When I was on the phone recently with my website provider, I really would have liked to have had a video connection. I am certain that I could have gotten more out of the call if it was video. At least it was a real time call and not through e-mail. The voice inflections gave me enough doubt to go ahead and pursue an alternate provider. Then again, video might have given my web site provider the ability to instill the confidence necessary for me not to pursue and alternative provider. And that is the point. Sometimes the best way to communicate is through video.

Someday our one on one communications will be mostly video. Pinpointing that exact time is difficult, but my proposition is that it will be sooner rather than later. Once the transition is in full swing, contact centers will already be fully video operable. Even today, there are some trends that will make video communications between callers and agents viable for many. Some of the trends are:

• Inexpensive Video Services Available on any Computer
• Smartphones and Tablets with Front and Rear Cameras
• Push Technologies to Computers and Mobile devices
• A Growing Comfort Level with Video Communications
• The Greater Collaborative Experience with Video

Inexpensive Video Services Available on any Computer

With free, freemium and low cost access to video communications, more and more people are taking the plunge and communicating with friends and family over video. The new adoption of video within social media makes video calling extremely easy, eliminating the need for users to download and configure software. So just about anyone that wants to can join a service and start seeing the person on the other side. It might not be the “immersive” HD experience that expensive telepresence units have, but it sure beats voice only. And many of the “immersive” HD providers are beginning to offer extremely low cost personal clients for the home and office which could be expanded to handle video sessions for contact centers and important clients.

Smartphones with Front and Rear Cameras

Do you ever with you could just show someone your problem versus trying to describe it over the phone? This is where the smartphone can be your anytime, anywhere portal to your balky device, or stalled lawnmower or your impossible to understand assembly instructions. The shortage of strong reliable 3G and 4G/LTE signals plus the growing bandwidth charges and the throttling of bandwidth by mobility providers are potential roadblocks. But video from mobile devices is already happening and will grow to the point that it is as inexpensive as today’s voice only charges. If I can show you what is going on or what I want by pulling a smartphone out of my pocket, it just makes things easier for everybody. Customer satisfaction, first call resolution rates and speed of resolution will all be enhanced as mobile video integrates into the contact center.

Push Technologies to Computers and Mobile Devices

Mobile Push is already being used by contact centers for a variety of needs. Callers can download apps for specific contact center applications and the contact center agents can push interactive screens to the caller. Applications such as technical assistance for high end automotive mechanics and wholesale to retail product help are just two of the many applications that mobile push is doing right now. Interactive screens are easier for callers to deal with than traditional IVR’s and agents can provide greater interaction with the caller enabling them to solve issues quicker. Videos for a variety of purposes like instructional videos can be sent to mobile devices with or without agent interaction.

A video client compatible with the contact center could be utilized as a future offering for contact centers using mobile push technology. Video conference providers are beginning to offer low cost licenses for use by individuals beyond the enterprise network that are dynamic. These licenses can be used and reused repeatedly as long as you have enough to satisfy demand for them. In the future, agents may be able to send links to callers that integrate with video cloud providers to speed up the process of converting a voice only call to a collaborative video call.

A Growing Comfort Level with Video Communications

One of the factors slowing the adoption of video is the fact that many people are naturally camera shy. It is easy to meet with people and engage in a dialogue, but stick a camera in the mix and it gets to be daunting. This applies to contact center agents as well as the general public. With a little training, though, everyone can get over the first time video jitters and begin to work the camera like a pro. Plus, so many people are taking the plunge at home and in company conference rooms, that it is beginning to become second nature for a lot of people. As evidenced by the popularity of video sharing services, there is no shortage of people that are willing to use video to communicate. And the numbers are growing rapidly.

Evidence of video going mainstream is abundant in popular culture as well. Even Wendy’s encouraged people to shoot videos about Wendy’s sweet potato fries for their commercials. I must admit, I am more comfortable with video than with sweet potato fries. Then again, I have not tried sweet potato fries yet. Of course, product placements of desktop video and telepresence systems have been around for years. But, Lisa Kudrow’s hit Web Therapy takes it to a new level. Web Therapy is ninety percent shown as a computer screen video conference. And the show’s popularity as a web only offering prompted Showtime to pick it up and broadcast it with additional content. These are just a few examples of the growing acceptance of video communications.

The Greater Collaborative Experience with Video

A video call to the contact center can make a dramatic difference in customer and agent satisfaction. For the caller, you can see who you are talking to and get a better sense that your need is being addressed properly. If a caller is video enabled they can show a video enabled agent the reason they are calling and give an indication of what might need to be done for call resolution. The agent can benefit by quickly resolving issues and could gauge the possibility of up selling their caller. Plus, it is harder to yell at someone that you are looking at than it is on a voice only call. Instances of rudeness would be dramatically cut using video.
The millennial generation and upscale consumers of all generations have been using video for years now. These same demographics are also demanding quick resolution to their questions and issues. Many, perhaps most will change their buying habits after one poor experience with a contact center. So if you are company “A” and you have the capability to upgrade your contact center to include video to gain a competitive advantage against company “B”, it makes sense to do so before company “B” does it.

Final Thoughts

Some might argue that contact centers are not equipped to handle video because there is no current way to queue video callers and that there are few people that really want to communicate through video. This is much the same positioning used relative to social media integration into the contact center just a short time ago. Now that more and more contact center providers have the capability to effectively integrate social media into the contact center, the tune has changed. Now, social media integration is a “must have” for any company wanting to protect their image and effectively communicate with the public. Amazing how that perception has changed almost overnight, isn’t it?

So if you hear from contact center manufacturers or their pundits that video is not that important or too expensive or impractical or technologically unfeasible, rest assured that the R&D labs are currently working on it with breakneck speed. And when someone is ready to introduce video integration for the contact center, it will be important, inexpensive, practical, technologically feasible and a “must have” for any company wanting to effectively communicate with the public. And they will be right. After all, except for face to face contact, there is no better way to communicate than with video.

The Xbox 360 is great. And with Kinect it’s phenomenal. But for Microsoft Chief Research and Strategy Officer Craig Mundie to dismiss Apple Siri and brag about Tellme in Windows smartphones?

Utter embarrassment, especially coming from an executive who’s supposed to be the technology visionary of the company. (Heck, we all know Ballmer isn’t the guy.)

Tellme was rumored to have cost $800 million in 2007, but has the technology been stuck in the past?

It’s now evident that the software giant does not consider speech technology important and will likely pay a price for it, much like when it played catch-up during the Web boom. While Microsoft wasn’t looking, Nuance had scooped up dozens of other companies and partnered with Apple to give Siri a voice in the cloud.

And now the blogosphere is abuzz with this:

What does Tellme tell you?

What developments in customer service are you thankful for? Is it a technology, a process, a methodology, or even a person?

Here are some things I’m thankful for:

• Speech recognition – Helps in those situations where you’re driving and need to find out your account balance, flight itinerary, or simply when you feel lonely and need someone to talk to.
• The “zero” key – The most important button in customer service. Yet, I’ve navigated touchtone IVRs that did not implement a zero key to get straight to an agent…
• Social media – More ways for customers to keep companies on their toes! Always a good thing!
• Virtual queuing – Understand this: the customer’s time is always more valuable than yours.

Besides the significant hardware upgrades, the other selling point of the Apple iPhone 4S is Siri, the speech-enabled assistant that can help you schedule appointments, set reminders, read and compose SMS, and many other tasks. The technology is essentially a massive (considering how many iPhone 4S users are there in the U.S.) cloud-based speech recognition service reportedly provided by Nuance software.

Unfortunately Apple decided to make Siri only available on the iPhone 4S even though various resourceful hackers have proven that it can be run on the older 3GS and 4 models. Even the iPad 2 didn’t get Siri although its hardware is similar with the 4S.

Well, the folks at Applidium have cracked Siri’s protocol and published very informative technical details. Among them:

• Siri uses TCP port 443, over HTTPS (Secure HTTP)
• The request is a custom “ACE” method (as opposed to commonly used “GET”)
• Raw audio data is sent but compressed using Speex codec
• An iPhone 4S identifier is required with Siri

Most companies establish contact centers to handle all those inbound customer service requests, whether it’s calls, emails, or otherwise. But when tons of money and effort is being spent on the design and implementation of a world-class contact center, are there discussions on how to proactively pre-emptive an inbound interaction? In other words, pushing service out to customers. Most of the time there’s no brainstorming session on how to reduce inbound customer service calls and why that should be considered.

In other words, bringing up a contact center is usually an reactionary exercise: we forecast x inbound calls per month — how can we handle that volume? How many toll-free numbers, how many IVR ports, how many speech licenses, how many servers, how fast the networks, how many supervisors, how many agents, how many this and that… Nobody gives thought to how can we reduce that x number up front.

The benefits of reducing x is obvious. A lesser inbound volume could mean lesser resources — hardware, software, and labor — are required, therefore cost savings could be realized.

It boils down to notifying the customer when an event occurs that could trigger an inbound call. A good example of this (and to my pleasant surprise when I first encountered it) is from airlines automatically notifying changes to a passenger’s reservation or itinerary. One time when I was at an airport awaiting my flight I received a call on my mobile phone from the airline informing me of a change in my flight time. It was great because I could stay where I was sipping a cold beer and not having to find out later from a LCD monitor or bother a gate agent.

The applications are numerous. Cable companies could send out alerts to area customers whose service is down. Banks could inform customers when a large withdrawal is made on an account. Retailers could notify customers about an order’s shipping status.

Some of these are already implemented by companies. But with today’s technologies there’s a lot more that could be done.

For example, a cell phone carrier knows a subscriber’s monthly charges. Its systems ought to be able to establish a pattern of usage and charges. If suddenly there’s a usage spike which results in excess fees, why can’t the carrier send an immediate SMS or make a phone call to inform of such an unusual activity? Instead, we keep hearing reports of “bill shock” and disgruntled customers, and it wasn’t until recently that carriers finally came to terms with the government to curb this.

So it took thousands of complaints from subscribers and eventually government intervention to end this, when in reality the carriers could’ve provided better service by proactively informing the customers about abnormal usage and fees.

Or how about this: a smartphone-toting customer recently purchased a product that turned out to be defective and has initiated the process to return it. One day as the customer is out on the road and comes near the retailer’s brick and mortar store, s/he receives a call (or SMS) from the store manager inviting him/her to the store with an exchange unit ready for pickup. Such a scenario is no longer science fiction with GPS-enabled smartphones equipped with proximity awareness features.

Again, why wait until a customer contacts you when you have an opportunity to serve the customer beforehand, armed with the best knowledge of the customer gleaned from your systems.

After meeting Elise for the first time more than a month ago, David was thrilled to see her again on his bus ride to his new job. For weeks since his failed senatorial bid he’s played in his mind repeatedly their serendipitous encounter in the men’s room and the intense emotional connection he felt in that moment.

And to see Elise, again, on the same bus, in a city of nine millions people — that’s fate. David swore to himself that he’d never let her out of his sight again.

They caught up with each other quickly and rather warmly as if they’d been friends for years. Their conversations were unending until David accidentally spilled his coffee on her skirt.

“Oh no, I’m so sorry!” David exclaimed while wiping Elise’s skirt with the one napkin he had.

“It’s all right. Don’t feel bad,” Elise tried to make light of the situation. Then David’s BlackBerry rang and buzzed.

“Oh, that’s my new phone. Please excuse me –” David felt around his jacket to find the company issued phone. He found it in the right pocket.

Before he was able to hit the answer button, Elise grabbed it and threw it into his cup of hot coffee. Bubbles rose from the cup as the BlackBerry continued to ring.

“Now we’re even.”

David cracked a thin smile. “Well let me pay for the dry cleaning then. Why don’t you write down your number?” He handed her a business card and a pen. Elise smiled back.

With Elise’s number in hand, David got off the bus as it stopped near his office. He rushed into the building trying not to be too late for the morning meeting. Since he’s already a bit late and didn’t want to catch grief for ruining a company phone on his first day on the job, he figured he would call the cell carrier first to ask about replacing or fixing his caffeinated phone.

He lifted the handset on his desk phone and dialed the toll-free number for customer service. After hearing the friendly automated greeting by a soft female voice, he pressed zero in hopes of bypassing the IVR menus –

– suddenly he couldn’t speak or move his fingers. He couldn’t move his body. He noticed two black-clad men from behind, each took a hold of an arm and pried him away from the phone, the desk, his office… Moments later, he became unconscious.

When David came to he was sitting on a folding chair, handcuffed, in the middle of an expansive warehouse. Men in black and gray surrounded him. Two of them wore hats, a tall man with silver hair and a shorter man much younger.

“Where am I?! Who are you people?!” David asked, fear clearly melded with his words.

The tall man calmly said, “We are from the Adjustment Bureau. You’re here because you deviated from the plan.”

David rubbed his eyes. “What plan?! I was just trying to reach customer service! My cell phone broke!”

“But you dialed zero, David. At the very beginning.”

“I was pressed for time… I was already late for a meeting!” David offered an explanation.

“We do not care. The plan calls for listening to the menus, making a choice, and getting to an agent.” The tall man took a step closer to David. “That is, if you don’t have to wait in queue.” The other men chuckled.

“Why can’t I speak with an agent directly? Why are you preventing me from talking to her?!”

The tall man gazed at David. “That’s irrelevant. The Chairman writes the plan, and you are expected to follow it. If you deviate, then we get involved. And it’s not always pretty when we do.”

David’s fears subsided and now he wanted to find out more. “So what, you dictate each decision I make? What toothpaste I choose? How I brush my hair in the morning?”

“Of course not, David. The little, unimportant stuff you get to do yourself. We may make things happen to correct the course — in this case, long automated greetings, nested menus, poor speech recognition, et cetera. In the end, we’re just interested in prolonging the time for you receive any customer service.”

He reached to grab David’s jaw. “Just remember — pressing zero is not part of the plan.”

The Adjustment Bureau is a 2011 movie based on Philip K. Dick’s sci-fi short story “Adjustment Team,” and stars Matt Damon (“David Norris”) and Emily Blunt (“Elise”).

Some of the main frustration points from customers calling into the contact center:

1. Having to go through an IVR first to get to a live person
2. Long wait time
3. The agent asking for the same information again when already given to the IVR

The typical self-service call flow has an IVR in the front-end to first find out something about the caller, then after retrieving the customer record, the call gets passed to a queue for a live agent. In essence, the IVR acts more like a receptionist to direct callers to the (supposedly) right department.

This is now the common flow in customer service. It’s the product of contact center industrialization, an evolution stemming from goals to lower labor costs, increase efficiency, and adopt automation.

That’s why now there’s a machine separating you, the customer, from obtaining good service.

How about flipping the flow — live agents first, IVR second?

When the caller dials the toll-free number, let an agent answer first. Well, go ahead and program a warm greeting nonetheless but that’s it. Then pass the call to an agent, queue the call if necessary.

All the agent has to do is say, “Hi. Thanks for calling Acme Bank, my name is Sam. How can I help you?”

There might be a brief silence on the other end of the line because the caller is probably surprised to be speaking with a live person at this point. And because the caller did not go through layers of menus and instructions, s/he has no expectation that the agent would know his/her account number, name, or other identifiable info. (Of course, some may propose an ANI match up-front to gather more info, but that usually has a low rate of success. Just keep it simple.)

The caller then tells the agent about the purpose of the call. The engaging agent now asks, “Would you like me to help you with that, or would you prefer our self-service system?” Imagine that — giving the caller a choice of how to obtain service! No forcing the use of DTMF, speech, or questionable gestures.

The caller can pick either one of those options: help me or self help. But guess what? Whichever option is chosen, it’s going to be a happy caller because s/he was in control.

Obviously, for this to work effectively the agent has to be well trained (and I mean, really well trained) and the IVR still has to have good design. But my theory is that you’ll end up with:

• Happier callers because they don’t go through an IVR initially and get to talk to an agent sooner
• Happier agents because they’re given better training and are empowered (first-tier service providers as opposed to getting the “leftovers” from IVR)
• Shorter queue times because callers will be less frustrated and those who decide on self-service are unlikely to go back into queue
• Simpler call flows because all inbound calls queue to an agent and the IVR only handles customers willing to use self-service
• Better disaster recovery and business continuation because if the IVR goes down the agents are already capable of handling most aspects of customer service (might even be an added bonus when the caller hears “Sorry but our self-service system is unavailable at the moment. Allow me to assist you.”)

The big question: What about cost?

And that’s a good question. My thinking is that with this paradigm, some money typically spent on an IVR upfront solution can be shifted to invest in the agents because it’ll be less IVR ports, less IVR licenses, and less professional services (simpler call flow). So maybe the cost is comparable, but hopefully you end up with higher customer satisfaction scores and less agent turnover.

Have you seen something like this in the field? What pitfalls can this paradigm bring? Do managers prefer to invest in hardware, software, and licenses rather than people? Is this feasible in today’s corporate contact centers? And what the heck is Eugene smoking?

Surveys are the necessary evil in the marketplace. Back then when automation was all the rage companies wasted no time to program dialers and IVRs for surveying. Remember how annoying — hence, ineffective — that was? Somehow telemarketers knew exactly when to interrupt your nice family dinner. It’s no surprise we’ve grown to love caller ID, the Do Not Call list, and spam filters.

Naturally, the Web is a great platform for surveys. The reach is much greater and those who respond do so at their own will (opt-in), therefore producing better survey data. Better yet, if done right the Web offers a much better visual environment to create surveys.

I was invited to try out Floodlight by Plum Voice. The company claims it is “the first survey tool in the market that’s truly multimodal — phone (IVR), Web, Facebook, and mobile devices.” Plus, it costs nothing to sign up and deploy on the Web and Facebook (costs money only with phone surveys).

Okay, so you’re probably thinking what I’m thinking: Facebook is part of the Web, so what’s the difference in terms of deployment? Good question. At first I’d thought that minimally Floodlight would make it as simple as a one-button operation to “Share on Facebook” like many apps do nowadays. Especially when this screen shows up:

Makes you think that deploying onto Facebook is just one click away, right? Not so fast. Turns out that Facebook icon cannot be clicked to take you to Facebook. Rather, it’s expected that the user copy the URL and share it after logging into Facebook separately. That survey URL for Facebook is the same as the regular Web deployment URL.

So maybe the “multimodal” claim ought to be consolidated a bit? It appears Web = Facebook in this respect.

However, I must still say that designing a survey using Floodlight was an enjoyable user experience. Signup was quick and painless. The survey design screen was intuitive, responsive, and offered a wide range of input types for the designer. It’s very powerful (even allows for SOAP/XML transactions for features such as authentication and real-time updates) and highly customizable. Testing a survey was also user-friendly. Reports are also accessible online and can be exported into the popular file formats. This is a great online tool to rapidly create, deploy, and analyze surveys.

Here is the test survey I created:

URL: http://www.floodlightsurveys.com/survey/take/3228-99596579

Embedded:

Phone: 888-565-XXXX

Earlier this year I cautioned against companies making tablets specifically marketed for the enterprise.

The facts laid before our eyes are that consumer tablets, especially the Apple iPad, are making inroads into the enterprise with lesser resistance and greater enterprise-friendly security features.

From Network World:

“Enterprise CIOs are adding iPad to their approved device list at an amazing rate,” Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer said recently. “Today, over 80 percent of the Fortune 100 are already deploying or piloting iPad, up from 65 percent in the September quarter. Some recent examples include JPMorgan Chase, Cardinal Health, Wells Fargo, Archer Daniels Midland, Sears Holdings and DuPont.”

A major reason that iPads are being accepted in the enterprise is that Apple significantly upgraded its iOS operating system last summer to include a number of enterprise-friendly security features.

Now the next question may be, But can another tablet device co-exist and complement the iPad in the enterprise?

To which I say, Just stop it! First, nobody wants to carry two tablets. That’d defeat the purpose of mobility, wouldn’t it?

Second, there is no enterprise tablet market. Consumer tablets are powerful enough to be used in the enterprise. If a company continues the path to make and market an “enterprise tablet,” then it’s a company that’s very out of touch with market trends and demands.

The market for mobile enterprise applications, on the other hand, has room to grow. After all, a tablet is just a piece of shiny glass without useful apps.

This is a guest post from seasoned contact center technologist and independent consultant Tony Tillyer. He offers an inspiring and provocative view of the future in customer interaction, with technologies we all are familiar with today. You may also read his other guest post about VOIP here.

Curious how a Service Provider has to deal with a multitude of customer wants and needs, through their Interaction Channels. Identifying them and providing for them seems a never-ending process of evaluation and re-evaluation. Recently I took stock of the general industry trends for interactions between customers and their contact centres and where that may lead in the future of interaction management – come take a trip with me, into the future of interactions…

Unified Communications (UC) is basically the means and ability for a customer to use whatever means they deem appropriate to contact their Service Provider — and to be responded to in a way that suits them. The absolute lengths a Service Provider will go to is primarily based on which channels they want to deploy — or can afford. Voice, for sure, but then there is Multimedia, Social Channels, Retail Channels, Smartphone Apps and…. Where does it end? Well, again, that is in the hands of the customer — or is it? A recent survey has suggested that the smartphone will pretty much be the communication channel of choice by 2015 — I wonder how many Service Providers have a roadmap that points in that direction, rather than fanning-out their Service Offerings across a plethora of other Channels? Sure, right now it’s nice to offer the Customer a choice — as long as it can be effectively managed from a central platform. Unfortunately, that is very rarely the case, as these Channels have evolved through different business entities especially in the mobile communications world. SMS was always a Channel in its own right, giving a telco the means to keep the customer informed. But then it’s supplemented by Web Chat, email, FAX(?) and other “electronic” means of connecting with the customer, through a central platform called “Multimedia.” The absolute indepedence of these Channels not only requires orchestration at a technical level to bring them together as “Multimedia” — the business also needs to accomodate these fundamental changes, too. Even the Voice Channel has its origins in Networks and national telco providers. The legacy telephony equipments (Switch, PBX, ACD, etc.) have been around an awful lot longer than the boys and girls in IT who brought us VoIP and SIP as a replacement, and the telephony providers have pretty much always been at odds with the new breed in IT.

Then there is the question of choice. Another Survey suggests that ”Generation Y” are just not interested in hanging around to talk to someone about their problem. And, if/when they eventually do get through to an ”expert,” they want to be able to discuss the finer details of the issue and not be palmed off with a standard response like “I’ll look into that for you and get back to you…” For the up and coming generation, it’s about proactivity, staying informed, and being fed. The sheer amount of information available under FAQs, self-service areas and the Internet in general leads customers to look at possible solutions before they contact anyone for help — and that means no more “general enquiries.”  It means having real experts on hand to deal with complex issues, not the “meet and greet” kind who are happy to pass your issue to the “back office.”  Hence the need for proactivity — the need to resolve issues as they happen and informing the customer of the result — not constant iterations of the problem.

So where does this lead? The knowledge that pretty much everything service-related will be served through a smartphone and that the customer base will only make contact when it is absolutely necessary means a new approach. It also means being best informed about the issues which exist and not only taking note of them but doing something about them — being proactive. Today’s contact centres are awash with information, to the point where many are actually drowning in it. But today it’s all just
“information.” Converting “information” into real-time, proactive measures is a natural next step for customer services. If you know what the problems are through effective and succinct knowledge management, and you know how it occurs or how likely it is to occur, then you have the means to be proactive and address the problem without the customer even being involved. It means
using the centralized information being fed in by your customer service representatives (“Agents”) and actually doing something with it, other than working out how to respond to the customer. Beyond that, providing the customer with a notification that there was an issue — and that it has been resolved — completes the circle of next generation customer services.

Taking a couple of “future” examples, then:

A bank customer has the bank’s app on their smartphone. Business preferences have been pre-set for the customer and an overdue bill payment needs to be made, but there are insufficient funds in the account to cover the amount. The bank determines the customer’s ability to pay through their account history and credit status and grants a short-term overdraft to meet their needs. An information message is sent to the customer’s smartphone app, to inform them of the “issue,” the “resolution” and a “recommendation.” In the back office, updates are made to the account, as appropriate.

A retail store customer has the store’s app on their smartphone. Through knowledge management and trends, business rules have been applied to determine the best possible time for that customer to be offered a “Special Offer,” specific and exclusive to them. The information is fed to the customer’s app and provides them not only with the offer details, but allows them the ability to reserve the item and provides them with directions to their nearest store.

I know some of this sounds pretty far-fetched but it does highlight how technology convergence, customer preference, business acumen, knowledge management and business and technical rules could be applied in a pro-active customer services environment. Using the real-time information available to anticipate the needs and requirements of a customer and keeping them
informed. It’s a long way from the plethora of systems, processes, technologies and techniques within an Enterprise today but with the right long-term strategy in place, it is not beyond the realms of possibility.

As a utopian view of the future of customer service then: CTI, CRM, business, technology and knowledge management merged into single channel which serves the customer and the business without the need for interaction, through the implementation of effective proaction.

How to get there is a journey that needs a lot of planning — convergence, actions, rules, terms, management, technology, architecture, process, infrastructure…

Where does your roadmap lead…?

Tony Tillyer has 25+ years’ experience in the IT and Telecommunications industry and 10+ years’ experience with Contact Centres with Genesys Products/Solutions. Currently working as an Independent Genesys Consultant.  Previous employments included banking, retail, automotive and mobile telecommunications as well as Service Integration, IT Networks, Enterprise Databases and military static and mobile communications.