The real problem with Erlang C and the crux of the debate is its lack of flexibility. Sure, it s accurate in a straightforward queuing situation where all reps are cross-trained and proficient enough to handle the randomly arriving traffic. However, computer simulation also has some downsides. Like a flight simulator, you have to run it over and over to identify potential results hinged on a multitude of possibilities. Moreover, a simulation program doesn t really tell you what to do it tells you what will likely happen, given the parameters you assume.
Computer models take time to feed variables into the program and interpret the results.
But you ll need to experiment with the many variables you ll likely encounter in your environment to really get value from the tool. There are also hybrid approaches, variations on Erlang C which let users adjust for blockage, abandoned calls and other variables outside of the formula s original assumptions. Further, some suppliers incorporate traditional formulas into proprietary software programs designed to analyze complex environments. As the old saying goes, the proof is in the eating of the pudding. For fairly straightforward environments, Erlang C remains an accurate tool, and it will probably always be around for teaching people queuing dynamics.