NICE CXone Mpower

We migrated to NICE CXone  from another global UC  solution provided by Cisco, and the main reason for that was that we wanted to move to a complete CCaaS  solution. This meant we would not be doing any maintenance on the actual end product; we would just be developing the actual solution. We went through a long-winded migration plan because it consisted of migrating services from the UK, North America, and Costa Rica.

We had a series of contact centers in the United Kingdom, so we had to ensure that any new starters were in the correct teams and had the relevant permissions to access their interactions, because all our calls were recorded. That side of things made sure that everyone was onboarded correctly and they were in the correct teams, had the relevant skill sets, and the ability to access other NICE CXone  components.

I found NICE CXone to be a very simplistic product overall to use, versus Cisco that was extremely complex to actually use. Everything was integrated very simplistically, whereas Cisco does not have their own call recording solutions. With NICE CXone, it was all integrated, and there were also various other applications, like the iX Workforce Management  suite, and various other packages. The simplicity of actually using the product was really the main advantage.

Historically, when we were using Cisco, we had different vendors such as Calabrio , who used to provide call recording, whereas when we moved to NICE CXone, we had everything under the same umbrella. If we ever ran into difficulties, we did not get one vendor saying there was a problem with our UC  platform, because NICE owned the whole product suite. I had also used the iX Workforce Management  suite before NICE actually acquired it, so I knew that it was going to be a good product set, and we had generally very few issues with it.

It has made day-to-day operations much more simplistic, as we came from an environment with multiple different systems. Sometimes the reliability of those systems was not always great. With NICE CXone, we basically had no issues.

On the call recording side of things, when we used Calabrio , we were not maintaining 100% uptime. Some months, it was approximately 97-98%. With NICE CXone, we had very few total outages with regards to the interaction feature, which is the call recording side of things.

Some of the prompts occasionally come too quickly.

I used NICE CXone in a previous role for approximately two and a half years.

We had no issues with that aspect in the time that I was using the system.

We had no issues with the scalability of it.

There were no issues with the customer support.

We used Cisco.

On the call recording side of things, when we used Calabrio, we were not maintaining 100% uptime. Some months, it was approximately 97-98%. With NICE CXone, we had very few total outages with regards to the interaction feature, which is the call recording side of things.

NICE directly was managing everything.

There were no issues with the accuracy after a period of time.

We went through an RFP against Amazon AWS  and also Genesys , and the feature set and the future roadmap was much better with NICE CXone.

I would really have a clear understanding of what features you actually want to be able to use, so you get value for money for your decision.

Because of the simplicity and the reliability, NICE CXone is a very nice, easy-to-use product. You are able to do a lot of the changes from a single webpage without the need to log into various different other platforms. The simplicity of the solution is the main advantage.

I would rate this review as a 9.

My main use case for NICE CXone  is workforce management and workforce engagement.

One specific example of how I use NICE CXone  for workforce management and engagement is to monitor quality assurance for our call recordings and customer experience interactions.

NICE CXone helps with monitoring quality assurance for call recordings and customer interactions by recording calls and creating transcripts from text or SMS, which are then sent to the quality management tool or a WEM tool, allowing us to automatically score those calls for compliance and quality, and document processes to improve in the areas that were scored.

We have seen improvements in agent productivity, customer satisfaction, and reduced wait times. Specifically, we have seen an improvement in our CSAT scores and NPS  scores, a reduction in cost per call, a decrease in average handle time, and utilization across the board has improved. Calls are more efficient because of agent assist and other tools, leading to many KPIs that have been improved through the use of NICE CXone.

The best features NICE CXone offers include a whole suite of products that encompasses workforce management, which involves scheduling the agents, recording their calls, and monitoring their calls, and performance management, providing coaching tools for the agent based on those quality scores. There is a wide array of WEM tools that help customer experience, agent performance, and optimization for the contact center.

Out of all those features, I find workforce management to be the most valuable in my day-to-day work because it allows us to schedule the agents and put them in the right place at the right time so that they are able to answer calls accordingly and our customers are not waiting for someone to speak to.

Workforce management allows for forecasting, scheduling, time off requests, and adjustments, making it a great tool that we utilize accordingly with our contact center.

NICE CXone has positively impacted my organization because the tools have been beneficial regarding the improvements I mentioned previously. One thing that could be better is the support that NICE provides around those tools. The tools themselves are adequate, we love the WFM tools, and the quality management tools have done their job, but they could be more robust and incorporate more AI solutions.

The support that NICE CXone provides is usually not timely, and we typically have to wait two or three days before we hear back or even longer to get an outcome or a response.

Enhancements in the tool could be beneficial, such as incorporating AI more thoroughly. An AI agent or some type of AI analyst would be beneficial so we do not have to do as much reporting and could simply input a prompt to an AI analyst who would provide us the coaching, feedback, statistics, or data we need.

The accuracy and reliability of NICE CXone's output need improvement. They are still using antiquated AI solutions instead of moving to more agentic models. They are still using more generative types of outcomes, which are acceptable, but much of the competition in the space have moved to more agentic and more natural language approaches. I think that is the next step for them.

I have been using NICE CXone for three years.

My advice to others looking into using NICE CXone is that it is an expensive product with a lot of guardrails on it. It forces you to use all the features, and it is not agnostic, so you have to use their call recording and all their other solutions. If you prefer something else, such as another WFM but prefer their QM, it does not work because it is all or nothing with them. I would rate this product a 6 overall.