We are launching a front-office automation project to help our support agents. We are debating between "Attended" bots that run on the user's desktop and "Unattended" bots triggered by a database event. Which approach is better for reducing average handle time (AHT) without disrupting the agent's workflow?
3 answers
For customer service, "Attended" bots are usually the winner for AHT. We use them as "Digital Assistants" that pull up customer history the moment a call is transferred. The agent stays in control, but the bot does the "alt-tabbing" between legacy systems. However, we use "Unattended" bots for the follow-up work, like sending confirmation emails or updating the billing system after the call ends. This "Hybrid Automation" approach is the most efficient. Don't try to make an attended bot do long tasks, or the agent will just sit there watching their mouse move, which actually increases frustration and AHT.
When using Attended bots, how do you handle the "User Interference" issue where a person accidentally clicks something while the bot is typing?
Unattended is always better for scaling. If a process can be moved to a server, do it. Only use attended for tasks that require real-time human judgment.
Exactly, Rebecca. We always try to "push" tasks to unattended servers first. Attended bots should only be for "triggering" the process or providing the final 10% of decision-making.
Kevin, we use "Background Execution" or "Picture-in-Picture" (PiP) mode. This allows the bot to run in a virtual session on the same machine. The agent can keep typing their notes in the CRM while the bot works in the hidden session. This was a game-changer for us. Before PiP, agents would fight the bot for the mouse, which caused constant errors. Now, they don't even notice the bot is working until it pops up a notification that the task is finished.