Techniques for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system

• US 10,298,762 B2
• Filed: 08/30/2017
• Issued: 05/21/2019
• Est. Priority Date: 01/28/2008
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Afiniti Ltd
• Original Assignee: Afiniti Europe Technologies Limited (Afiniti Ltd)
• Inventors: Chishti, Zia
• Primary Examiner(s): Nguyen, Quynh H
• Application Number:
  US15/691,163
• Publication Number:
  US 20170366671A1
• Time in Patent Office: 629 Days
• Field of Search: 37926501, 37926601, 379309
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/0639 Performance analysis of employees; Performance analysis of enterprise or organisation operations
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 2201/18 Comparators
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 2201/36 Memories
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5141 Details of processing calls and other types of contacts in an unified manner unified messaging in packet-switching networks H04L51/56
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5232 Call distribution algorithms
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5233 Operator skill based call distribution
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5235 Dependent on call type or called number [DNIS]

Abstract

Techniques for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system are disclosed. In one embodiment, the techniques may be realized as a method for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system comprising: determining for each contact of a plurality of contacts, an associated plurality of historical contact assignments; determining, for each contact, an associated outcome value; partitioning, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical assignments into a first associated subset assigned using a first pairing strategy and a second associated subset assigned using a second pairing strategy; determining, for each contact, a first portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the first associated subset and a second portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the second associated subset; and outputting a difference in performance between the first and second pairing strategies according to the first and second associated portions of the associated outcome value for each contact.

Claims

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

determining, by at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to perform benchmarking operations in the contact center system, for each contact of a plurality of contacts, an associated plurality of historical contact assignments, wherein each of the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is based upon a connection, previously established by a switch of the contact center system, between an associated one of the plurality of contacts and a respective agent based upon a pairing strategy;

determining, by the at least one computer processor, for each contact, an associated outcome value;

partitioning, by the at least one computer processor, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments into a first associated subset assigned using a first pairing strategy and a second associated subset assigned using a second pairing strategy;

determining, by the at least one computer processor, for each contact, a first portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the first associated subset and a second portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the second associated subset; and

outputting, by the at least one computer processor, a difference in performance between the first and second pairing strategies according to the first and second associated portions of the associated outcome value for each contact.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is a chronologically-ordered sequence of historical contact assignments.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative positions of the first and second associated subsets within the chronologically-ordered sequence.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative sizes of the first and second associated subsets.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the second pairing strategy is a FIFO or a performance-based routing strategy.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the contact center system is configured to cycle among at least the first and second pairing strategies.

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

at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to perform benchmarking operations in the contact center system, wherein the at least one computer processor is further configured to;

determine, for each contact of a plurality of contacts, an associated plurality of historical contact assignments, wherein each of the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is based upon a connection, previously established by a switch of the contact center system, between an associated one of the plurality of contacts and a respective agent based upon a pairing strategy;

determine, for each contact, an associated outcome value;

partition, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments into a first associated subset assigned using a first pairing strategy and a second associated subset assigned using a second pairing strategy;

determine, for each contact, a first portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the first associated subset and a second portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the second associated subset; and

output a difference in performance between the first and second pairing strategies according to the first and second associated portions of the associated outcome value for each contact.

9. The system of claim 8, wherein, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is a chronologically-ordered sequence of historical contact assignments.

10. The system of claim 9, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative positions of the first and second associated subsets within the chronologically-ordered sequence.

11. The system of claim 8, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative sizes of the first and second associated subsets.

12. The system of claim 8, wherein the first pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy.

13. The system of claim 8, wherein the second pairing strategy is a FIFO or a performance-based routing strategy.

14. The system of claim 8, wherein the contact center system is configured to cycle among at least the first and second pairing strategies.

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

a non-transitory computer 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 perform benchmarking operations in the contact center system and thereby cause the at least one computer processor to operate so as to;

determine, for each contact of a plurality of contacts, an associated plurality of historical contact assignments, wherein each of the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is based upon a connection, previously established by a switch of the contact center system, between an associated one of the plurality of contacts and a respective agent based upon a pairing strategy;

determine, for each contact, an associated outcome value;

partition, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments into a first associated subset assigned using a first pairing strategy and a second associated subset assigned using a second pairing strategy;

determine, for each contact, a first portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the first associated subset and a second portion of the associated outcome value attributable to the second associated subset; and

output a difference in performance between the first and second pairing strategies according to the first and second associated portions of the associated outcome value for each contact.

16. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein, for each contact, the associated plurality of historical contact assignments is a chronologically-ordered sequence of historical contact assignments.

17. The article of manufacture of claim 16, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative positions of the first and second associated subsets within the chronologically-ordered sequence.

18. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein, for each contact, relative sizes of the first and second portions are based on relative sizes of the first and second associated subsets.

19. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein the first pairing strategy is a behavioral pairing strategy.

20. The article of manufacture of claim 15, wherein the second pairing strategy is a FIFO or a performance-based routing strategy.