One of our business units comprises a base of FT and PT agents with auxiliary agents brought in to assist when needed. The process we are proposing is to generate the schedule with only the FT and PT agents. After the schedule is generated we would run a reschedule, adding the auxiliary agents. The auxiliary agents are assigned to flexible workplans which allow for a large range of weekly hours, varying shift lengths with all days of the week designated as optional days. What we are finding is that the Aux agents are being scheduled in intervals where our staffing numbers indicate there is no need (+5 difference (with shrinkage) or more). As a test we created a flexible workplan with 4 - 32 weekly hours. We assigned an agent to this workplan and ran a reschedule with this agent on a schedule where the staffing differentials were all in the plus (+) range. The expectation would be that the agent would be scheduled for the minimum number of hours (4). However, we noted that the agent was scheduled for 30 weekly hours with shifts being placed in intervals where there was already more staff than necessary to address the forecasted workload. I have uploaded screenshots of the flexible workplan and staffing differentials. This is critical to our operation as we want to provide the best service to our clients while managing staffing costs. Any helpful insights would be most appreciated.

The work plan you show has variable weekly time of 4h-32h, but the three possible shifts all have fixed time (5h, 6h, or 8h) requirements. They also only allow one possible start time each at 6am. This means that if the agent is needed at all for a day, they always get scheduled at 6am for a minimum of 5h. You can also see that the shift variations are quite small. The work plan is not very flexible other than all days being marked as optional. Even marking days as optional is not a guarantee that some days won't be scheduled depending on need and other constraints (e.g., minimum days per week, planning period constraints).

Looking at predicted staffing requirement versus scheduled staffing number (i.e., Forecast and Scheduled rows in schedule editor) at a gross level (e.g., all planning groups) likely is hiding valuable information. E.g., the agents you think shouldn't be scheduled actually are capable of handling need while the need of other planning groups are over staffed because those agents have even more rigid minimum weekly paid time and/or required days. If you are building a house and need framers, electricians, roofers, plumbers, etc. and think you need 20 total workers, it is important to know the actual number of say plumbers needed versus scheduled as opposed to a roll-up top-level number across all disciplines.

If nothing obvious, then I would recommend opening a support ticket so proper troubleshooting can occur.

One of our business units comprises a base of FT and PT agents with auxiliary agents brought in to assist when needed. The process we are proposing is to generate the schedule with only the FT and PT agents. After the schedule is generated we would run a reschedule, adding the auxiliary agents. The auxiliary agents are assigned to flexible workplans which allow for a large range of weekly hours, varying shift lengths with all days of the week designated as optional days. What we are finding is that the Aux agents are being scheduled in intervals where our staffing numbers indicate there is no need (+5 difference (with shrinkage) or more). As a test we created a flexible workplan with 4 - 32 weekly hours. We assigned an agent to this workplan and ran a reschedule with this agent on a schedule where the staffing differentials were all in the plus (+) range. The expectation would be that the agent would be scheduled for the minimum number of hours (4). However, we noted that the agent was scheduled for 30 weekly hours with shifts being placed in intervals where there was already more staff than necessary to address the forecasted workload. I have uploaded screenshots of the flexible workplan and staffing differentials. This is critical to our operation as we want to provide the best service to our clients while managing staffing costs. Any helpful insights would be most appreciated.

Thank you for your prompt reply Jay

I apologize as I was not explicit and the screenshots did not tell the whole story. The workplan actually comprises 4 shifts of 4, 5, 6 and 8 hour lengths. Each shift has a variable start time of starting at 6am and ending no later than 11pm. I've uploaded a screenshot of the schedule constraints for the 6 hour shift as an example. The minimum days worked is 1 while the maximum days worked is 5. there are no weekend or planning period constraints. The only general constraints are a maximum of 5 consecutive scheduled days and 12 hours between shift starts. I've uploaded a screenshot of the workplan constraints.

I'm aware that scheduled agents must be capable of answering calls from all planning groups in the forecast. The forecast comprises two planning groups and we always ensure that agents have the queue and ACD skill assignments that will ensure they are capable of answering all planning groups used to generate the forecast.

Unless there is something else I missed I will open a support ticket and hopefully the support tech will be able to shed some light on the situation.

Thanks Again

The work plan you show has variable weekly time of 4h-32h, but the three possible shifts all have fixed time (5h, 6h, or 8h) requirements. They also only allow one possible start time each at 6am. This means that if the agent is needed at all for a day, they always get scheduled at 6am for a minimum of 5h. You can also see that the shift variations are quite small. The work plan is not very flexible other than all days being marked as optional. Even marking days as optional is not a guarantee that some days won't be scheduled depending on need and other constraints (e.g., minimum days per week, planning period constraints).

Looking at predicted staffing requirement versus scheduled staffing number (i.e., Forecast and Scheduled rows in schedule editor) at a gross level (e.g., all planning groups) likely is hiding valuable information. E.g., the agents you think shouldn't be scheduled actually are capable of handling need while the need of other planning groups are over staffed because those agents have even more rigid minimum weekly paid time and/or required days. If you are building a house and need framers, electricians, roofers, plumbers, etc. and think you need 20 total workers, it is important to know the actual number of say plumbers needed versus scheduled as opposed to a roll-up top-level number across all disciplines.

If nothing obvious, then I would recommend opening a support ticket so proper troubleshooting can occur.

One of our business units comprises a base of FT and PT agents with auxiliary agents brought in to assist when needed. The process we are proposing is to generate the schedule with only the FT and PT agents. After the schedule is generated we would run a reschedule, adding the auxiliary agents. The auxiliary agents are assigned to flexible workplans which allow for a large range of weekly hours, varying shift lengths with all days of the week designated as optional days. What we are finding is that the Aux agents are being scheduled in intervals where our staffing numbers indicate there is no need (+5 difference (with shrinkage) or more). As a test we created a flexible workplan with 4 - 32 weekly hours. We assigned an agent to this workplan and ran a reschedule with this agent on a schedule where the staffing differentials were all in the plus (+) range. The expectation would be that the agent would be scheduled for the minimum number of hours (4). However, we noted that the agent was scheduled for 30 weekly hours with shifts being placed in intervals where there was already more staff than necessary to address the forecasted workload. I have uploaded screenshots of the flexible workplan and staffing differentials. This is critical to our operation as we want to provide the best service to our clients while managing staffing costs. Any helpful insights would be most appreciated.

The work plan you show has variable weekly time of 4h-32h, but the three possible shifts all have fixed time (5h, 6h, or 8h) requirements. They also only allow one possible start time each at 6am. This means that if the agent is needed at all for a day, they always get scheduled at 6am for a minimum of 5h. You can also see that the shift variations are quite small. The work plan is not very flexible other than all days being marked as optional. Even marking days as optional is not a guarantee that some days won't be scheduled depending on need and other constraints (e.g., minimum days per week, planning period constraints).

Looking at predicted staffing requirement versus scheduled staffing number (i.e., Forecast and Scheduled rows in schedule editor) at a gross level (e.g., all planning groups) likely is hiding valuable information. E.g., the agents you think shouldn't be scheduled actually are capable of handling need while the need of other planning groups are over staffed because those agents have even more rigid minimum weekly paid time and/or required days. If you are building a house and need framers, electricians, roofers, plumbers, etc. and think you need 20 total workers, it is important to know the actual number of say plumbers needed versus scheduled as opposed to a roll-up top-level number across all disciplines.

If nothing obvious, then I would recommend opening a support ticket so proper troubleshooting can occur.

One of our business units comprises a base of FT and PT agents with auxiliary agents brought in to assist when needed. The process we are proposing is to generate the schedule with only the FT and PT agents. After the schedule is generated we would run a reschedule, adding the auxiliary agents. The auxiliary agents are assigned to flexible workplans which allow for a large range of weekly hours, varying shift lengths with all days of the week designated as optional days. What we are finding is that the Aux agents are being scheduled in intervals where our staffing numbers indicate there is no need (+5 difference (with shrinkage) or more). As a test we created a flexible workplan with 4 - 32 weekly hours. We assigned an agent to this workplan and ran a reschedule with this agent on a schedule where the staffing differentials were all in the plus (+) range. The expectation would be that the agent would be scheduled for the minimum number of hours (4). However, we noted that the agent was scheduled for 30 weekly hours with shifts being placed in intervals where there was already more staff than necessary to address the forecasted workload. I have uploaded screenshots of the flexible workplan and staffing differentials. This is critical to our operation as we want to provide the best service to our clients while managing staffing costs. Any helpful insights would be most appreciated.