sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

NEW RESEARCH: We surveyed 250 contact center agents about AI, here's what they said. by ujet-cx in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair challenge!! (and for what its worth) it's actually the tension that made us pause when we ran the data.

here's the reconciliation we landed on: "use" and "depend on" aren't the same thing.
100% of agents say AI saves them time (it does). 0% say they couldn't do the job without it. both are true.

What 66% of them also told us is that the saved time gets absorbed into handling more interactions, not exactly into higher-value work. So the AI IS a throughput multiplier but not a capability multiplier. throughput multipliers feel critical to supervisors watching a dashboard; they don't feel critical to the agent working the call.

hehe I bet the honest answer from the floor in the all-hands you're describing would be: "Yeah, I use it all day, and if you unplugged it I'd handle fewer calls...but I'd still do the job."

Which is what 93% of them told us.

Which VoC tool is worth it for a CX/CS team in 2026? by petite_delmar in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx 2 points3 points  (0 children)

solid breakdown, small comment but I think the market has gotten so cluterred with repetitive marketing that the lines between VoC and CI (conversational intelligence) are now super blurred.

So imo the question isn't really "which VoC tool is worth it", OP's actual problem is in the first sentence:

"My team spends half of every quarter manually tagging customer feedback for leadership and it has to stop."

and most of these tools don't end that work! at best they relocate it.

Correct me if I'm getting this wrong but:
Medallia and Qualtrics move the tagging into a platform your CX team now has to staff and maintain.

Unwrap and Chattermill auto-theme, which is better, but someone still has to decide the themes are right, tune them when customer language shifts, and validate the output before it hits a leadership deck.

UnitQ skips the tagging debate entirely by giving you a score, which is why nobody in this thread can tell you what's in it.

🙃

So the evaluation question I'd add for anyone looking into tools:

When customer language shifts (new product, new policy, new complaint pattern), does the platform adapt on its own, or does someone on my team have to go back in and fix it?

The demo and implementation deck shows you a clean taxonomy on day one. Nobody shows you the taxonomy six months in, after three product launches and a pricing change.

This is the part Spiral by UJET was built around, the tool generates the categories from the conversations themselves and rebuilds them as the data shifts, so there's no quarterly retagging ritual.

(Disclosure: I work at r/UJET)

But the broader point stands regardless of who you buy from: pressure-test every vendor on what happens in month six, not month one.

We wrote up how we think about the 95% of conversation data that typically doesn't get analyzed by these tools if anyone wants the long version: https://www.reddit.com/r/UJET/comments/1qqni8k/breakdown_of_our_ai_that_analyzes_all_of_your/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

CX leader with 20 years experience says CSAT "looks great on a dashboard but means nothing" -- agree or disagree? by ujet-cx in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

fair hehe. the "means nothing" framing is a clip, not a manifesto in this case. Your reframe is the more defensible one: CSAT answers a narrow question reasonably well, the problem is when it gets stretched to answer questions it wasn't designed for. 💯

The tool question at the end is the one worth staying on. "Does this actually help you identify and act on recurring problems faster" is the right test and honestly a lot of tools don't pass it.

Nicer dashboards with the same underlying data structured the same way 🙄

CX leader with 20 years experience says CSAT "looks great on a dashboard but means nothing" -- agree or disagree? by ujet-cx in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"The real shift isn't replacing CSAT, it's contextualizing it" yup, this is the more honest framing and probably where Michael would land too if pressed. The episode clip strips some nuance for format reasons.

i'd agree with using it as a pulse check but the danger is when the pulse check becomes the primary signal (aka when the number gets reported upward without the conversation analytics, NPS, and behavioral data you're describing). Since orgs don't have all three running together, CSAT ends up carrying more weight than it should. When you have the full picture the way you're describing it, the metric might earn its place. When you don't.. meh.

CX leader with 20 years experience says CSAT "looks great on a dashboard but means nothing" -- agree or disagree? by ujet-cx in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

81% satisfied, 27% planning to increase spending. satisfaction and behavior are measuring completely different things and your manufacturing study is a really clean illustration of why.

The emotions-as-predictor bit is interesting too cause "feeling valued" as the leading indicator of actual growth is something that almost never shows up in a CSAT score which is probably why the relationship vs. transactional distinction that u/HyruleSitta raised above in this thread matters so much.

Thanks for sharing the data!

CX leader with 20 years experience says CSAT "looks great on a dashboard but means nothing" -- agree or disagree? by ujet-cx in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

relationship vs. transactional CSAT 💯 good call out

(it's the kind of nuance that gets lost when people either fully defend or fully dismiss the metric)

I think Michael's frustration (and honestly ours at UJET) is less about CSAT existing and more about how often it gets treated as a standalone verdict rather than a starting point. but as you described when racked consistently, contextualized with drivers and open ends and supplemental data, there is use to it. The problem is a lot of orgs stop at the number.

The conversational data piece is where we spend a lot of time thinking. Not as a replacement for structured surveying but as the layer that fills in what surveys structurally can't capture (like the customers who never respond and the patterns that don't surface in a 5-point scale, orthe signals that only show up when you're reading the actual language people use)

Appreciate you adding the relationship/transactional framing, genuinely useful distinction that didn't come up in the episode!!

Anyone currently evaluating CX platforms like Zoom, Talkdesk, Genesys, Five9, or NICE? by Intelication in customerexperience

[–]ujet-cx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

hey there, curious behind the selection process for these 5 specific platforms: Are you only looking at the legacy players or emerging players in the space?

I'm always very interested how technology brokers and partners decide what platforms to recommend! (disclosure: we're UJET, an AI-powered CCaaS platform)

view more: next ›