Alvaria Quality vs. Lifesize CxEngage

It all depends on the workforce team if they've settled the tool correctly for the company. In a previous experience, the tool was entirely settled with the group balance available, all the segments we need were added and up to date, and we could easily navigate the tool. On the new company though, there is a sentiment of incompletion, the UI slightly evolved over the past 2 years but only for the name and some design. Though the tool itself hasn't really changed and clarity is missing sometimes. We must be used to it to understand it well.

Incentivized

CxEngage can handle some more complex flow options that other vendors don't seem to be able to do. The integration for voice calls with Salesforce is a huge plus. The integration of email support with Salesforce is a BIG miss. After fighting with it for a year, we finally just turned it off and use Salesforce Omnichannel for email support. Chat using Salesforce Live Agent worked fine enough.

Incentivized

• Clarity on the daily tasks, it's easy to know what will be the tasks for the day and for how long it is planned.
• Many options available, entirely customizable for a better accuracy of the tasks.
• Very reliable and easy to use, with multiple format views available.

Incentivized

• Great flexibility working with flow creation and editing
• Great support staff
• Good overall package for workforce management and quality monitoring
• Integrates well with our tools.

Incentivized

• There is a lot of options, probably too many and more than 50% are no use to me.
• Some views can be very confusing, sticking to the time is best to avoid being confused by any overlapping segment.
• Lot of options but UI tends to be a bit slow to load and still empty sometimes.

Incentivized

• Stronger support and more reliable system for users not on a commercial network
• Consumer friendly and intuitive reporting and dashboard tools. build canned reports
• Reporting: Ability to get a combined SVL for all queues included on a report (now we manually calculate after exporting the report into excel). Same for all major data points (ASA, AHT, etc.)
• Ability to include abandoned calls and an abandonment percentage which excludes short abandons on the Queue summary report. Now the report just shows total abandons and abandonment percentage so if we want to exclude short abandons we have to pull a separate report to find out how many calls abandoned in less than 10 seconds then calculate the "true abandoned number" (calls abandoned minus short abandons)
• Ability to change what is considered a "short abandon" and then report on it. Right now the only option is the built in tracking of calls that abandoned in equal to or less than 10 seconds.
• Ability to "save" an agents "default" skill profile so that any changes we make can be returned to "BAU" with a click of a button
• quicker data/historical report retrieval
• way to separate what we have listed as a queue name for reporting vs. what is used for the queue name in the "whisper" (the issue we had with WT queue naming conventions because we had to have the whisper be super precise)

Incentivized

We implemented in 2018 and were only given 8 weeks to do it...as per the direction of our parent company at the time. Serenova at the time responded well and we were able to go Live within 8-weeks...albeit the product overall was a big change and had gaps in features over our previous contact management solution.

Incentivized

It's been too many years...I don't remember. Except in 2021 we looked briefly at Amazon and Salesforce call center offerings. Both were too basic at the time that even if we got a great deal on licensing (we are a Salesforce house for other things), we couldn't easily (or at all) do things like Callbacks and some of the more robust flow buildouts that we have in place today with Lifesize.

Incentivized

• lower operational costs
• improved agent productivity
• improved flexibility in design and admin work

Incentivized