[comp.dcom.telecom] Caller ID on Inbound-WATS

ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu) (03/20/89)

Readers of Telecom Digest should know that AT&T already provides calling number
ID to in-bound WATS customers.  Part of their emerging ISDN service
capabilities, the inbound WATS caller ID is provided over a D channel
in conjunction with an ISDN primary rate interface to a PBX.  American
Express is already using it for their customer service operators.

Since the IECs automatically receive caller identity on every long distance
call (this is part of what equal access means-- the IEC gets caller ID
for billing purposes so that you don't have to dial a PIN code with
MCI anymore), the IECs already have this information and can pass it
on to the callee.

My understanding is that in the experience of American Express -- and
others who have subscribed to this service -- the caller's number is
only useful about 65% of the time.  That is, American Express would
like to use the caller ID to automatically call up on the customer
service rep's screen your account records before she picks up.
However, 35% of the time, the caller is coming from behind a PBX, or
is not calling from his or her usual number, and thus the customer
service rep must ask for the customer's name or account number and
call up the record manually.

At one point customer reps were answering the phone with "Hello Mr.
Smith" or whatever the customer's name was; customers found this so
disconcerting that the service reps stopped doing it.  Thus, if the
service rep asks for your name, she may already have your record in
front of her and is just checking....

See for example, the article in Communications Week for October 10, 1988,
"American Express briefs users on ISDN primary rate trial".  See also
article in Communications Week for Dec 5, 1988 on the accelerated
roleout of this capability which AT&T markets under the trade name
"Info-2" service.

Since most in-bound WATS would be governed by the FCC as an interstate
service, the FCC would have to rule on the privacy issue.  As far as I
know, the FCC has never considered it.

Marvin Sirbu