Genesys PureConnect was an omnichannel contact center platform that offered cloud-based or on-premise deployments. It featured a SIP-based architecture with VoIP capabilities, allowing companies to connect legacy voice systems and use existing phones. A legacy product, new users are encouraged to investigate Genesys Cloud.
N/A
NiCE CXone
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
NICE CXone Mpower is a cloud-based contact center platform that manages customer interactions across multiple communication channels. It includes features such as automatic call distribution (ACD), interactive voice response (IVR), omnichannel routing, workforce optimization, feedback management, and interaction analytics.
$71
per month per user
ServiceNow Customer Service Management
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Built on the Now Platform, ServiceNow offers their Customer Service Management solution through the Standard and Professional Customer Service Management bundles. Both include agent workspace, knowledge management, survey and assessment module, and the community module, oriented in this edition to support customers rather than internal employees. The Professional bundle also includes performance analytics, predictive intelligence, and related tools to support customer support agents improvement…
PureConnect was selected 20 years ago, and it does show its age a little -- but like a high-quality machine tool, it continues to deliver value far longer than anyone expected.
While custom reports update a much faster rate than inContact, the scope of pre-built reports is much larger in PureConnect and it is much easier to schedule reports and deliver them via email attachment. PureConnect has issues with scheduled reports, sometimes they run later …
CIC is best suited for business models that rely on heavily leverage Data Integration especially one like ours that require real-time and high-speed data access for billing and customer integration. CIC is not well suited for small organizations < 50 where they are only answering phones in the course of doing business VS. the business is the phone.
NICE CXone Mpower offers a great suite of products and tools appropriate for contact centers. It is a one stop shop for all of the monitoring, scheduling, reporting, and quality tools a large or small contact center may need. It is very feature rich and has many components, some of which we haven't even grown to adopt yet but may in the near future.
It is well suited for medium to large companies that manage different teams and need to communicate constantly and track progress in a timely manner. It is less suited for small enterprises as it will overwhelm users with the features and functionalities embedded.
There can be changes in interface of the app, however it's still very good
I would appreciete detailed web page with all necessary information, but when I need anything, the customer support is very quick and provide all the information
We are so embedded on Pure Connect that we like to progress with it. For instance, we are looking into ways to provide different solutions to our customers, help our business to succeed, and work in a better CX.
One of the biggest advantages is that all is in one platform.
Nice made it possible for employees to work from anywhere with access to the internet, it made it possible to extract data from contacts in a very thorough way. In addition, the meticaes can be fully customized and the day-to-day monitoring of the operation is more visible.With nice, contacts with clients abroad became easier.
The interface is only semi user-friendly on almost every front. Agent experience is lacking and we have found many limitations within the system. Workforce forecasting is not as robust as expected. Quality continues to be a struggle. Interaction searches are not robust.
The lack of written SOPs makes some features (WFM / Performance management) very difficult to use. The training provided by NICE is extensive, but it's hard to remember everything shared in the hour. We spend so much time on the platform just trying to figure out how to use the features; it would be much easier with written instructions and screenshots.
Bottom line is that it does what you need it to do. We've been using Service Now as a ticket managing tool for a few years now. There's really not much it can't do when it comes to recording interactions. It has been nice using inventory tracking for software licenses and hardware as well.
The application itself uses a hub and spoke model that can help isolate errors in one section of the application from the rest, creating a much more stable overall program. Of all of the outages that we've had with our contact center platform, I can count on one hand how often it was truly a Genesys issue rather than a network issue, server issue or issue with a platform relied upon for an integration (web services, db calls).
NICE inContact CXone is available when you need it. I have been using it for about a year and I have never suffered any issues that caused my not to have access to the product. If there are updates, they must be downloaded and install in the background because I do not see them
Some of the client applications take a bit of time on initial load, but with the move towards web based applications that issue is alleviated. You can tell that effort really isn't putting into the desktop apps any longer and that the client development effort is being put into bringing Interaction Connect closer to feature parity with the desktop (and bringing wholly new features to Connect). As far as IVR operations, web service calls, database operations: they all operate reasonably.
NICE inContact CXone performs very well even on old computers that are limited in resources. I use a older computer with limited memory and it seems to handle NICE inContact CXone very well in most cases. There will be times when it acts up for whatever reason bust over ninety percent of the time.
Some cases are resolved quickly others are taking longer and the reseller sometimes has to chase support several times and explain the issue seen several times. While being a direct customer before, I recognise this and it seems that when a case moves to another engineer they don’t read the previous case notes or don’t understand what has been done. This, from a customers perspective, slows down resolution times.
inContact only allows specific users to contact them for support. Even though I use the product daily and it accounts for a large amount of my workload, I still have to contact an authorized user to create an incident. These users are managers and their schedules are very busy. This can result in delays in incidents being opened and resolved.
Support has been very good. Any time there has been a real issue, the team has responded very quickly and identified the issue without a lot of repetitive questions that I've seen from other services. There is a great external community and internal knowledge base that covers pretty much anything you need.
I liked the setup of the whole class. The instructor knew the topic well enough to answer questions from entry level to a more advanced one.
Instructor encouraged participation of the whole class and was able to engage every one. Also provided "real live" examples so everyone can relate to it.
The In-person training was fine for a general overview. I think it would have been really helpful to have a review of pre-built reports and how to use them as tools.
The online training itself is good. You are provided resources and can self study to a certain point, but the pacing always felt off. Either snails pace or like trying to drink from a fire hose. I think this easily could have had to do with course material and my personal preparations, though. I would say my main gripe is that since the acquisition the team responsible for actually booking training is very unresponsive and often not knowledgeable about the courses they offer. Booking my last training was a real chore.
I would rate 10, since the explanations were far enough to catch all the usabilities.I would rate 10, since the explanations were far enough to catch all the usabilities.I would rate 10, since the explanations were far enough to catch all the usabilities.I would rate 10, since the explanations were far enough to catch all the usabilities.
Don't try to go the perfect solution as a first target. Work on answer the more needs with a simple solution. Then analyse and try again to answer the most needs with adding a bit if complexity only if require. No needs to customise straight from the beginning or deployment takes too long.
We love the use of our new tools. However, NICE staff turnover was frustrating. We lost ground each time a new team took over. Some people were good some were not as much. Some people did great training while others were not as helpful
Call Manager, you had to buy all the components that are out of the box for PureConnect. The licensing model is more expensive on the Cisco side vs the Genesys PureConnect side. Lastly was on the Cisco side since you have to connect/integrate all the components on the cisco side you have to have so many vendors to install those parts. This drives the cost up even more so it was not worth going that route for our organization.
When it comes to this specific situation (cell centers) NICE definitely has an ADP beat. The analytics, scheduling, and forecasts are extremely well-tailored for this situation. ADP has a more comprehensive solution in my opinion - I feel their UI and mobile app are also more user-friendly. But in terms of performance management functionality, NICE has a more robust system and is able to create additional metrics if we need them When I used ADP there were no custom options available.
Atlassian Jira lacks certain features and process which was delivered by ServiceNow Customer Service Management. Also, flexibility to customise was a point to select ServiceNow Customer Service Management tool. Cost which was high than Atlassian Jira compensated as it improved overall customer satisfaction and reduced resolution time by taking help of Knowledge base integration
Genesys PureConnect's core and adjunct model allows for fairly easy growth in satellite locations via off site session managers, remote located media servers, remote content servers, etc to allow you to spread the infrastructure out while not pushing as much network traffic to your core data centers.
I rated 10, because Nice CX one is very much functional. You can simply acess it by website Nice, in any navigator, desktop, notebook or mobile, so you can in a fast way run on every departament of the company.
We're improving our CX by optimizing our call centers, using additional attributes and keys to identify the best rep for the job.
We are also streamlining the journey of each individual customer by using PureConnect as the central interface for omnichannel interactions, allowing us to pick up the conversation where we left off.
Using additional attributes that start with the contact center interaction, we're able to track a student journey and proactively step in - increasing our individualized support to focus on the student outcome.
