YAZIO deflects 80% of support tickets without lowering CSAT in 6 months with Forethought Solve
YAZIO's team of 5-8 agents could not keep up with rapidly increasing ticket volume while also managing help center content, templates, and internal knowledge bases; tickets went unanswered for too long and the team could not hire fast enough.
YAZIO had minimal success with an internal AI search tool, and other vendors they evaluated offered only rule-based chatbots built on large decision trees requiring regular maintenance—not true agentic AI.
Solve deflected 80% of YAZIO's tickets in six months while maintaining a 4.0/5.0 CSAT, despite a 40% growth in ticket volume; the in-house team still manages the same workload as before without adding headcount.
Show all 10 reported metrics
Frequently asked questions
What did this team achieve with this AI workflow?
Solve deflected 80% of YAZIO's tickets in six months while maintaining a 4.0/5.0 CSAT, despite a 40% growth in ticket volume; the in-house team still manages the same workload as before without adding headcount.
What tools did this team use?
Forethought, Solve, Discover.
What results were reported?
Ticket deflection rate at 6 months: 80%; CSAT score at 6 months: 4.0/5.0; Ticket deflection rate at 1 month: 60%; CSAT score at 1 month: 3.1/5.0 (source-reported, not independently verified).
What failed first in this deployment?
YAZIO had minimal success with an internal AI search tool, and other vendors they evaluated offered only rule-based chatbots built on large decision trees requiring regular maintenance—not true agentic AI.
How is this customer support AI workflow structured?
Customer submits support request → Sensitive data redacted → Agentic AI processes ticket → Complex tickets routed to agent → Resolution delivered in multiple languages.