Genesys Multicloud CX (formerly Genesys Engage, or PureEngage) is the Genesys customer engagement platform for enterprises. It is designed to be flexible for enterprises, who often have multiple and multi-national locations (including outsourcing) and large peak volumes and populations.
N/A
NiCE CXone Mpower
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.
NICE inContact also has a slick platform and were in the running for our business. In the end, Genesys was selected because they innovated in areas that other competitors had not yet done.
Solution is extremely agile and flexible. The new generation of containerized solution would be a game changer since it brings the ease of deployment and ability to get the innovations to a new total different place. I believe it is really hard to find in the competition who would have something similar or even close
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.
VHT as a stand alone model can be easily plugged into to the current call routing with minimal changes and it works like charm.
Platform SDKs are a powerful tool that help integrate with other third party solutions or to build custom made applications.
The whole routing solution is amazing . With user friendly composer, you have the option of building both VRUs and routing strategies. And, they are very easy to deploy.
The level of details for report customization is another strong point.
Genesys needs to pick up the pace with application upgrades. We see more and more issues with Genesys applications falling behind the operating systems versions. We need more apps to be ready for the latest server OC models. There is a lag.
There seems to be constant unrest with the management application platform, CME, SCI, Genesys administrator, GAX, then GAX plugins, then a move away from plugins. We would like one stable management platform that encompasses ALL aspects of management within the contact center.
Real-time reporting deficiencies with Genesys pulse web. this application cannot live up to CCPulse with respect to flexibility of views. Pulse web was a plugin now it's not a plugin any longer. constant movement, we finally get pulse web plugin onto production, 6 months later these something supposedly better.
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
Genesys Engage is instrumental in us meeting our service obligations to our customers. Engage enables our organization to deliver interactions to the right staff and helps us minimize service and coverage gaps through historical and real-time reporting. Additionally, we feel that only Genesys Engage can meet and exceed our business needs and requirements.
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.
Overall, from a customer perspective and also an agent perspective, it is very easy to use Genesys Engage's platform. The Agent Desktop and Genesys WDE are good. Usability is high and I would consider it an easy to use product and easy to adopt from this perspective.
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.
There are occasional failures, but distributed and High Availability features work well when architected, installed, and configured properly. Thoroughly reading and understanding system documentation is a must.
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
Never being disappointed in my 11 plus years of utilizing the various aspects of the system. No matter what we throw at it, the systems continue to perform as expected.
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.
There's definitely room for improvement. I would have love to see the chat functionality work more frequently. The level of expertise has diminished over the years. I understand that this in part has to do with the number of new products that has been introduced, but should not be an excuse for the lack of readiness.
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.
Good training, but on limited locations. You can almost only follow trainings in europ in the UK and in Germany. Uk location is relatively difficult to get to and on a exppensive location. The content of the training is good, supplied training material is okay, but sometimes a bit outdated. When you follow a training it is most likely because of a recent purchase which is uasually the latest version.
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.
Interesting webinars on relevant topic are being provided regularly. Th e webinars a often provided by Genesys and hosted by a very experienced product owner. In many occasions a customer is invited to share his / her experiences and best practices. Webinars can be watched at a later time for your convenience.
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.
It was a death march. We finally learned enough about the product to know that our vendor knew nothing and had done it wrong. We hired voice engineers and took over the project. We should have fired our vendor much earlier
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
For a similar contact center structure, I find Genesys products are faster to produce outcomes, and fast to respond (loading, changing screens...). However, in terms of user interface, I do prefer the way NICE did things there. Coming from an agent background, I find that the NICE agent interface is more visually appealing and offers more flexibility (parameters for agent exceptions).
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.
The Interactive Intelligence SIP based contact center platform has broken through the barriers of "board based" technology to processor based limits on scalability. This means their CIC premise or cloud platform can be engineered to support agent counts into the thousands.
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.
Utilizing Genesys Contact Center Portfolio has added increased employee efficiency, providing better availability to customer demands which in turn has increased customer satisfaction.
Utilizing Genesys Contact Center Portfolio has added increased management efficiency, automating resource planning and scheduling and providing management more time to focus on other important tasks.
