Abstract
Service providers routinely share information about upcoming waiting times with their customers, through delay announcements. The need to effectively manage the provision of these announcements has led to a substantial growth in the body of literature which is devoted to that topic. In this survey paper, we systematically review the relevant literature, summarize some of its key ideas and findings, describe the main challenges that the different approaches to the problem entail, and formulate research directions that would be interesting to consider in future work.
1 Introduction
Most service providers routinely share various levels of information with their customers. This information may be about the quality of the service provided, the service design, the current number of people in the system, the duration of anticipated delays, etc. In broad terms, sharing information with customers is deemed beneficial for two main reasons. First, customers usually appreciate receiving some feedback from service providers, rather than being “kept in the dark” during their service experiences, i.e., the quality of service is perceived to be higher because of such feedback. Second, because customers in service systems are people who typically change their behaviors in response to any information that they receive, informationsharing may be viewed as a lever of control in the system which, if managed in an effective manner, could be used to the benefit of the service provider.
Here, we focus on a setting where the service provider shares information about upcoming waiting times with customers, in the form of delay announcements. Nowadays, sharing delay information with customers is widespread: It is used in various service contexts such as amusement parks, call centers, hospitals, retail stores, immigration and border controls, transportation networks, etc. By and large, the announcements play a dual role: First, they increase customer satisfaction by reducing the uncertainty about upcoming waits; and second, they are a tool of voluntary demand modulation because they encourage customers to join lowcongestion states, and deter them from joining highcongestion states, i.e., they allow for a better match between demand and supply. Due to both its practical relevance and its theoretic appeal, the problem of effectively managing the provision of delay announcements in service systems is interesting to practitioners and academics alike. In particular, recent years have witnessed a remarkable growth of the body of literature devoted to studying that problem. In this paper, we survey that body of literature.
1.1 Do customers appreciate delay announcements?
For motivation, we begin by summarizing some of the main findings on the psychological impact of delay announcements. An important maxim in service science is that customers do not like the uncertainty associated with waiting. This finding has been confirmed with airline delays [77], banks [57], and websites [82]. Aversion to the uncertainty in waiting is also underlined as one of the axioms in Maister [59]. More generally, Leclerc et al. [58] provide empirical evidence (via experimental study) that waiting may be viewed as a cost for delayed individuals. Delay announcements are useful because they are means to reducing that undesirable uncertainty.
Another psychological benefit of delay announcements relates to the distinction between perceived time and actual time [43]. To be specific, the relationship between the perception of time and the evaluation of the waiting experience is mediated by several factors, including the perceived control over time [62]. Delay announcements are beneficial because they enable customers to have increased control over their waits. For example, if the waiting time is sufficiently long, a customer may elect to perform other tasks while waiting. Thus, customer waits may be perceived to be shorter. Even in settings where the delay information has no impact on the perceived duration of the wait, it typically has an impact on both the acceptability of the wait and the affective response to waiting [47]. Moreover, the announcements are usually helpful because they provide customers with a sense of progress during their waiting experiences [63].
1.2 Focus and aim
In this survey, we restrict attention to papers where the firm decides on whether and how to communicate delay information to its customers. In particular, customers cannot search for this information, nor can they acquire it themselves, for example, as in Hassin and Haviv [36], Hassin and RoetGreen [40], and Yang et al. [88]. We restrict attention to sharing waitingtime information, and do not include papers which consider alternative forms of shared information, for example, on the service quality or the service rate; for example, see Hassin [34] and Veeraraghavan and Debo [79]. Also, because the queueingtheoretic literature which studies properties of waiting times is vast, we restrict attention to papers that relate specifically to delay announcements. The first mathematical model of a queueing system with rational customers is Naor [65], where the queue is assumed to be observable to customers; the first unobservable model is studied in Edelson and Hilderbrand [24]. Numerous extensions to both models have been considered in the queueinggames literature, and the majority of those papers are relevant, albeit indirectly, to the problem of sharing delay information in queueing systems; see Hassin and Haviv [38] and Hassin [35] for comprehensive surveys. Of those papers, we only consider ones which compare, in a broad sense, the observable and unobservable models. Essentially, this amounts to quantifying the value of sharing delay information.
In this survey paper, our objectives are: (i) to classify and systematically review the relevant papers; (ii) to identify the main challenges entailed in the different approaches to the problem; (iii) to synthesize some key findings of the literature; and (iv) to identify gaps in the literature and formulate research directions which would be interesting to investigate in the future.
1.3 A bird’s eye view: key insights
In what follows, we synthesize some key findings of the literature, i.e., we address objective (iii) above; detailed descriptions of each of the papers referenced below are relegated to later sections of this survey.
Heterogeneity can be exploited through the announcements. In a setting where delay information is shared with customers, one general insight is that alternative levels of heterogeneity can be effectively managed, through the provision of delay announcements, to lead to superior outcomes. In that sense, the announcements may be viewed as a type of pricing tool which segments the customer population in an appropriate way, for example, as in priority pricing [1]. For one example, with a homogeneous customer population, the manager can benefit from “creating” heterogeneity by controlling the breadth of shared realtime congestion information; indeed, having both informed and uninformed customers can lead to improved throughput, social welfare, or operational performance [44]. For another example, heterogeneity in customers’ tolerances for waiting can be effectively managed through the provision of delay announcements to lead to increased throughput and social welfare [18, 28]. For yet another example, unobservable heterogeneity in customer types (reward from service and waiting cost) can be managed by the announcements to lead to increased profits [91]. For a last example, the heterogeneity in service capacities, between two competing service providers, makes sharing realtime delay information beneficial, for both market share and operational performance, for the lowcapacity firm [75].
More information is not always better. One may have different objectives in mind when assessing the value of providing delay information, and those objectives may be impacted by that information in different ways. While the value of information provision is usually contextdependent, one general principle is that providing more information need not always lead to improved performance and may even be detrimental. From a human psychology angle, customers do not always prefer more granular information [7, 47]. For both social welfare and throughput, less granular delay information may be beneficial ([15, 16, 28, 29, 33, 45, 69], etc.). Moreover, nonverifiable and nonquantifiable information may improve both the firm’s profit and the expected utility of customers [5]. Finally, under certain conditions, providing delay information may make the system more volatile and can lead to longer delays on average [10, 19, 42, 66].
Of course, providing delay announcements helps in many cases. In particular, another general insight is that providing realtime delay information usually yields the greatest benefit, for example, for profit, social welfare, and throughput, when the system experiences heavy congestion ([16, 33, 42, 44], etc.). Also, from an accuracy perspective, various delay predictors can be proved to have a superior performance under such highcongestion conditions as well, particularly when the system is large [50, 51].
There is no single “best” announcement. There is no universal best way to predict waiting times, and the accuracy of a specific announcement depends on both the amount of state information available, and the specific modeling context [84]. Thus, there is a need to consider several such contexts and to study performance under each specific setting. There are also different measures of performance, ranging from the average error, for example, using the MSE, to penalizing under or overestimation [55].
In broad terms, under the MSE criterion, and conditional on some systemstate information, for example, the queue length, the conditional expectation of the waiting time, given that information, is the most accurate prediction. While calculating conditional expectations is possible under certain conditions, it is, generally, a difficult task. Moreover, those resulting conditional expected values tend to perform poorly when the specific modeling assumptions under which they were derived fail to hold [50]. Thus, one needs to consider alternative, and simpler, ways to predict delays, for example, by exploiting the recent history of delays in the system [10]. Such delayhistorybased predictions can perform remarkably well, for example, in large heavily congested systems with or without customer abandonment, even when customers respond to the announcements [49]. There is also some empirical evidence substantiating their good performance in practice [71, 72]. However, they do not perform well in other settings, such as when the system is small or lightly loaded [78, 90], or under timevarying conditions [52]. The main takeaway is this: While the literature does not give us a conclusive answer as to what type of announcement to use under all circumstances, it does provide valuable insights on the appropriateness of various announcements in different settings.
Data methods and queueingtheoretic methods are complementary. The recent proliferation of empirical studies, in the context of delay announcements, prompts one to evaluate the alternative methods that are used to address that problem. In broad terms, the literature ranges from analytical work, typically substantiated by simulationbased results ([8, 83], etc.), to empirical work in the context of a welldefined structural model ([3, 81, 89], etc.), to work which relies, for the most part, on datamining methods [7, 70,71,72]. Each body of work is important in its own right, and it is crucial to emphasize the complementarity of those different approaches. Indeed, while relying on queueing models is instrumental to gain insight into performance and, importantly, allows for a mathematical framework through which controlling that performance is made possible, queueingtheoretic methods typically lack robustness in that they remain intimately tied to the specific technical assumptions under which the analysis is derived.
Empirical studies in the context of a welldefined structural model on customer utility have been instrumental in both validating existing models on customer response to the announcements, and extending those models as well. Grounded in both empirical evidence and theoretic analysis, they enable a better management of delay announcements in practice.
Datamining methods are clearly superior in terms of accuracy. Thus, if accuracy is the sole objective in mind, then there seems to be little value in going beyond them. However, datamining techniques are limited in that they are “blackbox” techniques that do not, in general, further our understanding about the dynamics of the system. Recently, the combination of those two frameworks (queueing and databased) has been advocated in several papers [7, 70,71,72]. Indeed, the delay predictors in those papers are inspired by both queueingtheoretic methods and datamining techniques and are shown to yield superior performance with reallife data sets. In the same spirit, Bassamboo and Ibrahim [11] propose a correlationbased approach to quantify the accuracy of delay announcements across different queueing models. That approach enables an easier assessment of that accuracy with reallife data, which circumvents the need to fit entire queueing models to data in order to gain insight into performance.
1.4 Organization
In this paper, we classify papers based on the assumptions that they make about the way customers respond to the announcements. In particular, we identify three main literature substreams:

In § 2, we survey papers which model customers as queued entities that do not react to the announcements received. This literature stream focuses, for the most part, on investigating the accuracy of various waittime predictors in alternative queueing models.

In § 3, we survey papers which model customers as utilitymaximizing, forwardlooking, decision makers. The focus of this stream is, primarily, on designing the effective control of the system, by studying the timing, breadth, and granularity of the shared information.

In § 4, we survey papers which assume that customers respond to the announcements, but where the specifics of the customer decisionmaking process, leading up to that response, are not modeled. In other words, customer response is assumed to be exogenous. The main objective of this stream is to study the existence and properties of resulting system equilibria, where announcements and actual delays “are close” in some sense.
For each one of the above categories, we precede our review of the relevant papers by outlining the main challenges in the corresponding stream of the literature. We conclude this survey by listing some potential future research directions in § 5.
2 Customers as queued entities
We begin by surveying papers which treat customers as queued entities that do not react to the announcements that they receive. For the most part, this branch of the literature focuses on studying ways of accurately predicting future waiting times. This is important for two main reasons: (i) from a practical perspective, systematically making inaccurate announcements may lead to customer distrust in those announcements and, ultimately, customer dissatisfaction with the service provided; and (ii) from an analytical perspective, studying waiting times in queueing systems allows for the derivation of structural results which are useful for our general understanding of those models.
In broad terms, two types of methods are typically used for predicting waiting times: Queueingtheoretic and databased. For queueingtheoretic methods (§ 2.2), the focus is on systematically considering alternative queueing models, and studying the accuracy of various realtime delay predictors in those models. The predictors may exploit different types of information about the state of the system at the time of the announcement, for example, the queue length or the history of recent delays. Relying on databased methods for delay prediction (§ 2.3) is relatively recent, and it usually allows for superior predictive power. For background on the analysis of queueing systems and their approximations, we refer the reader to, for example, Gross [27], Billingsley [13], and Whitt [85]. For a primer on datamining methods, we refer the reader to Tan et al. [76].
2.1 Snapshot of the main challenges
Usually, the modeling framework adopted in the line of literature is a \(G/GI/s+GI\) multiserver queueing system, which has a general stationary arrival process, independent and identically distributed (IID) service times with a general distribution, s homogeneous servers working in parallel, a firstcomefirstserved discipline, unlimited waiting space and IID times for waiting customers to abandon, again with a general distribution. For tractability, the allMarkovian \(M/M/s+M\) model is typically considered instead.
To measure accuracy, one must first decide on an appropriate measure. Typically, average measures of accuracy are used, for example, the meansquared error (MSE), which incorporates both the variance of the estimator and its bias. Under the MSE criterion, the conditional expectation of the waiting time, given some state information, is the most accurate prediction (there is no bias in this case). However, calculating such expected values is generally hard, and there is usually a need to resort to alternative predictions. The relative MSE, which is equal to the MSE divided by the expected waiting time, is useful for a relative measure of accuracy. One can also rely on accuracy measures which penalize overestimation and underestimation, for example, by using a newsvendorlike objective where different costs are assigned to each.
Assessing the predictive power of alternative estimators is usually done through a combination of analytical and numerical methods. On the one hand, deriving closedform expressions for prediction errors allows for an understanding of the dependence of those errors on alternative model parameters; on the other hand, detailed simulation studies allow for the extension of theoretical results to realistic settings which are not amenable to direct analysis.
To illustrate the complexity in doing direct analysis, let us consider an announcement which is equal to the delay of the Last customer to have Entered Service (LES) at the time of arrival of the new delayed customer. In what follows, we deliberately keep our exposition at a high level to convey key intuition. The LES announcement is accurate if the (stochastic) state of the system that the LES customer encounters upon arrival, for example, the queue length, is “not too different” from the state that the new customer, to whom the announcement is made, encounters. In other words, we need to determine whether the time scale at which the state of the system changes is “much larger” than the magnitude of the LES delay; if so, then the state of the system would not change considerably during the LES delay, i.e., the LES delay should be an accurate prediction. Because doing direct analysis is prohibitively difficult, there is a need to resort to approximations. This is often possible by relying on a manyserver heavytraffic framework, where results on asymptotic accuracy are derived. There is no single way of defining asymptotic accuracy; usually, a properly scaled sequence of differences between waittime estimators and corresponding delays is shown to converge to 0, for example, in a distributional sense. Importantly, one must first decide on an appropriate asymptotic regime.
To describe large systems, which are usually of primary interest, one alternative is to consider the qualityandefficiencydriven (QED) or Halfin–Whitt regime [26, 32], which strikes a balance between service quality and operational efficiency. To describe a system where waiting times are long, one can focus on the EfficiencyDriven (ED) regime instead [86]. Analysis in the QED regime is simplified for two main reasons: (i) the system exhibits economies of scale so that, asymptotically, waiting times are negligible, and (ii) a snapshot principle [68] holds, under certain conditions, so that the state of the system during the waiting time of a delayed customer changes negligibly. When the system is overloaded, fluidmodel approximations and ED diffusionscale refinements perform remarkably well and are typically used to establish asymptotic accuracy.
2.2 Queueing methods for delay prediction
Because there is no universal “most accurate” predictor, i.e., one which performs well in all queueing contexts, Whitt [84] systematically explores alternative ways of predicting waiting times in a multiserver queueing model with multiple classes, under certain distributional assumptions, by exploiting various levels of systemstate information. The types of information considered involve the queue length, individual customer abandonment and service rates, remaining service times of customers in service, etc. Full cumulative distribution functions of customer waiting times are estimated in each case, through either exact analysis or approximations.
Following up on Whitt [84], in a series of papers Ibrahim and Whitt [50,51,52,53] investigate the asymptotic accuracy of alternative realtime delay announcements, based on either the queue length or the history of delays, in queueing systems with several realistic features, such as timevarying arrivals and general distributional assumptions. The predictors that Ibrahim and Whitt consider are all singlenumber estimates, for example, the mean of the waittime distribution conditional on the queue length seen, or LES. For the most part, they consider the MSE criterion for accuracy and rely on a manyserver heavytraffic framework to: (i) derive approximations for MSEminimizing conditional expected waittime values, given systemstate information, which serve as new announcements, and (ii) quantify the accuracy of the various announcements considered. They substantiate their theoretical results with an extensive simulation study and formulate general insights on the usefulness and limitation of each type of delay prediction.
Ibrahim and Whitt focus solely on singleclass systems. The performance of LES in multiclass systems is considered numerically in Thiongane et al. [78]: The authors use simulation to explore the accuracy of the LES predictor in the context of a Markovian multiserver, multiclass system with abandonment. They explore the accuracy of LESbased announcements, including the weighted average of LES predictions, as well as predictors exploiting both the queue length and the LES delay. Bassamboo and Ibrahim [11] study the performance of LES with multiple classes as well and provide theoretical support to some of the numerical observations in Thiongane et al. [78]. Nakibly [64] also considers a multiclass context and allows for heterogeneous, classdependent service rates. She considers both exact and approximate methods. For example, in a twoserver queueing system with a nonpreemptive priority discipline and exponential classdependent service times, she describes the waitingtime distribution using difference equations and a matrix geometric method. She also considers an iterative algorithm to approximate that distribution in more complex models with multiple priorities and many servers.
For an alternative measure of accuracy, Jouini et al. [55] consider a newsvendor problem cost function instead, which allows penalization of overestimation and underestimation of delays using different cost parameters. They consider a multiclass queue with a priority service discipline and timevarying arrival rates. They empirically validate their theoretical results using data from a network of reallife call centers. In such a network, determining the number of servers available at every time epoch is difficult to do. In a system with both timevariations and an unknown number of servers, they propose simple approximations for waittime moments. They consider approximating the corresponding waittime distributions by using Erlang and Normal distributions with those matched moments and find optimal announcements from these distributions. Finally, they take their results to data: They quantify the performance of their predictors, along with a benchmark meandelay predictor. They find that Erlangbased predictions have a superior performance.
2.3 Databased methods for delay prediction
There has been recent interest in using datamining techniques for delay prediction in service systems. There are several papers which focus solely on datamining methods for waittime prediction, for example, in healthcare settings [67], or transportation systems [17]. In contrast, we focus here on papers which emphasize the importance of combining both queueingtheoretic and datamining methods.
Senderovich et al. [70,71,72] introduce a novel framework which combines processmining techniques, machinelearning algorithms, and queueingtheoretic results to predict waiting times in service queues. Singleclass systems are considered in Senderovich et al. [71], and multiclass systems in Senderovich et al. [72]. The authors consider various predictors, including delayhistorybased predictors, such as LES. Such predictors are termed “snapshot” predictors because their asymptotic accuracy in certain queueing contexts is substantiated by Reiman’s snapshot principle [68]. They also consider two average predictors, one which averages over the entire history of delays, and another which clusters waits according to k loads, using kmeans clustering. In general, snapshot predictors are found to be accurate in singleclass settings, consistently outperforming average predictors. In a multiclass setting, snapshot predictors and regressionbased methods yield good performance. Senderovich et al. [71, 72] are based on the analysis of call center data. Senderovich et al. [70] focus on a healthcare setting instead. In particular, the authors rely on predictors which combine patient information, for example, previous visits and other related information, with realtime congestion measures, such as the current number of patients and recent lengths of stay. The proposed prediction method is shown to have superior performance.
Ang et al. [7] also consider a healthcare setting and use data sets from four hospitals. They, too, emphasize a message similar to Senderovich et al. [70,71,72]: Combining queueingtheoretic results with datamining techniques leads to superior predictive performance. They introduce a novel estimation method, QLasso, which is inspired by both queueing theory and the Lasso method of statistical learning. In particular, they consider a queuelengthbased predictor, which is equal to the ratio of the queue length to the processing rate, as a covariate in the QLasso method. The authors find that the QLasso method consistently outperforms other prediction methods such as rollingaverage methods. The authors also implement their method in a hospital and discuss related implementation challenges.
3 Customers as decision makers
In this section, we survey papers which treat customers as forwardlooking, utilitymaximizing, decision makers. The announcements do not directly impact payoffs in the system, i.e, a customer is not compensated for following or discarding the waittime information. Moreover, the objectives of the different players, i.e., the firm and its customers, are usually not perfectly aligned. For example, the firm may want to increase throughput, whereas customers may want reduced waiting times. Hence, the main premise in that literature is that the impact of the announcements arises indirectly in equilibrium. There are many related questions: Does an equilibrium exist? If so, is it unique? Assuming that a unique equilibrium exists, what are the values of different objectives (revenue, social welfare, customer utility, etc.) at equilibrium? Most importantly, what is the impact of sharing delay information? For background on the analysis of singleserver queues and basic gametheoretic concepts, we refer the reader to chapter 1 in Hassin and Haviv [38].
It is important to note that while a singleserver queueing system is often not an accurate representation of a reallife system (which is usually much more complicated, including multiple servers, general distributions, and key characteristics such as customer abandonment), relying on a simplified singleserver queueing framework, with no customer abandonment, enables a tractable analysis which elucidates insights that should hold more broadly, even when more complicated modeling features are accounted for as well; for example, see § 1.3 for a short description of some of those insights.
3.1 Preliminaries: the classical framework
The classical queueing system is an M / M / 1 model. The firstcomefirstserved (FCFS) discipline is considered, and there is unlimited waiting space. Arrivals are according to a Poisson arrival process with rate \(\lambda \), service times are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) with rate \(\mu \), and there is a single server. Customers are delay sensitive, and we let C denote the waiting cost per time unit for a customer (which is assumed to be paid when the customer enters service). Customers also receive a reward R from service.
In Naor [65], a customer inspects, upon arrival, the queue length (number of customers in the system) and decides whether to join or balk. An individual joins a queue of size i if, and only if, her expected utility \(R  \frac{C(i+1)}{\mu } \ge 0\). The equilibrium joining strategy, i.e., individual optimizing strategy, is a thresholdbased strategy where customers who observe n customers in queue upon arrival join if, and only if, \(n+1 \le n_e\), where \(n_e \equiv \lfloor R\mu /C \rfloor \). The social benefit, per unit of time, assuming a threshold joining strategy with threshold n is given by \(\lambda (1p_n) R  C q\), where \(p_n\) is the stationary probability of finding n in the system, given a maximum queue length of n, and q is the expected queue length. A pure threshold socially optimal strategy exists, and Naor [65] shows that the social benefit attains its maximum at a value \(n_s \le n_e\). Rooted in this classical result, a general theme in the queueinggames literature is that the selfish behavior of utilitymaximizing customers leads to suboptimal equilibrium solutions compared to the socially optimal solution. The aim is then to investigate ways of restoring the imbalance. In Naor’s framework, by imposing an appropriate admission fee, i.e., a static, queuelength independent price, \(\theta \), customers can be motivated to adopt the threshold \(n_s\) instead of \(n_e\). The toll may also be set from a revenue maximizer’s objective, i.e., to maximize \(\lambda (1p_n) \theta \). In this case, the fee levied by the manager is too high, i.e., \(n_r \le n_s \le n_e\), where \(n_r\) is the corresponding equilibrium threshold.
Edelson and Hilderbrand [24] consider the basic unobservable model, where customers do not observe the queue length upon arrival, and make joining decisions based on the expected waiting time. Customers may either join the queue, not join, or adopt a mixed strategy where they join with probability q. It is found that a unique equilibrium strategy exists, and that it is based on the value of R: If R is “low,” then no customer joins; if R is intermediate, then customers adopt a mixed strategy with joining probability \(q_e \equiv \mu C/R\); and, if R is large, then everyone joins. The social benefit function attains its maximum at a value \(q_{soc}\) such that \(q_{soc} \le q_e\). Thus, as in the observable case, individual optimization leads to queues that are longer than socially desired, but the gap can be corrected by imposing an appropriate admission fee. We note that the objectives of a profit maximizer and the social planner coincide.
3.2 Snapshot of the main challenges
With endogenous customer response, studying implications on different objectives is not easy. A firstorder issue is to decide on an appropriate objective. For example, an engineer may care about throughput, whereas an economist may care about social welfare. Moreover, different objectives may be affected by the delay information in similar ways, but not always. For example, a naive view may assume that an increase in throughput, i.e., number of served customers, must correspond to an increase in waiting times. However, this need not be the case. Indeed, realtime delay information usually allows for a better matching between supply and demand, so that we may concurrently have increased throughput and shorter waiting times. Moreover, such results tend to be intimately tied to the specific modeling assumptions made.
To illustrate the complexity in this line of research, we consider the basic question: How does revealing information about the queue length, i.e., providing delay information, affect throughput and social welfare? For throughput: In the observable case, we know that revealing information would incite customers to join when the queue length is short, and deter them from joining when the queue length is long. In the unobservable case, where customers make their joining decisions based on the expected waiting time, they would join more if the system is, overall, not highly congested. Now, let us compare the observable and unobservable cases: It is not clear what the aggregate effect on throughput should be. Revealing the queue length may induce more customers to join, but if the system is, overall, lightly congested, then it may also deflect some customers who encounter an “exceptionally” long queue. The reverse argument holds when the system is heavily congested. Thus, it seems that no general statement can be made, and that the load in the system should play a role. For social welfare: We know from both Naor [65] and Edelson and Hilderbrand [24] that customers create negative externalities on other customers, and that they may join both observable and unobservable queues when it is not socially optimal for them to do so. Thus, it is not clear what the aggregate impact of revealing queuelength information on social welfare would be. In general, more complex issues should be considered, such as the granularity of the delay information (going beyond the reveal/ do not reveal dichotomy above), as well as the timing and breadth of the shared information. The literature that we survey next addresses such issues.
3.3 To reveal or not to reveal? Observable versus unobservable queues
We begin by surveying papers which compare the observable and unobservable systems, i.e., address whether or not to reveal queuelength information.
Social welfare, revenue maximization, and throughput. Hassin [33] studied the impact of information suppression from both the social planner’s and revenue maximizer’s perspectives. In both cases, two quantities play a central role: (i) the potential arrival rate, \(\lambda \), and (ii) the value of service, relative to the cost of waiting, \(\nu _s \equiv R \mu /C\). Hassin [33] compares profits, under profitmaximizing admission fees, in the observable and unobservable cases. He finds that if customers are “very” sensitive to delay, \(\nu _s \le 2\), i.e., \(C \ge R \mu /2\), then it is optimal to reveal the queue length for all \(\lambda > 0\). However, if customers are not very delay sensitive, \(\nu _s > 2\), then there exists a threshold, \(\varLambda _R\), such that it is only optimal to reveal the queue length for \(\lambda > \varLambda _R\). The intuition behind these results is as follows: When \(\lambda \) is large, many customers would opt to balk based on average waittime information, which is high because \(\lambda \) is high. In this case, disclosing the queuelength information encourages more customers to join in lowcongestion states. While it is true that it also discourages customers from joining highly congested states, the key is that these customers would have balked anyway in the unobservable case; thus, revealing information helps the firm. We now turn to the social welfare results. First, we note that the problem would be straightforward if a social welfare maximizing fee can be imposed. In this case, revealing delay information can only help the social planner since, in the observable case, a customer would enter only when it is socially desirable to do so, but this is not the case in the unobservable model. The more challenging case is when pricing cannot be socially controlled, for example, because price regulation is not desirable, but information suppression can be socially controlled. Under the assumption of a revenuemaximizing toll, the values of \(\nu _s\) and \(\lambda \) play similar roles, but the threshold on \(\lambda \), \(\varLambda _S\), is different and it is shown that \(\varLambda _S < \varLambda _R\). Thus, a social planner may want to reveal the queue length when it is not optimal for a revenue maximizer to do so, i.e., for \(\varLambda _S< \lambda < \varLambda _R\). However, it is never optimal to suppress information when a revenue maximizer voluntarily chooses to reveal it, i.e., for \(\lambda > \varLambda _R\).
Chen and Frank [16] study how information suppression impacts throughput. Intuitions similar to the ones in Hassin [33] continue to apply, so we will be brief. In particular, for a fixed admission fee, the role played by the system’s load is prominent. On the one hand, if the arrival rate is low, in particular \(\lambda < \varLambda ^*\), then customers may be turned away by realtime queuelength information, while they would have joined with a (low) average waittime information. This implies that \(\lambda _O < \lambda _U\), i.e., the effective joining rate is smaller in the observable system than in the unobservable system. On the other hand, if the arrival rate is high, in particular \(\lambda > \varLambda ^*\), then \(\lambda _O > \lambda _U\). Shone et al. [74] take a different view and focus on the situation where the decision of a service provider to reveal the queuelength information does not affect throughput. Shone et al. [74] assume out the possibility of optimizing the admission fee. They compare the observable and unobservable systems in terms of joining rates, both individually optimal (selfish) and socially optimal (altruistic), in addition to various other system performance measures. The authors derive necessary and sufficient conditions for the equality of equilibrium selfish and altruistic joining rates between the observable and unobservable systems and show that both equalities cannot simultaneously hold. Shone et al. [74] also observe that the decision of whether or not to reveal the queue length depends strongly on \(\nu _s\), as was observed in Chen and Frank [16].
A network of providers. The papers above focus on a setting with a single provider. Singh et al. [75] consider a competitive environment with two service providers instead. These providers may choose to diffuse different levels of information, either realtime or historical. The paper studies the first mover’s benefit, i.e., the first provider to announce realtime information. It considers two parallel M / M / 1 queues, in a multiperiod setting, where one provider announces the realtime queue length, and the other provider announces the expected delay of the previous period. For a performance comparison, the authors consider the market share and the expected delay, and customers join the lowerdelay alternative. The authors find that the benefit of being the first mover depends on the service capacity. In particular, for the lowercapacity provider, being the initiator in announcing realtime information increases the market share and reduces delays. However, the same does not hold for the highercapacity provider, where results are mixed. The authors also find that social welfare always increases when there is benefit on market share and delay.
Dong et al. [19] also consider a network setting with multiple providers, but they focus on a network of hospitals instead. In particular, they study, in the context of an empirical investigation, the impact of delay announcements on coordination in the network. Coordination is measured through the correlations of delays between hospitals: There is synchronization if those correlations are positive. This observation is rooted in a queueingtheoretic result which establishes that the jointheshortestqueue (JSQ) discipline synchronizes queues in the system. Indeed, if customers check the delay information, then it is reasonable to assume that they would join the shortest queue, which would then lead to synchronization. Thus, exploring the impact of delay information reduces to studying correlations between the waiting times at adjacent hospitals. By relying on data of reallife announcements and patient response (measured through online searches), the authors investigate whether the announcements do indeed impact the behavior of patients. They provide empirical evidence that this is indeed the case. They also conduct an extensive numerical study to investigate how sensitivity of customers to delays, the load of the system, and the heterogeneity between hospitals impact the synchronization level in the system. They show that using average wait predictors may lead to oscillations in the system, where customers systematically flock to one of the two queues; this numerical observation is studied in Pender et al. [66].
3.4 Granularity, timing, and breadth of the delay information
The papers above consider either full revelation or no revelation of realtime systemstate information. However, there are other considerations, such as the timing, granularity, and breadth of the shared delay information. We now survey papers which study decisions pertaining to those characteristics.
“Discrete” information: High and low announcements. The idea that full information may not be necessary, and that a discrete highlow type of announcement may suffice, already follows immediately from Naor [65]. Indeed, in the observable case, customers follow a thresholdtype joining decision; this indicates that only the information on whether or not the queue length exceeds a threshold, L, should suffice. Because this information structure is much simpler, there is interest in studying it. We note that setting \(L=0\) corresponds to the unobservable model in Edelson and Hilderbrand [24].
Altman and Jimenez [6] consider highlow announcements when there is no pricing decision. First, the authors consider that the value of L is fixed (not necessarily at optimum). In the social planner problem, they optimize the probabilities of accepting an arrival if the queue length is below or above L. Next, they consider the individual optimization problem where utilitymaximizing customers make their joining decisions, and investigate the ensuing equilibrium. In both problems, the optimal admission strategy has the form of either accepting all arrivals when the queue length is below L, or rejecting all arrivals when it is above L. The authors also show that imposing a socially optimal L value in the individual optimization problem does not lead to the socially optimal outcome. Hassin and Koshman [39] consider a similar setting as in Altman and Jimenez [6], albeit with pricing decisions. In particular, customers are charged \(p_L\) when the queue length is below L, and \(p_H\) otherwise. Hassin and Koshman [39] demonstrate how to obtain the maximum value of social welfare in Naor’s model by using their coarse dynamic pricing scheme.
The above twosignal strategy arises at equilibrium in Allon et al. [5]. In this paper, the authors relax two fundamental assumptions: (i) that the firm is truthtelling in revealing information, and (ii) that the information shared is quantifiable and verifiable by customers. As such, they allow for a richer information set which also includes intentional vagueness: A firm is intentionally vague when it provides the same announcement in different states of the system. They show that even though the information provided to customers is nonverifiable, it can improve the profits of the firm and the expected utility of customers. The incentives of the firm and its customers are neither perfectly misaligned (they both prefer shorter waits), nor perfectly aligned (the firm benefits from higher throughput, whereas the customers do not). This misalignment between the firm and its customers plays a key role in the analysis: Depending on its level, different equilibria emerge. Of particular interest are equilibria with influential cheap talk, i.e., ones where the firm can induce distinct customer actions based on different unverifiable messages.
Different levels of information. We now turn to the literature investigating the problem of finding the “best” type of delay information to share. Duenyas and Hopp [20] investigate that problem in a manufacturing setting. Each customer who places an order generates a reward for the firm, and there is a penalty for being late (per unit time exceeding the quoted lead time). In response to a quoted lead time, a, each customer places an order with probability p(a). Duenyas and Hopp [20] derive an optimal quote which maximizes the expected profit (revenue minus penalty cost), under both infinite (\(G/G/\infty \)) and finite (G / G / 1) capacity settings. In the infinitecapacity case, the optimal quote does not depend on the current backlog in the system. In the finitecapacity alternative, the optimal leadtime quoting policy is statedependent and increasing in the state, i.e., the higher the congestion, the higher the leadtime quote. Specifically, a profitmaximizing firm should give granular, statedependent information rather than rely on a coarse informationsharing scheme.
In their model, Duenyas and Hopp [20] trade the reliability of the quoted delay for maximizing throughput: While there is a penalty for being late, the firm is not, otherwise, restricted in the quote that it provides, i.e., it is not constrained to being reliable. In contrast, Dobson and Pinker [18] consider a similar problem but assume that the firm must provide reliable quotes: The statedependent leadtime quote provided, \(l_i\), depends on the number i of customers in the system and is a fractile from the conditional waittime distribution which must be met \((100\tau )\%\) of the time. In other words, letting \(W_i\) denote the conditional steadystate waiting time, we must have that \({\mathbb {P}}(W_i \le l_i) = \tau \). The proportion of customers who join the system, in response to \(l_i\), is given by \(\alpha (l_i, \tau )\). Dobson and Pinker [18] compare alternative scenarios, \(S_k\), which reflect different levels of information granularity: For scenario \(S_k\), customers are provided with a statedependent announcement \(l_i\) for \(i < k\), and with a static announcement for \(i \ge k\). Increasing k amounts to increasing the granularity of the delay information. The authors derive a sufficient condition under which sharing more information increases throughput, and emphasize that this need not always be the case. Importantly, they demonstrate that higher throughput may also be associated with lower expected waiting times, and less variable waits, because the delay information deters customers from joining highly congested states, and encourages customers to join lowcongestion states. They also highlight the importance of customer heterogeneity, i.e., the extent to which different information granularity leads to different demand rates: The greater the heterogeneity, the higher the throughput, i.e., the higher the value that can be derived from quoting lead times.
The role played by customer heterogeneity is also central in the work of Guo and Zipkin. Guo and Zipkin [28] consider three levels of information: (1) no information, (2) partial information, i.e., queue length upon arrival, and (3) full information, i.e., exact waiting time. For performance measures, they consider throughput and the expected customer utility. Customers are assumed to be heterogeneous in their delay costs. Specifically, each arriving customer has a cost type, \(\theta \), which is drawn from a continuous and bounded distribution, H, and density function, h. There is also a basic cost function, c(w), associated with a wait w. Thus, the cost incurred by a \(\theta \)customer who is delayed for w is equal to \(\theta c(w)\). Different levels of delay information incite more or fewer customers to join. The information provided also segments customers depending on their delay sensitivity: A customer who joins under one type of information may balk under another type. Guo and Zipkin [28] demonstrate that both system throughput and customer utility, under different information levels, are impacted by the shape of the customer delay distribution. Depending on that distribution, they characterize conditions under which information helps either the customers or the service provider. The main takeaway is that more information may or may not be beneficial, depending on the distribution of customer delay sensitivity. In subsequent papers, the above results are generalized to systems with phasetype service times [29], different levels of information [30], and alternative cost functions [31].
In a series of papers, Burnetas and Economou [15], Economou and Kanta [22, 23], and Economou et al. [21], the authors quantify the impact of state information on system dynamics under various assumptions. Burnetas and Economou [15] consider an M / M / 1 queue with setup times. In particular, when a new customer arrives to an empty system, the server requires an exponentially distributed time with rate \(\theta \) before beginning service. At time t, the state of the system is described by the pair (N(t), I(t)), where N(t) is the number of customers in the system and \(I(t) = 0\) or 1 is the state of server (idle or busy, respectively). Customers may be exposed to different levels of information about the system, corresponding to four cases: (i) fully observable, where customers observe both N(t) and I(t); (ii) almost observable, where customers observe only N(t); (iii) almost unobservable, where customers observe only I(t); (iv) fully unobservable, where customers do not observe either I(t) or N(t). In all cases, customer equilibrium strategies are analyzed, as well as the stationary behavior in the system and the social benefit for all customers. Economou et al. [21] consider an extension of Burnetas and Economou [15] where both general service and general setup times are allowed. Economou and Kanta [23] assume that the waiting space is divided into compartments, to be served sequentially in increasing order, and joining customers may know either the compartment number (but not their position in the compartment that they join) or their position within a compartment (but not the compartment number). Both information levels correspond to partial information since customers do not fully observe the system state in either case. For a frame of reference, if a customer knows both the compartment index and the compartment position, then the model reduces to the model in Naor [65], whereas if neither are known then the model reduces to the model in Edelson and Hilderbrand [24]. Economou and Kanta [22] and Wang and Zhang [80] assume that the server may break down and require repair. The time to repair is considered to be equal to 0 in the former and is exponentially distributed in the latter. The authors in those two papers compare two levels of information: (i) fully observable, where customers know both the queue length and the state of the server, and (ii) partially observable, where customers know only the queue length. Both papers compare equilibrium threshold balking strategies in their contexts.
Timing and breadth. The question of when to make a delay announcement, and the extent to which information should be shared, have also been investigated in the literature. He and Down [42] rely on both heavytraffic analysis and simulation to study performance in a queueing system where only a fraction of customers are informed about waiting times. Specifically, they consider two customer classes and two server pools. Dedicated customers in each class can only be served by one of the two pools, for example, because of a language requirement. A fraction of customers is flexible and may choose one of the two server pools depending on which has the shortest queue. He and Down [42] focus on the expected waiting time for both classes and demonstrate that “a little flexibility goes a long way” in that delay information (the queue length) significantly improves performance even when a small proportion of customers are informed about waiting times. They also address the question of information updating by considering, numerically, a setting where the mean waiting time is updated periodically, and customers use the most recent update in making their joining decisions. They show that there could be significant degradation in performance if the delay information is not updated frequently enough, and the system may experience oscillation behavior because customers herd together for one queue for a period of time.
Hu et al. [44] also address the question of the breadth of the information shared. They consider a setting where only a fraction of customers are informed about the queue length in the system. Informed customers make their joining decisions based on the observed queue length. Uninformed customers make their joining decisions based on the expected waiting time in the system. The fraction of informed customers is assumed to be exogenous. Informed customers join the system in accordance with the threshold joining policy in an observable queue, as in Naor [65]. Uninformed customers randomize their joining decisions. Uninformed customers indirectly influence informed customers by influencing the distribution of the queue length in the system. The authors find that, in systems which are not under very low loads, informing a fraction of customers about realtime delay information increases either the throughput or the social welfare. Their results depend on both the offered load in the system and the joining behavior of uniformed customers. To relate their results to Chen and Frank [16]: They find that when the offered load is low enough, throughput decreases with the information. Similarly, if the offered load is high enough, then throughput increases with the information. However, in the intermediate region for the offered load, throughput is maximal if only a fraction of customers are informed. Also, while the standard view, as in Hassin [33], is that social welfare is always improved by revealing the queue, the authors demonstrate that when the offered load is high enough, it is optimal to have only a fraction of informed customers, i.e., social welfare does not always increase by revealing the queue length to everyone. In short, the presence of uninformed customers improves throughput under low offered loads and increases social welfare under high offered loads.
Despite its practical importance, the question of timing of the announcements remains understudied, with the vast majority of papers assuming that the announcement is given immediately upon arrival of the delayed customer. At a high level, the tradeoff is as follows: Postponing the announcement allows the firm to make a more informed decision about whether or not to admit the customer. With more information at its disposal because of the delay in making the announcement, the firm should benefit. However, postponing the announcement also means potentially keeping customers longer in queue. Thus, it is not clear whether a firm would want to resort to this postponement. Allon and Bassamboo [4] address this question in the context of an unobservable M / M / N queue; the model specifics are, otherwise, similar to Allon et al. [5]. The authors focus on identifying conditions under which influential cheap talk emerges in equilibrium. To model the system with postponed announcements, they consider a twostage system. The first stage, which models, for example, a call center’s IVR, is an infiniteserver queue which is essentially a delay station. The second stage is an M / M / N queue: Upon entry to this M / M / N queue, the firm makes a nonverifiable cheap talk type of delay announcement. The authors characterize the optimal admission policy for the firm in the second stage and demonstrate that it is of a threshold type where the threshold depends on the number of customers in the first stage. They also characterize the set of possible equilibria in the delayed cheap talk game and compare these to the nondelayed game. They show that such a comparison is complex: The firm may or may not benefit, i.e., create credibility and impact customer behavior, from delaying the delay information.
Pender et al. [66] also consider the impact of delaying the delay announcements. Specifically, they study the oscillation behavior observed in both He and Down [42] and Dong et al. [19]. They use two deterministic fluid models to examine the effect of providing customers with delayed delay information. In particular, they consider two systems: System I consists of two infiniteserver queues where arriving customers receive delayed information about the queue length. The delay in information is quantified by a deterministic parameter \(\varDelta \). Customers choose which queue to join depending on the delayed delay information that they receive, in accordance with a multinomial logit customer choice model. By analyzing the dynamics of the resulting fluid model, the authors demonstrate that there is asynchronous behavior between the two queues if \(\varDelta \) is large enough, i.e., there are systematic oscillations and no stable equilibrium. System II also consists of two infiniteserver queues, but the delay information is in the form of a timeaverage of the queuelength information in a window of length \(\varDelta \) instead. In this case as well, the authors demonstrate a similar asynchronous behavior between the two queues if the window over which the average is taken is long enough.
RoetGreen and Hassin [69] also consider a setting where customers learn delayed information about the queue length in the system but, contrary to Pender et al. [66], the delay in information is assumed to be random (exponentially distributed), corresponding to the travel time needed for a customer to join the queue after the delay information is received. In other words, customer joining decisions are not instantaneous. A customer joining strategy is a vector that assigns a probability of traveling to each possible queue length. Because the travel time is not negligible, a customer who had decided to join a system based on “old” queuelength information may decide to balk upon arrival to the system if the realtime queue length is too long. Thus, customer decisions are made at two successive epochs. The authors investigate the structure of a symmetric Nash equilibrium. They find that customers often adopt a doublethreshold strategy: Customers travel when the queue length is short, balk or mix between balking and traveling when the queue length is at an intermediate length, and travel when the queue length is long. The intuition is that a customer who observes an intermediate queue assumes that previous customers must have observed short queues, and are now on their way. Thus, the system’s congestion is likely to soon increase and, consequently, the customer decides to balk. The intuition is reversed when a customer observes a long queue: In this case, that customer assumes that previous customers must have observed an intermediate queue and balked. Thus, the congestion in the system is likely to soon decrease, and the customer decides to join the queue. The authors also demonstrate that social welfare may be higher under the noinformation model than under the delayed information model.
Hu and Wang [45] consider a setting where customers share queuelength information with each other. Because information is shared at the arrival epoch of an arriving customer, it constitutes lagged information for a future customer who wishes to join the system based on this “historical” information. Customers decide to join or balk based on previous information, but do not update their decisions upon arrival to the system because they do not observe the queue length in the second stage, unlike in RoetGreen and Hassin [69]. Indeed, they observe the queue length only upon entering the system. The authors investigate how this shared information structure affects throughput, expected queue length, and social welfare in the system, and draw comparisons between the fullinformation and noinformation models. They find that (i) throughput under shared information is less than that under full information; (ii) the expected queue length under shared information is less than that under full information; and (iii) social welfare may be lower or higher under shared information, depending on the offered load in the system.
3.5 Joint optimization: announcements and other controls
Because delay announcements are levers of control in the system, it is natural to investigate how a manager may jointly optimize the announcements with other levers of control, such as staffing and scheduling decisions.
Armony and Maglaras [8, 9] study joint routing and delay announcement decisions in the context of a call center which offers a callback option to delayed customers. Specifically, callers are informed, upon arrival, of their predicted waiting time for realtime service, and a delay guarantee for postponed service. There is a continuum of delaysensitive customer types, and customers assign utilities to joining either queue, and join the queue corresponding to the highest utility. The problem is how to provide accurate delay estimates and decide on an accompanying routing rule which guarantees that the postponed service is offered within the specified deadline. This problem is analytically difficult to solve, primarily because future arrivals from the postponed service may affect the waiting times of customers who are already in queue. Thus, the authors focus on the manyserver heavytraffic Halfin–Whitt regime instead. Under this regime, the authors show that using a local version of Little’s law, i.e., announcing the queue length encountered upon arrival divided by the arrival rate, is asymptotically consistent (it becomes accurate in large systems) under a thresholdtype routing rule which is asymptotically compliant (satisfying the delay guarantee constraint). Specifically, the manager gives priority to realtime service customers, so long as the queuelength for the postponed service does not exceed a given threshold. While Armony and Maglaras [9] focuses on steadystate delay information, Armony and Maglaras [8] considers statedependent delay information instead. In comparing the performance of the system with steadystate or statedependent delay information, the authors show that statedependent information increases resource utilization while improving the quality of service for realtime service.
Yu et al. [91] also consider a setting where a profitmaximizing firm uses the announcements in conjunction with optimizing a routing rule, but where customer types are unobservable to the manager. Because customers are heterogeneous in both their delay costs and the values drawn from service, the firm may gain from customer segmentation through a priority service discipline. There is information asymmetry in the model: While the firm has private information about the congestion level in the system, customers have private information about their types. Since information on customer types is not observable by the firm, the announcements play a dual role: They inform customers about upcoming (expected) delays, and they are means to eliciting information about customer types. In other words, the priority discipline used by the firm depends on the announcements given. The authors examine the ability of the firm to sustain an equilibrium with influential cheap talk in the above setting, and distinguish between two cases, depending on whether the two customer classes considered have homogeneous or heterogeneous holding costs. In the homogeneous case, they show that the firm can achieve its unconstrained firstbest profit, where it has both full information and full control over customers, through the provision of delay announcements. In particular, a partial segmentation of the customer population may be sufficient to achieve maximal profit. Moreover, under certain conditions, not differentiating customers at all may be the profitmaximizing strategy. In the heterogeneous case, the firm can no longer achieve its firstbest through the announcements. Nevertheless, it can improve its profits by giving priority to customers who receive the highest announcements. The authors also characterize babbling equilibria in the system, where no credible information is shared with customers so that the state of the system and the announcement given by the firm are independent; they also compare babbling equilibria to influential equilibria where the firm communicates credible information to customers. They find that providing credible delay information always increases the firm’s profit, but may improve or hurt the expected total customer utility.
Ibrahim [48] also takes the view that the announcements can be used as a control tool which can be optimized jointly with other controls. In particular, the focus there is on a queueing system where the number of servers is random. This setting arises in sharingeconomy applications, for example, because of the selfscheduling behavior of workfromhome call center agents. Because agents show up at random, there are congested periods in the system. Because of this congestion, the abandonment distribution plays an important role. In particular, it can be controlled, via delay announcements, to alleviate the cost of selfscheduling. The author studies how to control the announcements, along with other tools, namely the compensation offered to agents and the staffing level in the system, in order to minimize costs.
3.6 Empirical studies
The literature above is analytical in nature. The recent availability of granular data, for example, at the callbycall level in call centers, has made it possible to study changes in customer behavior, in response to the announcements. We now recap the main results from those papers.
Early empirical evidence which illustrates how customers update their patience times in response to delay announcements, in call centers, can be found in Mandelbaum and Zeltyn [61] and Feigin [25]. Akşin et al. [3] undertake a more detailed empirical study to explore the impact on customer behavior and, in turn, on system performance, due to the announcements. The authors begin by providing empirical evidence, using a Cox regression analysis, substantiating the impact of the announcements on the abandonment behavior of (call center) customers. Their data set has two priorities, and the announcements are equal to the queue position or the elapsed waiting time of the longest waiting customer; they are also made sequentially over time. The study reveals that both the composition and sequence of the announcements have an impact on customer abandonment behavior, and that customers who receive longer announcements, or see a deteriorating delay condition (increasing announcements during their wait), abandon earlier. The impact of the announcements is also affected by the priority class of the customer.
In order to explore the operational impact of the announcements, the authors use a structural estimation approach: They model callers’ abandonment decisions as in the optimal stopping time model introduced in Akşin et al. [2]. Specifically, time is divided into periods, and a customer makes a decision on whether or not to abandon at the beginning of each period. Customers are heterogeneous in both the rewards that they receive from service and their perunit waiting costs (both of these are drawn from lognormal distributions). The announcements received impact the abandonment distribution of callers which, in turn, impacts their decisions on staying or reneging, sequentially over time. The parameters of that endogenous model for caller abandonment are estimated from data, for each priority class. In order to study the impact of the announcements, the authors assume a setting where customers receive only one announcement upon arrival. By relying on the approximation in Whitt [87], they characterize the equilibrium that arises in the system in steady state, where the equilibrium is defined as one where the distribution of waiting times based on the optimal stopping time model coincides with the distribution of the waiting time using the approximation from Whitt [87]. Through a simulation study, Akşin et al. [3] then study the operational impact of the announcements. Their main conclusions are as follows: (i) delay information helps customers make better decisions in the sense that callers who receive a long (short) delay announcement abandon more and faster (less and slower); (ii) the impact of the announcements is strongest when the state of the system is congested; and (iii) the increased granularity of the waittime announcement (exact queue length position vs. range for the number in queue) leads to a smoother change in caller behavior.
Yu et al. [89] also adopt an empirical approach in studying the impact of delay announcements on customer patience. They begin by introducing the concepts of informative and influential announcements. An informative announcement is one that carries information about the current congestion level in the system, i.e., one where longer delays do indeed correspond to larger announcements. An influential announcement is one where the patience of customers changes in response to the announcements. By statistically comparing the survival distributions of customers, the authors find that the impact of the announcements is ambiguous: Some announcements are influential and/ or informative, whereas others are not. This prompted the authors to undertake a deeper investigation into the dynamics of the performance impact of the announcements; they did so by relying on a structural estimation approach.
The structural model is as follows: Customers may return multiple times and, at each return, receive multiple delay announcements during their wait. At each announcement epoch, the caller revisits their decision of staying until service or reneging. Customers are heterogeneous, but their heterogeneity is modeled through their cost–reward ratio rather than separately through their service rewards and waiting costs. The cost–reward ratios and variance of idiosyncratic shocks are then estimated from data. The authors consider two models: (i) a base model where customers update their beliefs about offered waits using the announcements received; (ii) a refined model where not only customer beliefs but also the waiting costs of customers are impacted by the announcements. The authors find that their second model explains the ambiguous impact on customer impatience observed earlier in their data analysis. In particular, they show that while the cost–reward ratio decreases in the offered wait associated with the announcements (“I waited so long already, so why not wait a little longer?”), the variance of the idiosyncratic shocks increases. This dual effect explains the nontrivial impact of the announcements on customer behavior. The authors then explore, through a simulation study, what managerial implications can be drawn from their analysis. In particular, they find that providing delay announcements leads to an increase in the surplus of customers (surplus is equal to reward minus waiting cost), and that less refined delay information (in the form of three signals on the congestion of the system) may lead to higher customer surplus than more granular information.
Yu et al. [90] undertake a field experiment in an Israeli bank’s call center to explore the loss aversion of customers in time, and its dependence on the delay information available. Specifically, customers who receive delay announcements typically form a reference point based on the announcement received. If the actual waiting time experienced is smaller than that reference point, then the time difference is considered a gain. If the actual waiting time experienced is larger, then the time difference is considered a loss. Loss aversion means that customers value lost time more than they value gained time. Customers are either provided with accurate, inaccurate, or no announcements. By using a structural model to infer the customers’ value of time (the abandonment behavior is modeled through an optimal stopping time problem), the authors find that customers indeed exhibit loss aversion, and that this is independent of the correctness of the delay information given. (Loss aversion is measured through an increase in the perunit waiting cost after the announcement.) However, the accuracy of the delay announcement does have an impact on the reference point formed. Specifically, with accurate information, the reference point coincides with the delay information given, whereas with inaccurate information, customers use the observed average delay as a reference point instead. This contradicts the standard viewpoint that firms should give an inaccurate but high announcement to make the customers “feel better about their waits.” Indeed, the analysis suggests that customers may disregard such inaccurate announcements but retain their loss aversion.
In a related paper, Webb et al. [81] rely on a proportional hazards model for the hazard rate of the abandonment distribution instead. The covariates used in that model include the gain and loss in time effects due to the announcements. In particular, the announcement creates a reference point which is the expectation of the wait time for service. The authors find that a model in which customers react to the announced value of the first announcement, and in which reference points are induced by the first two announcements, is the best fit to their data. They also find that customers are loss averse, that they fall for sink cost effects, and that a higher announcement leads to more abandonment. Finally, they study implications on staffing decisions and find that firms who take behavioral implications of the announcements into account can significantly reduce their staffing levels.
4 Exogenous changes in customer behavior
In this section, we survey papers which model customer response to the announcements, but do not explicitly model the dynamics of the customer decision process leading up to that response. In other words, changes in customer behavior are assumed to be exogenous. While the literature in § 3 focuses on modeling customer joining/balking decisions only, the papers in this section consider changes in customer abandonment behavior as well and focus, for the most part, on the accuracy of the announcements in light of those changes.
4.1 Snapshot of the main challenges
Studying the accuracy of delay announcements, when customers respond to these announcements, is challenging. Indeed, changes in customer impatience affect system dynamics and, in turn, the future announcements made. For example, if customers abandon faster because of high announcements, then future waiting times, and future announcements which depend on those waiting times, should be shorter. Thus, studying the accuracy of the announcements involves characterizing an equilibrium in the system. At a high level, an equilibrium must correspond to the longrun performance in the system, where the average announced delay coincides with the average experienced delay.
First, it is not clear whether such an equilibrium exists, or if it is unique; indeed, there may be multiple equilibria and the system may exhibit oscillations between those equilibria. Second, even when a unique equilibrium exists, it is not clear how to specify that the announcement and the corresponding delay, which are both random variables, coincide in that equilibrium, for example, this could be in expectation, in distribution, or asymptotically when scaled in an appropriate way. Third, it is not clear how stochastic fluctuations around the equilibrium affect the system’s performance and the accuracy of the announcements. Even under Markovian assumptions, explicit analysis of the underlying birthanddeath process is analytically complex. This is so because the transition rates of the birthanddeath chain would all be dependent on the announcements. Therefore, analysis is typically done in an asymptotic heavytraffic regime instead. However, establishing asymptotic accuracy is not easy, primarily because it may be that the underlying stochastic processes, for example, the queuelength process, do not even converge. Even if the underlying processes do converge, then the analysis is complicated by the statedependent nature of the arrival and abandonment rates in the system, due to the announcements.
4.2 Accuracy and performance impact
One fundamental idea is that the announcements help by deterring the most impatient customers from waiting, i.e., by converting late abandonment into early balking. Indeed, since those customers would have abandoned anyway, inciting them to abandon immediately upon arrival, for example, balk, should help in reducing congestion in the system while not affecting throughput.
Replacing exponential reneging with balking. We begin with the case where customers who receive delay information consider it to be truthful, know their personal preferences, and are able to decide, upon arrival, whether they would be willing to wait at all. In this case, all reneging is replaced by balking because of the announcement. Whitt [83] adopts this view, and compares two singleclass M / M / s / r queueing systems (where r denotes the maximum queue length allowed) with reneging and balking. In particular, Model 1 assumes that customers balk with a given probability and otherwise join the system and may renege after some time. Model 2 assumes that customers are given systemstate information upon arrival, for example, the queue length. In Model 2, all reneging is replaced with balking at arrival. Because of the dynamics of customer response, and conditional on the system state seen upon arrival, a customer does not take other customers’ actions into account when making her own decision to join or balk. By analyzing general birthanddeath processes, with announcementdependent rates, Whitt [83] shows that the number of customers in Model 1 is larger in Model 2 in the likelihoodratio stochastic ordering sense. In other words, the announcements lead to an improvement in performance by converting reneging after some delay with balking upon arrival. Jouini et al. [56] extend Whitt [83] by considering a system with two customer classes and a nonpreemptive priority service discipline. In a model where customers replace subsequent reneging with balking upon arrival, as in Whitt [83], the authors do analysis to derive balking probabilities and moment expressions for the virtual waiting times of the high and low priority customers.
In practice, delay announcements do not convert reneging entirely into balking [25, 61]. Indeed, it seems more common that the most impatient customers balk in response to the information, while more patient customers elect to stay but update their patience levels, depending on the announcement. If the announcement is long, then there will be more balking, and less subsequent reneging, and vice versa. Thus, there is a tradeoff between reneging and balking, based on the announcement. This is one of the main ideas in Jouini et al. [54]. The authors consider a delay announcement which is equal to a fixed percentile of the waiting time, conditional on the queue length seen upon arrival, and study how varying that percentile, or coverage \(\beta \), impacts performance in the system. Jouini et al. [54] consider three models: Model 0 assumes that the delay information is exact, and arriving customers respond to that information by balking upon arrival if their patience falls below that threshold; there is no subsequent balking in the system. This model is in the same spirit as Whitt [83], and it is argued that this is indeed a reasonable model when customers fully trust the information that they are given. Model 1 assumes no delay announcement, and that a higher proportion of customers balks upon arrival because of the lack of information; customers may later renege if their patience expires before reaching service. Model 2 introduces the idea of a coveragebased announcement, where the firm announces a given percentile of the waitingtime distribution. In this model, customers update their patience based on the announcements that they receive: The updated patience rate, \(\gamma '\), is equal to a combination of their individual patience before the announcement, and the delay information received (later approximated by an exponential distribution for the analysis). Under an exponential assumption on the announcementdependent abandonment, the authors rely on the analysis of birthanddeath models to analyze the performance impact of the announcements. For consistency, the announcement given must coincide with the fractile of the stationary delay distribution. Thus, an equilibrium analysis is needed, and the announcementdependent abandonment rate is derived based on a fixedpoint algorithm. This algorithm reveals the dependence of \(\gamma '\) on \(\beta \). Thus, varying \(\beta \) leads to different performance in the system. The authors find that, all else held constant, an announcement with more coverage leads to higher balking in lieu of late abandonment from the queue. However, through investigating the value of the “optimal” coverage (minimizing the balking probability, subject to a constraint on the reneging probability) an important insight is reached: More coverage, which is equivalent to more precise delay information, at the expense of a larger announcement, is not always better for the service provider. Indeed, this would depend on a host of factors, including the way in which customers react to the specific announcements that they receive.
Nonexponential but smooth abandonment. Armony et al. [10] go beyond the exponential assumption on the abandonment distribution, in response to the announcement. Direct analysis is hard, and the authors rely on two approximation methods to study the resulting equilibrium in the system: (i) a deterministic fluid model and (ii) an iterative numerical algorithm, based on Whitt [87], where general abandonment is approximated by Markovian abandonment with statedependent rates. The authors focus on the performance impact of making the LES delay announcement. By analyzing the fluid model, they derive conditions on customer response to guarantee the existence and uniqueness of that equilibrium. In the fluid model, LES coincides at equilibrium with a fixed delay announcement (FD), equal to the average equilibrium delay. This motivates the authors to also consider an FD announcement, and they use simulations to study the equilibrium behavior with both LES and FD announcements in the \(M/GI/n+GI\) model. They validate both approximation methods, and illustrate that the LES announcement is usually more effective, leading to smaller variance. Using the framework in Armony et al. [10], one can quantify the value of communicating delay information, for example, by comparing the equilibrium that arises with performance in a system without announcements. This performance impact depends on the assumptions made on the way customers respond to the announcements.
Armony et al. [10] do not discuss the accuracy of the individual announcements, which involves quantifying the stochastic fluctuations around equilibrium. This is done, in a similar setting, in Ibrahim et al. [49]. The authors demonstrate that the LES announcement, with customer response to the announcements, is asymptotically accurate in both the qualityandefficiencydriven and efficiencydriven regimes. A main technical issue in the analysis is demonstrating that the stochastic fluctuations around the equilibrium in the system (when it exists and is unique) would not drive the system out of that equilibrium, thus guaranteeing accuracy.
Abandonment “jumps”: Going beyond the fluid model. Armony et al. [10] illustrate that the fluid model may not be accurate when the abandonment response to the announcements is not smooth, for example, when there is an announcementdependent “jump” in abandonment, which is consistent with empirical evidence. To analyze the system with such jumps necessitates going beyond the fluid approximation, i.e., a more refined approximation is needed. Such an approximation is presented in Huang et al. [46]. Because the announcements play a role in altering customer abandonment, it is conceivable that jointly optimizing the control of announcements along with the staffing level would lead to staffing levels that are different than in the absence of announcements. Huang et al. [46] are the first to show this by considering an overloaded \(GI/M/s+GI\) queue where they jointly optimize the staffing level and the timing of the announcements, subject to qualityofservice constraints. The announcementdependent hazard rate of the abandonment distribution is assumed to be discontinuous. In particular, they consider two types of delay announcements, corresponding to two types of responses. The first is similar to Armony et al. [10], where customers who hear an announcement upon arrival have a changed abandonment response at the point of the announcement, as well as balking upon arrival in response to the announcement. The second type of announcement is made during the waiting time, leading to an abrupt increase in the likelihood of abandonment at the announcement epoch. The objective of the paper is to quantify the impact of the nonsmooth change in abandonment on system performance and operational decisions. To do so, the authors introduce an approximation based on scaling the patiencetime distribution. They substantiate the accuracy of their refined approximation, demonstrate that there is an \({\mathcal {O}}(\sqrt{\lambda })\) reduction in the staffing level due to the announcements, and show that the optimal timing of the announcement coincides with the fluid offered waiting time.
5 Future research directions
In this section, we identify some “macrolevel” themes that we believe would be interesting to investigate in future research.
Bridging the psychological and the operational. As mentioned in Bitran et al. [14], there is a general need to narrow the gap between mathematical models of customer response in service systems, and the complex reality of human behavior and psychology. The body of literature devoted to analyzing customer response to the announcements generally assumes that changes in customer behavior arise from individual customers maximizing their expected utilities from service and waiting. Some papers have challenged whether such an approach is always appropriate. For example, Guo and Zipkin [28] indicate that relying on utilitybased approaches may lead to counterintuitive results, such as customers preferring more congested states. In the same spirit, Allon et al. [5] indicate that customers may not be expectedutility maximizers and may, for example, prefer accuracy over no accuracy, or information over no information. To wit, extant experimental work from psychology and marketing studies offers important insight on how customers perceive and react to both having to wait for service, and to receiving delay announcements while waiting (§ 1.1). There remains ample opportunity to design more sophisticated models which incorporate such psychological features, to test the validity of those models with data, and to study implications on decisionmaking in the system.
One recent work in that vein is Yu et al. [90], which tests the loss aversion of customers (to waiting) by conducting a field experiment in the context of a call center. Webb et al. [81] study implications on operational decisionmaking with similar behavioral features. Another relevant work, though not specifically related to delay announcements, is Yuan et al. [92]. In this paper, service providers share a common entertainment option, which alleviates the cost of waiting on their customers, but compete on other service dimensions. This duality between cooperation and competition is termed coopetition. The authors demonstrate that a service provider’s profit can increase when engaging in coopetition. In other words, Yuan et al. [92] quantify how a psychological dimension, i.e., making the customer waiting experience more pleasant, can indeed influence traditional operational measures, such as the firm’s profit. Further studies, in the same spirit, are interesting venues for future research.
Alternative designs for delay announcements. In the literature on delay announcements, it is commonly assumed that a single delay announcement is given to customers, that the manager decides on whether or not to provide the announcement, and that the delay information is given immediately upon arrival. Recent work has begun challenging those assumptions [5, 45, 66, 69], primarily on issues concerning the timing of the announcement, and how the announcements are actually diffused to the customer population, for example, whether this is done by the manager or by the customers themselves.
Recent technological advances have made it possible for firms to obtain a wealth of data about individual customers, and to track the evolution of the service experience in real time. This opens up an opportunity for a better segmentation of (heterogeneous) customers, for example, via targeted delay announcements, and a study of the implications of such segmentation on performance in the system. Optimizing the granularity of the information shared with such heterogeneous customers, potentially sequentially during their stay, is an interesting topic for future research. Indeed, experimental evidence suggests that people value a sense of progress during their waiting times, which can be made possible through the announcements; for example, see Munichor and Rafaeli [63]. Moreover, by targeting customers with (multiple) different announcements, the firm can incite different abandonment behaviors. While models for rational customer abandonment have been advanced in some papers ([37, 41, 60, 73], etc.) and have been substantiated empirically in others [2, 89], systems with endogenous abandonment, which is dependent on delay announcements, remain understudied in general. In a context with announcementdependent abandonment, jointly optimizing the provision of announcements and the scheduling of those impatient customers (for example, in the spirit of [12]) would be possible. Further exploration of, for example, the design of a system with multiple announcements, the study of the dynamic impact of such sequential announcements on customer behavior, and the analysis of corresponding implications on the operational management of the system, and on various related objectives, remain interesting venues for future research.
Toward building a service science. In this survey paper, we reviewed papers taking different approaches to the effective management of delay announcements in service systems. The overall objective of that rich body of work is to build a service science. With that goal in mind, it is important to systematically study different queueing models with various complexities, and to paint a complete picture of the impact and accuracy of delay announcements. Therefore, it is important to mention that several model extensions remain underexplored, despite their prevalence in practice. Here is a noncomprehensive list of such extensions: nonstationary and nonPoisson arrival models; alternative service disciplines (beyond FCFS); multiple classes with heterogeneous service rates and/or heterogeneous abandonment rates; queueing networks; queues where capacity is uncertain, for example, due to the selfscheduling behavior of agents; queues where different levels of information are missing, for example, on service, arrival, and abandonment rates, and on customer types and classification, etc.
References
Adiri, I., Yechiali, U.: Optimal prioritypurchasing and pricing decisions in nonmonopoly and monopoly queues. Oper. Res. 22(5), 1051–1066 (1974)
Akşin, Z., Ata, B., Emadi, S.M., CheLin, S.: Structural estimation of callers’ delay sensitivity in call centers. Manag. Sci. 59(12), 2727–2746 (2013)
Akşin, Z., Ata, B., Emadi, S.M., CheLin, S.: Impact of delay announcements in call centers: an empirical approach. Oper. Res. 65(1), 242–265 (2016)
Allon, G., Bassamboo, A.: The impact of delaying the delay announcements. Oper. Res. 59(5), 1198–1210 (2011)
Allon, G., Bassamboo, A., Gurvich, I.: We will be right with you: managing customer expectations with vague promises and cheap talk. Oper. Res. 59(6), 1382–1394 (2011)
Altman, E., Jimenez, T.: Admission control to an M/M/1 queue with partial information. In: International Conference on Analytical and Stochastic Modeling Techniques and Applications, pp. 12–21. Springer, Berlin (2013)
Ang, E., Kwasnick, S., Bayati, M., Plambeck, E., Aratow, M.: Accurate emergency department wait time prediction. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 18(1), 141–156 (2015)
Armony, M., Maglaras, C.: Contact centers with a callback option and realtime delay information. Oper. Res. 52(4), 527–545 (2004a)
Armony, M., Maglaras, C.: On customer contact centers with a callback option: customer decisions, routing rules, and system design. Oper. Res. 52(2), 271–292 (2004b)
Armony, M., Shimkin, N., Whitt, W.: The impact of delay announcements in manyserver queues with abandonment. Oper. Res. 57(1), 66–81 (2009)
Bassamboo, A., Ibrahim, R.: Delay announcements in service systems: When is the average wait good enough? Working paper. Northwestern University (2017)
Bassamboo, A., Randhawa, R.S.: Scheduling homogeneous impatient customers. Manag. Sci. 62(7), 2129–2147 (2016)
Billingsley, P.: Convergence of Probability Measures. Wiley, Hoboken (2013)
Bitran, G., Ferrer, J.C., Oliveira, P.R.: Om forum—managing customer experiences: perspectives on the temporal aspects of service encounters. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 10(1), 61–83 (2008)
Burnetas, A., Economou, A.: Equilibrium customer strategies in a single server Markovian queue with setup times. Queueing Syst. 56(3), 213–228 (2007)
Chen, H., Frank, M.: Monopoly pricing when customers queue. IIE Trans. 36(6), 569–581 (2004)
Demir, E., Demir, V.B.: Predicting flight delays with artificial neural networks: case study of an airport. In: 2017 25th IEEE Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU), pp. 1–4 (2017)
Dobson, G., Pinker, E.: The value of sharing lead time information. IIE Trans. 38(3), 171–183 (2006)
Dong, J., YomTov, E., YomTov, G.B.: The Impact of Delay Announcements on Hospital Network Coordination and Waiting Times. Working paper. Northwestern University (2017)
Duenyas, I., Hopp, W.: Quoting customer lead times. Manag. Sci. 41(1), 43–57 (1995)
Economou, A., GómezCorral, A., Kanta, S.: Optimal balking strategies in singleserver queues with general service and vacation times. Perform. Eval. 68(10), 967–982 (2011)
Economou, A., Kanta, S.: Equilibrium balking strategies in the observable singleserver queue with breakdowns and repairs. Oper. Res. Lett. 36(6), 696–699 (2008a)
Economou, A., Kanta, S.: Optimal balking strategies and pricing for the single server Markovian queue with compartmented waiting space. Queueing Syst. 59(3), 237–269 (2008b)
Edelson, N., Hilderbrand, D.: Congestion tolls for Poisson queuing processes. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 43, 81–92 (1975)
Feigin, P.: Analysis of customer patience in a bank call center. Working paper, The Technion, Haifa, Israel (2006)
Garnett, O., Mandelbaum, A., Reiman, M.: Designing a call center with impatient customers. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 4(3), 208–227 (2002)
Gross, D.: Fundamentals of Queueing Theory. Wiley, Hoboken (2008)
Guo, P., Zipkin, P.: Analysis and comparison of queues with different levels of delay information. Manag. Sci. 53(6), 962–970 (2007)
Guo, P., Zipkin, P.: The effects of information on a queue with balking and phasetype service times. Naval Res. Logist. (NRL) 55(5), 406–411 (2008)
Guo, P., Zipkin, P.: The effects of the availability of waitingtime information on a balking queue. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 198(1), 199–209 (2009a)
Guo, P., Zipkin, P.: The impacts of customers delayrisk sensitivities on a queue with balking. Probab. Eng. Inf. Sci. 23(03), 409–432 (2009b)
Halfin, S., Whitt, W.: Heavytraffic limits for queues with many exponential servers. Oper. Res. 29(3), 567–588 (1981)
Hassin, R.: Consumer information in markets with random product quality: the case of queues and balking. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 54, 1185–1195 (1986)
Hassin, R.: Information and uncertainty in a queuing system. Probab. Eng. Inf. Sci. 21(03), 361–380 (2007)
Hassin, R.: Rational Queueing. CRC Press, London (2016)
Hassin, R., Haviv, M.: Equilibrium strategies and the value of information in a two line queueing system with threshold jockeying. Stoch. Models 10(2), 415–435 (1994)
Hassin, R., Haviv, M.: Equilibrium strategies for queues with impatient customers. Oper. Res. Lett. 17(1), 41–45 (1995)
Hassin, R., Haviv, M.: To Queue or Not to Queue: Equilibrium Behavior in Queueing Systems, vol. 59. Springer, Berlin (2003)
Hassin, R., Koshman, A.: Optimal Control of a Queue with HighLow Delay Announcements: The Significance of a Queue. Working paper. Tel Aviv University (2017)
Hassin, R., RoetGreen, R.: The impact of inspection cost on equilibrium, revenue, and social welfare in a singleserver queue. Oper. Res. 65(3), 804–820 (2017)
Haviv, M., Ritov, Y.: Homogeneous customers renege from invisible queues at random times under deteriorating waiting conditions. Queueing Syst. 38(4), 495–508 (2001)
He, Y.T., Down, D.G.: On accommodating customer flexibility in service systems. INFOR 47(4), 289 (2009)
Hornik, J.: Subjective vs. objective time measures: a note on the perception of time in consumer behavior. J. Consum. Res. 11(1), 615–618 (1984)
Hu, M., Li, Y., Wang, J.: Efficient ignorance: information heterogeneity in a queue. Manag. Sci (2017). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2747
Hu, M., Wang, J.: Efficient Inaccuracy: Information Sharing in a Queue. Working paper. University of Toronto (2017)
Huang, J., Mandelbaum, A., Zhang, H., Zhang, J.: Refined models for efficiencydriven queues with applications to delay announcements and staffing. Oper. Res. 65, 1380–1397 (2017)
Hui, M.K., Tse, D.K.: What to tell consumers in waits of different lengths: an integrative model of service evaluation. J. Mark. 60, 81–90 (1996)
Ibrahim, R.: Managing Queueing Systems Where Capacity is Random and Customers are Impatient. Working paper. University College London (2017)
Ibrahim, R., Armony, M., Bassamboo, A.: Does the past predict the future? The case of delay announcements in service systems. Manag. Sci. 63(6), 1762–1780 (2017)
Ibrahim, R., Whitt, W.: Realtime delay estimation based on delay history. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 11(3), 397–415 (2009a)
Ibrahim, R., Whitt, W.: Realtime delay estimation in overloaded multiserver queues with abandonments. Manag. Sci. 55(10), 1729–1742 (2009b)
Ibrahim, R., Whitt, W.: Realtime delay estimation based on delay history in manyserver service systems with timevarying arrivals. Prod. Oper. Manag. 20(5), 654–667 (2011a)
Ibrahim, R., Whitt, W.: Waittime predictors for customer service systems with timevarying demand and capacity. Oper. Res. 59(5), 1106–1118 (2011b)
Jouini, O., Akşin, Z., Dallery, Y.: Call centers with delay information: models and insights. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 13(4), 534–548 (2011)
Jouini, O., Akşin, Z., Karaesmen, F., Aguir, S., Dallery, Y.: Call center delay announcement using a newsvendorlike performance criterion. Prod. Oper. Manag. 24(4), 587–604 (2015)
Jouini, O., Dallery, Y., Akşin, Z.: Queueing models for fullflexible multiclass call centers with realtime anticipated delays. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 120(2), 389–399 (2009)
Katz, K.L., Larson, B.M., Larson, R.C.: Prescription for the waitinginline blues: entertain, enlighten, and engage. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 32(2), 44 (1991)
Leclerc, F., Schmitt, B.H., Dube, L.: Waiting time and decision making: is time like money? J. Cons. Res. 22(1), 110–119 (1995)
Maister, D.: The psychology of waiting lines. Serv. Encount. 113–123 (1985)
Mandelbaum, A., Shimkin, N.: A model for rational abandonments from invisible queues. Queueing Syst. 36(1), 141–173 (2000)
Mandelbaum, A., Zeltyn, S.: Datastories about (im)patient customers in telequeues. Queueing Syst. 75(2–4), 115–146 (2013)
McGuire, K., Kimes, S., Lynn, M., Pullman, M., Lloyd, R.: A framework for evaluating the customer wait experience. J. Serv. Manag. 21(3), 269–290 (2010)
Munichor, N., Rafaeli, A.: Numbers or apologies? Customer reactions to telephone waiting time fillers. J. Appl. Psychol. 92(2), 511 (2007)
Nakibly, E.: Predicting Waiting Times in Telephone Service Systems. Ph.D. thesis, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology (2002)
Naor, P.: The regulation of queue size by levying tolls. Econom. J. Econom. Soc. 37, 15–24 (1969)
Pender, J., Rand, R., Wesson, E.: Managing Information in Queues: The Impact of Giving Delayed Information to Customers. Working paper. Cornell University (2017)
Pereira, S., Portela, F., Santos, M., Machado, J., Abelha, A.: Predicting pretriage waiting time in a maternity emergency room through data mining. In: Smart Health, pp. 105–117. Springer, Berlin (2015)
Reiman, M.I.: The heavy traffic diffusion approximation for sojourn times in Jackson networks. In: Applied Probability Computer Science: The Interface, pp. 409–421. Springer, Berlin (1982)
RoetGreen, R., Hassin, R.: Information Can Reduce Social Welfare When Customers Decide Whether or Not to Travel to a Queue. Working paper. University of Rochester (2017)
Senderovich, A., Weidlich, M., Gal, A.: Feature Learning for Accurate Time Prediction in Congested Healthcare Systems. Working paper. Technion (2017)
Senderovich, A., Weidlich, M., Gal, A., Mandelbaum, A.: Queue mining–predicting delays in service processes. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 42–57. Springer, Berlin (2014)
Senderovich, A., Weidlich, M., Gal, A., Mandelbaum, A.: Queue mining for delay prediction in multiclass service processes. Inf. Syst. 53, 278–295 (2015)
Shimkin, N., Mandelbaum, A.: Rational abandonment from telequeues: nonlinear waiting costs with heterogeneous preferences. Queueing Syst. 47(1), 117–146 (2004)
Shone, R., Knight, V., Williams, J.: Comparisons between observable and unobservable M/M/1 queues with respect to optimal customer behavior. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1(227), 133–141 (2013)
Singh, S.P., Delasay, M., SchellerWolf, A.: Evaluating the Firstmover’s Advantage in Announcing RealTime Delay Information. Working paper. Carnegie Mellon University (2017)
Tan, P.N., Steinbach, M., Kumar, V.: Introduction to Data Mining. Pearson Education India, Bengaluru (2006)
Taylor, S.: Waiting for service: the relationship between delays and evaluations of service. J. Mark. 58, 56–69 (1994)
Thiongane, M., Chan, W., L’Ecuyer, P.: New historybased delay predictors for service systems. In: Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), 2016, pp. 425–436. IEEE (2016)
Veeraraghavan, S., Debo, L.: Joining longer queues: information externalities in queue choice. Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag. 11(4), 543–562 (2009)
Wang, J., Zhang, F.: Equilibrium analysis of the observable queues with balking and delayed repairs. Appl. Math. Comput. 218(6), 2716–2729 (2011)
Webb, E.M., Yu, Q., Bretthauer, K.M.: Linking Delay Announcements, Abandonment, and Staffing: A Behavioral Perspective. Working paper. Indiana University (2017)
Weinberg, B.: Don’t keep your internet customers waiting too long at the (virtual) front door. J. Interact. Mark. 14(1), 30–39 (2000)
Whitt, W.: Improving service by informing customers about anticipated delays. Manag. Sci. 45(2), 192–207 (1999a)
Whitt, W.: Predicting queueing delays. Manag. Sci. 45(6), 870–888 (1999b)
Whitt, W.: StochasticProcess Limits: An Introduction to StochasticProcess Limits and Their Application to Queues. Springer, Berlin (2002)
Whitt, W.: Efficiencydriven heavytraffic approximations for manyserver queues with abandonments. Manag. Sci. 50(10), 1449–1461 (2004)
Whitt, W.: Engineering solution of a basic callcenter model. Manag. Sci. 51(2), 221–235 (2005)
Yang, L., Debo, L., Gupta, V.: Trading time in a congested environment. Manag. Sci. 63(7), 2377–2395 (2016)
Yu, Q., Allon, G., Bassamboo, A.: How do delay announcements shape customer behavior? An empirical study. Manag. Sci. 63, 1–20 (2017a)
Yu, Q., Allon, G., Bassamboo, A.: The Reference Effect of Delay Announcements: A Field Experiment. Working paper. Indiana University (2017)
Yu, Q., Allon, G., Bassamboo, A., Iravani, S.: Managing customer expectations and priorities in service systems. Manag. Sci (2017). https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2785
Yuan, X., Dai, T., Chen, L.G., Gavirneni, S.: Coopetition in Service Clusters with WaitingArea Entertainment. Working paper. Harbin Institute of Technology (2017)
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Ward Whitt for his support and guidance through the years, and for being a tremendous source of inspiration. Ward, I am honored to have been your student.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Ibrahim, R. Sharing delay information in service systems: a literature survey. Queueing Syst 89, 49–79 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s111340189577y
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s111340189577y
Keywords
 Delay announcements
 Queueing models
 Service systems
Mathematics Subject Classification
 90B22
 90B50