<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The PlusNet Phone System / IVR</title>
	<atom:link href="http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/</link>
	<description>News and Updates on the Community.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 11:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ian Wild</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/#comment-3636</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Wild</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 18:49:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12450#comment-3636</guid>
		<description>The issue is that we don't have one queue - we have a number of separate queues and use priorities, overflows and other measures to balance call load and keep the overall longest waiting time down. Calls can also be moved between queues in real-time if need be, and so can people (especially between working on calls and tickets if we have a sudden influx of one or the other).

So, the problem is, a call can be in position 1 in one huntgroup which has 2 members working on it. If both are tied up with long calls a team leader may choose to move  the waiting call to a huntgroup with 12 people working on it, and although it might go in at position 5, it would still be answered more quickly. Telling someone their queue position there would lead to enormous confusion. 

The reality is that nothing is impossible, and with a bit of time and thought I'm sure we could re-design the IVR to make it better, and perhaps even to end up with just one queue. The problem with that however is that if it reduces our ability to manage calls efficiently, the ultimate loser ends up being our customers. 

What I would add is that I would be interested to hear if you've come across a call switching system anywhere else that works much better from a usability perspective. We're always open to suggestions as to how we can improve and on the IVR front, if it's often people's first point of contact with us, so we do want it to be the best it can be. 

Ian</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The issue is that we don't have one queue - we have a number of separate queues and use priorities, overflows and other measures to balance call load and keep the overall longest waiting time down. Calls can also be moved between queues in real-time if need be, and so can people (especially between working on calls and tickets if we have a sudden influx of one or the other).</p>
<p>So, the problem is, a call can be in position 1 in one huntgroup which has 2 members working on it. If both are tied up with long calls a team leader may choose to move  the waiting call to a huntgroup with 12 people working on it, and although it might go in at position 5, it would still be answered more quickly. Telling someone their queue position there would lead to enormous confusion. </p>
<p>The reality is that nothing is impossible, and with a bit of time and thought I'm sure we could re-design the IVR to make it better, and perhaps even to end up with just one queue. The problem with that however is that if it reduces our ability to manage calls efficiently, the ultimate loser ends up being our customers. </p>
<p>What I would add is that I would be interested to hear if you've come across a call switching system anywhere else that works much better from a usability perspective. We're always open to suggestions as to how we can improve and on the IVR front, if it's often people's first point of contact with us, so we do want it to be the best it can be. </p>
<p>Ian</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: johpal</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/#comment-3635</link>
		<dc:creator>johpal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 17:57:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12450#comment-3635</guid>
		<description>So settle the difference! "You are 30th in the queue. We estimate you will be waiting 5 minutes."
Satisfaction. ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So settle the difference! "You are 30th in the queue. We estimate you will be waiting 5 minutes."<br />
Satisfaction. <img src='http://community.plus.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Be3G</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/#comment-3634</link>
		<dc:creator>Be3G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 17:25:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12450#comment-3634</guid>
		<description>I don't know, I suspect PlusNet could be missing the point here a little bit. When IVR systems tell you what position you're in, they tell you regularly as far as I'm aware. So if Mr Bloggs phones up and is told he's 30th in the queue, but after only five minutes is told he's tenth in the queue, he can figure out for himself that he doesn't have long to wait thereafter. That, to me, seems a better system than making up some guesstimate of time remaining which will most likely be fairly inaccurate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don't know, I suspect PlusNet could be missing the point here a little bit. When IVR systems tell you what position you're in, they tell you regularly as far as I'm aware. So if Mr Bloggs phones up and is told he's 30th in the queue, but after only five minutes is told he's tenth in the queue, he can figure out for himself that he doesn't have long to wait thereafter. That, to me, seems a better system than making up some guesstimate of time remaining which will most likely be fairly inaccurate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kelly Dorset</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/#comment-3631</link>
		<dc:creator>Kelly Dorset</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 16:25:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12450#comment-3631</guid>
		<description>Because it's probably an uneducated question.  

People asking "What position am I" are more likely meaning to ask "How long will I have to wait".

"What position am I" is pretty meaning less if you don't know how many agents we have in! :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Because it's probably an uneducated question.  </p>
<p>People asking "What position am I" are more likely meaning to ask "How long will I have to wait".</p>
<p>"What position am I" is pretty meaning less if you don't know how many agents we have in! <img src='http://community.plus.net/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Be3G</title>
		<link>http://community.plus.net/blog/2008/05/19/the-plusnet-phone-system-ivr/#comment-3629</link>
		<dc:creator>Be3G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 14:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://community.plus.net/?p=12450#comment-3629</guid>
		<description>I'm admittedly playing the devil's advocate here as I never phone PlusNet (touch wood - will probably find my connection goes down completely now I've said that), but... if people have specifically asked to be told what &lt;i&gt;position&lt;/i&gt; they're in, why not just give them that information, rather than umming and ahhing about alternatives which haven't been asked for?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I'm admittedly playing the devil's advocate here as I never phone PlusNet (touch wood - will probably find my connection goes down completely now I've said that), but... if people have specifically asked to be told what <i>position</i> they're in, why not just give them that information, rather than umming and ahhing about alternatives which haven't been asked for?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
