Engagor (discontinued) vs. SnapEngage

Engagor is a very powerful tool for customer care purposes to be able to engage in real-time with your customers. If there are a lot of messages coming in during important peaks throughout, we can easily answer them every 30 seconds.
Engagor isn’t that fit to use for publishing. We mostly use Engagor to reply to messages in real-time. However, for scheduling posts in Engagor, we publish and schedule on the native platform instead.

It helps business grow, if your business is more reliable on marketing or if your business is in starting stage implementing SnapEngage to your website will give a kick start to your business because it helps to get close with the customers which are in need with those quick questions and responses we are getting from customers using chat agent.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Real-time mention tracking is a must these days. Quick responsiveness is critical on many social media platforms, especially on Twitter.
• Fast and helpful support via Engagor chat and messages helps a LOT! I think the longest wait time was about 40 seconds for me. My workflow never gets disrupted because of idle sessions.
• Automations can help you a lot. Automated "recipes" are great tools for decreasing your agents' workload, and there are many customizable settings for them.

• Allows team members to see type in real-time before it is submitted. This enables us to gather information for responses in a more timely manner.
• We can see which of our team members are available, busy, or not-available.
• Ability to see some biographical information of chatters and to sync information with Salesforce.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• The UX is pretty clunky. Engagor only loads about 10 mentions per page, so if my team is behind on tagging/mention resolution by a couple of days, for a global brand that can mean an extra week of work. Would be much easier if the user could choose how many mentions show up on their screen.
• Over the year we have had issues with Engagor's glitches. For example, the user has the capability to publish to a platform (like Facebook, Twitter, etc.) through Engagor as the brand. For a couple of the brands we work on, Engagor would show the update as published as one brand, but would actually publish as another. As an agency that handles social media content/community management for several very large brands, we cannot afford to have accidental status updates despite the author's efforts. This happened several times over the course of our experience with Engagor, to a point that we had to forego this feature for those brands and publish natively through the platform.
• It has definitely skewed reporting numbers more than once -- for a set time period (i.e. 30 days, our typical monthly reporting period), the stats for a platform will appear very different from how they display on the native platform itself. For example, on occasion Engagor would load numbers from a Facebook fan count during a 30-day period that did not at all match up with the numbers Facebook showed me. This also applies to the number of overall mentions of a brand/account.
• There is no immediately clear "undo" feature when resolving a mention. There have been times I have bulk-tagged a set of mentions, set all as resolved and then realized that I had made an error, without a very clear way to revert that action.
• Double mentions have shown up, skewing numbers and sentiment/tagging analytics.
• The insights/reporting section could definitely be a little more clear in how it explains metrics (or why the user should care to report these metrics). While we have an analyst on our team who is happy to explain these terms, I can see how some of them would not be intuitive at all to a user who doesn't live and breathe social media analytics. Also, the line graphs can be very difficult to read and parse. If the user downloads a line graph to their desktop from Engagor, it doesn't necessarily show all of the information you need, making it necessary to screengrab rather than downloading a higher-quality visual.

• The admin dashboard is the hardest to navigate of any tool I've ever used! THere are 7 tabs in the left-hand panel. Just within the one tab that reads "Settings" (there is a separate tab for "My Account", also Permissions?) there are 9 tabs at the top (which include names like "Agent Settings", "Integrations", "Design Studio", "Options", "Hub"), then at least another 8 tabs WITHIN those 9 tabs, giving you a total of 14 different pages of settings to search through, again, JUST in the Settings tab. What the heck?!
• Something as simple as notification settings are spread throughout the 14 different settings pages mentioned above. Rather than having one area where you can enter email addresses for notifications, I've had to search through the 14 pages and use Ctrl+F on multiple occasions to fully remove a user from all the notifications they received. This should be much simpler!

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Both the tool and the support that we receive from the customer service department and the customer success manager makes me likely to renew the use of Engagor.

I give SnapEngage a 9 due to how successful our company has been while using it. Unless prices were raised by an insane amount, I don't see us using a competing service.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

I have never needed to contact them for support.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

Sprout Social is good for smaller accounts with limited traffic. Some insights available but often questionable data. Only picks up direct interaction (i.e. doesn't monitor likes or favourites). Sysomos was used for a while, but spent ages defining search times still producing questionable data. Did not properly monitor Facebook interaction and often did not pick up from that platform at all. Customer service only operated in US time (we are UK) which proved increasingly problematic

We actually demo'ed LiveChat and LivePerson and besides SnapEngage having a better UI and ease of use, the support from their team was worlds and away above the rest. They let us run an extended demo, gave us constant support, and made sure we felt comfortable before we went live with the system.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Better customer service.
• Better detection of potential crisis on social media which leads to avoiding the crisis or better managing it.

• It has allowed us to provide more service with a much smaller team than our phone team.
• It provides us with data helpful to not only ourselves, but our marketing team as well.
• It's customizable so it allows us to create and update our platforms immediately when needed.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info