Techniques for case allocation

• US 10,135,988 B2
• Filed: 02/08/2018
• Issued: 11/20/2018
• Est. Priority Date: 12/01/2015
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Afiniti Ltd
• Original Assignee: Afiniti Europe Technologies Limited (Afiniti Ltd)
• Inventors: Kan, Ittai, Delellis, David J.
• Primary Examiner(s): Hong, Harry S
• Application Number:
  US15/892,166
• Publication Number:
  US 20180167513A1
• Time in Patent Office: 285 Days
• Field of Search: None
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06311 Scheduling, planning or task assignment for a person or group
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 2203/408 Customer-specific call routing plans
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5233 Operator skill based call distribution

Abstract

Techniques for case allocation are disclosed. In one particular embodiment, the techniques may be realized as a method for case allocation comprising receiving, by at least one computer processor, at least one case allocation allocated using a first pairing strategy, and then reassigning, by the at least one computer processor, the at least one case allocation using behavioral pairing.

Claims

1. A method for benchmarking pairing strategies in a service center system comprising:

receiving, by at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to operate in the service center system, a first plurality of results for a first plurality of cases assigned to a plurality of agents using a first pairing strategy;

receiving, by the at least one computer processor, a second plurality of results for a second plurality of cases assigned to the plurality of agents using a second pairing strategy different from the first pairing strategy;

determining, by the at least one computer processor, a difference in performance between the first and second pluralities of results, wherein the difference in performance provides an indication that assigning cases using the second pairing strategy results in a performance gain for the service center system attributable to the second pairing strategy, wherein the difference in performance also provides an indication that optimizing performance of the service center system is realized using the second pairing strategy instead of the first pairing strategy; and

outputting, by the at least one computer processor, the difference in performance between the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy for benchmarking at least the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first pairing strategy is case assignment by a management authority.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first pairing strategy is a first-in, first out (FIFO) pairing strategy.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the second pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy to optimize performance of the service center system.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein each case of the second plurality of cases comprises a confidence level below a threshold confidence level.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein each case of the first plurality of cases comprises a rationale from a management authority and a confidence level above a threshold confidence level.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein each case of the second plurality of cases is randomly selected, by the at least one computer processor, for assignment.

8. A system for benchmarking pairing strategies in a service center system comprising:

at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to operate in the service center system, wherein the at least one computer processor is configured to;

receive a first plurality of results for a first plurality of cases assigned to a plurality of agents using a first pairing strategy;

receive a second plurality of results for a second plurality of cases assigned to the plurality of agents using a second pairing strategy different from the first pairing strategy;

determine a difference in performance between the first and second pluralities of results, wherein the difference in performance provides an indication that assigning cases using the second pairing strategy results in a performance gain for the service center system attributable to the second pairing strategy, wherein the difference in performance also provides an indication that optimizing performance of the service center system is realized using the second pairing strategy instead of the first pairing strategy; and

output the difference in performance between the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy for benchmarking at least the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy.

9. The system of claim 8, wherein the first pairing strategy is case assignment by a management authority.

10. The system of claim 8, wherein the first pairing strategy is a first-in, first out (FIFO) pairing strategy.

11. The system of claim 8, wherein the second pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy to optimize performance of the service center system.

12. The system of claim 8, wherein each case of the second plurality of cases comprises a confidence level below a threshold confidence level.

13. The system of claim 8, wherein each case of the first plurality of cases comprises a rationale from a management authority and a confidence level above a threshold confidence level.

14. The system of claim 8, wherein each case of the second plurality of cases is randomly selected, by the at least one computer processor, for assignment.

15. An article of manufacture for benchmarking pairing strategies in a service center system comprising:

a non-transitory processor readable medium; and

instructions stored on the medium;

wherein the instructions are configured to be readable from the medium by at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to operate in the service center system and thereby cause the at least one computer processor to operate so as to;

receive a first plurality of results for a first plurality of cases assigned to a plurality of agents using a first pairing strategy;

receive a second plurality of results for a second plurality of cases assigned to the plurality of agents using a second pairing strategy different from the first pairing strategy;

determine a difference in performance between the first and second pluralities of results, wherein the difference in performance provides an indication that assigning cases using the second pairing strategy results in a performance gain for the service center system attributable to the second pairing strategy, wherein the difference in performance also provides an indication that optimizing performance of the service center system is realized using the second pairing strategy instead of the first pairing strategy; and

output the difference in performance between the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy for benchmarking at least the first pairing strategy and the second pairing strategy.

16. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein the first pairing strategy is case assignment by a management authority.

17. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein the first pairing strategy is a first-in, first out (FIFO) pairing strategy.

18. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein the second pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy to optimize performance of the service center system.

19. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein each case of the second plurality of cases comprises a confidence level below a threshold confidence level.

20. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein each case of the first plurality of cases comprises a rationale from a management authority and a confidence level above a threshold confidence level.