Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

ICM Reporting (Facility Level)

I've been trying to find out if there's a way to report on ICM Activity per facility that we transfer activity to instead of depending on Agent Login mappings?  Is there some sort of underlying network parameter that will help identify this if we configure the desktops to use it?  We have multiple Vendors we send calls to that use the same Skill Groups but we want a way to send each Vendor their individual activity w/ out depending on the AgentLogin to Vendor relationship.

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks.

3 REPLIES
Green

Re: ICM Reporting (Facility Level)

I believe the short answer is no.

The way this was done in the past, and is still done today by large service providers, is to set up a NAM with CICMs for the customers, resulting in complete configuration/reporting independence. But that would not give you the routing you have today, which is odd - to say the least.

You could build an artificial partitioning with a single Team for each Vendor, then a Team based activity report should work.

Another possibility is to have Skill Groups for each Vendor, but group them all in a single Enterprise Skill Group and adjust the scripting to use ESGs, so they route to the first available agent independent of vendor (is that what you are doing?)

Regards,

Geoff

New Member

Re: ICM Reporting (Facility Level)

Here's the reply I got from the Telecom guy.

"Supplier specific Skill Groups in shared queues/call types is not an option......in the new world (ie VACD) we have one to one between Avaya Skill and ICM skill group and all "routing" - ie agent selection - is done within the Avaya not the ICM - doing supplier specific skill groups would require supplier specific skills in Avaya and thus multiple identical skills for every queue.....Given that we need to have different priority levels for skills, a multi-skill design would mean would multi-subskill per skill per queue which would quickly become exponential in the Vector and ICM configurations - which we obviously can't allow to happen....."

I still don't understand why one can't maintain the Avaya Skill to the ICM Enterprise Skill Group instead of the individual Vendor\Supplier Skill Groups.

Green

Re: ICM Reporting (Facility Level)

I should have paid closer attention when you used the word ICM and not IPCC or UCCE. I gave you an IPCC answer,

Looks like you are out of luck.

Regards,

Geoff

404
Views
0
Helpful
3
Replies