Best Contact Center/Call Center Analytics: The 2018 CRM Service Leaders

THE MARKET

The contact center analytics market was valued at $709.5 million in 2017 and is expected to reach $1.4 billion by 2022, according to MarketsandMarkets. The analyst firm cites demand for better customer experience management solutions, the proliferation of cloud computing, growing demand for speech and text analytics solutions, and increased compliance requirements as the key drivers of this growth.

Rebecca Wettemann, vice president at Nucleus Research, says that “in general, analytics and [artificial intelligence] will be important differentiators for contact center providers moving forward. The ability to handle full-text analytics and use it to train AI models is particularly interesting.”

THE LEADERS

Aspect Software posted scores of 3.6 across the board. Paul Stockford, president and chief analyst at Saddletree Research, says that it offers a “highly reliable solution from a highly reliable, innovative company.” Ian Jacobs, senior analyst at Forrester Research, adds that the company “has launched some nice ways to increase access to analytics. Agents, for example, can access speech analytics directly from their dashboard.” 

Although it struggled in depth of functionality (3.4), Calabrio otherwise turned in a strong performance this year, with scores of 4.2 in cost, 4.0 in company direction, and 3.9 in customer satisfaction. Jacobs notes that the company “has some cool analytics tools, including one that predicts customer satisfaction before an interaction occurs,” and that “on the total-cost-of-ownership front, Calabrio has a single analytics license: a customer that buys it receives speech, text, and desktop analytics.” Stockford says Calabrio offers “an ideal solution for its customer and prospect base, which the company understands extremely well” and also notes that it is “a company on a rapid rise in the right direction.”

Genesys had strong scores in cost and company direction, earning marks of 4.0 and 3.8, respectively. It struggled, however, in depth of functionality and customer satisfaction, earning scores of just 3.4 and 3.3. Stockford says the company provides only a “very basic offering.” But that is likely to change, with Jacobs noting that “analytics will be one of the linchpins in the company’s efforts to expand into marketing and sales use cases.”

Verint Systems had a strong showing all around, posting scores of 4.0 in depth of functionality, 3.6 in customer satisfaction and cost, and 3.5 in company direction. According to Stockford, its solution is a “strong contender from a strong company and customer journey visionary.” Jacobs adds that the company “has started some creative packaging. For example, its automated quality offering incorporates speech analytics without requiring a full-on speech analytics deployment.”

THE WINNER

NICE posted a category-leading 4.4 in depth of functionality. It also earned scores of 3.8 in company direction, 3.6 in cost, and 3.5 in customer satisfaction. Stockford calls it “the gold standard in the analytics market segment,” where it “is almost untouchable.” Its products, he adds, “are sophisticated and highly capable,” giving special credit to those it gained during its early 2016 acquisition of Nexidia. Jacobs, meanwhile, says NICE offers a “large range of strong analytics tools, from journey analytics to desktop analytics to speech analytics,” and that “the CXone cloud contact center offerings will help expand NICE’s addressable market significantly.” 

ONE TO WATCH

CallMiner earned a 4.1 in cost and had a decent showing across the board, with scores of 3.7 in company direction, 3.6 in depth of functionality, and 3.5 in customer satisfaction. “Although there are many start-ups focusing on analyzing speech and other interactions, CallMiner is the biggest name in the stand-alone analytics world,” Jacobs says. “It has a very nice approach to using analytics to drive automated quality programs.” Stockford says that it offers a “sturdy solution with an excellent industry reputation.”

---

[Editor's note: The overall award rating is based on a composite score of analyst ratings for customer satisfaction, depth of functionality, company direction, and cost. For the cost score, analysts gave the highest marks to vendors with the lowest expected costs. Company revenues were also factored into the overall score, but these numbers are not included in the chart above.]