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
NiCE CXone Mpower
Score 8.9 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.
PureConnect was selected 20 years ago, and it does show its age a little -- but like a high-quality machine tool, it continues to deliver value far longer than anyone expected.
We used PureConnect before moving to Cloud CX. The PureConnect had more features and functions at the time we switched, but Cloud CX has been making up ground to compete feature to feature with their on-premise solutions.
I've only used two other Contact Center software applications in the past years ago that I can't remember the name of right now. But, I do remember years ago when I start to use [Genesys] PureConnect as a [first] level agent that it was way better than the previous software I …
Genesys is for contact centers who are looking for more value-add from their data. Avaya and Cisco traditionally have not had these types of capabilities from my experience. Integrations are much more robust, and many of the functions are customizable.
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 …
Much better features than competing products, and better overall stability and support. Evidenced by being a smaller company that has risen fast in a crowded marketplace to be a solid and fierce competitor.
Cisco, a big competitor just does not have great call center …
In our perspective these players were no where in the same league as Genesys and yes I recognize that Genesys eventually bought Echopass. The only thing better was that we could get line by line interaction data on any inbound or outbound answered or abandoned interaction.
I was not involved in the purchase of Genesys PureConnect, so I do not have anything to compare it to. I have been using the product for over 5 years and so far haven't hit any shortcomings within the product.
You cannot compare PureConnect to the Nortel 11C that I used to support. They are completely different animals. In regard to the ShoreTel system that I supported, PureConnect was considerably more mature with vastly superior support, documentation and functionality.
Pros of NICE when compared to Verint: 1. Better options to manage leaves, schedules and update employee settings, line of businesses etc 2. The managers and supervisors have more powers in terms of scheduling, updating leaves, adherence etc
Both were great but desktop only supported limited interactions. Nice enlighten AI is more up to date and supports many different channels which is great when your business or company is more robust and utilizes many methods.
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 …
I could say that it is compared in a more personal way, since it is not a very well-known tool, many of its functions are for more private teams and for specific organizations.
NICE inContact is for our soft phone or virtual phone. They have their own functions in our organization. They are both useful and easy to use. Two different functionality but same NICE. Very friendly tools and recommend this two in their platform. NICE software are really …
While custom reports update a much faster rate than inContact, the scope of pre-built reports is much larger in PureConnect and it is much easier to schedule reports and deliver them via email attachment. PureConnect has issues with scheduled reports, sometimes they run later …
Superior to Verint in its agent self-service options and the ability to get more detailed schedule activity. Strongly compares with Aspect. Specific features that work for a given business will separate the best choice.
inContact blows ININ away (now bought by Genesys systems). ININ requires a lot of money to upgrade, wouldn't do any customization for free, and would not be able to integrate as nice with Salesforce.
Uptivity by far works better than NICE. I have many issue when trying to pull up calls, locate calls, and evaluate calls within the NICE platform however with the simple logic of Uptivity I never have issues.
I have used numerous amounts of text analytics, including: Clarabridge, Polyvista, SPSS, and other tools in the past. Attensity was by far the best of the lot. It was a bit pricier than some of the other solutions out there, but if you need a positive return on understanding …
We looked at several tools for turning text into data. The easy to understand tools had limited functionality, the analytical tools required a PHD to attend the sales pitch. Attensity had taken the approach of including reporting and alerting with their text engine.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
NICE CXone offers a very intuitive interface that is easy for our customers to understand in a short period of time and easy for us to administrate. All tools like Admin, ACD, Reporting, and Analytics are very user-friendly, and with little training, customers can reap the benefits of the tools.
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).
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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 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.
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.
The training was very brief, teaching how to use the features for my role. Over time, I discovered many other features that were not explained. I believe that if it were done more completely, it would know the features earlier. An example of this is the productivity page, where I needed to measure together with my colleagues, to know the real information that the screen brought and, to my surprise, it was very useful.
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 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
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.
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.
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.
The scalability is awesome because of the multiple uses it is able at performing for users. A large organization with several user can use this product in the same fashion that a smaller organization could. I believe the larger organization would see more benefits because of the users ability between communication coworkers
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.