I would try A since the Entitlement related list on the Case itself should show whatever entitlement is linked to this case. Feels like it gives agents what they need at a glance, but maybe it’s not enough if entitlements are managed on Contacts or Accounts. Not totally sure here, anyone see a flaw?
B . The question flags product specialization as a need, so Skills-Based Routing (B) would actually assign cases based on what agents know, not just balance the load. C looks tempting since it's about even distribution, but that's their current setup and it's not working for them. Trap option there for sure.
I don’t think C solves the core issue, since queue-based routing would just split cases evenly like they're already doing. B addresses the product specialization requirement by matching cases to managers with the right skills. Anyone think I’m off here?
Queues plus escalation rules really are the Salesforce way to make sure cases don’t slip through the cracks, so option A makes sense. It auto-escalates if an agent hasn't picked up the case in the first hour, giving another hour buffer before breaching the SLA. Pretty sure this is what they’re looking for, but let me know if anyone's seen a better approach.
I don't think B is the best option here. A matches Salesforce best practices since assigning to queues with escalation rules ensures the case doesn't slip through without ownership, which is core to meeting the SLA. B just notifies, doesn't really handle assignment. Anyone see a reason to pick C?
Yeah, I'd say A. Email-to-Case is the only native way for customers to send in digital images or files as part of their case submission, all covered in the official study guide and practice questions. Web-to-Case doesn't let users upload attachments unless you customize heavily, which isn't considered best practice for this scenario. Pretty sure about this but open to other thoughts if I've missed something.
Why does Salesforce keep making us choose between hacking Cases and buying an app? With project tracking, AppExchange apps (C) are just built for it. Cases just aren’t meant for that use case imo.
Had something like this in a mock and picked C. AppExchange has dedicated project tracking apps with timelines, tasks, dependencies-all the stuff you'd expect for engineering projects. Making Cases work would be really clunky in comparison. Pretty sure C is best unless the scenario blocks third-party installs, which it doesn’t mention. Agree?
Wouldn't number of closed cases (A) also show improvement in capacity if more can be handled after the new WFM system? Or is it less relevant than utilization?
Pretty sure it's B. Agent utilization shows if the workforce management system is helping match schedules to demand, which is the core of capacity planning. Closed cases might go up for other reasons, so not as direct. Open to counterpoints if anyone disagrees.