Lifesize CxEngage vs. Zoom Contact Center

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

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.

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

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

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

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

• lower operational costs
• improved agent productivity
• improved flexibility in design and admin work

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.