You are here:
Setting Up Priority Values Without Enhanced Scheduling and Optimization
When the optimization engine calculates the score for a schedule, it considers the reward earned by scheduling each appointment. When the engine compares two schedules, the one with the highest total reward is preferred.
The total reward to schedule an appointment is composed of two parts.
- Base reward - All service appointments are given a base reward value of 500 to schedule the appointment.
- Priority reward - The reward value is based on the priority value.
When you use a 1 to 10 priority scale, the reward values assigned to priority values are non-linear.
| Priority Value | reward (Including Base REward) |
|---|---|
| 1 | 25,500 |
| 2 | 20,500 |
| 3 | 15,500 |
| 4 | 5,500 |
| 5 | 4,250 |
| 6 | 3,000 |
| 7 | 2,500 |
| 8 | 2,000 |
| 9 | 1,500 |
| 10 | 1,000 |
When you use a 1 to 100 scale, the reward values assigned to priority values are linear.
| Priority Value | reward (Including Base REward) |
|---|---|
| 1 | 25,500 |
| 2 | 25,250 |
| 3 | 25,000 |
| 4 | 24,750 |
| 5 | 24,500 |
| Etc | |
| 97 | 1,500 |
| 98 | 1,250 |
| 99 | 1,000 |
| 100 | 750 |
Any priority value outside the scale is given the base reward value of 500, such that when you’re setting up your scheduling policy, the sum of weights of all service objectives doesn’t exceed 500. The reward for scheduling the appointment is 500, but if the sum of the weight of objectives is more than 500 (for example, the best possible scenario for minimizing travel is not traveling), then the score of not scheduling the appointment can be higher than the score of scheduling the appointment. Generally, scheduling an appointment with poor metrics is more beneficial than not scheduling the appointment at all.
The reward provides the optimizer guidance on which appointments are more important to schedule and which appointments can be left off the schedule when there’s no availability to schedule all appointments. For example, when you use using the 1 to 100 scale, a priority 1 appointment is given a reward of 25,500, and a priority 3 appointment is given a reward of 25,000. Since the reward for scheduling a priority 1 is higher than scheduling a priority 3, the optimizer schedules the priority 1 appointment.
The non-linear reward assignment for the 1 to 10 scale and the broader 1 to 100 scale is designed to handle scenarios where scheduling multiple lower-priority appointments is more valuable than scheduling a single higher-priority appointment. For example, a priority 1 appointment is given a reward of 25,500, and a priority 3 appointment is given a reward of 25,000. While the reward for scheduling a single priority 3 appointment is less than the reward for scheduling a single priority 1 appointment, the reward for scheduling two priority 3 appointments is more (250,00 x 2 = 50,000 is greater than 25,500) and preferred over a single priority 1 appointment.
Using the scale of priority values, you can choose values for service appointments such that a higher-priority type of appointment can still outweigh multiple lower-priority appointments. For example, assume scheduling an emergency appointment is more important than scheduling two installation appointments. You can set the priority value for the emergency to 1 and the priority value for an installation appointment to 53. The reward for scheduling a priority 1 emergency is 25,500 and the reward for scheduling two priority 53 installation appointments 12,500 x 2 = 25,000. So the reward for scheduling the emergency is higher than the total reward for scheduling two install appointments.
If you schedule individual appointments by using priorities, as opposed to a group of appointments by using optimization, see Book and Schedule Appointments by Using Priorities.
