Vantage Point vs. Zoom Contact Center

It's great if you have a small contact center and are very comfortable with Vantage Point's coding, and you don't use Macs. Outside of that it can be a pretty tough platform to use. If you are running a large contact center or anything that will change much, I wouldn't recommend Vantage Point

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.

• Cheap - Vantage point is a very economic solution.
• Strong WFM models - Modified Erlang is great.

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

• Predications are not accurate, much less than 80% they advertise
• Price point is high
• Try to charge you for indicators [that] would be free on literally any platform, MACD for example

• 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 didn't have a clear operating agreement, and whenever we would call or email them they would tell us they were working on something, then we wouldn't hear back. We could have solved the problems ourselves if we had known we needed to - poor communication

Incentivized

We picked Vantage Point based on functionality and price. We wanted something that was purely wfm and not anything else. Vantage Point has an a la carte solution and is very economical. In some ways, the failure of Vantage Point for our application wasn't Vantage Point's fault. We didn't dedicate as many resources as needed. That said, we didn't feel we got any support from their team

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

• Not much impact.
• Learned we needed to dedicate a full FTE to just program/manage Vantage Point.
• We eventually built our own scheduling tool since it was not intuitive.

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.