammering the same agent multiple times for the same interaction - even if we've subsequently removed them from the queue.

This is a 'feature' from Genesys that can't be turned off.

We've since given up on trying to handle multiple web messages at once because we can't afford to have one staff member constantly getting work and the others sitting there idle (especially when that person first starts the shift before the others, they are more likely to have this continued conversation throughout the day).

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Thanks Jeff, so if we're using the disconnect/end session function we shouldn't really this issue as each new message after that creates a new interaction/thread.

Hi Vaun,

We were eventually able to discern the routing discrepency in our web messages was due to 'last agent routing':

https://help.mypurecloud.com/faqs/why-is-an-email-routed-from-a-queue-to-an-agent-no-longer-in-that-queue/

Despite having a team of staff available, it will keep hammering the same agent multiple times for the same interaction - even if we've subsequently removed them from the queue.

This is a 'feature' from Genesys that can't be turned off.

We've since given up on trying to handle multiple web messages at once because we can't afford to have one staff member constantly getting work and the others sitting there idle (especially when that person first starts the shift before the others, they are more likely to have this continued conversation throughout the day).

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Hi Vaun,

We were eventually able to discern the routing discrepency in our web messages was due to 'last agent routing':

https://help.mypurecloud.com/faqs/why-is-an-email-routed-from-a-queue-to-an-agent-no-longer-in-that-queue/

Despite having a team of staff available, it will keep hammering the same agent multiple times for the same interaction - even if we've subsequently removed them from the queue.

This is a 'feature' from Genesys that can't be turned off.

We've since given up on trying to handle multiple web messages at once because we can't afford to have one staff member constantly getting work and the others sitting there idle (especially when that person first starts the shift before the others, they are more likely to have this continued conversation throughout the day).

------------------------------
Jeff

Original Message:
Sent: 06-27-2023 22:26
From: Vaun McCarthy
Subject: Chat Utilization

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

------------------------------
Vaun McCarthy

Original Message:
Sent: 02-14-2023 08:45
From: Paul Simpson
Subject: Chat Utilization

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

------------------------------
Paul Simpson
Eventus Solutions Group

Original Message:
Sent: 02-14-2023 08:03
From: Chris Bohlin
Subject: Chat Utilization

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

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

Original Message:
Sent: 02-13-2023 09:31
From: Paul Simpson
Subject: Chat Utilization

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

------------------------------
Paul Simpson
Eventus Solutions Group

Original Message:
Sent: 02-09-2023 09:32
From: Slade Benda
Subject: Chat Utilization

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

#ConversationalAI(Bots,AgentAssist,etc.)
#Routing(ACD/IVR)
#SystemAdministration

------------------------------
Slade Benda
Mayo Employees Federal Credit Union
------------------------------

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Part of the problem here is that different sites want diametrically opposite behaviors.

For example, say you have agents who can take multiple interaction types. To simplify matters, lets only think of real-time (synchronous) interactions (so Calls and Chats) and let us assume we have the system set up for 4 simultaneous Chats and 1 Call, with neither able to interrupt the other. (This would make sense, since being on a call would probably occupy 100% of the agent's attention, but they should be able to "multi-task" chats without discernable impact on the CX - as long as the number of chats is kept fairly low!) OK, so say we have 4 agents logged in and on queue, and 4 chats in progress. If these were evenly distributed to the agents (one each) and a call came in, then no single agent would have the capacity for that call and so it would wait in queue.

Let us take this to the extreme, if there is a continuous flow of incoming chats, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 at any given time, we could get a situation where agents are, at most, 50% utilized, yet no calls ever get answered!

By "filling up" agents (i.e. assigning 4 chats to Agent 1 before moving on to Agent 2) we will have a situation where there is more likely to be an agent completely idle, to take the call.

Either way, there will be downsides, and I guess Genesys could add a queue setting to control whether an "even spread" or a "fill one agent, then the next" approach is used for each queue, but I can bet that folks would then want that to be schedulable, or based on some other metric-based criteria....

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Our messaging team has actually decided to dramatically reduce agents on messaging channel due to this issue.  I don't understand how least occupied routing is not a simple fix.  We too had some agents handling most of the inbound messages while another mix of agents were idle or very low volume.  Unfortunately the powers that make decisions at my company have decided to drop messaging for the time being. 

Part of the problem here is that different sites want diametrically opposite behaviors.

For example, say you have agents who can take multiple interaction types. To simplify matters, lets only think of real-time (synchronous) interactions (so Calls and Chats) and let us assume we have the system set up for 4 simultaneous Chats and 1 Call, with neither able to interrupt the other. (This would make sense, since being on a call would probably occupy 100% of the agent's attention, but they should be able to "multi-task" chats without discernable impact on the CX - as long as the number of chats is kept fairly low!) OK, so say we have 4 agents logged in and on queue, and 4 chats in progress. If these were evenly distributed to the agents (one each) and a call came in, then no single agent would have the capacity for that call and so it would wait in queue.

Let us take this to the extreme, if there is a continuous flow of incoming chats, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 at any given time, we could get a situation where agents are, at most, 50% utilized, yet no calls ever get answered!

By "filling up" agents (i.e. assigning 4 chats to Agent 1 before moving on to Agent 2) we will have a situation where there is more likely to be an agent completely idle, to take the call.

Either way, there will be downsides, and I guess Genesys could add a queue setting to control whether an "even spread" or a "fill one agent, then the next" approach is used for each queue, but I can bet that folks would then want that to be schedulable, or based on some other metric-based criteria....

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Hi folks - just wanted to chime in on this conversation.  All good points and I want to make it known that we aren't saying we will NOT do a tall vs. wide utilization distribution - just that its not on our roadmap in the next 6 months as we have a really deep backlog of other great features already lined up.  We understand the ask and Paul does a more eloquent job that I would have done outlining the issues in his last post.

I do think we'll be able to tackle this at some point in the future, I'm just not sure how far out into the future that is.

Thanks,

Chris

Our messaging team has actually decided to dramatically reduce agents on messaging channel due to this issue.  I don't understand how least occupied routing is not a simple fix.  We too had some agents handling most of the inbound messages while another mix of agents were idle or very low volume.  Unfortunately the powers that make decisions at my company have decided to drop messaging for the time being. 

Part of the problem here is that different sites want diametrically opposite behaviors.

For example, say you have agents who can take multiple interaction types. To simplify matters, lets only think of real-time (synchronous) interactions (so Calls and Chats) and let us assume we have the system set up for 4 simultaneous Chats and 1 Call, with neither able to interrupt the other. (This would make sense, since being on a call would probably occupy 100% of the agent's attention, but they should be able to "multi-task" chats without discernable impact on the CX - as long as the number of chats is kept fairly low!) OK, so say we have 4 agents logged in and on queue, and 4 chats in progress. If these were evenly distributed to the agents (one each) and a call came in, then no single agent would have the capacity for that call and so it would wait in queue.

Let us take this to the extreme, if there is a continuous flow of incoming chats, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 at any given time, we could get a situation where agents are, at most, 50% utilized, yet no calls ever get answered!

By "filling up" agents (i.e. assigning 4 chats to Agent 1 before moving on to Agent 2) we will have a situation where there is more likely to be an agent completely idle, to take the call.

Either way, there will be downsides, and I guess Genesys could add a queue setting to control whether an "even spread" or a "fill one agent, then the next" approach is used for each queue, but I can bet that folks would then want that to be schedulable, or based on some other metric-based criteria....

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Chris, I appreciate your effort on other great features, but when the business has decided to stop using the product all together due to utilization issues, then those features won't be seen.  Having idol agents vs. over stacked agents has just become a show stopper.  By the way, it doesn't seem like it would be a huge lift for fix. 

Hi folks - just wanted to chime in on this conversation.  All good points and I want to make it known that we aren't saying we will NOT do a tall vs. wide utilization distribution - just that its not on our roadmap in the next 6 months as we have a really deep backlog of other great features already lined up.  We understand the ask and Paul does a more eloquent job that I would have done outlining the issues in his last post.

I do think we'll be able to tackle this at some point in the future, I'm just not sure how far out into the future that is.

Thanks,

Chris

Our messaging team has actually decided to dramatically reduce agents on messaging channel due to this issue.  I don't understand how least occupied routing is not a simple fix.  We too had some agents handling most of the inbound messages while another mix of agents were idle or very low volume.  Unfortunately the powers that make decisions at my company have decided to drop messaging for the time being. 

Part of the problem here is that different sites want diametrically opposite behaviors.

For example, say you have agents who can take multiple interaction types. To simplify matters, lets only think of real-time (synchronous) interactions (so Calls and Chats) and let us assume we have the system set up for 4 simultaneous Chats and 1 Call, with neither able to interrupt the other. (This would make sense, since being on a call would probably occupy 100% of the agent's attention, but they should be able to "multi-task" chats without discernable impact on the CX - as long as the number of chats is kept fairly low!) OK, so say we have 4 agents logged in and on queue, and 4 chats in progress. If these were evenly distributed to the agents (one each) and a call came in, then no single agent would have the capacity for that call and so it would wait in queue.

Let us take this to the extreme, if there is a continuous flow of incoming chats, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 at any given time, we could get a situation where agents are, at most, 50% utilized, yet no calls ever get answered!

By "filling up" agents (i.e. assigning 4 chats to Agent 1 before moving on to Agent 2) we will have a situation where there is more likely to be an agent completely idle, to take the call.

Either way, there will be downsides, and I guess Genesys could add a queue setting to control whether an "even spread" or a "fill one agent, then the next" approach is used for each queue, but I can bet that folks would then want that to be schedulable, or based on some other metric-based criteria....

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?

Hi folks.

I look forward to some of the new features/fixes in this space.

In the meantime, would this option in Global Settings be of any use.  It resets the 'routing score' based on status change rather than last interaction.

Routing Includes Agent Presence

Chris, I appreciate your effort on other great features, but when the business has decided to stop using the product all together due to utilization issues, then those features won't be seen.  Having idol agents vs. over stacked agents has just become a show stopper.  By the way, it doesn't seem like it would be a huge lift for fix. 

Hi folks - just wanted to chime in on this conversation.  All good points and I want to make it known that we aren't saying we will NOT do a tall vs. wide utilization distribution - just that its not on our roadmap in the next 6 months as we have a really deep backlog of other great features already lined up.  We understand the ask and Paul does a more eloquent job that I would have done outlining the issues in his last post.

I do think we'll be able to tackle this at some point in the future, I'm just not sure how far out into the future that is.

Thanks,

Chris

Our messaging team has actually decided to dramatically reduce agents on messaging channel due to this issue.  I don't understand how least occupied routing is not a simple fix.  We too had some agents handling most of the inbound messages while another mix of agents were idle or very low volume.  Unfortunately the powers that make decisions at my company have decided to drop messaging for the time being. 

Part of the problem here is that different sites want diametrically opposite behaviors.

For example, say you have agents who can take multiple interaction types. To simplify matters, lets only think of real-time (synchronous) interactions (so Calls and Chats) and let us assume we have the system set up for 4 simultaneous Chats and 1 Call, with neither able to interrupt the other. (This would make sense, since being on a call would probably occupy 100% of the agent's attention, but they should be able to "multi-task" chats without discernable impact on the CX - as long as the number of chats is kept fairly low!) OK, so say we have 4 agents logged in and on queue, and 4 chats in progress. If these were evenly distributed to the agents (one each) and a call came in, then no single agent would have the capacity for that call and so it would wait in queue.

Let us take this to the extreme, if there is a continuous flow of incoming chats, with a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 8 at any given time, we could get a situation where agents are, at most, 50% utilized, yet no calls ever get answered!

By "filling up" agents (i.e. assigning 4 chats to Agent 1 before moving on to Agent 2) we will have a situation where there is more likely to be an agent completely idle, to take the call.

Either way, there will be downsides, and I guess Genesys could add a queue setting to control whether an "even spread" or a "fill one agent, then the next" approach is used for each queue, but I can bet that folks would then want that to be schedulable, or based on some other metric-based criteria....

So what's the final say on this one guys?  It should even itself out isn't an answer that a business will necessarily accept, as it does mean that at times you've got agents idle but one or more agents getting hammered with multiple interactions.  That type of thing is picked up on pretty quickly.

Also true, however the OP was asking why at any given moment, an agent on a chat would get another one when a second agent was idle.

As you say, over time, it should even itself out.

Yes, that is true, Paul - but if your agents handle times are similar, over time you should see a fairly even distribution of interactions. 

Ignoring Skills for a minute, Genesys Cloud ACD sends new interactions to the Agent who has been available the longest. Availability is the time since the last ACD interaction disconnected. (Although there are some settings for when they go offline etc.)

So, if Agent A is the one who has been available the longest, they get a chat, nothing else happens and another comes in, they will still be the agent who has been available the longest, so if they have the capacity they will get the second chat as well.

Of course, if Agent A was already on a chat and between the first and second chats mentioned above arriving, disconnects that pre-existing chat, then a different agent may well have been available the longest, so get the next one.

It isn't really related to when the chats were delivered, but more when they were completed.

HTH

We currently have chats setup for a maximum of 4 per Agent. Our problem is these chats are evenly distributed so sometimes an Agent can get 2 chats while others might not have any at all. Would be work to just set the chats for a maximum of 1? What would happen if everyone is on a chat and another one comes in? Or is there something in the routing that should be changed instead?