Ongoing as far as I know, but in my day-to-day I don't usually use the RTA view myself, so I'm not 100% sure. My original post was the first I knew about it after a question from someone else in our org.
------------------------------
Chad Blanton
North American Bancard
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-17-2023 11:40
From: Belinda Herrera
Subject: RTA - Unscheduled vs Unavailable
Yes, I completely understand, having to filter them out is not ideal. Quick question, this has been an ongoing issue for you correct? Or was this something you noticed recently and wasn't an issue previously?
------------------------------
Belinda Herrera
GENESYS TELECOMMUNICATIONS LAB. INC
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-17-2023 06:13
From: Chad Blanton
Subject: RTA - Unscheduled vs Unavailable
Hey Belinda, thanks for the response. Thought for sure I had to just be missing something. I knew that it wasn't affecting the actual historical adherence calcs, thankfully.
This would be a huge QOL update for teams/orgs with Adherence KPIs. Like I said, we make do by filtering out the unscheduled, but the Adherence live view would be much more useful (and accurate) if the unscheduled were removed from the equation.
------------------------------
Chad Blanton
North American Bancard
Original Message:
Sent: 10-16-2023 16:41
From: Belinda Herrera
Subject: RTA - Unscheduled vs Unavailable
Hello Chad,
Thanks for submitting your feedback. You are correct in that the overall calculation is negatively impacted by your Unscheduled agents. From a historical adherence standpoint, Unscheduled is not included in the calculation so it should be calculated correctly. I have reached out to our engineers to have them take a look at the current calculation in the RTA screen as it should probably not include the Unscheduled agents. I'll let you know as soon as I have more information on this.
------------------------------
Belinda Herrera
GENESYS TELECOMMUNICATIONS LAB. INC