by Larry Mead, Kate Kompelien and Kurt Schroeder
In the enterprise and the contact center, organizations are continually trying to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their tools and processes. A week doesn't pass where some new book or product challenges our thinking about how we're doing things. When it comes to PureConnect(CIC), there have been several choices of client over time, and each decision to switch brings with it new challenges that hopefully have been outweighed by the enhanced productivity the change made.
The Client of the Future
For a few years now, Interaction Connect has been available for users of PureConnect (CIC) to use as a web-based alternative to Interaction Desktop. Adoption of it (from my informal query of several customers) appears to be slow. And I won't pretend to not understand why it's been that way. The most prevalent reason blowing through the wind about the subject is: feature parity. "We must have [this or that] before we can truly look at making the switch". This got me thinking - What things, if any, are really still missing? What other reasons might there be to not make the switch? Has a PureConnect(CIC) "web client" just gotten a bad rap based on an earlier "swing and a miss" or misconception? Based on what we're seeing in the Interaction Connect release notes, Genesys is spending a substantial amount of time and energy investing in this client, and it definitely seems worth taking some time to dig deeper and do some analysis on where things stand.
So that's what I'm going to do in the coming weeks. I'll start by looking at Interaction Connect at a high level, and then proceed to get into the details. I'll take feedback our customers have shared and put it to the test, then share with you where things stand. If there's something specific you'd like me to investigate and report on in this series, feel free to reach out at InteractionConnect@www.avtex.com, or simply comment below. If you've never seen Interaction Connect in action, check this out: