Dynamic and adaptable system and method for selecting a user interface dialogue model

A communication system includes a selection module for selecting appropriate user interface types for nodes within a task. The selection module interacts with a selection criteria library and a user interface dialogue model library to determine an appropriate user interface. Selection criteria library and user interface dialogue model library may be selectively and dynamically adapted to reflect environmental, customer and organization changes.

TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates in general to communication systems and more particularly to an adaptable system and method for selecting a user interface dialogue model.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Customers contact organizations such as telecommunications companies in order to accomplish tasks including ordering a service, requesting repair service, or asking questions about their bill. When a customer contacts the organization, the customer's call is connected to a user interface which may be a customer service representative or any of a number of automated systems. Currently, when designing a system for communicating with customers, the determination of the type interface or dialogue model a customer will interact with is decided at an early stage within the design of the communication system. Typically, designers choose a primary interface, such as a speech directed dialogue interface, and a secondary or back-up interface, such as a touch tone interface, in case the primary interface fails.

As a communication system changes over time, the existing dialogue model is often ill suited for newly added tasks. However, the existing dialogue model is often maintained because redesigning the system to incorporate a new dialogue model is prohibitively expensive. This may lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of the system as well as customer dissatisfaction and frustration.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Preferred embodiments and their advantages are best understood by reference toFIGS. 1 through 3, wherein like numbers are used to indicate like and corresponding parts.

Now, referring toFIG. 1, a communication system for communicating with customers, depicted generally at10, is shown. Communication system10is preferably designed to receive communications from customers or other constituents of an organization. In the present embodiment, communication system10is designed to receive incoming communications from telecommunications customers on behalf of a telecommunications company.

Communication system10includes selection module12which is operably connected with both user interface dialogue model14and selection criteria library16. Persona library50as well as a plurality of communication task modules such as module A,60module B,70and module C,80are also operably connected with selection module12.

In the present embodiment, selection module12operates to select an appropriate user interface for a particular node of a communication task. Selection module12includes criteria evaluation module18, interface scoring module20, interface selection module22, persona evaluation module24and feedback module25. Selection module12is generally operable to communicate with selection criteria library16and user interface dialogue model library14. User interface dialogue model library14is a database or other information storage means for storing information about a plurality of different user interface dialogue models30which may also be referred to as user interfaces or dialogue models. User interface dialogue model library14includes criteria scores38for each user interface type.

In the present embodiment, user interface dialogue model library14includes four user interface types: service representative31, touch tone IVR32, speech directed dialogue34, and speech statistical language model/natural language understanding (SLM/NLU)36. In the present embodiment, criteria scores38are listed for each individual user interface type and are also associated with a criteria number39. Each criteria number39corresponds to a criteria40listed within selection criteria library16.

Selection criteria library16is a database or other information storage means for storing information related to selection criteria for selecting a user interface type. Selection criteria library16includes a listing of a plurality of criteria40and associated criteria weight scores42. Criteria40may include, for example, criteria such as cost, customer satisfaction, automation rate, task completion rate, task complexity, confidence of outcome, length of time in system, list length, interface used in previous state, and a dialogue state counter. These example criteria40are described in greater detail with respect toFIG. 2, below. Criteria weight42is an assigned valuation of the importance or weight given to each particular criteria40. In the present embodiment, criteria weight42is dynamic and adaptable. Criteria weight42may be adapted, modified or changed to reflect changing environmental factors, changing customer factors, and changing organizational factors.

As an example, environmental factors may include background noise and cell phone (modality) use. High background noise may shift the VUI selection to one that operates better in high noise. Cell phone may shift the VUI selection to one that does not require keying information manually, but rather utilizes voice commands. Examples of customer factors include changing customer views and priorities generally and system-specific factors. General views and priorities may include, for instance, customer views on cost and customer service which may be gained from survey data or other similar data. System-specific trigger events such as increasing the weight of the “time in system” criteria if the average time a customer spends in the system exceeds a pre-selected average. An example of a changing organization factor may be that an organization may periodically change its goals with respect to factors such as cost and automation rate. In these instances, the criteria weights may be changed to reflect changes in an organization's goals or priorities.

Selection module12operates to select a proper user interface type from user interface dialogue model library14for anyone of the plurality of communication task modules60,70, or80. Each communication task module such as communication task module A60includes a number of steps or nodes62required to complete the task. Each node may have associated therewith one or more variables64. Variables64may be used to adjust the value of criteria weight42or criteria score39to reflect node-specific factors. One example of a node-specific factor that is used to adjust criteria weight42is list length. An example of where variable64may be used to adjust a criteria score is with respect to the time in system score related to a service representative31form of user interface because the time in system for such an interface will be directly affected by whether or not a customer service representative is available or whether the customer will be put on hold.

In operation, selection module12evaluates which user interface type30to use a particular communication task such as communication task module A60. Selection module12first evaluates which user interface type30to use for the first node62or step within communication task module A60. After successful completion of each node62, selection module12evaluates and selects a user interface type for each successive node62within the communication task module. Criteria evaluation module18begins this process by retrieving criteria40and their associated criteria weights42from selection criteria library16. Interface scoring module20then retrieves criteria scores38for each of the plurality of listed user interface dialogue models30. Interface score module20then, for each user interface dialogue model30, multiplies each criteria score38with each corresponding criteria weight42and adds the resulting values to determine an interface score. Interface selection module22then selects the user interface dialogue model that has the highest interface score. The communication node is then directed to the selected user interface dialogue model and proceeds until the completion of the current node of the communication task.

In some embodiments, interface scoring module20may incorporate one or more values such as variable value65associated with a node, such as node66. Variable value65may then be factored into a criteria weight value42or a criteria score value39. For example, interface scoring module20may multiply selected criteria weight67by variable65. By multiplying the variable value with criteria weight67, interface selection module22adjusts the criteria weight for node specific variables. As another example, interface scoring module20may incorporate variable value69as the criteria score for service representative30user interface type dialogue model. In this particular instance, variable69is a factor that represents the average time (using a moving average) in system for a call routed to a service representative. Accordingly, when there are not enough service representatives to handle incoming calls, and customers must be put on hold before they can speak to a customer service representative, this may be factored into the criteria score.

After selection module12selects a user interface type, persona evaluation module24may evaluate whether the selected user interface dialogue is appropriate for the particular call based on call-specific aspects known as persona. In particular, persona evaluation module24may be used to evaluate whether or not a specific call is appropriate for user interface types that include a voice recognition component such as a speech directed dialogue34or SLM/NLU36. Persona library50contains call specific data, including data related to the caller's choice of words, the caller's pitch, modulation, and attitude. If persona evaluation module24determines that the selected user interface type is not appropriate for a particular call then persona evaluation module communicates with interface selection module22to select the user interface type with the next highest interface score. The process of persona evaluation24may then be repeated for the second selected user interface type.

Selection module12also includes feedback module25. Feedback module25automatically provides feedback to the variables64associated with the communication task module60, criteria weights42, and criteria scores38. For example, feedback module25operates to and keep track of the success rate and time lengths associated with the plurality of user interface types. Feedback module25may automatically adjust criteria weights42, communication task variables64and criteria scores38to reflect the current state of the communication system10. Feedback module25also allows a system administrator to manually adjust the criteria weight42and criteria scores39to reflect changing environmental factors, customer factors, and organizational factors.

For example, if the customer begins with a very broad topic, the speech SLM/NLU36style of “How May I help You/Speak Freely” would be utilized. However, if the environment has a lot of background noise, the Touch Tone32style would be utilized through operation of persona evaluation module24. As the customer continues their interaction, the dialogue model could change from Speech Directed Dialogue34to a Service Representative31. An important aspect of this invention is that the dialogue models may change dynamically as the behavior and goals of the customer becomes more evident, the task evolves, and the environmental situation changes.

This invention also allows for the dynamic update of the content of each dialogue model30, based on user behavior and system performance. For example, a speech directed dialogue model34may be very effective for billing tasks, but is not effective for repair tasks. In this case, touch tone model32may be adapted to be more likely to be selected for nodes related to repair tasks and to include repair options in a more prominent location within the interface. This functionality helps ensure that each interface type is customer-centric.

Now referring toFIG. 2, a flow diagram of a communication system for selecting a user interface, depicted generally at100, is shown. In operation, a particular node or dialogue state is begun within communication system100at110. When the node is begun112, criteria evaluation module114first considers criteria132stored within criteria library130. Criteria132, in the present embodiment, includes cost134, customer satisfaction136, automation rate138, task completion rate140, task complexity142, confidence of outcome144, time in system146, list of length148, VUI for previous state150and dialogue state counter152. In an alternative embodiment, additional criteria may be listed within criteria library130and some of the criteria listed in the present embodiment may not be included.

Criteria library also includes a criteria weight154corresponding to each criteria132. Criteria weight154reflects the relative weight or importance placed on each particular criteria. For instance, if an organization is attempting to keep costs low, the criteria weight154for the criteria of cost134would be set at a relative high valuation. In some embodiments, criteria weight154may be set at 0 for various criteria132effectively eliminating those criteria from consideration.

Cost134is a reflection of the cost of a particular interface type. For example, a service representative168is typically the most expensive form of user interface while a touch tone interface166is typically the least expensive form of user interface.

Customer satisfaction136is an indication of the degree to which callers, customers, or constituents are satisfied with the particular user interface. Automation rate138is an indication of the rate at which user interface selection is more for automated systems (such as a touch tone or directed dialogue system) versus non-automated systems (such as a service representative). Task completion rate140is the rate of successful completion of tasks by a particular user interface type. In a particular embodiment task completion rate140may be specific to the successful task completion rate of a particular user interface type to a particular node or a particular communication task module (as shown inFIG. 1).

Confidence of outcome144is an indication of the likelihood that a particular node will be successfully completed. Time in system146is a reflection of the average time a user interface type takes to complete a particular node. List length148is a node specific characteristic reflective of the number of list options associated with a particular node. Interface from previous state150is an indication of the user interface type that was used by the previous node. Dialogue state counter152is a counter to keep track of the number of times a user has used a particular dialogue state for a particular node. The dialogue state counter is intended to indicate when a user continues to fail to complete a task after several attempts using a particular user interface type.

The use of tasks broken down into nodes as well as dialogue state counter152helps the customer from “going backward” in the interaction. “Going backward” occurs when the interface style does not change and the customer fails in accomplishing their task with a particular style (for whatever reason), and the customer may have to repeat information. In other words, the customer may be asked to re-enter information that they previously provided. With this invention, the library provides a dialogue model knowing the current state of information.

Criteria evaluation module114retrieves the criteria132and corresponding weights154as described with respect to criteria valuation module18shown inFIG. 1. Next, user interface scoring module116interacts with user interface library160. User interface library160includes criteria weight information for a plurality of user interface types. In the present embodiment the user interface types include statistical language model162, directed dialogue model164, touch tone model166, and service representative168. In an alternative embodiment, additional user interface types may be included and less than all the current user interface types may be included. The present invention encompasses web-based and wireless web-based user interface types.

Criteria scores170are particular to each user interface type and a criteria score corresponding to each criteria132listed within criteria library130is preferably maintained. Criteria scores170are preferably a relative reflection of the strength of each particular interface type with respect to each criteria132. For example, with respect to cost134, statistical language module162will have a lower criteria score than directed dialogue module164because a statistical language model type interface162is typically more expensive than directed dialogue type interface164. However, touch tone type interface166will have a higher criteria score than a directed dialogue interface and a service representative type interface168will have a lower criteria score170than a statistical language model162type user interface.

User interface scoring module116retrieves criteria score information170from user interface library160similar to the operation of interface scoring module20as described with respect toFIG. 1. User interface scoring module116calculates a user interface score by multiplying criteria weight154by criteria score170for each criteria132and for each of the plurality of user interfaces. The resulting sum of all of the criteria weights multiplied by their corresponding criteria scores170is equal to the interface score for each particular user interface type. User interface scoring module116then selects the user interface type with the highest interface score. In an alternative embodiment such as the embodiment shown inFIG. 1, a separate model such as the interface selection module22performs the selection of the user interface type. In some embodiments, user interface scoring module116may rank the user interface types according to their interface scores.

In the present embodiment, after user interface scoring module116selects an appropriate user interface type, persona consideration module116interfaces with persona library180to determine whether the selected user interface is appropriate for a particular call. Persona library180includes a number of call specific factors including age182, gender184, choice of words186, pitch188, modulation190, and attitude of192. For each factor persona library180also includes persona score of194. In an alternative embodiment, more or fewer call specific factors may be included within persona library180. In the present embodiment, persona consideration module118operates similarly to persona evaluation module24as shown inFIG. 1and is primarily directed to considering the appropriateness of voice activated user interface types.

After the persona consideration module approves of the interface selection, the node is advanced to allow interaction with user120. If the node is successfully completed, the method is repeated for the next node. If the node is not successfully completed124, criteria evaluation module114reconsiders the criteria132contained within criteria library130for the particular node112. In effect, the process is repeated. In addition, information related to handling node112is incorporated into feedback module128. Feedback module128interacts with user interface library160to adjust criteria scores170and with criteria library130to adjust criteria weights154appropriately.

Now referring toFIG. 3, a flow diagram showing a method for selecting user interface dialogue nodes is shown. The method begins200by determining the appropriate criteria for the first node of a task212. The criteria for the first node of the task are then scored214and a dialogue module or interface type is selected to complete the first node of the task216.

In some embodiments (not expressly shown), an additional step may be implemented following selection step216. This added step would preferably gather feed back information pertaining to the results of the customer's experience with the first node. For example, if the customer fails to successfully complete the first node or if there is a high background noise, this information may be considered for the next step,218. This additional step my then be repeated after each subsequent selection step222and228.

Next, a selection criteria for a second node of a particular task are determined218. The selected criteria for the second node of the tasks are then weighed or scored220and an appropriate dialogue module is selected to complete the second node of the particular task222. These steps are then repeated for each ensuing node of a task such that for the nthnode of a particular task the appropriate criteria are determined224and then scored or weighed226to determine and select an appropriate dialogue task228.

The present invention advantageously allows the unique advantages of particular dialogue models matched with nodes to the customer's and organization's advantage. The selection of which dialogue model is a dynamic and customizable approach that can be adapted over time based on the priorities defined by the company, user behavior, and system performance.

Although the disclosed embodiments have been described in detail, it should be understood that various changes, substitutions, and alterations can be made to the embodiments without departing from their spirit and scope.