Question
Offer Constraints and bundled (Grouped) offers
Two part question.
#1. In my test campaign, I am trying to use offer constraints. The offer constraint seems to work fine for a stand alone offer however it doesn't seem to work when I try to use an offer constraint the parent in the bundle (grouped) offer. See attachment.
#2. I am bundling two propositions/offers in my strategy as a grouped offer. Shouldn't the number of initiated offers be equal? Please see both attachments.
Thanks,
Kirk
Pegasystems Inc.
US
Hi,
Question #1:
Pega Marketing volume constraint is supported only constraining on "Fixed" bundle types as documented under (other bundle types are ignored and selected as-is) :
https://community.pega.com/knowledgebase/documents/pega-marketing-81-user-guide (See page 277 notes)
From upcoming GA 8.2 we are expanding that capability for Grouped and Flexible bundles too.
Basically the flexible and group bundle parent will be considered as a primary offer for constraining purposes and if the parent offer passes the constraint test, the child offers will auto-qualify without any further constraint tests. Can you please give reasons why you can't switch to a "Fixed" bundle parent for your use case ? Please explain with a proper business case. Also mention the Pega Marketing version you are on.
Question #2:
Looks to me your Champion-Challenger shape in the strategy is arbitrating more number of member offers than the grouped parent.
You might have to pull both the parent and child into a common shape (like strategy property-set) and then the final connector you will have to pass on to the champion-challenger shape.
Try testing without the Champion-challenger arbitration shape - you will see the right results most likely.
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company
US
Question 1. We are working in PM 7.4. The use case for using "Bunlded" offers is as follows. The offers are all channel specific as we are writing customer and offer details to files via the "Send Generic" shape in the Offer Flow for consumption by 3rd party vendors. The Client would like to see the offer results written independently to I.H. It is my understanding that only bundled types will record these offer results independently.
Question 2. The Champion Challenger is arbitrating between 4 bundled offers and 1 stand alone offer. Per your comment, the Parent/Member offers ARE being brought together via a "Set Property" shape to provide the bundle name.
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company
US
OK....just did a VERY simple test. 4 Stand alone offers split proportionately by the Offer Constraint counts. As you can see, the offer constraints are NOT working for all offers. Do I need to log an SR for this? Please see additional attachements for OBCDMT15 and OBCDMT_Strat
Pegasystems Inc.
US
Hi,
So given there is no MINIMUM constraint, but all your offers have just MAX constraints - it has still done what it is supposed to do. Yes please go-ahead and raise an SR for deeper help from support on this. But I don't see an issue here. When you just set max constraint, unless the other offers have their MAX reached, you cannot guarantee all offers will be evenly distributed.
You can also set pxPriority if one or more offers have to be targeted to reach there maximum's first before targeting others. Also from your earlier post it does not look like you are forced to do Grouped bundles, but can also do Fixed bundles, as fixed bundles also set IH responses for all the offers.
The different type of bundles will matter when you are doing "Inbound" responses - i.e like an "Accept" for the offer. Looks like you don't have such requirements.