Techniques for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system
Techniques for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system are disclosed. In one particular embodiment, the techniques may be realized as a method for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system including determining results for a first plurality of contact-agent interactions, determining results for a second plurality of contact-agent interactions, and determining combined results across the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions corrected for a Yule-Simpson effect.
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 operate in the contact center system, results for a first plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determining, by the at least one computer processor, results for a second plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determining, by the at least one computer processor, combined results across the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions corrected for a Yule-Simpson effect; and
outputting, by the at least one computer processor, the combined results, wherein the combined results demonstrate that optimizing performance of the contact center system may be realized after correcting for the Yule-Simpson effect.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein at least one of the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions were paired using at least two pairing strategies.
3. The method of claim 2 , wherein a pairing strategy of the at least two pairing strategies comprises at least one of:
a behavioral pairing (BP) strategy,
a first-in, first-out (FIFO) pairing strategy,
a performance-based routing (PBR) strategy,
a highest-performing-agent pairing strategy,
a highest-performing-agent-for-contact-type pairing strategy,
a longest-available-agent pairing strategy,
a least-occupied-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-contact pairing strategy,
a fewest-contacts-taken-by-agent pairing strategy,
a sequentially-labeled-agent pairing strategy,
a longest-waiting-contact pairing strategy, and
a highest-priority-contact pairing strategy.
4. The method of claim 2 , wherein the at least two pairing strategies alternate more frequently than once per day.
5. The method of claim 2 , wherein the at least two pairing strategies alternate more frequently more frequently than once per hour.
6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the Yule-Simpson effect was a result of an underlying partitioning of contact-agent interactions into at least the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions according to at least one of:
a plurality of time periods,
a plurality of agent skills,
a plurality of contact-agent assignment strategies (pairing strategies),
a plurality of contact center sites,
a plurality of contact center switches, and
a plurality of benchmarking schedules.
7. The method of claim 1 , further comprising determining, by the at least one computer processor, an estimation of an extent of the Yule-Simpson effect.
8. A system for benchmarking pairing strategies in a contact center system comprising:
at least one computer processor communicatively coupled to and configured to operate in the contact center system, wherein the at least one computer processor is further configured to:
determine results for a first plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determine results for a second plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determine combined results across the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions corrected for a Yule-Simpson effect; and
output the combined results, wherein the combined results demonstrate that optimizing performance of the contact center system may be realized after correcting for the Yule-Simpson effect.
9. The system of claim 8 , wherein at least one of the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions were paired using at least two pairing strategies.
10. The system of claim 9 , wherein a pairing strategy of the at least two pairing strategies comprises at least one of:
a behavioral pairing (BP) strategy,
a first-in, first-out (FIFO) pairing strategy,
a performance-based routing (PBR) strategy,
a highest-performing-agent pairing strategy,
a highest-performing-agent-for-contact-type pairing strategy,
a longest-available-agent pairing strategy,
a least-occupied-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-contact pairing strategy,
a fewest-contacts-taken-by-agent pairing strategy,
a sequentially-labeled-agent pairing strategy,
a longest-waiting-contact pairing strategy, and
a highest-priority-contact pairing strategy.
11. The system of claim 9 , wherein the at least two pairing strategies alternate more frequently than once per day.
12. The system of claim 9 , wherein the at least two pairing strategies alternate more frequently more frequently than once per hour.
13. The system of claim 8 , wherein the Yule-Simpson effect was a result of an underlying partitioning of contact-agent interactions into at least the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions according to at least one of:
a plurality of time periods,
a plurality of agent skills,
a plurality of contact-agent assignment strategies (pairing strategies),
a plurality of contact center sites,
a plurality of contact center switches, and
a plurality of benchmarking schedules.
14. The system of claim 8 , wherein the at least one computer processor is further configured to:
determine an estimation of an extent of the Yule-Simpson effect.
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 operate in the contact center system and thereby cause the at least one computer processor to operate further so as to:
determine results for a first plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determine results for a second plurality of contact-agent interactions;
determine combined results across the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions corrected for a Yule-Simpson effect; and
output the combined results, wherein the combined results demonstrate that optimizing performance of the contact center system may be realized after correcting for the Yule-Simpson effect.
16. The article of manufacture of claim 15 , wherein at least one of the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions were paired using at least two pairing strategies.
17. The article of manufacture of claim 16 , wherein a pairing strategy of the at least two pairing strategies comprises at least one of:
a behavioral pairing (BP) strategy,
a first-in, first-out (FIFO) pairing strategy,
a performance-based routing (PBR) strategy,
a highest-performing-agent pairing strategy,
a highest-performing-agent-for-contact-type pairing strategy,
a longest-available-agent pairing strategy,
a least-occupied-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-agent pairing strategy,
a randomly-selected-contact pairing strategy,
a fewest-contacts-taken-by-agent pairing strategy,
a sequentially-labeled-agent pairing strategy,
a longest-waiting-contact pairing strategy, and
a highest-priority-contact pairing strategy.
18. The article of manufacture of claim 16 , wherein the at least two pairing strategies alternate more frequently more frequently than once per hour.
19. The article of manufacture of claim 15 , wherein the Yule-Simpson effect was a result of an underlying partitioning of contact-agent interactions into at least the first and second pluralities of contact-agent interactions according to at least one of:
a plurality of time periods,
a plurality of agent skills,
a plurality of contact-agent assignment strategies (pairing strategies),
a plurality of contact center sites,
a plurality of contact center switches, and
a plurality of benchmarking schedules.
20. The article of manufacture of claim 15 , wherein the at least one computer processor is further caused to operate so as to:
determine an estimation of an extent of the Yule-Simpson effect.