Community members - 

In an organization's Utilization settings, an administrator can control whether or not users should be alerted to ACD calls when on a non-ACD call using the 'Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity' checkbox.  Today, this has the side effect of changing the user's routing status depending on the value of the flag, as below:

To more accurately reflect the user's status, we're considering changing this behaviour, such that the user's routing status would not be dependent on the value of Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity, as below:

There would be no impact on utilization from the above change.  The value of the flag would still be respected when routing ACD calls, and it would still be possible to prevent ACD calls being received when on a non-ACD call. 

We'd like to get feedback on the change proposed above, specifically

1. Would you agree this change makes sense?
2. Is there any impact or potential impact that you'd foresee on your users or operations from this change?

Why not use Interacting for either the ACD call or the Non-ACD call?  Having both as Communicating does not let supervisors know if they are on an ACD call or Non-ACD call.  Seems like part of the use case is to A) Know when the agent is talking on the phone and B) is the agent on an ACD call.  

Community members - 

In an organization's Utilization settings, an administrator can control whether or not users should be alerted to ACD calls when on a non-ACD call using the 'Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity' checkbox.  Today, this has the side effect of changing the user's routing status depending on the value of the flag, as below:

To more accurately reflect the user's status, we're considering changing this behaviour, such that the user's routing status would not be dependent on the value of Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity, as below:

There would be no impact on utilization from the above change.  The value of the flag would still be respected when routing ACD calls, and it would still be possible to prevent ACD calls being received when on a non-ACD call. 

We'd like to get feedback on the change proposed above, specifically

1. Would you agree this change makes sense?
2. Is there any impact or potential impact that you'd foresee on your users or operations from this change?

hi Robert,

we aren't proposing a change to any of the behavior around ACD interactions.  an agent with a connected ACD interaction will continue to have a routing status of INTERACTING.  we're only talking here about non-ACD interactions.

Why not use Interacting for either the ACD call or the Non-ACD call?  Having both as Communicating does not let supervisors know if they are on an ACD call or Non-ACD call.  Seems like part of the use case is to A) Know when the agent is talking on the phone and B) is the agent on an ACD call.  

Community members - 

In an organization's Utilization settings, an administrator can control whether or not users should be alerted to ACD calls when on a non-ACD call using the 'Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity' checkbox.  Today, this has the side effect of changing the user's routing status depending on the value of the flag, as below:

To more accurately reflect the user's status, we're considering changing this behaviour, such that the user's routing status would not be dependent on the value of Count non-ACD calls in utilization capacity, as below:

There would be no impact on utilization from the above change.  The value of the flag would still be respected when routing ACD calls, and it would still be possible to prevent ACD calls being received when on a non-ACD call. 

We'd like to get feedback on the change proposed above, specifically

1. Would you agree this change makes sense?
2. Is there any impact or potential impact that you'd foresee on your users or operations from this change?