
Making The Case
Opponents of IVR usually come in two colors: proponents of outsourcing who make their case for mainly economical reasons, and opponents, such as Paul English, whose case rises solely from purported ‘customer frustration’ and gives little thought to the economics of call centers.
Unfortunately, both of these claims are outdated. While these may have been valid arguments 10 – or even 5 – years ago, the advances in speech recognition technology and the progression of modern IVR render both of these claims if not outright false, then largely misleading.
In order to explain why, it is first important to understand the overall benefits of IVR:
While the benefits of IVR are widely known, outsourcing proponents often site economics as the reason for what they believe to be the superiority of outsourcing. But, for a variety of reasons, a hosted solution is most often much more cost effective:
As aforementioned, those who herald live agents as the call center solution often pay no attention to economics. For them, the first, last and only argument against IVR is ease of use. However, advances in speech recognition technology have not only made IVR a more pleasant experience, it has made IVR a more efficient experience. In fact, speech is a better option in the following scenarios:
There will always be those who give thought to either economics or customer service and wish to tip the scales to one at the expense of the other. For those in the middle, however, hosted call solutions with efficient and effective speech recognition will become the optimal choice.
