Compare Virtual Call Agents to IVRs

The following graph compares the cost of deploying various call automation technologies with the degree of call complexity they can handle.

A live agent is by far the most expensive method and can handle the most complex and valuable calls. Many companies want a live agent on revenue producing calls as well as calls for complex issues and key customers.

At the other end of the field, touchtone IVRs are an inexpensive way to assist with call flow; however, these systems can only handle simple “yes/no” questions or specific “1 digit” selections.

Speech IVRs can handle slightly more complex conversations but are more expensive to develop than touchtone systems. Most speech IVRs handle only limited words or phrases and often frustrate callers because of their limited understanding. In addition, they can be so expensive to program effectively that the cost approaches that of a live agent.

SmartAction Virtual Call Agents use a combination of natural language and Artificial Intelligence to provide a cost effective solution that can handle complex conversations in free flow form. The best part of Virtual Agents is that they get smarter over time as the intelligence engine learns with each new application. Since the “brain” learns on its own, cost stays the same even though the Virtual Agents have learned to be more effective and handle more complex calls.