Workforce Engagement Management

Hi folks,

I'm hoping someone can help me understand what's happening with the schedules I'm trying to generate for a customer.

The customer has agents who spend off queue time each day either in the morning or afternoon to do casework that's not routed through GC. So I've created a number of Work Plans and Rotations that should cater for this.

However, when I generate a schedule it seems to place too many agents with Off Queue time at the same time. 

It's even worse when a work plan with a defined team meeting is in play:

I feel like I've adjusted every setting possible, but I'm not getting the coverage I'd expect. Does anyone have any ideas about what's happening and what I can do to fix it?

Cheers,

Tristan.

Isn't that top line of numbers the required staff row? Without more details it looks like your need is in the second part of the day where less of that large Off Queue block is being scheduled. Not sure if there are more agents I cannot see, but it looks like a fairly tight range, percent wise, of understaffing throughout the day.

If you have multiple planning groups, then viewing across all planning groups make the gross required number less meaningful the more tactical (e.g., intraday) you are working.

Your work plan is very rigid (no variability in start time of shift or activities other than break; 5 variations only for each of the two possible shifts). You probably designed it this way, but I'd suggest making those big off queue blocks simply have a large start window. Then you could go down to exactly one shift (example pasted at the bottom). That type of shift has flexibility in a number of ways and will be significantly more likely to produce better coverage.

If nothing stands out, then I would recommend opening a support ticket.

------------------------------
Jay Langsford
VP, R&D
------------------------------

Hi, 

I don't have full visibility into the current configuration or the exact requirements for the rule.

However, if this "off-queue" time is mandatory and follows a set pattern, I suggest creating distinct work plans and alternating between them using rotation plans.

If it is based on availability, I suggest creating a single work plan that allows for flexibility regarding these activities throughout the day-similar to what was shown in the screenshot shared earlier. But this could lead to issues: if your distribution isn't optimized based on your forecast, the system tends to constantly reassign staff to where they are needed most. You might end up with a schedule like the one you showed, where everyone's shifts remain largely static.

Regarding the specific issue with off-queue activities: the system treats them as a break. You need to configure the activity code to allow for activity overlapping; doing so should help you prevent this problem.

I hope I've been able to help in some way.

Hi Tristan, 

This thread might also be of interest to you:
https://community.genesys.com/discussion/workplans-for-backoffice-work

Paul

**edit**
it might also be worth looking at the Activity Smoothing option in the Business Unit--> Schedule configuration and Schedule Generation options:

Add a business unit - Genesys Cloud Resource Center

Generate a schedule from a forecast - Genesys Cloud Resource Center

In the Schedule Generation section, use the fields as indicated:

• Default Activity Smoothing list: Indicates how the flexible work plan activities such as break, lunch time, can be distributed through the agent’s shift. The available options in this field are: 
  • Reduce concurrent activities across the Business Unit (Recommended). Select this option, enabled by default when you create a business unit, to ensure that the schedules of agents in the same business unit are updated to minimize the number of concurrent activities. For example, lunch breaks for all agents in the business unit have to be scheduled from noon. to 1:00 p.m. The lunch breaks are distributed in a way that best supports the business unit service predictions. This can result in some management units seeing specific times within the flexibility period configured in the work plan having more concurrent activities.
  • Reduce concurrent activities within the Management Unit. Select this option to ensure that the schedules in the same management unit are updated to minimize the number of concurrent activities. For example, break time of agents in the management unit are distributed in such a way that all agents do not get to take their breaks at the same time.
  • Schedule activities to offer the most consistent service goal prediction across the whole schedule. Select this option to ensure that the service levels are consistently maintained and result in more concurrent activities for agents. For example, breaks are distributed in a way that provides the most consistent service predictions. The supervisor assigns breaks in the same time, rather than distributing the activities evenly across the flexibility period.

------------------------------
Paul Wood
Genesys - Employees
WFM Product Manager
------------------------------

I think the thread @Paul Wood shared probably maps very closely to your scenario.

The point about Off Queue activities not being optimized against forecasted workload seems especially relevant here and may explain why the scheduling engine is grouping too many agents into those activities at the same time.

Definitely worth reviewing that approach against your current Work Plans.

It might help, but the fundamental issue is that across the two shifts there are only two total options for where to optimize/place that huge off queue block. On the one picture it is a ~30-50% understaffing throughout the day. With so few of agents and shift variations, a single change from early to/from late off queue shift would swing the understaffing significantly.

I have not seen evidence presented on this thread to suggest it is not optimized against the forecast workload as best that can be had given the constraints. The original post only noted "seems to place too many agents with Off Queue time at the same time" which is more of a visual critique if presented without forecast, predicted service performance, etc. per planning group. There could also be many other things in play (agents not really filling any capacity).

------------------------------
Jay Langsford
VP, R&D
------------------------------