Dynamically allocating server resources to competing classes of work based upon achievement of service goals

• US 7,200,219 B1
• Filed: 02/10/1999
• Issued: 04/03/2007
• Est. Priority Date: 02/10/1999
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: Avaya Incorporated
• Original Assignee: Avaya Technology Corporation Miami Lakes FLA US
• Inventors: Mullen, David C., Edwards, Thomas J.
• Primary Examiner(s): Deane, Jr.; William J.
• Application Number:
  US09/247,893
• Time in Patent Office: 2,974 Days
• Field of Search: 37926501-26514, 37926601-2661, 379/309, 709/310
• US Class Current: 379/265.01
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5234 Uniform load distribution
• CPC Class Codes: H04M 3/5237 Interconnection arrangements between ACD systems

Abstract

A facility for adjusting a number of servers assigned to server pools for performing certain work types on the basis of unmet service needs in a work processing facility. Servers may include service agents, both human and robotic. A server assignor and corresponding server assignment method may each be employed in a work distributor or an automatic call distributor (“ACD”) to conditionally adjust server availability in server pools. The server assignor compares a composite preference value for a work type against each server'"'"'s threshold value for the work type. When the server assignor determines that the composite preference value is greater than or equal to a server'"'"'s threshold value, then the server assignor indicates that the server may be included in the server pool for that work type. Each server has preference values and threshold values for different kinds of work. The magnitude of a preference value represents an affinity for the work type. The server'"'"'s threshold value represents a reluctance to perform work having that work type. The server does not normally receive work for which the preference value is less than the threshold value, unless the server assignor determines that the composite preference value exceeds the server'"'"'s threshold value for that work type. The server assignor and corresponding server assignment method may compute the composite preference value from a number of user-selectable inputs and utilize a number of user-selectable functions.

Claims

1. A method for determining if a first agent should service work items of a first work type in a work processing facility, comprising:

(a) an agent assignor selecting the first agent, wherein the first work type and/or a selected work item in the first work type has an associated first dynamic preference value and the first agent has an associated first agent preference value and first agent threshold value for the first work type and wherein the first dynamic preference value reflects the work processing facility'"'"'s preference for processing of work items of the first work type in comparison to processing work items of work types other than the first work type;

(b) the agent assignor determining, as a function of the first dynamic preference and first agent preference values, a first agent composite preference value for the first work type;

(c) the agent assignor comparing the first agent composite preference value with the first agent threshold value, wherein the first agent threshold value measures the first agent'"'"'s lack of proficiency in servicing the first work type and/or selected work item in the first work type;

(d) the agent assignor, when the first agent composite preference value exceeds the first agent threshold value, finding the first agent to the qualified to service the first work type; and

(e) the agent assignor, when the first agent composite preference value is less than the first agent threshold value, finding the first agent to be unqualified to service the first work type.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of at least one of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, an alarm condition for the work type, and an answer delay for the work type, a desired service level for the work type, a call abandonment rate for the work type, and an operator intervention value for the work type.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of at least one of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, and an answer delay for the work type.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value function is the sum of the first agent'"'"'s preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value is the product of the first agent preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the first agent preference value is a function of a personal desirability of the first agent for servicing the first work type.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein in step (d) the first agent is added by the agent assignor to a pool of agents qualified to service the first work type and in step (e) the first agent is not added by the agent assignor to the pool of agents.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of a first service level value for the first work type, the first service level value being measured over a selected period of time.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and further comprising:

(f) the agent assignor, when the first agent composite value is equal to the first agent threshold value, finding the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type.

10. The method of claim 1, further including the agent assignor not performing step (b) and finding the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type, when the first agent'"'"'s preference value for the first work type is greater than the first agent threshold value for the first work type.

11. The method of claim 1, further comprising before step (b):

(f) determining a state of the work processing facility;

(g) based on the state of the work processing facility, selecting a first composite preference value function from among a plurality of possible preference value function, wherein the first composite preference value function is used to determine the first agent composite preference value.

12. The method of claim 11, wherein the state of the work processing facility is a function of a degree of achievement of one or more objectives.

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the one or more objectives comprise at least one of a selected degree of allocation of service level performance in excess of an associated goal, a selected degree of utilization of agents, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in service level attainment, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in server idleness, and a selected mode-specific behavior.

14. A computer readable medium comprising executable instructions to perform the steps of claim 1.

15. A system for determining whether a first agent should service work items of a first work type in a work processing facility, comprising:

agent assigning means for (a) selecting the first agent, wherein the first work type and/or a selected work item in the first work type has an associated first dynamic preference value and the first agent has an associated first agent preference value and first agent threshold value for the first work type and wherein the first dynamic preference value reflects the work processing facility'"'"'s preference for processing of work items of the first work type in comparison to processing work items of work types other than the first work type;

(b) determining, as a function of the first dynamic preference and first agent preference values, a first agent composite preference value for the first work type;

(c) comparing the first agent composite preference value with the first agent threshold value, wherein the first agent threshold value measures the first agent'"'"'s lack of proficiency in servicing the first work type and/or selected work item in the first work type;

(d) when the first agent composite preference value exceeds the first agent threshold value, finding the first agent to the qualified to service the first work type; and

(e) when the first agent composite preference value is less than the first agent threshold value, finding the first agent to be unqualified to service the first work type.

16. The system of claim 15, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of at least one a plurality of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, an alarm condition for the work type, an answer delay for the work type, and a desired service level for the work type, a call abandonment rate for the work type, and an operator intervention value for the work type.

17. The system of claim 15, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of a plurality of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, an answer delay for the work type, and a desired service level for the work type.

18. The system of claim 15, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value function is the sum of the first agent'"'"'s preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

19. The system of claim 15, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value is the product of the first agent preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

20. The system of claim 15, wherein the first agent preference value is a function of a personal desirability of the first agent for servicing the first work type.

21. The system of claim 15, wherein in function (d) the first agent is added by the agent assigning means to a pool of agents qualified to service the first work type and in function (e) the first agent is not added by the agent assigning means to the pool of agents.

22. The system of claim 15, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of a first service level value for the first work type, the first service level value being measured over a selected period of time.

23. The system of claim 15, wherein the agent assigning means, when the first agent composite value is equal to the first agent threshold value, finds the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type.

24. The system of claim 15, further including the agent assigning means not performing operation (b) and finding the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type, when the first agent'"'"'s preference value for the first work type is greater than the first agent threshold value for the first work type.

25. The system of claim 15, further comprising:

composite preference evaluator means for determining a state of the work processing facility; and

, based on the state of the work processing facility, selecting a first composite preference value function from among a plurality of possible preference value function, wherein the first composite preference value function is used to determine the first agent composite preference value.

26. The system of claim 25, wherein the state of the work processing facility is a function of a degree of achievement of one or more objectives.

27. The system of claim 26, wherein the one or more objectives comprise at least one of a selected degree of allocation of service level performance in excess of an associated goal, a selected degree of utilization of agents, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in service level attainment, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in server idleness, and a selected mode-specific behavior.

28. A system for determining whether a first agent should service work items of a first work type in a work processing facility, comprising:

an agent assignor operable to (a) select the first agent, wherein the first work type and/or a selected work item in the first work type has an associated first dynamic preference value and the first agent has an associated first agent preference value and first agent threshold value for the first work type and wherein the first dynamic preference value reflects the work processing facility'"'"'s preference for processing of work items of the first work type in comparison to processing work items of work types other than the first work type;

(b) determine, as a function of the first dynamic preference and first agent preference values, a first agent composite preference value for the first work type;

(c) compare the first agent composite preference value with the first agent threshold value, wherein the first agent threshold value measures the first agent'"'"'s lack of proficiency in servicing the first work type and/or selected work item in the first work type;

(d) when the first agent composite preference value exceeds the first agent threshold value, find the first agent to the qualified to service the first work type; and

(e) when the first agent composite preference value is less than the first agent threshold value, find the first agent to be unqualified to service the first work type.

29. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of at least one a plurality of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, an alarm condition for the work type, an answer delay for the work type, and a desired service level for the work type, a call abandonment rate for the work type, and an operator intervention value for the work type.

30. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of a plurality of a service level value for the work type, a queue condition for the work type, an answer delay for the work type, and a desired service level for the work type.

31. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value function is the sum of the first agent'"'"'s preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

32. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first agent composite preference value is the product of the first agent preference value and the first dynamic preference value.

33. The system of claim 28, wherein the first agent preference value is a function of a personal desirability of the first agent for servicing the first work type.

34. The system of claim 28, wherein in operation (d) the first agent is added by the agent assignor to a pool of agents qualified to service the first work type and in operation (e) the first agent is not added by the agent assignor to the pool of agents.

35. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the first dynamic preference value is a function of a first service level value for the first work type, the first service level value being measured over a selected period of time.

36. The system of claim 28, wherein the first dynamic and agent preference values are nonzero and wherein the agent assignor, when the first agent composite value is equal to the first agent threshold value, finds the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type.

37. The system of claim 28, further including the agent assignor not performing operation (b) and finding the first agent to be qualified to service the first work type, when the first agent'"'"'s preference value for the first work type is greater than the first agent threshold value for the first work type.

38. The system of claim 28, further comprising:

a composite preference evaluator operable to determine a state of the work processing facility; and

, based on the state of the work processing facility, select a first composite preference value function from among a plurality of possible preference value function, wherein the first composite preference value function is used to determine the first agent composite preference value.

39. The system of claim 38, wherein the state of the work processing facility is a function of a degree of achievement of one or more objectives.

40. The system of claim 39, wherein the one or more objectives comprise at least one of a selected degree of allocation of service level performance in excess of an associated goal, a selected degree of utilization of agents, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in service level attainment, a selected degree of dampening of fluctuations in server idleness, and a selected mode-specific behavior.