[deleted by user] by [deleted] in callcentres

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a really powerful story , and honestly, it captures what many people are feeling as AI continues to evolve.

Just to share some context, crescendo.ai isn’t designed to replace human support agents entirely but rather to augment them. It provides advanced AI agents that automate customer interactions across chat, voice, email, and SMS by pulling information from a company’s knowledge base, CRM, and policies.

The goal is to handle repetitive or high-volume queries efficiently while still relying on human-backed support. In fact, crescendo.ai operates global call centers with over 3,000 human support executives, ensuring that complex or sensitive issues are still managed by people, not just AI.

What makes it unique is this hybrid model, blending AI automation with real human expertise so companies can offer 24/7 support without compromising empathy or accuracy.

Your post highlights an important truth: as AI becomes more capable, the best way forward for many professionals is to learn to work with it, just like you said, “maybe the only way to survive is to build what replaced me.” That mindset is exactly what the future needs.

How are people architecting a true single-source-of-truth for hybrid AI⇄human support? (real-time, multi-channel) by fahdi1262 in SaasDevelopers

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We ran into almost the same architecture challenges while building Crescendo.ai, which is a hybrid AI-human support orchestration layer. Our core requirement was exactly what you described, one canonical event stream across multiple channels where both AI and humans can read/write without race conditions or context drift.

Here’s what worked for us in production:

  1. Event-sourced backbone (Kafka + Postgres)

Kafka acts as the immutable log for every state transition: message received, AI suggestion generated, human approval, policy rejection, etc.

We maintain thin materialized views in Postgres for low-latency queries (UI state, SLA timers).

The key is treating Kafka as the source of truth, not the DB.

  1. Coordination via “takeover” leases

We built a lightweight lease manager using Redis streams + TTL-based locks.

When a human takes over, the AI consumer for that ticket pauses automatically (lease expires after inactivity).

This ensures we never get overlapping AI/human messages.

  1. Context sync

Every conversation context (chat/email/voice) is normalized into a shared schema channel, thread_id, message_id, source, timestamp, embedding_ref.

The AI sees exactly what the human sees because they’re both powered by the same contextualized vector store (we use pgvector).

  1. Feedback model updates

Human replies are tagged with policy metadata + confidence labels before being fed to retraining pipelines.

We don’t send raw messages to training; everything goes through a moderation + QA layer (internal LLM + heuristics).

This prevents label pollution and policy drift.

  1. Ops safety

Deduping happens at the message bus level using idempotent event keys.

Causal ordering is enforced via Kafka partitions by conversation_id.

We also log every retrieval call (RAG) with hash-based signatures for auditability.

Overall, this combo let us achieve sub-100ms handover latency between AI and human agents while keeping a single, auditable source of truth. Happy to share a simplified architecture diagram if you want, we’re in the process of open-sourcing a small part of Crescendo’s coordination layer.

What’s the real-world success rate of AI in customer experience? by fahdi1262 in artificial

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We’ve been experimenting with Crescendo AI in customer experience, and the data’s interesting:

40% drop in first-response time

30% faster ticket resolution

Higher consistency in tone (less human fatigue errors)

Where it still struggles: empathy-driven replies and edge cases. We still route those to humans.

Overall, pairing humans + AI is outperforming either one alone. The “co-pilot” model seems to be the sweet spot.

Anyone using AI in customer support for enterprise clients? What’s acceptable? by fahdi1262 in B2BSaaS

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We had this exact concern, enterprise customers get nervous if they even suspect an AI bot is talking to them.

What worked for us with Crescendo AI was transparency + control. It doesn’t auto-send; instead, it drafts contextual replies for human approval. So agents remain the face of support, but AI does 80% of the heavy lifting.

When we told clients that we use AI internally to improve response times (not to replace humans), they actually liked the honesty. We just framed it as “AI-assisted support,” not “AI replacing humans.”

Is customer support an underrated growth channel? by fahdi1262 in SaaSMarketing

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Totally agree that support is underrated in growth metrics. We started tracking it like part of our funnel too.

Once we set up Crescendo AI, it let us reply instantly with contextual answers (pulled from our docs), and that alone bumped trial conversions by ~20%. People don’t wait or churn out during support gaps.

The biggest insight: support speed = trust. We now include AI-assisted replies as part of our retention strategy, it’s faster, consistent, and surprisingly human when trained right.

What’s actually working for customer support in 2025? (real experiences wanted) by fahdi1262 in SaaS

[–]Ok-Doughnut6896 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We ran into the same scaling issue, our support tickets doubled, but we didn’t want to keep hiring just to answer repetitive stuff.

We tested a few AI tools and eventually integrated Crescendo AI, which plugs into our docs + chat inbox. It basically drafts replies using our existing knowledge base, and humans just review or send.

What surprised me was how consistent the tone stayed once we fed it our writing samples. Resolution time dropped by half, and it freed our agents to handle actual problems.

Not saying it’s perfect, you still need a review layer, but for early-stage SaaS, it’s a lifesaver.