Idea

sa92663 suggested Apr 8, '14 john-sauber commented Sep 25, '19

Call Queues: allow mixture of call handling (simultaneously and in fixed order)

In a particular extensions call forwarding section (home, mobile, office), you can set the phones to ring simultaneous or in a fixed order. You also have the ability to group certain numbers such that home + cell ring simultaneous for 4 rings, and failing that, it goes to office numbers. Now let's talk about Call Queues. The options are simultaneous (to all members), round-robin (to all members), or fixed order (to all members). What I want is to have a call queue ring our call center first for four rings. They should answer 95% of the time within a ring. But failing that, I don't want the call to go to voicemail. I want it to "escalate" to a level 2 engineer (there are 9 of them). So I created extensions for each of their cell phones. So the call queue has 10 members (the call center extension + 9 extensions for the nine engineer cells). The trouble is that if I set the Call Queue to simultaneous, all extensions (call center + all engineers' cell) ring at the same time. If I set it to fixed-order, the call center rings first (good!) but then engineer #1 gets any calls after that. Engineer #2 wouldn't be attempted until 4 rings of engineer #1 cell first. This isn't good customer service at all. What I would like is the "grouping" feature, such that I could set the queue to try the call center first, and then failing that, simultaneously call the 9 engineer cells. I've tried to nest groups within groups, so that after trying the call center, the first call queue forwards to a second call queue that has all the engineer cells set to simultaneous. But that isn't allowed. Any ideas?

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

Tom Mundy commented Jun 1, '17

There is one workaround that we are using that seems to work.

1) Set up a call queue with all the members that you require
2) Ensure the settings on the members do no forward to any overflow service or to voicemail.
3) Set the member's ring time to between 20-75 *ensure everyone's is the same*
4) Add a final user that we call a ghost user to the group this user set to the same or a tiny bit shorter ring time on the first ring option then add your overflow number to the second ring option.

It is important that this user is never set to DND or it will just go straight to overflow.

RingCentral for this one feature alone I am shopping around so please take this a high risk of churn feature request. It is not acceptable that we are using a workaround like this for such as simple feature.

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

chaya-n5954 commented Jun 22, '17

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Calls forwarded to desktop app should recognize DND status. We have a number that is set up as a user, and this number first forwards to one desktop app, and then if that desktop app doesn't answer, the call forwards to another number. I would like to be able to set the desktop app to "Do Not Disturb" when I am not available so that the calls will forward straight to the next number instead of ringing the Desktop app for 20 seconds first. However, this is a feature limitation where forwarded calls do not recognize a DND status. It would not help me to set rules for different hours, because I need to be able to set the app to DND at random times on different days. I also can't set this up as a call queue because I need the number to ring for different amounts of time at different users (another feature limitation that can't be done with call queues). This means that I have customers who have to wait on the line for an extra 20 seconds for no good reason because I am not available anyway.

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

tempered commented Aug 3, '17

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Call Queue Groups - Additive and Same Priority Call Handling rules. ---Summary:Enhance Call Handling rules with additive and same priority options

---Use Case -- make following configuration possible:

Customer calls sales
Ring 5 members of sales team for 15 seconds,
Ring first 5 plus an additional 4 users (9 total) for 15 seconds
Ring 2 supervisors for 10 seconds
Send Caller to Voicemail

Just and idea....
---Proposed methods---
Add order field that accepts integer array next to each member of Call Queue.
Example using above use case
RingPriority[]; User
1,2; SalesUserA
1,2; SalesUserB
1,2; SalesUserC
1,2; SalesUserD
1,2; SalesUserE
2; SalesUserF
2; SalesUserG
2; SalesUserH
2; SalesUserI
3; SalesUserJ

3 priority levels (ring groups)
User ...A-E: First and Second Ring group
User ...F-I: Second Ring group only
User ...J: Third Ring Group only

(US,Manufacturer)

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

mgmt-group commented Nov 6, '17

Still hoping after 4 years and RC promising that it was in the roadmap 2 years ago that this would be a feature by now.

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

extension3956 commented · Nov 06, 2017 at 02:35 PM

Amen.

0 ·

robert-jerina115 commented · Nov 16, 2017 at 02:17 PM

Yeah... we're getting tired of waiting. We're looking at other options. Who knew something so expensive would be so limiting.

0 ·

jon-carissimo2950 commented Feb 20, '18

We have been using what RingCentral calls a "mobile User" to set this up, basically using an additional extension that rings all the phones, and will then will forward to our answering service. We set this up under guidance of tech support years back when we signed up because call queues did not have this capability. The call queues were very limited then and are still very limited now. This hasn't been a perfect solution, all of our users have to keep logging in and out switching back and forth between their extension and the shared extension, but we've made due.

Found out the other day that ring central is going to start billing us for a mobile user extension now for this setup.

I'd be ok paying the extra line access if it worked the way we want not to, but this is a half-a**ed work around that gets us by.

I though we we're just special needing some further configuration options for a call queue.

The current options call queues have (same options from years back btw) are very limited and not geared toward providing excellent customer service.

These shouldn't be an option to just disconnect a caller if the call queue exceeds a certain number of callers. I can only imagine the organizations that utilize such a laughable feature.

Again, I'm ok with paying more, but in exchange for additional value.

Rather than innovating and charging more for new features, RC is putting the squeeze on it's current customers for additional revenue for features already implemented.

I might just be wasting my time venting here, because it seems that RC doesn't pay any attention here since these ideas don't really ever make their way into being an actual feature.

I'm in the process of exploring other VOIP providers at this point, RC just isn't the company they used to be...

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

Chuck Fuscone commented · Feb 20, 2018 at 05:46 PM

Hi Jon, I do agree with you that the disconnect option is not ideal and I do not have any customers that use it but the voice mail option is. you could also be creative with the message stating in your greeting that you have reached this voice mail because of the volume and allow them to leave a message or tell them to dial an extension and forward to someone else.

also with the overflow call queues in play you have many more options. It sounds like your configuration could be reviewed a bit to meet the needs.

RC has implemented Contact center which is for those that have a much greater need of call handling, reporting and call control. This is not for everyone but it does exist for a price.

You need to see how many people or virtual extensions you have in your setup compared to the paid digital lines.

So sounds like a review of your call flow and requirements may get you a better configuration that what you have now.

I would be willing to talk with you about your setup to see if a better configuration could be obtained

Chuck Fuscone
Certified RC consultant
Chuck@yoritguy.com
630-975-1200

1 ·

jon-carissimo2950 commented · Feb 20, 2018 at 06:06 PM

all we need to do is have incoming calls ring all extensions and after a certain amount of time if there is no answer calls forward to our answering service.

We have no interest in using voicemail again, the answering service does a much better job than voicemail does at capturing lead info.

We have our set up where it rings a quasi-"queue" extension that follows the aforementioned forwarding rules.

I think this is the best way to structure it, the only point of resistance we encounter is having to switch back and forth between logging in and out of the shared extension and our individual extensions.

Also the call queue is not ideal for us because we do want our users to be able to field multiple calls at once. If our customers wait on hold too long they'll just call one of our competitors.

So it looks like we'll just have to bite the additional line access charge bullet on this one to maintain the current setup, because at this time, actual call queues do not allow us to set up like we want.

0 ·

chaya-n5954 commented Feb 20, '18

I have had the same issue as Jon. I spent HOURS on the phone with Ring Central reps trying to find a solution, and they did not have any good solution. We currently have our call queues as users that forward to other users, but call forwarding does not recognize when you are "Busy" or in "Do Not Disturb", so our callers have to wait while the call rings for each possible extension, even if the first three are on Do Not Disturb. Terrible customer service. And we can't set these up as call queues, because we need to allow it to ring for different amounts of time at each extension AND we need to forward to an outside number. So we're stuck.

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

sa92663 commented Feb 20, '18

I'm the original poster for this thread (OVER FOUR YEARS AGO) and it's sad to see there's no progress, just lame workarounds. After over a decade with RingCentral, I canceled everything and went with another provider (I won't mention it here because I don't want to sound like I'm a sales person). The new provider does everything I want, at the cost of a more difficult user interface. But most of the people posting on this thread are IT or tech-savvy, so the interface shouldn't be an issue. Oh, and it's like half the cost for our office.

For those of you still waiting for RingCentral to get their act together -- I'd recommend against holding your breath. Look for another provider.

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

robert-jerina115 commented · Feb 20, 2018 at 06:17 PM

Send me a message and tell me who haha

1 ·

jon-carissimo2950 commented · Feb 20, 2018 at 06:29 PM

lol yes I'm also interested

1 ·

rick1137 commented · Feb 20, 2018 at 06:50 PM

Please message me as well. I'm so done with RC.

1 ·

scott-clift532 commented · Apr 18, 2018 at 12:35 AM

Please message me as well, thanks.

0 ·

rick1137 commented Feb 20, '18

Not only have they not fixed this issue, they've made it worse with their "updates".

1 |1000

Attachments: Up to 8 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MiB each and 10.0 MiB total.

mike-gustavson13338 commented Jan 10, '19

We've had to really restructure (and simplify) our call handling due to switching to RC - and not in a positive way.

It's so frustrating to not be able to have more complex queue rules - such as the OP suggested 4 years ago...

The best case scenario for us would be a mix of rules (simultaneous and then round robin) or similar - so we can control the first rings, and if it bypasses that, have a standard round robin apply - or a second group of simultaneous.