" /> Outbound calls not equitably - Genesys CTI User Forum

Author Topic: Outbound calls not equitably  (Read 7919 times)

This topic contains a post which is marked as Best Answer. Press here if you would like to see it.

toumtoum

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
Advertisement
Hello,

Is anybody know why, when I use Genesys during an Outbound Calls Campaign, the calls are not distributed equitably between the agents ?

Some of agents receive more calls than others...

Thanks,

toumtoum

Tony Tillyer

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #1 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
I've had this before but I thought it had been fixed by Genesys. Can you list your component versions for OCM/OCS/CPD?

We had a situation where the Agent availability list went from the top down, by ACD extension (e.g. Ext1001, then Ext1002 then Ext1003, etc.) but I'm sure an upgrade to OCS fixed that.

Tony

toumtoum

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #2 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
Thanks for your help Tony,

List of my component versions :
OCM : v6.5
OCS : v6.5.2
CPD : v6.5.2

toumtoum

Vic

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #3 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
I have glanced through the release notes available to me, and there are quite a few corrections to OCS between OCS 6.5.2 and 7.1

Have you checked them out and see if any one of those is related to your problem.

When you mean "distributed between agents", do you mean some agents get more calls than others? Do you have OCS sending calls to ACD queue or Routing Point and then to agent? If so, I would look at URS/ACD stats used to target agents.

What are you using for targetting? URS? If so, what are target settings?


Tony Tillyer

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #4 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
Vic there are quite a few "constraints" within 6.5, fixed at 7.2. First suggestion is to upgrade to 7.2.

Aside from that, there are Options to be considered when implementing the OCM Campaign Component, which include;

FIFO (First In, First Out) call delivery (Agents are delivered calls in the order they are listed by ACD Number)
Agent Availability (Number of Outbound Calls taken, versus time on Outbound Calls, etc.)

Perhaps if you create a CCPulse View to show time on calls, versus number of calls, you can see why OCM has determined which Agent to deliver to, next.

Tony

toumtoum

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #5 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
Hi,

Vic I mean some agents get more calls than others.

Tony concerning "FIFO (First In, First Out) call delivery (Agents are delivered calls in the order they are listed by ACD Number)" : where can I find this option ? In the OCM ?

I have created a CCPulse View, and it confirms what I say.
Agents are connected during more than 2 hours and get 1 calls... and others are connected during few minutes and get more calls !

So, upgrade to 7.2, why not ? But, first of all, I want to search if any option exist. Maybe the FIFO...

Thanks,

toumtoum

Vic

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #6 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
Are you using URS or ACD to transfer the call to the agent?
If you are using URS, please check the targetobject in the strategy for the statistic used to select an agent.

Also, what are you using for dialingmode and optimized parameter.

My guess is:

you are using URS to distribute the call and your statistic in the target object is probably not the right one. Check where the call is being routed for your AgentGroup, PlaceGroup assigned to the campaign and see how that DN is set to distribute the calls.

To be frank, I do not recall FIFO setup for OCS. I have checked the manuals and could not find anything there either: Tony, are you talking about ACD settings?


Marked as best answer by on Today at 07:54:12 PM

Tony Tillyer

  • Guest
Outbound calls not equitably
« Reply #7 on: January 01, 1970, 12:00:00 AM »
  • Undo Best Answer
  • Sorry, yes, FIFO is an ACD constraint depends on your setup, obviously...

    Tony