TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers vs. Lifesize CxEngage

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers

    Score6 out of 10
    N/AEnghouse Interactive headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona offers Contact Centers, call center software. Enghouse Interactive is a division of global, publicly traded company Enghouse Systems.N/A

    Lifesize CxEngage

    Score7.8 out of 10
    N/ACxEngage is a cloud contact center solution designed to meet users' needs and work in their environment. Unlike monolithic architectures and on-premises solutions, CxEngage is a ‘born-in-the-cloud’ platform to deliver unified visibility across voice, video, and digital channels. CxEngage is designed to just work anywhere, and to be implemented in a few days or weeks.

    $85

    per month per user

    Pricing
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Contact Center Software
    Comparison of Contact Center Software features of Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers and Lifesize CxEngage
    Feature
    Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers
    7.0
    2 Ratings
    19% below category average
    Lifesize CxEngage
    6.9
    2 Ratings
    20% below category average
    Agent dashboard7.02 Ratings7.31 Ratings
    Validate callers6.02 Ratings00 Ratings
    Outbound response7.02 Ratings7.31 Ratings
    Call forwarding9.02 Ratings6.41 Ratings
    Click-to-call (CTC)6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Warm transfer7.02 Ratings00 Ratings
    Predictive dialing6.02 Ratings00 Ratings
    Interactive voice response9.01 Ratings7.31 Ratings
    REST APIs6.01 Ratings6.41 Ratings
    Call scripts6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Call tracking8.01 Ratings7.72 Ratings
    Multichannel integration7.02 Ratings6.32 Ratings
    CRM software integration7.01 Ratings6.41 Ratings
    Workforce Optimization (WFO)
    Comparison of Workforce Optimization (WFO) features of Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers and Lifesize CxEngage
    Feature
    Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers
    7.4
    2 Ratings
    12% below category average
    Lifesize CxEngage
    7.0
    2 Ratings
    17% below category average
    Inbound call routing8.02 Ratings7.32 Ratings
    Omnichannel inbound routing8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Recording6.01 Ratings8.62 Ratings
    Quality management8.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Call analytics8.02 Ratings6.82 Ratings
    Historical reporting8.02 Ratings5.92 Ratings
    Live reporting8.01 Ratings6.42 Ratings
    Customer surveys6.02 Ratings00 Ratings
    Customer interaction analytics7.01 Ratings7.31 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Small Businesses
    Zendesk Talk
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Zendesk Talk
    Score8.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Genesys Multicloud CX (discontinued)
    Score8 out of 10
    Genesys Multicloud CX (discontinued)
    Score8 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Bright Pattern Contact Center
    Score8.4 out of 10
    Bright Pattern Contact Center
    Score8.4 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.0
    (3 ratings)
    7.7
    (2 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.2
    (2 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Enghouse Interactive Contact CentersLifesize CxEngage
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Enghouse
    Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers is well suited for organizations with existing Microsoft solutions e.g. Lync/Skype for business infrastructure/Teams, Those who run Busy (1000+ calls/day) OMNI channel contact centres and depend on quality management/Quality assurance. I would say less appropriate for small to medium organizations that do not have existing PABX infrastructure.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    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
    Read full review
    Pros
    Enghouse
    • Allows management to easily monitor activity for calls, callers, users, and queue management
    • Relatively simple UI allows users to effectively manage their communication sessions
    • Provides in-depth insights to communication and work activity metrics
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    • 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
    Read full review
    Cons
    Enghouse
    • Sound Alerts
    • Detail of who hangs up the call
    • Less expensive support
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    • 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
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Enghouse
    Price. Easy to use. Support.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation Rating
    Enghouse
    No answers on this topic
    Lifesize
    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
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Enghouse
    Enghouse Interactive Contact Centers compared to Zeacom is very powerful in terms of features. The support for integrating with third-party software/hardware is better, and it is much simpler to use because less training is required to upskill the contact center staff. Comes with a lot of documentation and interactive guides/manuals.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    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
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Enghouse
    • Using Enghouse to manage our inbound and outbound call communication has allowed for us to focus more time on call quality and trends, rather than how to manage the call load and where to allocate calls.
    • The time spent managing server blips and failovers remains a detractor for our teams.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Lifesize
    • lower operational costs
    • improved agent productivity
    • improved flexibility in design and admin work
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    Lifesize CxEngage Screenshots

    Screenshot of Agent Interface - SFDC Integrated AgentScreenshot of Agent Interface - Skylight Desktop Chat InteractionScreenshot of Agent Interface - Skylight Mockup 1Screenshot of Agent Interface - Skylight Mockup 2Screenshot of Chat - Mockup 1Screenshot of Chat - Mockup 2