VQ Stats: Entered v 'Offered' - opinions?

[mark]

Offered (calculation) = Ans + Aban
Entered = standard stat

What are peoples opinions on only reporting on 'Offered' in historical reporting, including using this stat for scheduling?

I am trying to show some people that having entered is a good idea (currently they have no view of it).

Any thoughts?

[tony]

Hi Mark

As a Best Practice, I think it's about comparing stats - and, as a general rule of thumb, I think it is a good idea to make sure that whatever you use in Volume Reporting should also be used in WfM...

As a computed statistic, "Offered" has it's advantages - as long as the business implicitly understand what this statistic actually means and how it may be affected by external factors.

"Entered" on the other hand, is a pure statistic and is not prone to change.  However, "Entered" implies "Offered" and that is not the case...

Perhaps talk it over with the business owners and give them the pro's and con's of both and let them decide.  When they have decided, use the same volume calculation in both CCA and WfM... and CCP ...and anything else!

Personally, I would use N_Entered, since it cannot be changed - whereas N_Offered can be re-defined...

HTH?

T

UPDATE:

Just thought about this some more...

VQ: "Entered" Interactions may be removed through a Routing Strategy, to another VQ or Target.  In that way, "Entered" may reflect what was due to be delivered on the VQ - but it may well have "Cleared" through another Strategy...

Offered is better for knowing the Volume of Interactions expected to be Answered by the Targets....

Confused..? 

[mark]

Thanks Tony, thats where it starts to get messy.

There are a few instances where the call clears to another VQ, by seeing offered only, the analysts will only see the calls on the 2nd VQ, but with Entered they would see the call did still have some interaction on the original VQ.

Now, if the 2nd VQ was unique to these cleared calls, it wouldn't be too much of an issue.. however, the 2nd VQ is actually used as a primary VQ in other instances.

I hope I don't see hyperion for a long time once I have done this!!! haha

[tony]

Owowow...! 

Consider that VQ's are for monitoring purposes and can be applied pretty much anywhere where there is a Target... and more than once, if needs be...

Have you considered using UData...?  Attaching a simple item of attached data [i]before [/i] the call is Routed to any of the VQ's (Caller="CS", or CallerType="1", or something similar) then using a Filter on either [i]Entered [/i] or [i]Offered[/i], in both CCA and WfM...

?

T

[mark]

Filters were an option, but they were used (extensively) in the previous environment. A single VQ per call would be my preferred option, then just expand groups to answer if more people are needed. That is not going to happen though.

Things get more interesting when areas have routes to voicemail when wait time has exceeded x seconds and things like that

Its all fun!

[tony]

If there are legs of a call that you need to mark/monitor, then Udata is defo an option... ? Just because it's been done before, doesn't mean... ?

T