06-21-2010 08:14 PM - edited 03-14-2019 05:55 AM
Does anyone have an elegant way of providing UCCX agents with an indial service on their agent phones? Customer currently has the scenario where selected customers are given the agent's indial number to call directly, rather than going through the queue. They want to preserve this capability. A second line is not ideal since they also want to report on these calls from the UCCX reporting suite. I can see how we can do this with individual agent CSQs (only an handful of agents so scaleability is not an issue) however I'm not sure if this is the best way to go.
Thanks
Folks
Solved! Go to Solution.
06-23-2010 04:55 AM
Usually you can do it either way. I tend to go the single-script route more often than not. Here are a few thoughts in no particular order:
Again, either path will likely work for you. The BU has generally avoided taking much of a "best practice" stance to avoid the massive debate that would doubtlessly ensue. Cisco is not well accustomed to having a product that includes an IDE. Everyone programs CCX differently because of this. There is a document on the topic but it's pretty light IMO.
06-22-2010 05:04 AM
My suggestion is to do agent-based routing and fallback to the general CSQ if the agent is not available. This has the advantage of getting the customer connected to a live agent when they call the first time.
You would do this by creating a new application, assigning the indial [DID] numbers as triggers to this application, and then use a large Switch statement which contains a different condition for each of the DIDs. Each matching condition will have a Select Resource step that has the agent's username in it instead of a CSQ. This will offer the call to the agent if they are available. If they are already on the phone, the step will fail (no queue branch on agent-based routing). From there you can proceed to queue the caller against the CSQ for the department.
06-22-2010 05:58 PM
Thanks Jonathon,
Thats pretty much what I though, although I was thinking of an application and script for each agent rather than the switch step. Less elegant perhaps but offers a bit more flexibility if they want different treatment between agents on no availability. voicemail or overflow for example. Do you have one big script or lots of little ones. My approach oin the past has been for the latter. I'm not sure if there are any performance issues either way.
Cheers,
Bruce
06-23-2010 04:55 AM
Usually you can do it either way. I tend to go the single-script route more often than not. Here are a few thoughts in no particular order:
Again, either path will likely work for you. The BU has generally avoided taking much of a "best practice" stance to avoid the massive debate that would doubtlessly ensue. Cisco is not well accustomed to having a product that includes an IDE. Everyone programs CCX differently because of this. There is a document on the topic but it's pretty light IMO.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide