Alvaria Performance vs. Zoom Contact Center

Alvaria Performance is suited for a company that needs to provide an easy way to schedule employees, provide a general schedule to adhere to daily. Alvaria Performance is also good with creating a visual representation of scheduling data to make it easier to view in a hurry. Alvaria Performance is less suited for specific schedule adjustments, it is good for increments of 1hr or more but less useful if change requires minutes.

Incentivized

Perfect for companies that have agents all over the place, e.g., different offices or WFH. Also good for companies that aren't big enough to have a "phone guy" as this platform allows IT to do the phone work as it doesn't require esoteric knowledge like other phone systems.

• Customer service - Whether for sales, setup, or technical assistant, their team is always patient, informed, and helpful.
• Cutting Edge - Every month there are a plethora of new or enhanced features that are well thought, tested, and ready for implementing.
• Stability - Our uptime is important to our clients. As a 24/7 365 day/year contact center, having confidence that Zoom's systems are up and running means our clients have trust in our abilities to service their calls.

Incentivized

• The Teams dashboard for monitoring agents needs some customization options.
• Friendly names, I would like to be able to name a number and when it rings you can see the name of the number.
• Point flows at flows would be nice, instead of flows to queues only.

Incentivized

First and foremost for our results, the omnichannel approach and ease of use on the internal side (agents, supervisors and administrators) have made adoption very simple, we have managed to reduce response times (SLA) and internal communication has become very fluid. We get good feedback from our clients for having implemented ZCC in the company to serve them.

Incentivized

Microsoft Teams was very difficult. Many third-party providers didn't understand the integration and capabilities of the systems. The Teams app is very clunky, and you can get very different capabilities and compatibility when using it between Mac and PC environments. Zoom had a local team that could help with the transition directly, which is very valuable

Incentivized

• Intuitive, Easier and almost effortless to maintain.
• Lesser Operational Expenses that the alternative we also have
• We wish it has a better integration with Zoom Phone, in terms of channels integration (Voice and Chat) to quick identify callers.
• It is missing "modular" programming to "reuse" Existing Flows and call them from other flows then return to the main flow.
• It is missing the capability to compartmentalizing different teams/groups related to reporting, admin, and global parameters.