NICE CXone is a good feature, but it is expensive and costlier than other products such as Genesis or other alternatives. When it comes to solutioning, there are too many SKUs, which are line items or components that could have been bundled together. For example, CXone agent licenses do not include QM in the basic packages, whereas in the Genesis world it is bundled. The price comparison is higher compared to Genesis or other platforms. I have been using Genesis for three to four years across multiple customers, and now that NICE CXone has become available, I have started comparing all the features and benefits. I find there are some gaps, with more features available but at a higher cost for NICE. Regarding cost-effectiveness and return on investment of NICE CXone, the main challenge is working with the NICE team. The speed of onboarding is lengthy and people-dependent initially. When comparing with other OEMs and CCaaS products, the UI interface and partner portal have multiple access points. I need to log into different portals for NICE CXone, whereas my other competitor platforms offer single sign-on where I can log in once and access all partner-led programs and learning materials in one location. There is room for improvement in this area, though gradually NICE can change this approach.
The reporting isn't bad, but there are opportunities for improvement; we get real-time dashboards for monitoring, though for performance management, we have to procure certain reports manually by pulling down raw data from the system, which could be better. Regarding the pricing, this would be an area of opportunity as well; this feedback is based on where we're positioned in the Caribbean. Compared to challengers such as Zoom, which seem more cost-effective, NICE CXone's suite of products is very modular, so as they provide new services, you have to add to your existing package and this balloons your costs since there's an additional license needed to use the new tools, leading to potentially higher out-of-pocket expenses.
We need more control over the AWS side of NICE CXone as that's the only area where we lack control. We should have more control over our AWS implementation instead of relying on connections and controls from NICE CXone to AWS. They currently have excessive control in that area. I would need to examine other aspects of social media integration for NICE CXone and their control mechanisms. They are expanding into platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram. I'm interested in researching if we can communicate through NICE CXone when someone discusses our brand on these platforms.
The audio quality in NICE CXone has room for improvement, as I experience issues like diffused calls and crackling audio. Clearing cache and cookies from browsers often resolves these problems, but it's something that occurs frequently. Simplifying the studio tool could also be an improvement, along with organizing external training and better communication about new features, like agent assist or agent co-pilot.
One area where CXone could improve is in creating a more streamlined, user-friendly interface. While the interfaces are good, they can get a bit dated over time, though NICE is usually good about updating them. The implementation process can be challenging, which seems to be a common issue across CCaaS vendors. As someone focused on reporting and numbers, I would like to see improvements in the reporting features. It’s good as it is, but there are opportunities to streamline and simplify it since creating custom reports often requires specialized knowledge and coding skills.
Donor Management Coordinator at Legacy Donor Services Foundation
Real User
May 22, 2020
There are times when the data does not load and you have to keep hitting refresh. More colors and different layouts should be included in the next release.
Donor Management Coordinator at Legacy Donor Services Foundation
Real User
May 21, 2020
Occasionally, the system runs slow and will kick us out of Max, which then has to be restarted, and can cause issues as our call center deals with time sensitive phone calls. It is a hassle, if you are busy and caught up with something, that it will log you out.
Service Level Supervisor at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
Real User
Mar 19, 2020
I have noticed that occasionally the dashboard will freeze and some things may get stuck for a while. For example, if I have a dashboard open that shows how many calls are in queue and how many are currently being handled by agents, sometimes a call that an agent is handling will get stuck on the dashboard after the agent ends the call and the dashboard will show that the call is still a live call. Our tech team has explained this to us as a ghost call. After some time (or maybe many screen refreshes) the call will go away like it has just ended.
I would like to see inView be a built-in feature of CXone rather than a separate platform, but everything else is terrific. The ACD/QM reporting and the dashboards inside of CXOne are a little clunky and hard to navigate compared to the inView reports and dashboards. The inView dashboards have so many options and drilling methods, it would be great to combine that directly with CXone to be able to drill into actual contacts, which is the strength that the CXOne dashboards do have going for them.
NICE CXone enhances customer service with AI-driven tools, omnichannel support, and dynamic help systems. Ideal for contact separation and centralized reporting, it simplifies call and email handling with real-time analytics and a flexible interface.NICE CXone supports sophisticated customer interactions by offering features to improve call management and reporting. Integrating omnichannel experiences through consistent analytics, it provides efficient WebRTC functionality and customization....
NICE CXone is a good feature, but it is expensive and costlier than other products such as Genesis or other alternatives. When it comes to solutioning, there are too many SKUs, which are line items or components that could have been bundled together. For example, CXone agent licenses do not include QM in the basic packages, whereas in the Genesis world it is bundled. The price comparison is higher compared to Genesis or other platforms. I have been using Genesis for three to four years across multiple customers, and now that NICE CXone has become available, I have started comparing all the features and benefits. I find there are some gaps, with more features available but at a higher cost for NICE. Regarding cost-effectiveness and return on investment of NICE CXone, the main challenge is working with the NICE team. The speed of onboarding is lengthy and people-dependent initially. When comparing with other OEMs and CCaaS products, the UI interface and partner portal have multiple access points. I need to log into different portals for NICE CXone, whereas my other competitor platforms offer single sign-on where I can log in once and access all partner-led programs and learning materials in one location. There is room for improvement in this area, though gradually NICE can change this approach.
The reporting isn't bad, but there are opportunities for improvement; we get real-time dashboards for monitoring, though for performance management, we have to procure certain reports manually by pulling down raw data from the system, which could be better. Regarding the pricing, this would be an area of opportunity as well; this feedback is based on where we're positioned in the Caribbean. Compared to challengers such as Zoom, which seem more cost-effective, NICE CXone's suite of products is very modular, so as they provide new services, you have to add to your existing package and this balloons your costs since there's an additional license needed to use the new tools, leading to potentially higher out-of-pocket expenses.
We need more control over the AWS side of NICE CXone as that's the only area where we lack control. We should have more control over our AWS implementation instead of relying on connections and controls from NICE CXone to AWS. They currently have excessive control in that area. I would need to examine other aspects of social media integration for NICE CXone and their control mechanisms. They are expanding into platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram. I'm interested in researching if we can communicate through NICE CXone when someone discusses our brand on these platforms.
The audio quality in NICE CXone has room for improvement, as I experience issues like diffused calls and crackling audio. Clearing cache and cookies from browsers often resolves these problems, but it's something that occurs frequently. Simplifying the studio tool could also be an improvement, along with organizing external training and better communication about new features, like agent assist or agent co-pilot.
One area where CXone could improve is in creating a more streamlined, user-friendly interface. While the interfaces are good, they can get a bit dated over time, though NICE is usually good about updating them. The implementation process can be challenging, which seems to be a common issue across CCaaS vendors. As someone focused on reporting and numbers, I would like to see improvements in the reporting features. It’s good as it is, but there are opportunities to streamline and simplify it since creating custom reports often requires specialized knowledge and coding skills.
It could improve the quality of calls.
There are times when the data does not load and you have to keep hitting refresh. More colors and different layouts should be included in the next release.
Occasionally, the system runs slow and will kick us out of Max, which then has to be restarted, and can cause issues as our call center deals with time sensitive phone calls. It is a hassle, if you are busy and caught up with something, that it will log you out.
inContact should offer a way to send faxes.
I have noticed that occasionally the dashboard will freeze and some things may get stuck for a while. For example, if I have a dashboard open that shows how many calls are in queue and how many are currently being handled by agents, sometimes a call that an agent is handling will get stuck on the dashboard after the agent ends the call and the dashboard will show that the call is still a live call. Our tech team has explained this to us as a ghost call. After some time (or maybe many screen refreshes) the call will go away like it has just ended.
I would like to see inView be a built-in feature of CXone rather than a separate platform, but everything else is terrific. The ACD/QM reporting and the dashboards inside of CXOne are a little clunky and hard to navigate compared to the inView reports and dashboards. The inView dashboards have so many options and drilling methods, it would be great to combine that directly with CXone to be able to drill into actual contacts, which is the strength that the CXOne dashboards do have going for them.