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
Lifesize CxEngage
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
CxEngage 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.
N/A
Pricing
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
Lifesize CxEngage
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
Lifesize CxEngage
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
Lifesize CxEngage
Features
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
Lifesize CxEngage
Contact Center Software
Comparison of Contact Center Software features of Product A and Product B
Genesys PureConnect (discontinued)
7.9
Ratings
5% below category average
Lifesize CxEngage
6.9
Ratings
18% below category average
Agent dashboard
6.70 Ratings
7.30 Ratings
Validate callers
7.50 Ratings
00 Ratings
Outbound response
8.50 Ratings
7.30 Ratings
Call forwarding
7.70 Ratings
6.40 Ratings
Click-to-call (CTC)
8.00 Ratings
00 Ratings
Warm transfer
8.30 Ratings
00 Ratings
Predictive dialing
8.00 Ratings
00 Ratings
Interactive voice response
8.00 Ratings
7.30 Ratings
REST APIs
7.00 Ratings
6.40 Ratings
Call scripts
8.50 Ratings
00 Ratings
Call tracking
7.70 Ratings
7.70 Ratings
Multichannel integration
9.00 Ratings
6.30 Ratings
CRM software integration
8.00 Ratings
6.40 Ratings
Workforce Optimization (WFO)
Comparison of Workforce Optimization (WFO) features of Product A and Product B
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.
Implementation was top notch. Great team to work with. Application and tools are good and very useful. Customer Support is strong as well. Would recommend more details and assistance on some resolutions but over all, quick response and quick resolutions is the norm. Room for improvement for front line associates working from home. And better understanding on how Twilio issues affect CxEngage as some time the status pages don't match the same story
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)
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.
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 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).
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.
This really depends if/who your Vendor is or if you purchase directly from Genesys. I would say that whenever I deal with Genesys directly they've always been able to answer my questions and find a resolution to my issues. Unfortunately being on an older version means that answer is usually that you need to spend money to upgrade or move to the cloud
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 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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.