How are enterprises using Interactions or custom Contact/Call Logs

Liketa McCune · ‎04-01-2026

My company has a retail helpdesk that uses a scope ServiceNow CSM application. We're also integrated with Five9 so agents use the Five9 adapter to manage their calls directly in ServiceNow. We have a requirement that agents should track every inbound call with a case, even if its a call to follow-up on an existing open issue or to update that issue. This process typically creates unnecessary data in our case queues. I was ask to have our ServiceNow admins add some additional categories and subcategories to account for these update/follow up case type. My concern is this could potentially become a catch-all for agents and further degrade data quality.

Additionally, our agents paste an AI‑generated call summary from the Five9 IVA into their case work notes. This is try to more accurately capture what the caller reported and what actions were taken. We are looking to dive deeper into AI automation and tighter contact‑center integration (with Five9 or potentially another platform), but I want to make sure our data model and process are future‑ready, not just optimized for logging activity. After doing some research I found that ServiceNow implemented Interaction Manager a few releases back, and I think this would be a great option for us to pivot to as we look forward to future AI potentialities. Once caveat it that we're already in the middle of another integration with Five9 to auto populate a case in ServiceNow from information collect in the Five9 IVR. This is how I also came across the Contact/Call log suggestion.

I'm interested in getting some insight from other enterprises that use interaction or some sort of custom contact/call log in their environment. Specifically, if anyone can share details for my questions below, it would be appreciated:

How are you handling status inquiries, follow‑ups, or non‑case‑creating calls?
Are you using Interactions, Contact/Call Logs, or related records instead of opening a new case each time?
How do you associate those interactions back to an existing case while preserving clean reporting?
Have you designed this in a way that supports AI summaries, automation, or downstream analytics without relying heavily on free‑text work notes?
What tradeoffs did you consider when deciding between “new case,” “interaction only,” or hybrid models?

Note, I'm not necessarily looking for a quick workaround, but more of what can scale, improve reporting, and position the platform for AI enhancements over time. Any lessons learned or architectural guidance would be appreciated

sanjaygupta · a week ago

I’d recommend a hybrid approach using ServiceNow Interactions for tracking every customer contact and CSM Cases for issues that need investigation or resolution. Creating a new case for every inbound call can inflate case volumes and make reporting less reliable.

Use Interactions for status inquiries, follow-ups, and calls that don't require a new case.
Link each interaction to an existing case when the customer is calling about an ongoing issue.
Create a new case only when the customer reports a new issue that needs action.
Keep Five9 call IDs, interaction outcomes, and AI-generated summaries linked to the appropriate records.
Use structured fields for call outcomes and actions taken instead of relying entirely on free-text work notes.

This approach keeps the history of every call without creating unnecessary cases. It also gives you cleaner reporting and a better foundation for AI-driven automation and analytics.

Before changing the existing Five9 integration, I’d validate Interaction Management in a sub-production instance and confirm that your connector supports creating interactions and associating them with existing cases.

mugi-san · a week ago

Hi, @Liketa McCune .

I previously implemented a feature that links generated interaction records to a customized many-to-many (m2m) table, making them accessible via a related list. Additionally, I added functionality to append required information from the interaction record to the management record.

In other words, all operators need to do is identify whether an interaction corresponds to a previously opened management record and link the interaction to it.

For management records that have no linked interactions, I set up an automated system to close them after a certain number of days.In addition, although I cannot go into the details, I also developed the solution so that various follow-up processes and functionalities are triggered automatically afterward.

I hope this idea helps solve the issue.

regards,